tulsa 2011
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2010
- Messages
- 354
Transgressors In Isaiah 1: 28 and Quarrels In Romans 1: 29
Isaiah 1: 28. "And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed."
Isaiah 1: 28 talks about the transgressors and the sinners as two different ways of displeasing God. In Isaiah 1: 28 sinners is from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Number 2400, chatta, "a criminal, or one accounted guilty, offender, sinful, sinner."
One who violates the moral law in some way is a sinner.
But in Isaiah 1: 28 the transgressors are from Strong's number 6586, pasha, "a primary root through the idea of expansion, to break away, from just authority, i.e., trespass, apostatize, quarrel, offend, rebel, revolt, transgress."
Transgressors are those who break away from just authority, which is the word of God, and go into apostasy, or false doctrines. It is very interesting that Strong's includes the word quarrel in the definition of transgressors, from the Hebrew word pasha. For Paul in Romans 1: 29 in talking about those given over to a reprobate mind lists debate as one of their traits, among several other traits of the reprobate mind.
In Romans 1: 29, debate is from eris, Strong's number 2054, "a quarrel, by implication, wrangling, contention, debate, strife, variance." Those who engage in quarrels are contentious, and full of strife.
Link removed.
"Middle English debaten, from Old French debatre : de-, de- + battre, to beat; see batter."
The motivation in bickering or quarreling is to verbally beat
your opponent, to win the argument.
To argue that debate as a quarrel, as contention, and strife is now acceptable for Christians is to admit that Christianity in 2013 has come under the influence of humanism. As Solzhenitsyn said several decades ago, humanism has had a large influence over Christianity in the West.
Bickering, as on Christian forums, has much the same meaning as quarreling.
Those who try to follow Jude 1: 3, and earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints, would not want to be part of the world and agree that quarrels and bickerings using words against others is acceptable. Contending for the truth as stated in the Bible is acceptable.
Paul in I Corinthians 1: 10-11 says "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you." Contentious is from eris.
I Corinthians 11: 16 says "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
II Corinthians 12: 20 says "For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:"
Here the Greek word eris is translated as debates and eritheia is translated as strifes. Again, a debate can be strife or contention by words. A debate does not have to be contentiousness expressed verbally, but human nature has not changed though some claim the meaning of debate has changed.
Paul uses a different Greek word in II Timothy 2: 23, mache, "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes."
And in I Timothy 6: 3-4 he uses an interesting Greek word, logomachia, "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings."
This is a significant text, because what Paul is saying is that those who get off into doctrines that were not taught by Christ and the Apostles tend to get into logomachia, or strifes of words." Lets see what Strong's says about logomachia.
Logomachia is number 3055 in Strong's and is said to mean "disputations, strife of words." One might translate logomachia as "word fights."
Yet Paul and Barnabus in Acts 15: 2 enaged in dissention and disputation with those Pharisees who claimed to believe in the Messiah, but insisted that Christians who had been Gentiles be circumcised and keep the law of Moses (the ceremonial law) to be saved.
Paul was defending the doctrines he received from just authority, that is, from the risen Jesus Christ, as he describes in Acts 26: 15-18. He was not making a quarrel against New Testament doctrines as a transgressor does.
Disssention is from Strong's 4714, stasis, a standing, position, dissention, insurrection, standing, uproar."
Paul was sticking to the position, or doctrines given him by Christ. He was standing for them.
Disputation in Acts 15: 2 is Strong's number 4803, suzetesis, "mutual questioning, i.e, discussion, disputation, reasoning."
Those who defend their false doctrines, their transgressions, or their pasha, often do so in making a quarrel against that which is of faith, and against scripture, and especially are opposed to interpreting scripture by scripture rather than by man-made theology.
Isaiah 1: 28. "And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed."
Isaiah 1: 28 talks about the transgressors and the sinners as two different ways of displeasing God. In Isaiah 1: 28 sinners is from Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Number 2400, chatta, "a criminal, or one accounted guilty, offender, sinful, sinner."
One who violates the moral law in some way is a sinner.
But in Isaiah 1: 28 the transgressors are from Strong's number 6586, pasha, "a primary root through the idea of expansion, to break away, from just authority, i.e., trespass, apostatize, quarrel, offend, rebel, revolt, transgress."
Transgressors are those who break away from just authority, which is the word of God, and go into apostasy, or false doctrines. It is very interesting that Strong's includes the word quarrel in the definition of transgressors, from the Hebrew word pasha. For Paul in Romans 1: 29 in talking about those given over to a reprobate mind lists debate as one of their traits, among several other traits of the reprobate mind.
In Romans 1: 29, debate is from eris, Strong's number 2054, "a quarrel, by implication, wrangling, contention, debate, strife, variance." Those who engage in quarrels are contentious, and full of strife.
Link removed.
"Middle English debaten, from Old French debatre : de-, de- + battre, to beat; see batter."
The motivation in bickering or quarreling is to verbally beat
your opponent, to win the argument.
To argue that debate as a quarrel, as contention, and strife is now acceptable for Christians is to admit that Christianity in 2013 has come under the influence of humanism. As Solzhenitsyn said several decades ago, humanism has had a large influence over Christianity in the West.
Bickering, as on Christian forums, has much the same meaning as quarreling.
Those who try to follow Jude 1: 3, and earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints, would not want to be part of the world and agree that quarrels and bickerings using words against others is acceptable. Contending for the truth as stated in the Bible is acceptable.
Paul in I Corinthians 1: 10-11 says "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you." Contentious is from eris.
I Corinthians 11: 16 says "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
II Corinthians 12: 20 says "For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:"
Here the Greek word eris is translated as debates and eritheia is translated as strifes. Again, a debate can be strife or contention by words. A debate does not have to be contentiousness expressed verbally, but human nature has not changed though some claim the meaning of debate has changed.
Paul uses a different Greek word in II Timothy 2: 23, mache, "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes."
And in I Timothy 6: 3-4 he uses an interesting Greek word, logomachia, "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings."
This is a significant text, because what Paul is saying is that those who get off into doctrines that were not taught by Christ and the Apostles tend to get into logomachia, or strifes of words." Lets see what Strong's says about logomachia.
Logomachia is number 3055 in Strong's and is said to mean "disputations, strife of words." One might translate logomachia as "word fights."
Yet Paul and Barnabus in Acts 15: 2 enaged in dissention and disputation with those Pharisees who claimed to believe in the Messiah, but insisted that Christians who had been Gentiles be circumcised and keep the law of Moses (the ceremonial law) to be saved.
Paul was defending the doctrines he received from just authority, that is, from the risen Jesus Christ, as he describes in Acts 26: 15-18. He was not making a quarrel against New Testament doctrines as a transgressor does.
Disssention is from Strong's 4714, stasis, a standing, position, dissention, insurrection, standing, uproar."
Paul was sticking to the position, or doctrines given him by Christ. He was standing for them.
Disputation in Acts 15: 2 is Strong's number 4803, suzetesis, "mutual questioning, i.e, discussion, disputation, reasoning."
Those who defend their false doctrines, their transgressions, or their pasha, often do so in making a quarrel against that which is of faith, and against scripture, and especially are opposed to interpreting scripture by scripture rather than by man-made theology.
