(this post was significantly re-worked on 12-28-06)
Both cessationists and continuationists hold that believers have an ongoing role to play in building on the “foundation” that Paul, in 1 Corinthians 3:10-11, says that he has laid. The questions at the heart of the cessationist/continuationist debate are these: What, exactly, is the foundation? What is nature of our ongoing role as believers to build on the foundation? What is the role of the Holy Spirit in this building process?
To begin to answer these, I want to continue on from examination of 1 Corinthians 2 and examine what Paul has said in both 1 Corinthians 3:1-15 and in Ephesians 2:19-22.
1 Corinthians 3 (New International Version)
1 Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ.
2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it.Indeed, you are still not ready.
3You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men?
4For when one says, "I follow Paul," and another, "I follow Apollos," are you not mere men?
5What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task.
6I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow.
7So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow.
8The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor.
9For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.
10By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds.
11For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw,
13his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work.
14If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward.
15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.
Here, the “foundation” in this passage has the aspect of being A) Jesus Christ Himself and B) Paul’s ministry about “Jesus Christ and him crucified” (back in 1 Corinthians 2:2) in power to the Corinthians. “Jesus Christ and him crucified” understood as the "foundation" is oriented specifically around the rudiments that Paul taught and demonstrated about Jesus Christ – His teaching and life on earth, the doctrine of who He is and the salvation that He offers, and the grace and power of His presence.
To the Corinthians, their rudimentary understanding of the foundation of their faith in Jesus Christ is the “milk” that Paul refers to in verse 2 above. In 1 Corinthians 2:1-5, the “wisdom of the mature” (wisdom that belongs to mature, spiritual men that involves them making “judgments about all things”), is made distinct from Paul’s conspicuous lack of avoiding any display of his own judgments and knowledge.
Initially, Paul operated with a conspicuous lack of his own judgments and knowledge among the Corinthians to preach “Christ and him crucified” and to be the vehicle for the Spirit’s power to be demonstrated for the Corinthians.In parallel form, In 1 Corinthians 3:2, the “solid food” is made distinct from the “milk” given to babes, which can be interpreted as the doctrinal basics of “Jesus Christ and him crucified” that Paul preached to the new Corinthian believers. It is for this reason that Paul’s discussion of the “wisdom of the mature” is related to understanding the “solid food”.
In 1 Corinthians 3, Paul says that he laid down the basic teachings on Christ and him crucified, which he laid as an "expert builder". As is obvious in chapter 3, the Corinthians were in a crisis of "leader idolatry" and needed to understand their proper relationship to their leaders, and to begin to understand what is involved in being a leader. To confront this crisis, Paul, in chapter 2 has first outlined the "wisdom of the mature" as a general principle as the gospel taken beyond its rudiments and applied to the understanding of "all things". Then, in chapter 3, Paul begins to apply this "wisdom of the mature" to confront this particular crisis in the Corinthian church. In this way, Paul lays the first "housebuilding" brick, adding teaching onto the foundation he has already laid, which is the basic teachings of "Jesus Christ and him crucified".
In chapter 3, Paul applies the "wisdom of the mature" to begin to confront their "leader idolatry" and then outlines what is involved in being a Godly leader. It is my interpretation 1 Corinthians 2 and 3, understood as related passages, that the process of one operating as a leader in chapter 3 is a result of the leader applying the "wisdom of the mature" as it is defined in chapter 2. As Paul's application of the wisdom of the mature in the specific regard to "leader idolatry" is in the category of "solid food", so too is any leader's application of the wisdom of the mature in the category of "solid food".
As I elaborated on in my discussion of 1 Corinthians 2, in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16, the “wisdom of the mature” is the ongoing process of a mature believer being instructed by the ”mind of Christ” to understand “all things” in order to understand “what has been freely given” (1 Corinthians 2:13). The mature believer who discerns the ongoing instruction from the mind of Christ is able to make “judgments about all things”.
With this understanding of how chapters 2 and 3 fit together, the understanding of “all things” (chapter 2) is given to a mature believer for him to understand the foundation so that the mature believer is able to then build on the foundation. With this understanding, this act of building on the foundation is connected to Jesus Christ in two different aspects:
A) The act of building on the foundation is connected to Jesus Christ as the foundation Himself in the sense that 1) Jesus Christ's essense as He so demonstrated by His life on earth and 2) His teachings and the doctrine about Him as “Christ and him Crucified” are both aspects of the foundation. Here, the truth of Jesus Christ in essence, incarnation, teaching and doctrine is the foundational plumb line for any and all subsequent building.
B) The act of building on the foundation is connected to Jesus Christ as the “mind of Christ”, the living Person who continually instructs the mature on how to build on the foundation.
In regard to the “we” and “you” division in verse 9, Paul makes a distinction between, he, Apollos and the other leaders who are currently providing the labor as God’s servants— the “we”, and those whom Paul is addressing who had been receiving and benefiting from that leadership – the “you”. However, Paul said back in verse 5 that the “… as the Lord has assigned to each his task", where the word "each" is being used to modify the word "servants". In this passage Paul is describing the ongoing role of a particular type of servanthood to the church.
It is on the basis of verse 5 that it can be interpreted that the task “house building” on the foundation is something that all believers are eventually held accountable to as they progress from “milk” to “solid food”. In other words, the “we” and “you” distinction that is made in verse 9 to separate Paul and Apollos from the Corinthian readers, is being made only because the Corinthians are still immature, and not because the role of “house building” on the foundation is somehow limited merely to Paul, Apollos, or the Corinthians’ current leader/pastor.
While “house building” on the foundation is primarily the act of providing executive leadership to the church, it also encompasses any capacity of judgment making that affects the development of the church. While Paul is unique among workers as the foundation layer, Paul, Apollos, or any “spiritual man” or any who is among the “mature”, participates with God in developing the church as God’s fellow workers according to the task that God has assigned to him.
For some this will mean the act of building directly on the foundation as pastors and leaders. To the extent that other mature believers are not building directly on the foundation in an executive fashion, participating in the building process will mean operating with influence in the lives of others and critically evaluating how the church is being led based on whether their leader is properly building on the foundation. In whatever capacity believers are participating in the “house building”, as builders or evaluators, Paul’s message on building on the foundation is germane to all.
Whether directly building, influencing or critically evaluating, all are ways of participating in the building process as “mature” believers who are partaking of “solid food”. It is in operating as “house builders” according to Paul’s direction that a believer A) avoids deviating from the sound doctrine of Jesus Christ and the living Person of Jesus Christ and B) succeeds in putting a leader in proper perspective and not elevating one leader as someone higher than who he is. Though there are many possible forms of hay and straw that can be interpreted from this passage, it is these two errors that are most easily discernable from the immediate context of 1 Corinthians, chapters 2 and 3 as being part of the "gold", "hay", "straw" etc... that mature believers are to shun as they engage in the building process.
Paul’s use of the metaphors of plants in a field and of a building describe the relationship between God and mature believers as they work together to develop the church through time. As Paul has laid down the foundation, mature believers continue in the process of “house building” the church, operating in the understanding of their relationship with God that Paul has described in both of his metaphors.While Paul’s “plant” metaphor particularly emphasizes the power and agency of God in the midst of the believer’s “house building” labor, Paul’s “building” metaphor particularly emphasizes the involvement of a believer’s use of his judgment in the act of “house building”. Actual building and construction, when taken into account as a trade, involves skill, judgment and measurement.
Moving on to examine a parallel passage regarding the “foundation” in Ephesians 2.
Ephesians 2:19-22
19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household,
20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.
21In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.
22And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.
In Ephesians, the "building"/"foundation" metaphor involves Christ as having the roles, metaphorically, of being the cornerstone, the mortar, the brick developer and the architect who makes the building "rise to become a holy temple in the Lord".
So how do the building/foundation metaphors in Ephesians and in 1 Corinthians fit together? First let’s examine how they’re different. There the obvious way in which the foundation metaphor in Ephesians is expanded beyond "Jesus Christ and him crucified" to include all of the prophets (Paul is referring to the Old Testament prophets, not those within the New Testament church with the “gift of prophecy”) and the apostles. The foundation metaphor in Ephesians is more oriented around the idea that the housebuilding “bricks” are people, built as the church, collectively. In 1 Corinthians, the foundation metaphor is more oriented around the housebuilding “bricks” as teachings that are built on the rudiments of "Jesus Christ and him crucified".
Now here is how these two foundation metaphors blend together. For starters, in 1 Corinthians, Paul says that the "foundation" is Jesus Christ the Person, and not merely Paul’s teaching about Jesus Christ. And, in Ephesians, there are aspects of the building process that involve the agency of the person of Jesus Christ that relates to what is described in 1 Corinthians 3.
While it is the agency of God's power to grow the church that is the reflected in the "plant" metaphor in 1 Corinthians, it is the agency of Jesus' ongoing executive direction that is reflected in the manner in which Jesus enables the "whole building to rise into a holy temple". It is my interpretation of the blend of Ephesians and 1 Corinthians, that Jesus, as the architect in Ephesians who makes the "whole building rise into a holy temple", is also the "general contractor" who assigns the “tasks” to servants as described in 1 Corinthians 3:5.
Now here is how I interpret the blend of these passages specifically in regard to the “wisdom of the mature”. The role of Jesus as “architect” as described in Ephesians, is the same role of Jesus as the “mind of Christ” that provides ongoing instruction to the “mature” who "make judgments in all things". In regard to building on the foundation, it is the ongoing grace of Jesus, operating as the "mind of Christ" in His agency to build on the foundation, that helps those who are making "judgments in all things": this, so that those making judgments will make the judgments that will successfully build on the foundation in the manner that Paul has described in 1 Corinthians 3.
My extrapolations
As Paul was instructed by the "mind of Christ" to lay the foundation and the first bricks to confront the particular problems facing the Corinthians at that time, so too do believers need the illumination of the Holy Spirit to correctly appropriate the truth of the Gospel to understand confront new and various times and situations that different people face and that different generations face so that everything that the church is confronted with in time is understood properly in light of the revealed truth of the Gospel. It is in this process that the church is successfully developed from one generation to the next, and the foundation that was laid 2000 years about is properly built upon.
As the spiritual man is endowed with this grace of illumination, the spiritual man is able to “house build” with precision with God to build the church. It is the quality of how a man is continually operating in this grace by learning all things from the “mind of Christ” that determines whether he will be able to make the correct judgments that will faithfully “house build” on the foundation that has been laid. It is the quality of each believer’s endeavor of “house building” that will be judged at the end of time. At that time, each believer’s endeavor of “house building” on the foundation will be judged according whether it conforms to the cornerstone and to the foundation and it will be judged whether the material used to build is consistent with purity, precision, direction and intent of Jesus Christ via the Holy Spirit.
Post Script – “Solas Fundas”
All of this leads us to the other major question that is at the heart of the cessationist/continuationist debate in regard to this discussion of the “foundation”: What is the nature of the exclusivity of Scripture? Does that exclusivity preclude any ongoing guidance from the Holy Spirit?
While the “foundation” metaphor in Ephesians is more oriented towards people than is the foundation metaphor in 1 Corinthians, the “foundation” metaphor in Ephesians nonetheless has a strong aspect to it that involves the teaching of the Prophets, Apostles and Jesus. To the extent that the “foundation” metaphor in Ephesians involves the teachings of the Prophets, Apostles and Jesus, the question is this: how does the "foundation", understood as the teachings of the Prophets, Apostles and Jesus, fit in with the 1 Corinthians idea of the "foundation" as the rudimentary teaching about “Jesus Christ and Him crucified” ?
If the “wisdom of the mature” is defined according to 1 Corinthians as the act of one being instructed by the "mind of Christ" to appropriate the rudiments of “Jesus Christ and him crucified” to make judgements on sundry specific issues and crises in the church, then the “foundation” that is described in Ephesians would include any and all applications of this “wisdom of the mature” by the apostles. In other words, the Ephesians “foundation” metaphor recognizes the foundational aspect of all the applications of the “wisdom of the mature” by the apostles, even as they are the “first bricks” laid on the foundation understood in 1 Corinthians as “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified.”
As I explained in my post on 1 Corinthians 2, Paul has outlined the “wisdom of the mature” as an endeavor for the “mature” and the “spiritual man” and not merely for the apostles and prophets. It is on this basis that the understanding of “the wisdom of the mature” in 1 Corinthians – which is being instructed by the "mind of Christ" to appropriate the rudimentary understanding of “Chris and him crucified” to confront specific issues that the church is confronted with – can be amplified as the ongoing act of being instructed by the "mind of Christ" to appropriate all of the teachings of the Prophets, Apostles and Jesus to confront specific issues and crises facing the church.
In other words, the “foundation” metaphor in Ephesians can be understood to broaden the 1 Corinthians “foundation” in regard to what is the foundation on which the “wisdom of the mature” is to be applied. It is in this sense that the “wisdom of the mature” -- the ongoing act of being instructed by the mind of Christ to appropriate all of the teachings of the Prophets, Apostles and Jesus to confront specific issues and crises facing the church— is an ongoing practice among believers.
While this is so, it is the particular applications of the “wisdom of the mature” among the apostles in the first century that have the unique status of being understood as part of the “foundation” and thus, along with the teaching of the prophets and Jesus, comprise our Bible canon. Even as this is so, there is no indication that the process of being instructed by the mind of Christ to apply the wisdom of the mature has ended. As the "wisdom of the mature" has not ended, neither has the guidance of the Spirit of God that is involved in the "wisdom of the mature" and the discernment of that guidance ended .
In regard to the Reformation idea of “Sola Scriptura”, the “Sola”/the “exclusivity” /the “only” that can be substantiated regarding the Scripture directly from Paul’s writing in Ephesians would be that of “Solas Fundas”, which is Latin for “The Only Foundation”. As “Solas Fundas” relates to the hotly debated question of the exclusivity and uniqueness of the Bible canon, what makes the New Testament Bible canon unique as a Bible canon is that it comprises the complete understanding of the Foundation.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Monday, November 13, 2006
Is 2 Timothy 3:16-17 a basis for cessationism?
I want to revisit the cessationist/continuationist debate as it relates to 2 Timothy 3:16-17. To begin, here is the New American Bible (1991) version of 2 Timothy: 10-17, which is a very close literal word for word translation of the original Greek.
10 You followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,
11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.
12 In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.
13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived.
14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it,
15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
To begin to examine this passage, I want to first deal with the question, what are the "scriptures”? Specifically, in verse 15, which says “…and that from infancy you have known the sacred scriptures…”, Paul is referring to the training in the Torah and Prophets that Timothy would have received as a Jewish boy. As for verse 16, which says “all scripture”, “scripture” here would have the central meaning of being the Old Testament Torah and Prophets, though the Old Testament Torah and Prophets would not be the exclusive meaning. For the purpose of discussing and applying verses 16 and 17, the “scriptures” in this passage in Timothy can be safely amplified to include Old and New Testament Scriptures.
Cessationists who use this passage as an argument for cessationism interpret verses 16 and 17 to mean that the Scriptures, and not the ongoing leading/guidance of the Holy Spirit is to be the sole source of guiding a believer. To the cessationist, relying on anything other than the chapter-verse of Scripture challenges the self-sufficiency of Scripture, which cessationists interpret from this passage. For a cessationist, if Scripture is capable of being used to teach, correct and rebuke to make one competent, equipped for every good work, why would one need any ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit?
To confront this cessationist interpretation of 2 Timothy 3:16-17, in the verses that precede it going back to verse 10, Paul lists his teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance. These things all comprise “what you [Timothy] have learned and believed” in verse 14. After Paul admonishes Timothy to remain faithful to what he has learned and followed, Paul adds, “and that from infancy you have known the Scriptures”, thereby establishing the Scriptures as something that is complementary to all that Timothy has learned, believed and followed.
In regard to Paul’s list in verse 10, Paul refers to his “way of life”. Paul clearly intends his “way of life” to be a “way” that extends to others beyond Paul and not merely to be Paul’s life as a unique specimen in history. Paul’s way of life is inseparable from Paul’s “teaching” and, therefore, any aspect of Paul’s teaching is intended to be complementary to Timothy’s understanding of Scripture, along with Paul’s way of life. Timothy would have been exposed to Paul’s teaching as it is represented throughout the NT epistles, which include Paul’s teachings on the gifts and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, Paul’s experience of the Holy Spirit would have been inseparable from Paul’s “faith” in the broader understanding of Paul’s way of life as a temporal endeavor of relating to God.
A cessationist could try to argue that the “you” in verses 10 and in verses 14 and 15 were exclusive only to Timothy . A cessationist could argue that only Timothy would have directly known and followed Paul and only Timothy would know Paul personally to have learned directly from him (verse 14). From this point of interpretation, a cessationist could argue that the substance of verses 10 and 14 were only for Timothy, and were not intended to be time-transcendent teachings for all believers.
To begin to confront the problem with this line of interpretation, In 2 Timothy, Paul cannot have been guiding Timothy to hold to the Scriptures apart from the ongoing experience of the Holy Spirit, which was clearly part of Paul’s way of life and woven into his teaching. The “but” in verse 14 that Paul uses to distinguish Timothy from the “wicked people and charlatans” in verse 13 is a contrast that Paul also intends to refer back to “all who want to live religiously for Christ Jesus” (verse 12), whom Paul has also contrasted with “wicked people and charlatans”. It is "all who want to live religiously [or 'live a Godly life' as some translations have it] for Christ Jesus" who must distinguish themselves from the “wicked people and charlatans” by following Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as must Timothy, as it is Timothy’s charge to pass on Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance to others.
Of course it is true that all believers throughout the ages beyond Timothy would not have the benefit of having followed Paul in person or having known Paul in a personal way. This does not mean that the principle of the text does not apply to all believers to the extent that believers are capable of knowing about Paul, or the other apostles, from Scripture and church tradition. To the extent that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance can be known, all believers are to remain faithful to what they have learned and believed about it.
In the context of the passage taken as a whole, Scripture is complementary to Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance for the benefit of Timothy and any other believer. It is this understanding – that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance is complementary to Scripture– that explains how the application of Scripture --as it is used for teaching, correcting and rebuking –is useful for making a believer “competent”. It is the one who, like Timothy, follows Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance who is capable of applying the Scripture correctly in the act of teaching, rebuking and correcting.
The cessationist who uses this passage as an argument for cessationism, however, does not emphasize the complementary relationship between Scripture and Paul’s teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance to interpret this passage. Rather, the aforementioned cessationist emphasizes the slight change of tone that happens when Paul stops directly addressing Tim directly and begins a new sentence in verse 16 that speaks directly of a principle regarding Scripture. It is this slight change of tone, beginning a new sentence that is part of the basis for a cessationist interpretation of the passage that verses 16 and 17 are more time-transcendent than the verses 10 and 14 that were addressed specifically to Timothy.
Here, the aforementioned cessationist works backward from the idea of being equipped for every good work and reads 2 Tim 3:16 and 17 to mean that the Scripture is “exclusively useful” for being used for teaching rebuking and correcting. It is this cessationist understanding that the application of Scripture for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training will preclude the need for a believer to be guided and/or illumined by the Holy Spirit beyond the canonized chapter-verse of Scripture. This cessationist idea from 2 Tim 3:16 that the Scripture is “exclusively useful” is another way of saying that the Scripture is “self-sufficient” as a cessationist understands that term.
I examined some different translations of 2 Timothy 3:16-17 with the help of my friend Steve Blackwelder, who is knowledgeable in New Testament Greek. For these verses, the NAB (as featured at the top of this post) is very close to the original Greek:
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
New English Bible (1970), also close to the original Greek says,
16 Every inspired Scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, or for reformation of manners and discipline in right living, 17 so that the man who belongs to God may be efficient and equipped for good work of every kind.
New American Standard Bible (1977) also very close the original Greek says,
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
There are other translations of the Bible which amplify the word “competent” with the idea of being “thoroughly competent” or some other equivalent. Here is the King James Bible:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Regarding the word “perfect” in verse 17 here in the KJV, according a footnote in the Nestle-Alande Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition (1993) of the Greek text, the Greek artios, which modern translations translate as “adequate” or “competent”, is in most of the ancient manuscripts that have this verse. Some later ancient manuscripts have the word teleios, which means "perfect", instead of artios. However, only one later Greek manuscript is cited for this, and the rest are early Latin translations.
Here is the NIV (1973) which is genetically linked to the King James:
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Here is the RSV (1971) which is also genetically linked to the King James:
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
These translations make the idea of “adequate”, “competent” or “proficient” as it appears in the original Greek into something stronger in English. These translations make it easier for cessationists to work backward from the idea of a believer being “thoroughly equipped”— via his receiving rebuking, correcting and teaching from Scripture— to interpret that the Scriptures are to be “exclusively useful” for his instruction toward sanctification as believer.
The problem with interpreting the Scripture as being “exclusively useful” in verse 16 and 17 in this way is that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance includes the guiding experience of the Holy Spirit. A cessationist cannot interpret 2 Timothy to mean that Scripture that is useful for teaching, rebuking and correcting is complementary to Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance for present day believers in the full and robust way that Paul experienced the guidance and deliverance of the Holy Spirit. Rather, a cessationist must interpret this passage in such a way that present day believers are to follow only a partial understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as an ongoing practice: those aspects of Paul’s teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance that do not involve any teaching or practice regarding the instruction, illumination or guidance from the Holy Spirit.
For a cessationist, believers are to understand that the full understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance was intended as part of a dispensation that was only for Paul to operate as an apostle – and was only intended in diminishing degrees to characterize the lives of Timothy and the subsequent “pre-canon” believers. It is for this reason that a cessationist will emphasize the idea that verses 10 and 14 were intended more exclusively for Timothy and not for all believers.
Here, a cessationist could try to argue that the full understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance would include the word “purpose” which would include Paul’s purpose as an apostle and writer of the Bible canon. From this a cessationist could argue that all believers operate on a partial understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance and that the only debate is over the degree of partiality. A cessationist could further argue that “you know from whom you learned it” (verse 14) is Paul asserting his unique apostolic authority as the bearer of teaching.
It is true that Paul had a unique individual purpose in church history as an apostle and as a writer of the Bible canon. However, there is nothing in Paul’s teaching wherein Paul intended his experience of the Holy Spirit to be exclusive to him. The only exceptional experience of the Holy Spirit that Paul claims for himself as an apostle was the manner in which Jesus appeared to Paul after Jesus’ resurrection. In regard to Paul’s “way of life”, he taught, clarified and prayed for an ongoing experience of the guidance and illumination of the Holy Spirit for others. As I will get into more in later blog posts on this topic, the only exclusivity that Paul claims for himself and for the other apostles is that they were laying down a foundation.
And this brings us to the final question regarding this passage: what is a “good work” (verse 17)? For a cessationist who interprets 2 Tim 3:16-17, discerning the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit cannot be counted as a “good work” that Scripture equips us for. For a continuationist, discerning the ongoing guidance of God via His Holy Spirit is precisely one of the many “good works” that Scripture equips us for. As I have elaborated on earlier posts, it is precisely to equip us for discernment that Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 (this would fall under the umbrella of Paul’s “teaching” and as “scripture” in its amplified meaning) and that John writes in 1 John 2:20-4:6 (this would fall under the umbrella of “scripture” in its amplified meaning).
In conclusion: In regard to 2 Tim 10-17, To the extent that:
A) Paul has made using the Scriptures for rebuking and teaching complementary to his way of life and teaching
B) Paul’s instructions to Tim in verses 10 and 14 can be interpreted in a general way to be “time-transcendent” for all believers and were not merely exclusively for Timothy,
C) Paul’s teaching includes teaching about the guidance of the Holy Spirit that Paul intended for others to experience beyond him.
D) The “Scriptures” of verse 15 can be amplified to include all the NT, that include Paul’s teachings on the Holy Spirit,
2 Tim: 16-17 cannot be construed as Paul’s intention that the Scriptures are to be used to equip a believer in a way that precludes the ongoing guidance/illumination of the Holy Spirit. Rather, the Scriptures are intended to be useful along with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to equip a believer for every good work, including the good work of discerning the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit. To interpret the passage as indicating that the Scriptures are “exclusively useful” for teaching, rebuking and correcting toward equipping believers—to the exclusion of the ongoing guidance and illumination of the Holy Spirit— is to interpret a “dispensational divide” between the aspects of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as they were meant to Timothy and those that were meant for modern believers.
Cessationists who support this idea by using the fact that Paul starts a new sentence in verse 16 are making too much of the new sentence. Verses 16 and 17 are merely a continuation of the teaching that was intended by Paul to be useful to Timothy in the context of the teaching that had just been given to Timothy, and in the context of the teaching to follow. Cessationists who support their “dispensational divide” by using the word “perfect”, “thoroughly equipped”, or some other similar translation in verse 17 to work backward toward the idea that Scriptures are “exclusively useful” are operating from an idea that has been made stronger in certain English translations than it is in the original Greek. On close examination, the “dispensational divide” that a cessationist interprets from the text separating what is relevant for Timothy and what is relevant for modern believers can only be construed from silence. It is in the force of that silence that cessationists apply their isogesis to 2 Tim 3:16-17 to have it mean something other than what Paul meant by it as a proof text for cessationism.
10 You followed my teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance,
11 persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me in Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, persecutions that I endured. Yet from all these things the Lord delivered me.
12 In fact, all who want to live religiously in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.
13 But wicked people and charlatans will go from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived.
14 But you, remain faithful to what you have learned and believed, because you know from whom you learned it,
15 and that from infancy you have known (the) sacred scriptures, which are capable of giving you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
To begin to examine this passage, I want to first deal with the question, what are the "scriptures”? Specifically, in verse 15, which says “…and that from infancy you have known the sacred scriptures…”, Paul is referring to the training in the Torah and Prophets that Timothy would have received as a Jewish boy. As for verse 16, which says “all scripture”, “scripture” here would have the central meaning of being the Old Testament Torah and Prophets, though the Old Testament Torah and Prophets would not be the exclusive meaning. For the purpose of discussing and applying verses 16 and 17, the “scriptures” in this passage in Timothy can be safely amplified to include Old and New Testament Scriptures.
Cessationists who use this passage as an argument for cessationism interpret verses 16 and 17 to mean that the Scriptures, and not the ongoing leading/guidance of the Holy Spirit is to be the sole source of guiding a believer. To the cessationist, relying on anything other than the chapter-verse of Scripture challenges the self-sufficiency of Scripture, which cessationists interpret from this passage. For a cessationist, if Scripture is capable of being used to teach, correct and rebuke to make one competent, equipped for every good work, why would one need any ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit?
To confront this cessationist interpretation of 2 Timothy 3:16-17, in the verses that precede it going back to verse 10, Paul lists his teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance. These things all comprise “what you [Timothy] have learned and believed” in verse 14. After Paul admonishes Timothy to remain faithful to what he has learned and followed, Paul adds, “and that from infancy you have known the Scriptures”, thereby establishing the Scriptures as something that is complementary to all that Timothy has learned, believed and followed.
In regard to Paul’s list in verse 10, Paul refers to his “way of life”. Paul clearly intends his “way of life” to be a “way” that extends to others beyond Paul and not merely to be Paul’s life as a unique specimen in history. Paul’s way of life is inseparable from Paul’s “teaching” and, therefore, any aspect of Paul’s teaching is intended to be complementary to Timothy’s understanding of Scripture, along with Paul’s way of life. Timothy would have been exposed to Paul’s teaching as it is represented throughout the NT epistles, which include Paul’s teachings on the gifts and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, Paul’s experience of the Holy Spirit would have been inseparable from Paul’s “faith” in the broader understanding of Paul’s way of life as a temporal endeavor of relating to God.
A cessationist could try to argue that the “you” in verses 10 and in verses 14 and 15 were exclusive only to Timothy . A cessationist could argue that only Timothy would have directly known and followed Paul and only Timothy would know Paul personally to have learned directly from him (verse 14). From this point of interpretation, a cessationist could argue that the substance of verses 10 and 14 were only for Timothy, and were not intended to be time-transcendent teachings for all believers.
To begin to confront the problem with this line of interpretation, In 2 Timothy, Paul cannot have been guiding Timothy to hold to the Scriptures apart from the ongoing experience of the Holy Spirit, which was clearly part of Paul’s way of life and woven into his teaching. The “but” in verse 14 that Paul uses to distinguish Timothy from the “wicked people and charlatans” in verse 13 is a contrast that Paul also intends to refer back to “all who want to live religiously for Christ Jesus” (verse 12), whom Paul has also contrasted with “wicked people and charlatans”. It is "all who want to live religiously [or 'live a Godly life' as some translations have it] for Christ Jesus" who must distinguish themselves from the “wicked people and charlatans” by following Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as must Timothy, as it is Timothy’s charge to pass on Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance to others.
Of course it is true that all believers throughout the ages beyond Timothy would not have the benefit of having followed Paul in person or having known Paul in a personal way. This does not mean that the principle of the text does not apply to all believers to the extent that believers are capable of knowing about Paul, or the other apostles, from Scripture and church tradition. To the extent that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance can be known, all believers are to remain faithful to what they have learned and believed about it.
In the context of the passage taken as a whole, Scripture is complementary to Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance for the benefit of Timothy and any other believer. It is this understanding – that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance is complementary to Scripture– that explains how the application of Scripture --as it is used for teaching, correcting and rebuking –is useful for making a believer “competent”. It is the one who, like Timothy, follows Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance who is capable of applying the Scripture correctly in the act of teaching, rebuking and correcting.
The cessationist who uses this passage as an argument for cessationism, however, does not emphasize the complementary relationship between Scripture and Paul’s teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance to interpret this passage. Rather, the aforementioned cessationist emphasizes the slight change of tone that happens when Paul stops directly addressing Tim directly and begins a new sentence in verse 16 that speaks directly of a principle regarding Scripture. It is this slight change of tone, beginning a new sentence that is part of the basis for a cessationist interpretation of the passage that verses 16 and 17 are more time-transcendent than the verses 10 and 14 that were addressed specifically to Timothy.
Here, the aforementioned cessationist works backward from the idea of being equipped for every good work and reads 2 Tim 3:16 and 17 to mean that the Scripture is “exclusively useful” for being used for teaching rebuking and correcting. It is this cessationist understanding that the application of Scripture for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training will preclude the need for a believer to be guided and/or illumined by the Holy Spirit beyond the canonized chapter-verse of Scripture. This cessationist idea from 2 Tim 3:16 that the Scripture is “exclusively useful” is another way of saying that the Scripture is “self-sufficient” as a cessationist understands that term.
I examined some different translations of 2 Timothy 3:16-17 with the help of my friend Steve Blackwelder, who is knowledgeable in New Testament Greek. For these verses, the NAB (as featured at the top of this post) is very close to the original Greek:
16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
New English Bible (1970), also close to the original Greek says,
16 Every inspired Scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, or for reformation of manners and discipline in right living, 17 so that the man who belongs to God may be efficient and equipped for good work of every kind.
New American Standard Bible (1977) also very close the original Greek says,
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
There are other translations of the Bible which amplify the word “competent” with the idea of being “thoroughly competent” or some other equivalent. Here is the King James Bible:
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Regarding the word “perfect” in verse 17 here in the KJV, according a footnote in the Nestle-Alande Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition (1993) of the Greek text, the Greek artios, which modern translations translate as “adequate” or “competent”, is in most of the ancient manuscripts that have this verse. Some later ancient manuscripts have the word teleios, which means "perfect", instead of artios. However, only one later Greek manuscript is cited for this, and the rest are early Latin translations.
Here is the NIV (1973) which is genetically linked to the King James:
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Here is the RSV (1971) which is also genetically linked to the King James:
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
These translations make the idea of “adequate”, “competent” or “proficient” as it appears in the original Greek into something stronger in English. These translations make it easier for cessationists to work backward from the idea of a believer being “thoroughly equipped”— via his receiving rebuking, correcting and teaching from Scripture— to interpret that the Scriptures are to be “exclusively useful” for his instruction toward sanctification as believer.
The problem with interpreting the Scripture as being “exclusively useful” in verse 16 and 17 in this way is that Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance includes the guiding experience of the Holy Spirit. A cessationist cannot interpret 2 Timothy to mean that Scripture that is useful for teaching, rebuking and correcting is complementary to Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance for present day believers in the full and robust way that Paul experienced the guidance and deliverance of the Holy Spirit. Rather, a cessationist must interpret this passage in such a way that present day believers are to follow only a partial understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as an ongoing practice: those aspects of Paul’s teaching, way of life , purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance that do not involve any teaching or practice regarding the instruction, illumination or guidance from the Holy Spirit.
For a cessationist, believers are to understand that the full understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance was intended as part of a dispensation that was only for Paul to operate as an apostle – and was only intended in diminishing degrees to characterize the lives of Timothy and the subsequent “pre-canon” believers. It is for this reason that a cessationist will emphasize the idea that verses 10 and 14 were intended more exclusively for Timothy and not for all believers.
Here, a cessationist could try to argue that the full understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance would include the word “purpose” which would include Paul’s purpose as an apostle and writer of the Bible canon. From this a cessationist could argue that all believers operate on a partial understanding of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance and that the only debate is over the degree of partiality. A cessationist could further argue that “you know from whom you learned it” (verse 14) is Paul asserting his unique apostolic authority as the bearer of teaching.
It is true that Paul had a unique individual purpose in church history as an apostle and as a writer of the Bible canon. However, there is nothing in Paul’s teaching wherein Paul intended his experience of the Holy Spirit to be exclusive to him. The only exceptional experience of the Holy Spirit that Paul claims for himself as an apostle was the manner in which Jesus appeared to Paul after Jesus’ resurrection. In regard to Paul’s “way of life”, he taught, clarified and prayed for an ongoing experience of the guidance and illumination of the Holy Spirit for others. As I will get into more in later blog posts on this topic, the only exclusivity that Paul claims for himself and for the other apostles is that they were laying down a foundation.
And this brings us to the final question regarding this passage: what is a “good work” (verse 17)? For a cessationist who interprets 2 Tim 3:16-17, discerning the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit cannot be counted as a “good work” that Scripture equips us for. For a continuationist, discerning the ongoing guidance of God via His Holy Spirit is precisely one of the many “good works” that Scripture equips us for. As I have elaborated on earlier posts, it is precisely to equip us for discernment that Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 (this would fall under the umbrella of Paul’s “teaching” and as “scripture” in its amplified meaning) and that John writes in 1 John 2:20-4:6 (this would fall under the umbrella of “scripture” in its amplified meaning).
In conclusion: In regard to 2 Tim 10-17, To the extent that:
A) Paul has made using the Scriptures for rebuking and teaching complementary to his way of life and teaching
B) Paul’s instructions to Tim in verses 10 and 14 can be interpreted in a general way to be “time-transcendent” for all believers and were not merely exclusively for Timothy,
C) Paul’s teaching includes teaching about the guidance of the Holy Spirit that Paul intended for others to experience beyond him.
D) The “Scriptures” of verse 15 can be amplified to include all the NT, that include Paul’s teachings on the Holy Spirit,
2 Tim: 16-17 cannot be construed as Paul’s intention that the Scriptures are to be used to equip a believer in a way that precludes the ongoing guidance/illumination of the Holy Spirit. Rather, the Scriptures are intended to be useful along with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to equip a believer for every good work, including the good work of discerning the ongoing guidance of the Holy Spirit. To interpret the passage as indicating that the Scriptures are “exclusively useful” for teaching, rebuking and correcting toward equipping believers—to the exclusion of the ongoing guidance and illumination of the Holy Spirit— is to interpret a “dispensational divide” between the aspects of Paul’s teaching, way of life, purpose, faith, patience, love, and endurance as they were meant to Timothy and those that were meant for modern believers.
Cessationists who support this idea by using the fact that Paul starts a new sentence in verse 16 are making too much of the new sentence. Verses 16 and 17 are merely a continuation of the teaching that was intended by Paul to be useful to Timothy in the context of the teaching that had just been given to Timothy, and in the context of the teaching to follow. Cessationists who support their “dispensational divide” by using the word “perfect”, “thoroughly equipped”, or some other similar translation in verse 17 to work backward toward the idea that Scriptures are “exclusively useful” are operating from an idea that has been made stronger in certain English translations than it is in the original Greek. On close examination, the “dispensational divide” that a cessationist interprets from the text separating what is relevant for Timothy and what is relevant for modern believers can only be construed from silence. It is in the force of that silence that cessationists apply their isogesis to 2 Tim 3:16-17 to have it mean something other than what Paul meant by it as a proof text for cessationism.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Revelations 13:16-17 under a microscope
After having offered some of my speculations last week on Revelations 13:16-17, I was re-examining the text of those verses as they are presented in the NIV version which says:
(16) He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, (17) so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Normally, I'm not especially interested in seeking to interpret the original Greek when interpreting the New Testament. In Scripture, most of what one needs to understand is available from the immediate context of the passage. Most any correct interpretation of a passage that one can arrive at by reading the original New Testament Greek, one can also arrive at from a good English translation of a passage by interpreting the passage in the context of textual clues that are available to be cross-referenced in the passage itself and in the context immediately before and after the passage.
There are instances, however, when examining the original New Testament Greek can provide better clarity on the meaning of the passage. In the case of Revelations 13:16-17, I wanted to see if the original Greek text supports the idea that the anti-christ/beast directly forces people to get the mark of the beast against their will or, rather, manipulates a situation into existence wherein people must get the mark of the beast in order to buy and sell. To see which understanding the original Greek leans toward I decided to seek the help of Steve Blackwelder, who is very knowledgeable of ancient New Testament Greek and the various ways that is has been translated into different versions of the Bible.
After having discussed it and examined it with Steve, he and I, Greg Wertime, co-wrote the following examining of Revelation 13:16-17. Here is the passage in Greek, Romanized, with the verbs we want to examine in boldface.
Here is the almost word for word translation, with the same verbs in boldface:
16 And it (the second beast of verse 11, the Greek word for "beast" is grammatically neuter) caused everyone,
the small and the great,
and the rich and the poor,
and the free and the slave,
that they may give themselves a sign on their right hand or on their forehead
17 and that no one may be able to buy or sell
unless that one having the sign of the name of the beast or the number of its name.
Verses 16 and 17 are one sentence in Greek. The first verb, poiei, has several possible translations into English, expressing varying levels of force or manipulation from "make" to "bring about". The beast is the grammatical subject and also the agent of this verb. The second verb, dosin, is in the subjunctive mood, which is grammarspeak for not being %100 definite-- for presenting only a possibility and not an absolute reality. Like dosin, the third verb, dunetai, is also the result of poiei, and so dunetai also subjunctive, reflecting its parallel relationship with dosin. Considering the relationship that poiei has with these two subjunctive verbs, poiei is better translated as "cause", which is a softer verb than "make" or "force". This translation of poiei indicates that the beast is not the only agent in advancing the sign of the beast. Rather, the beast causes a situation to exist wherein "everyone" is also an agent, and "everyone" has some degree of choice or volition in the matter.
As a supplement to examining the ancient Greek directly, Steve and I also examined some other New Testament translations of the passage. Here is the NASB (1977) translation, done by a theologically conservative committee who were committed to translating as literally as possible and were less concerned about English style:
And he causes all, the small and the great, the rich and the poor, the free men and the slave, to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead, and he provides that no one should be able to buy or sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Here is the NRSV (1989) translation done by a committee of theological conservatives, moderates and liberals who followed the maxim, "as literal as possible, as free as necessary":
Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell who does not have the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.
Both of these translations do not express the idea of people "giving themselves" the sign in the active sense as it indicated in the original Greek. Both of the NASB and the NRSV translate dosin as the more passive "to be marked" or "to be given". However, both of these translations do use the subtler, more manipulative translation of poiei as "causes".
Now here, again, is the passage in the NIV (1984), translated by a committee of theological conservatives and moderates:
He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could by or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Unlike the NASB or the NRSV, the NIV translates poiei as "force" instead of "cause". This clashes with the agency of "everyone" that is implied in a careful analysis of the original Greek. It is the NASB and the NRSV translations that are closer to conveying the proper degree of agency on the part of both the beast and "everyone".
Conclusion -- Having examined the original Greek under a microscope, and having cross-referenced other New Testament translations of the passage, the best interpretation of Revelations 13:16-17 is this: that the beast will manipulate people in such a way that leads to an infrastructure wherein one cannot participate in the markeplace without having the mark of the beast. Careful examination of these verses reveals the possibility that the anti-christ will operate more like a vampire than Atilla the Hun, and the mark of the beast will be the result of an infrastructure that is created and nurtured into existence by a populace that has been deceived.
(16) He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, (17) so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Normally, I'm not especially interested in seeking to interpret the original Greek when interpreting the New Testament. In Scripture, most of what one needs to understand is available from the immediate context of the passage. Most any correct interpretation of a passage that one can arrive at by reading the original New Testament Greek, one can also arrive at from a good English translation of a passage by interpreting the passage in the context of textual clues that are available to be cross-referenced in the passage itself and in the context immediately before and after the passage.
There are instances, however, when examining the original New Testament Greek can provide better clarity on the meaning of the passage. In the case of Revelations 13:16-17, I wanted to see if the original Greek text supports the idea that the anti-christ/beast directly forces people to get the mark of the beast against their will or, rather, manipulates a situation into existence wherein people must get the mark of the beast in order to buy and sell. To see which understanding the original Greek leans toward I decided to seek the help of Steve Blackwelder, who is very knowledgeable of ancient New Testament Greek and the various ways that is has been translated into different versions of the Bible.
After having discussed it and examined it with Steve, he and I, Greg Wertime, co-wrote the following examining of Revelation 13:16-17. Here is the passage in Greek, Romanized, with the verbs we want to examine in boldface.
Here is the almost word for word translation, with the same verbs in boldface:
16 And it (the second beast of verse 11, the Greek word for "beast" is grammatically neuter) caused everyone,
the small and the great,
and the rich and the poor,
and the free and the slave,
that they may give themselves a sign on their right hand or on their forehead
17 and that no one may be able to buy or sell
unless that one having the sign of the name of the beast or the number of its name.
Verses 16 and 17 are one sentence in Greek. The first verb, poiei, has several possible translations into English, expressing varying levels of force or manipulation from "make" to "bring about". The beast is the grammatical subject and also the agent of this verb. The second verb, dosin, is in the subjunctive mood, which is grammarspeak for not being %100 definite-- for presenting only a possibility and not an absolute reality. Like dosin, the third verb, dunetai, is also the result of poiei, and so dunetai also subjunctive, reflecting its parallel relationship with dosin. Considering the relationship that poiei has with these two subjunctive verbs, poiei is better translated as "cause", which is a softer verb than "make" or "force". This translation of poiei indicates that the beast is not the only agent in advancing the sign of the beast. Rather, the beast causes a situation to exist wherein "everyone" is also an agent, and "everyone" has some degree of choice or volition in the matter.
As a supplement to examining the ancient Greek directly, Steve and I also examined some other New Testament translations of the passage. Here is the NASB (1977) translation, done by a theologically conservative committee who were committed to translating as literally as possible and were less concerned about English style:
And he causes all, the small and the great, the rich and the poor, the free men and the slave, to be given a mark on their right hand, or on their forehead, and he provides that no one should be able to buy or sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Here is the NRSV (1989) translation done by a committee of theological conservatives, moderates and liberals who followed the maxim, "as literal as possible, as free as necessary":
Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell who does not have the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.
Both of these translations do not express the idea of people "giving themselves" the sign in the active sense as it indicated in the original Greek. Both of the NASB and the NRSV translate dosin as the more passive "to be marked" or "to be given". However, both of these translations do use the subtler, more manipulative translation of poiei as "causes".
Now here, again, is the passage in the NIV (1984), translated by a committee of theological conservatives and moderates:
He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could by or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
Unlike the NASB or the NRSV, the NIV translates poiei as "force" instead of "cause". This clashes with the agency of "everyone" that is implied in a careful analysis of the original Greek. It is the NASB and the NRSV translations that are closer to conveying the proper degree of agency on the part of both the beast and "everyone".
Conclusion -- Having examined the original Greek under a microscope, and having cross-referenced other New Testament translations of the passage, the best interpretation of Revelations 13:16-17 is this: that the beast will manipulate people in such a way that leads to an infrastructure wherein one cannot participate in the markeplace without having the mark of the beast. Careful examination of these verses reveals the possibility that the anti-christ will operate more like a vampire than Atilla the Hun, and the mark of the beast will be the result of an infrastructure that is created and nurtured into existence by a populace that has been deceived.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
