Results 41 - 46 of 46
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: RWC Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Is His humanity a reasonable explanation | James 1:13 | RWC | 131784 | ||
Yes, I have heard the explanation that Christ was tempted in His humanity but not in His divinity. I find that explanation to be somewhat unsatisfying though. Yes, Jesus was and is fully human and fully divine. Those two natures were somehow brought into a single union; by this I mean that Jesus is and was one individual being. But by saying that Jesus was tempted as a human though not in His divinity, are we not then suggesting that there is a "division" between Jesus the Son of God and Jesus the Son of Man; that they are somehow two different entities? That certainly seems, to me at least, to be where that explanation leads, and that is not good place to go. Does the Commentary Critical to which you refer offer this explanation for Jas. 1.13? I don't know of this commentary so I can't check myself. I agree with you that there is a difference between being tempted and falling to that temptation. But that difference really doesn't come into play in understanding this verse, although it is certainly part of the context of the verse (cf. vv. 14-15). This verse, or at least the part I am asking about, says quite directly (in the modern English translations) that God cannot be tempted, not just that He cannot fall to temptation. The problem comes around though because we know (Mt. 4.1 and He. 4.15) that Jesus the eternal Son of God was tempted. What are we not understanding that makes this seem like a contradiction? |
||||||
42 | Greek help in translation anyone? | James 1:13 | RWC | 131785 | ||
Would the translation "God ought not to be tempted" be a more reasonable (or better) translation of the Greek in thsi verse instead of "God cannot be tempted"? Is there anyone out there with enough of a background in Greek to be able to offer a litle insight here? | ||||||
43 | How do they go together? | James 1:13 | RWC | 131821 | ||
To answer your question first, I don't think that it should be translated any differently than it is commonly communicated in the major modern English versions. That translation was offered to me as a "possibly better" rendering of the text by someone whom I respect a great deal and who knows Greek far better than I (though he is no expert either and he would never suggest that he was). My guess is that he read a definition for apeirastos similar to the one you quoted (untried, that is, not temptable: not to be tempted) and then he grabbed on to the last part of the definition (not to be tempted) as a means to try to deal with this apparent contradiction. I told him at the time that I thought he was on pretty thin ice textually, but that I would think about it and research it a little. So that is where the Greek part of the question comes from. I still think he is on thin ice textually. I would like to ask you a question from your comments though. You wrote that "God cannot sin, so He cannot be tempted to sin." If that is true, exactly and litterally as you have put it, how do you understand verses and passages that say that Jesus was tempted (Mt. 4.1 and He. 4.15 for example)? |
||||||
44 | So you tr: "God ought not to be tempted" | James 1:13 | RWC | 131844 | ||
There is much in your note with which I would heartily agree, but I am not entirely clear about your understanding of the Greek meaning of this word as it pertains to God in this verse. You wrote, "there is a kind of tempting of God that is prohibited. That is the kind that tests His patience in the face of disobedience." Then you add, "James in this passage is talking about that kind of temptation." Are you then in agreement with my friend's suggested translation of this verse as "God ought not to be tempted" (ie. God can be temptable, but we are not do it) or are you more inclined to stay with the common translation of "God cannot be tempted" (ie. God is untemptable)? Either option, of course, leads to further questions. A large part of the confusion that this passages causes, it seems to me, comes from the fact that this Greek word can have quite different meanings: *testing* meaning as you said "to be scrutinized, examined, proven, tested, assayed" and *tempting* meaning again as you said, "trying to get someone to do wrong, especially by a promise of reward." That confusion is made all the greater because, it seems, that at different places even within the context of this one passage (James chapter 1), both meanings are intended by the use of this one word. |
||||||
45 | 1. logic? 2. differences with Eng. tr.? | James 1:13 | RWC | 131872 | ||
Hello Doc, If I may sir, I have two questions from your post. If I sound like "I am not getting it," I guess it is because I'm not. Please be patient with me. Question 1: How does your logic work here? You wrote that: 1. We are commanded not to tempt God. 2. Christ was tempted. Christ is God. Therefore, God was tempted. and then you say: "These conclusions make it impossible for your friend's translation to stand." But it sounds to me like your points 1 and 2 are *exactly* what my friend is trying to get this verse to say (that is, that we are being commanded not to tempt or test God: "God ought not to be tempted")! I don't think there is anything wrong with the statement biblically or theologically. I just am questioning whether it stands up textually in this verse. Question 2: Are you suggesting that textually this verse is not saying that God is untemptable (sorry for the double-negative), but rather that God cannot be tempted to the point of giving into sin? That seemed to be the point being emphasized by the literal translation that you offered for this verse, especially in light of your acknowledgment that God can be tempted. And if that is true (if that is what you see being said and emphasized in the text of this verse), then why do you suppose that none of the major English translations have translated it that way? They all seem to emphasize that God is untemptable. I hope I am not testing your patience with my questions. I'm just trying to understand. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss this with me. |
||||||
46 | How do you reconcile them? | James 1:13 | RWC | 131873 | ||
Hi there, I have no problem with the fact that Jesus maintained a position of authority over Satan throughout His whole earthly life through the power of the Holy Spirit and the power of the Word of God, including the period of temptations in the wilderness. The question I was trying to ask is, "How are we to understand this verse that seems to say that God is untemptable when we have other verses that seem to say that God the Son was tempted?" How do you understand it? How do you put this verse together with verses like Heb 4:15 and Mt. 4:1? |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |