Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Thessalonians 5:23 ¶ Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Thessalonians 5:23 ¶ Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you through and through [that is, separate you from profane and vulgar things, make you pure and whole and undamaged--consecrated to Him--set apart for His purpose]; and may your spirit and soul and body be kept complete and [be found] blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. |
Bible Question:
Hi Nicodemus, Thanks for your input, brother. Although I greatly respect Charles C. Ryrie (I, too, have one of the study Bibles), I believe we need to excercise caution when refering to the study notes. Yes, Ryrie does make the statement: "5:23-24 spirit and soul and body should NOT be understood as defining the parts of man, but as representing the whole man." (1 Thess. 5:23) (emphasis mine) My question is, upon what evidence does he base his conclusion? Please don't misunderstand me. I have nothing against Ryrie. What I don't understand is - what has happened to critical thought in the 'Christian community'? Many questions on this forum are answered with 'copy and paste' answers out of one study Bible or another. And, while I agree that a good study Bible is a fine supplement to understanding scripture, I don't believe that it's commentary ever carries the divine inspiration we have in the Word of God. I believe that the scripture we have is our sole source for God's revelation to men. Yes, I believe that God, in His grace, has 'illumined' scripture down through the ages through various Christians. But I view their contributions as supplementary, not substitutionary. All that being said, the Greek DOES make a distinction in these two passages between spirit and soul as you have noted, the spirit (pneuma) and the soul (psuche). Ryrie says that he feels that a destinction SHOULDN'T be made, Nelson's says that a distinction is IMPLIED, and the Scofield says they ARE divisible and distinguished (in certain cases). It seems our 'theologians' are not in agreement. So, brother, what do YOU think? I can read my Ryrie, Nelson, Scofield, NIV Study, Matthew Henry, etc. for myself. But what do YOU think? I would appreciate LIVE interaction with fellow brothers and sisters on these issues. One last disclaimer (humor me). I am just as guilty. The web address that I posted does have a 'theologian's' interpretation there. I understand and accept that that is what it is. I'm just curious as to what other 'live' Christians may think? In Christ, Bill Mc |
Bible Answer: Hello there Bill. Ryrie and Scofield and the creators of the Thomas Nelson Bible are/where all REAL people! And they created their resources for the very purpose of helping us in our understanding of the Bible! If you do not like the use of such resources as this, then that is Ok. But I strongly disagree with you when you try to "belittle" them. Yes, they should not be used in the place of Scripture, and Scripture stands alone. But one should not dismiss them on a whim!! You should not dismiss anyone on any Biblical subject so quickly when you have only spent 30 seconds analyzing a verse and these have spent half of their lives interpreting the Bible! What qualifications do you have? Are you anywhere near as prepared as they to answer specific questions about the Bible? Of course you are not. And neither am I! As for my opinion, I agree with Scofield here. And yes, Scofield was a LIVE Christian! :) I will continue to use any resources that I see fit to put onto this Forum. --Nicodemus |