Biblical Scholars: Are there any other examples of the Imperative tense in Greek in Scripture other than the Great Commission at Mt 28:19-20?

[PRmerger]

I will never finish studying Greek. It has been about 12 years now. I have studied with individuals and have systematically gone through the same texts that Seminary students use such as Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek and Wallace’s Greek grammar beyond the basics.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not promoting myself as an expert. However in my dealings with apologists from other religions who have actually attended Seminary I have never found myself at a disadvantage. The adage “use it or lose it” applies to Koine Greek more so than other disciplines!

Dan

Ya know, Dan, thanks but no thanks for the offer to teach me Greek.

It’s not that I don’t trust your scholarship, but would I really know the difference if I asked you to teach me how to say in Greek, “The Great Commission has no primacy over any of the other commands Jesus gave”? I might actually be saying, “My big toe has a nasty fungus on it.” and I would never know!

 

[PRmerger]

I am a firm believer that the bible does interpret itself. Dan

Where do you get this belief from, Dan? Does the Bible teach this?

(Now, you gave an example of what you believe is the Bible interpreting itself, but I’d like to know a chapter and verse where the Bible teaches: Scripture interprets itself.)

 

[dj_dave]

Where do you get this belief from, Dan? Does the Bible teach this?

(Now, you gave an example of what you believe is the Bible interpreting itself, but I’d like to know a chapter and verse where the Bible teaches: Scripture interprets itself.)

Actually, if there is one it doesn’t matter if you are a reasonable person…Remember The apostle Paul made it a practice to ‘reason from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references’ what he taught. (Acts 17:2,3) open your Bible to Romans chapter 9. Here you will find an outstanding example of how the faithful Christian Paul did this. In this one chapter alone, Paul quotes 11 times from other parts of the Bible. Some critic might even charge that Paul does a considerable amount of “skipping around.” Starting with the first book of the Bible, he skips over to the 39th book, before continuing with the 2nd, the 28th, and finally, the 23rd book of the Bible.

Of course, it would have been wrong for Paul to take scriptures out of their context and twist them to fit his own personal ideas. But Paul was not guilty of this. Apparently some early Christians were guilty, however, for the apostle Peter speaks of “things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”—2*Peter 3:16.

Question: Do you think the “knowlege of God” spoken of at Proverbs 2:1-5 can be found in the Bible?..if so, then the Bible has to interpret itself–but, you are right if you think only up to a point. But I believe you are mistaken if you think the CC takes over. SEE FOOTNOTE

Proverbs 2:1-5 "My son, if you will receive my sayings and treasure up my own commandments with yourself, 2 so as to pay attention to wisdom with your ear, that you may incline your heart to discernment; 3 if, moreover, **you call out for understanding itself and you give forth your voice for discernment itself, 4 if you keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures **you keep searching for it, 5 in that case you will understand the fear of Jehovah, and you will find the very knowledge of God. 6 For Jehovah himself gives wisdom; out of his mouth there are knowledge and discernment.…compare Ps.119:9,105; Ps 1:1-5–.or do you feel this is talking about the CC? Did you notice the Knowlegde can BE FOUND in His Word.

‘Twisting the Scriptures to fit our own ideas can result in lasting harm. (2*Pet. 3:15, 16)’ (2)‘Two things can help us to understand the Bible correctly. First, consider the context (surrounding verses) of any statement. Next, compare texts with other statements in the Bible that deal with the same subject. In that way we are letting God’s own Word guide our thinking, and the interpretation is not ours but his. That is the approach taken in the Watch Tower publications.’

A key factor is that the Witnesses really believe that the Bible is God’s Word and that what it contains is there for our instruction. (2 Tim. 3:16,17; Rom. 15:4; 1 Cor. 10:11) So they do not resort to philosophical arguments to evade its clear statements of truth or to justify the way of life of people who have abandoned its moral standards.

In pointing out the meaning of symbolic language in the Bible, they let the Bible provide its own explanation, instead of giving their theories as to its significance. (1Cor. 2:13) Indications as to the meaning of symbolic terms are usually found in other parts of the Bible. (As an example, see Revelation 21:1; then, regarding the meaning of “sea,” read Isaiah 57:20. To identify “the Lamb” referred to in Revelation 14:1, see John 1:29 and 1 Peter 1:19.)

Jesus said that he would have on earth a “faithful and discreet slave” (his anointed followers viewed as a group), through which agency he would provide spiritual food to those making up the household of faith. (Matt. 24:45-47)

Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize that arrangement. As was true of first-century Christians, they look to the governing body of that “slave” class to resolve difficult questions—not on the basis of human wisdom, but by drawing on their knowledge of God’s Word and his dealings with his servants, and with the help of God’s spirit, for which they earnestly pray.—Acts 15:1-29; 16:4,5.

FOOTNOTE
Respectfully, AS I STATED IN ANOTHER THREAD–, if Christ established the Roman Catholic Church, why is it that we look in vain in the Holy Bible for such expressions most current among her, such as trinity, purgatory, mass, immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, No Contraception?

If Christ Jesus and his apostles did indeed establish the Roman Catholic Church, then why is it that we look in vain, from Matthew through Revelation, for any mention whatsoever of the Holy Father, or a pope, a college of cardinals, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs, monsignors, right reverends, abbots, monks and nuns?

Also, if Peter was in Rome Nor do the Scriptures and the facts of history prove that Peter went to Rome, served there as bishop and died there. Paul wrote several of his letters from Rome during the time that Peter was supposed to have been there. Yet in not one of these does he make any reference to Peter’s being in Rome. At 2 Timothy 4:11 Paul complains that only Luke continued with him. And in the letter Paul wrote to the Christian congregation at Rome he sends greetings to twenty-six, and, in all, makes mention of thirty-five Christians, but does not mention Peter. (Rom 15:3-16 Could Paul have thus ignored Peter if Peter had been in Rome, and pope at that? Unthinkable! Indicative of the weakness of the case of Peter’s having been in Rome is the applying of Babylon to Rome at 1Peter 5:13.

Finally, the last living apostle was John, not Peter. The Catholic Encyclopedia lists four popes as succeeding Peter, St. Linus, St. Anacletus I, St. Clement I and St. Evaristus, the last of whom reigned about A.D. 99. John lived until about A.D. 100 Yet John never once mentioned the name of any of these popes or even the fact that any pope existed. Stranger yet Yet, if there was to be a successor, John, one of the twelve foundation stones, would be the most logical choice. and of course the old standby If Peter was given the Authority why then did they continue to argue who is greatest afterward?(Luke 22:24-26) (Mark 9:33-35)

 

[Dan_Parker]

Where do you get this belief from, Dan? Does the Bible teach this?

(Now, you gave an example of what you believe is the Bible interpreting itself, but I’d like to know a chapter and verse where the Bible teaches: Scripture interprets itself.)

If you read what I wrote in context you will see that I make this comment after showing how the CONTEXT explains the very verse we were discussing. My comment is based on my experience that this is frequently the case. It is especially true when discussing a subject with those who like to proof-text.

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

Ya know, Dan, thanks but no thanks for the offer to teach me Greek.

It’s not that I don’t trust your scholarship, but would I really know the difference if I asked you to teach me how to say in Greek, “The Great Commission has no primacy over any of the other commands Jesus gave”? I might actually be saying, “My big toe has a nasty fungus on it.” and I would never know!

From your example, it appears that you misunderstand the value of the original languages in exegesis. It is rarely an exercise to determine the “way” to say a particular English expression in Greek. If the NT was written in English and we spoke Koine Greek your example might have some merit.

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

Like I said, english class wasn’t my strong suit. I got the impression you were saying the act of baptizing was not part of Jesus’ commission.

The act of baptizing is the end result of making disciples. Let me give you an example. Marriage is the end result of courtship, but not part of the courtship.

Does this help?

Dan

 

[ryanoneil]

The act of baptizing is the end result of making disciples. Let me give you an example. Marriage is the end result of courtship, but not part of the courtship.

Does this help?

Dan

That doesn’t make sense to me. How can you seperate the results Jesus is looking for from the commission itself? Jesus isn’t commissioning them to make fiancees. He is commissioning them to make brides (disciples). In order for them to make brides they need to get them married to Jesus. Baptism is the marriage. The act of baptism is the initiation rite that makes one a disciple, and it is part of the commission.

 

[PRmerger]

Actually, if there is one it doesn’t matter if you are a reasonable person…Remember The apostle Paul made it a practice to ‘reason from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references’ what he taught. (Acts 17:2,3) Jesus said that he would have on earth a “faithful and discreet slave” (his anointed followers viewed as a group), through which agency he would provide spiritual food to those making up the household of faith. (Matt. 24:45-47)

The CC teaches that we are to “reason from the Scriptures”. Just looking for a chapter and verse that says that “Scripture interprets itself”, which seems to be a saying among a bunch of bible-believing folks. It’s just that I can’t find that verse in Scripture.

So there isn’t a chapter and verse that says, “Scripture interprets itself” in Scripture…and it would seem that this would be a man-made tradition that some bible-believing Christians have accepted.

Respectfully, AS I STATED IN ANOTHER THREAD–, if Christ established the Roman Catholic Church, why is it that we look in vain in the Holy Bible for such expressions most current among her

These questions have been addressed and conquered on numerous threads. You should check them out…

such as trinity

here

purgatory

here

mass

here

immortal soul, lent, novenas, indulgences, penances, holy water, veneration of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, the Assumption of Mary, No Contraception?

here here here (this is getting tiresome. I think I’ll let you do the rest of the work. Suffice it to say that all your questions have been discussed ad nauseum. BTW, if you bring up the question, you ought to be intellectually honest and go look for the answers. )

 

[PRmerger]

If you read what I wrote in context you will see that I make this comment after showing how the CONTEXT explains the very verse we were discussing. My comment is based on my experience that this is frequently the case. It is especially true when discussing a subject with those who like to proof-text.

Dan

So there is no verse in Scripture that says that Scripture interprets itself, then, Dan, right? If there isn’t, then where do you get that idea?

 

[PRmerger]

From your example, it appears that you misunderstand the value of the original languages in exegesis. It is rarely an exercise to determine the “way” to say a particular English expression in Greek. If the NT was written in English and we spoke Koine Greek your example might have some merit.

Dan

So what did you mean specifically by your offer to teach me Greek?

 

[Dan_Parker]

That doesn’t make sense to me. How can you seperate the results Jesus is looking for from the commission itself? Jesus isn’t commissioning them to make fiancees. He is commissioning them to make brides (disciples). In order for them to make brides they need to get them married to Jesus. Baptism is the marriage. The act of baptism is the initiation rite that makes one a disciple, and it is part of the commission.

Someone can fulfill the commission to preach and teach without finding someone who will listen and get baptized. It is out of their control if someone accepts the message or if they do not. Whether or not they actually make a convert has no bearing on their fulfillment of the commission to teach others. Likewise, someone could court someone with a view to marriage but the person might decline the proposal. That does not mean the person was not courting.

Dan

 

[Dan_Parker]

So what did you mean specifically by your offer to teach me Greek?

What I actually said was:

Would you like me to teach you **some **Greek?

Many issues that divide different denominations are disagreements as to how a text should be translated or how it should be interpreted. In these cases it is necessary to argue from the original languages. If you have noticed, this includes some issues you have raised with me. If you make an effort to engage my arguments which employ Greek you will learn “some” Greek.

Dan

 

[PRmerger]

What I actually said was:

Many issues that divide different denominations are disagreements as to how a text should be translated or how it should be interpreted. In these cases it is necessary to argue from the original languages. If you have noticed, this includes some issues you have raised with me. If you make an effort to engage my arguments which employ Greek you will learn “some” Greek.

Dan

Ah. I see.

So what was your point with the Great Commission, then, and the Greek Imperative? How does one’s understanding about it change if one know the original Greek?

 

[Dan_Parker]

Ah. I see.

So what was your point with the Great Commission, then, and the Greek Imperative? How does one’s understanding about it change if one know the original Greek?

For one thing, one knows that Jesus is giving a command in that verse. One cannot tell this merely from the English text. I use this fact to support the view of Jehovah’s Witnesses that making disciples is not an optional activity for a Christian. It is also not something that one does casually. It has great importance for anyone who wants to obey Christ. In fact, one might say that it is a litmus test for whether one is a Christian.

Can you provide any commands of Jesus for Christians which proves otherwise?

Dan

 

[PRmerger]

For one thing, one knows that Jesus is giving a command in that verse. One cannot tell this merely from the English text. I use this fact to support the view of Jehovah’s Witnesses that making disciples is not an optional activity for a Christian. It is also not something that one does casually. It has great importance for anyone who wants to obey Christ. In fact, one might say that it is a litmus test for whether one is a Christian.

Can you provide any commands of Jesus for Christians which proves otherwise?

Dan

Ok, then! That’s what I thought you were trying to prove with this whole Greek imperative mood thing.

So here’s the thing, Dan. You are creating a strawman argument, arguing as if Catholics are claming the Great Commission is not a command. I’ve already told you, and Zerinus also has told you here in Post #265: we believe it’s a command of Christ.

So please stop trying to prove to us, through your knowledge of Biblical Greek, that Jesus commands us to preach. I already told you, and even gave you a reference (here it is again!) that are all Catholics are called to preach.

So, now my question is why don’t JWs give likewise preference to Jesus’ other commands, like “take and eat” and “do this in memory of me” and “feed my sheep”?

 

[PRmerger]

For one thing, one knows that Jesus is giving a command in that verse. One cannot tell this merely from the English text. I use this fact to support the view of Jehovah’s Witnesses that making disciples is not an optional activity for a Christian. It is also not something that one does casually. It has great importance for anyone who wants to obey Christ. In fact, one might say that it is a litmus test for whether one is a Christian.

Can you provide any commands of Jesus for Christians which proves otherwise?

Dan

And one more thing, knowing the Greek does not change the CC’s interpretation of Mt 28:19-20 one bit.

I still can’t figure out what this whole Greek diversion thing was 'cause it certainly did not answer my original question as to where Scripture shows the Great Commission to be a **priority. ** Your original answer was because it says so in Greek.

Now you’re saying the Greek says it’s a command.

Well, I knew that when I read it in English.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Ok, then! That’s what I thought you were trying to prove with this whole Greek imperative mood thing.

So here’s the thing, Dan. You are creating a strawman argument, arguing as if Catholics are claming the Great Commission is not a command. I’ve already told you, and Zerinus also has told you here in Post #265: we believe it’s a command of Christ.

So please stop trying to prove to us, through your knowledge of Biblical Greek, that Jesus commands us to preach. I already told you, and even gave you a reference (here it is again!) that are all Catholics are called to preach.

So, now my question is why don’t JWs give likewise preference to Jesus’ other commands, like “take and eat” and “do this in memory of me” and “feed my sheep”?

Lets back up a moment. I was explaining why Jehovah’s Witnesses make their ministry more important than higher education and other secular pursuits. I was answering a challenge to Jehovah’s Witnesses. I did not bring up the subject, others brought it up.

As for those other commands like “take and eat”, I have not looked at the Greek and you have not given the references. But that is not necessary because all of those things are done by someone who is primarily making disciples as their vocation.

In fact, the commission explicitly commands that all be taught to “observe **all **that I have commanded you” which means that this Great Commission INCLUDES any command you can dig up in the GNT!

NAB Matthew 28:19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to **observe all that I have commanded **you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.

There are therefore no commands Jesus has given which would not be taught to these disciples. It will be a vain pursuit for you to attempt to find any. All Christians will be making disciples AND doing all those other things.

Dan

 

[PRmerger]

Lets back up a moment. I was explaining why Jehovah’s Witnesses make their ministry more important than higher education and other secular pursuits. I was answering a challenge to Jehovah’s Witnesses. I did not bring up the subject, others brought it up.

So when did you bring up this whole Greek thing?

Here’s what I remember: I asked you where Scripture made the Great Commission a priority. You brought up the Greek thing. Which was a strawman–it never answered my question.

Here’s the text just to help your memory:

Originally Posted by PRmerger
No, Dan. Where do you see that it is given any more priority than “Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you shall not have life within you” or “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” or “Feed my sheep” or “Love your enemies” or “Go and sin no more”.

Show us where does He make it a priority.

Dan:
I will be glad to demonstrate this from the Greek text. In Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus gives his last instructions for his disciples.

So…you can see that you brought up the Greek as if to answer why you believe Matt 28 is a priority…except this Greek nonsense is nothing more than telling us what we already knew. sigh!

 

[PRmerger]

As for those other commands like “take and eat”, I have not looked at the Greek and you have not given the references. But that is not necessary because all of those things are done by someone who is primarily making disciples as their vocation.

Dan

I know nothing about the JW religion except what I’ve read on these few threads. I’ve never ever had one face to face conversation with a JW–so you’re my first exposure to the Witnesses, Dan!

My questions: do the JWs observe the Lord’s Supper? (Obviously I know you don’t celebrate the Eucharist, but I want to know if you at least follow Jesus’ command to “do this in memory of me”)

 

[Dan_Parker]

I know nothing about the JW religion except what I’ve read on these few threads. I’ve never ever had one face to face conversation with a JW–so you’re my first exposure to the Witnesses, Dan!

My questions: do the JWs observe the Lord’s Supper? (Obviously I know you don’t celebrate the Eucharist, but I want to know if you at least follow Jesus’ command to “do this in memory of me”)

As a matter of fact the Lord’s Supper is the only religious celebration Jehovah’s Witnesses observe. We do this annually on the same date as did Jesus in the first century.

Dan