the words of the law "are not annulled"- for study- not erased nor left out of a religious publishing- [assuming they are good books- for this discussion] while the "force" of the law is inoperative- matching paul's message in several places- the one most clear is second-corinthian-3
*2 cor. 3
in verses 7-11 in greek "the law in stone [litho] which is glory became deprived of force" in other words: void, nothing, made idle, inactive, annulled and deprived of force.
murder will be discussed below. first-
the context compares the glory of the differing services-
now we should analyze this verse- because it is the one that messianic jews use the hebrew word cancel- so they need to play games with the words "what was annulled"- so we must- in search of letting the book establish the doctrine- see which words they dance around.
verse 11 compares something "lasting and permanent" with the law of stone which is different- not permanent.
"even what was annulled and cancelled had glory- hence so much more what is permanent".
this discussion will not speculate "the why"- why is the law of moses temporary- if jesus is deity, then the question never begins and is not valid- the same god who commanded the law, can define which generation is bound and for which generation not in force- there are even sources in the old testament and even rabbinic talmud about time-limits and expiring laws- to be quoted elsewhere- from even rabbinic doctrine- talmud bkorot and mkilta on exodus 12- and several books which i have read have quoted numerous similar rabbinic doctrines- which should remove conflict with paul's messages- these rabbinic comments were for interpreting the "original" commands- but not for this discussion-
the fact is: the content of this new-testament-book.
annulled are the ceremonies in the law-of-moses, and even the moral ideas have expired and need new commands. the "do not murder" of the bible was very limited- VERY, VERY LIMITED, and allowed for "many kinds of killings" in the books exodus, numbers, and even leviticus and deuteronomy too- the killer could- in the biblical literary and religious context-
claim "i did good! i only killed the sinner, not the sin of murder. admittedly, I killed, and yet the command was not: do not kill guilty, so I did not murder" this is the lesson of pineas in numbers [not ferb's family] which matches a long list of immoral-yet-biblicaly-justified murders- which are not "considered murder" to name just one "if my son shames me he deserves death" in exodus 21- look later-please!
and happily that "do not murder" which was very limited, has been deprived of force and a new morality COVERS it. with the word erase and "cover" in col. 2.14.
what is the word in cor. in greek: "argeo"? to annul and to cancel. and it refers to the law- paul is comparing the services and in brief explaining that "the law in stone with glory- was cancelled" the glory is just part of the message- admittedly moses' face stopped glowing at some time- [or perhaps that still glows? I never saw!] the law in stone is the issue here- the greek words: "moses glory face his annulled" and also the glorious message became annulled/cancelled- because in verse 7 the law in stones is mentioned and described as glory- and this glorious "service" is annulled because that is what paul is discussing:
"the service written in stone [litho see previous post: ten of deca-logue annulled]" with+ "moses glory face his argeo" meaning briefly- "the law in stone, which is glory, became annulled". the translations have added several words more than the greek- i will not speculate why, instead we should focus on noting the facts.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2co/3/1/t_conc_1081007
the usage of the word argeo is not only- defined as annul and cancel, which suffices and means to make idle and inoperative- [an archaic word not to be used anymore is: "abrogate" also means annull cancel- repeal, www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/abrogate]
but also we can see the usage in romans 3.3
which i was surprised to discover ensures salvation for those who stop believing the faith.
the word "apostasy" is in this verse- apostasy=a+postis=faith and a+postasy is denial- unfaith, like a+morphous etc.the greek message is "not denial their faith of theo=God annul" when studying this word-term argeo, i discovered it was used in this verse, which simply promises believers: that "denial not annul faith" which they once had.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rom/3/3/t_conc_1049003
DENIAL NOT ANNUL FAITH, cool. many books have debated this issue- and brought numerous verses that god will punish an ex-believer who denies, verses which doctrine requires them to bend, in order to allow the "doctrine" of "guarantee/assure" the grace is secured=security- when in fact behind the veil of lengthy english- is a simple statement "faith is not annulled by denial" this was the books message in romans 3.3- me=no, source:
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3361&t=KJV
denial no annul faith. this means no need for a question mark in kjv! "me+argeo" means "not cancel" and not annul the faith in god [theo]. this is the usage of the word argeo- for cancel=annul=void=deactivate used here in cor. to tell a message that the glorious law of stone- is argeo=deprived of force. in other words- the same idea used for "no+annul+faith", is the word used here for "law+stone+glory+annul"- which became void and cancelled. "the law written in stone with glory is "argeo"= became deprived of force- like the usage in romans, there with the word no, the idea is: became idle, inactive, inoperative, rest, became void nothing [nought archaic same idea] annul, abolish. so you call me "dictionary boy"- I am chatty and loquacious, [remember that action video con-air, 1997?] but when people play games- someone needs to be much more clear.
the idea is "abolish out" kata+argeo. hence the hebrew translators wrote here "btl" for the idea of the law with glory became abolished out.
the message of paul is that the glorious law in stone has become abolished out- so consistently he wrote in romans 8.2 "the law of grace has freed me" note the english word me- even paul the jew is freed from the law of moses- because even if we assume it is good and glorious [or part is good after moral editing and re-interpretation]- it has become "abolished out" and "deprived of force".
now that we have a clear message that the "law" of moses was not permanent, we no longer need to dance around col. 2.14 "cover/erase legal document of decree"- the idea is not only "forgave sins to erase the debt" which is part of the message there- but also "forgiving by erasing the legal document of decree" called the law of moses, so/therefore the violate-r "has not sinned against the deactivated law of moses"- if so, shall we, if so act immoral? jesus does not want that! paul explains and asks this and answers "no"- [in romans, see later, please]
the message is that those commands became "deprived of force" so it is not "considered sin" and that is the forgiveness. in other words: if theoretically an israelite, once commanded not to steal, falls to temptation and secretly takes some chalk home from school [and lost it, in this example]- under the law that is a sin- [+and atheists consider it immoral and bad- probably not prison if he confesses], the forgiveness of sin is "the erasing of the debt document" which refers both to "erase the sin" something spiritual which was created by the act and refferred to as a debt-document and can also refer to the "document of the decree" which is the "law of moses" and that word erase and wipe away is this same idea of deprive of force, written in the other epistle as above. so the immoral bad act- is different than a sin violating the command. it is only immorally bad.
so in theory: do not steal, but if you did, do not tell the missionary "I admit", and instead know that even according to his book- you have not lost all hope.
did god ever tell the gentiles not to steal? moses was sent to israelites! "simon never said so you are out"- unless paul teaches to be moral- which in fact he does in many letters because that is how a disciple of jesus is supposed to act- with morality, the same as an atheist must be moral.
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה