Heresy or error?

[Johann]

So it’s okay though. We don’t arrive at our understanding by one verse but by many.

Thanks for your reply and digging into the Greek, like I've said, it's all in the Definite Articles and in this verse only one, to the [Definite Article] saints kai pistois/faithful.

Pretty amazing...and you still get confused re the kai.....

So let‘s take a look at Ephesians 1:1. The NRSV reads, “To the saints who are in Ephesus and (καί) are faithful in Christ Jesus.” What is the relationship between “ the saints who are in Ephesus” and those who “are faithful in Christ Jesus”? One or two groups? Is the former the larger and the latter a subset? Can you be a “saint” and not be “faithful”?

The Greek is, at first glance, a little more ambiguous than the NRSV. τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσιν [ἐν Ἐφέσῳ] καὶ πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. Word for word: “to the Saints who are in Ephesus and faithful in Christ Jesus.” Grammatically, the question is the precise meaning of καί.

The translations all see correctly (in my opinion) that this cannot be two groups of people. Paul can’t be addressing the “saints,” and then a second group who are “faithful.” If you let a gloss of καί control your understanding of its meaning, you could make this mistake. But none of the translations do.

The ESV comes dangerously close to conveying the wrong idea. “To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus.” In fact, I think they step over the line and miscommunicate. (I lost this vote in committee.)

NASB. “To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus.” The repetition of the “who” connects both phrases to the same “saints.” The NLT makes some effort to avoid the confusion with the use of the comma: “I am writing to God’s holy people in Ephesus, who are faithful followers of Christ Jesus.”

The NIV beautifully sees the καί as epexegetical and writes, “To God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus.”

The HCSB removes all doubt. “To the faithful saints in Christ Jesus at Ephesus.”

The point is that καί has a range of meaning, and you can’t always just stick in “and” and move on.

This also illustrated the myth of translations not being interpretive. If you just went word for word and translated with “and,” you would suggest there are two groups of people, and in my view of Pauline theology that is not possible.

When does καί not mean “and”? (Eph 1:1) | Bill Mounce

Yes?

So just asking questions randomly is not good, especially asking questions off topic.

 

[Johann]

Thanks for your reply and digging into the Greek, like I've said, it's all in the Definite Articles and in this verse only one, to the [Definite Article] saints kai pistois/faithful.

Pretty amazing...

Are you faithful in Christ Jesus? I don’t know, I don’t live with you. What are you like in your conversations? What are you like in your business life? How much do you cheat on your income taxes? Why do you try to make people think you are something when you know good and well you are not?

That is not what it means to be faithful in Christ Jesus. It’s even in the little things. How you treat the waitress when she comes to the table, and you ordered beans, and she brings peas, and they’re cold has a lot to do with whether or not you’re faithful in Christ Jesus. You cannot tell me that a person can be rude to the people God died for and turn right around and claim to faithful in Christ Jesus.

How do you know they are faithful? By the little things. And if they are faithful in little, they will be much. Well, are you faithful this morning in Christ Jesus? I could never point a finger. There are too many times when I am unfaithful. But the believers at Ephesus were faithful. They were saintly saints. And Paul in Ephesians 1 wants them to be enlightened about a few things.

In Chapter 2 he wants them to remember some things, things that will help them. In chapter 3 he wants them to understand and comprehend some things that will bless their socks off. And then in chapters 4-6 he has some things to encourage and instruct them with that will help these saintly saints keep on living as the saints God wants them to be.

Can God count on you in the little things?
Can you be called a true servant of Christ?
Can God trust you with a ministry?
Do you want a ministry?
Can God trust you?
Are you faithful?
Are you the one that can disciple others?
Can you share the Word?
If you are not living it yourself,
how can you teach it to anyone else.

J.

...and...
So let‘s take a look at Ephesians 1:1. The NRSV reads, “To the saints who are in Ephesus and (καί) are faithful in Christ Jesus.” What is the relationship between “ the saints who are in Ephesus” and those who “are faithful in Christ Jesus”? One or two groups? Is the former the larger and the latter a subset? Can you be a “saint” and not be “faithful”?

The Greek is, at first glance, a little more ambiguous than the NRSV. τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσιν [ἐν Ἐφέσῳ] καὶ πιστοῖς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ. Word for word: “to the Saints who are in Ephesus and faithful in Christ Jesus.” Grammatically, the question is the precise meaning of καί.

The translations all see correctly (in my opinion) that this cannot be two groups of people. Paul can’t be addressing the “saints,” and then a second group who are “faithful.” If you let a gloss of καί control your understanding of its meaning, you could make this mistake. But none of the translations do.

The ESV comes dangerously close to conveying the wrong idea. “To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus.” In fact, I think they step over the line and miscommunicate. (I lost this vote in committee.)

NASB. “To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus.” The repetition of the “who” connects both phrases to the same “saints.” The NLT makes some effort to avoid the confusion with the use of the comma: “I am writing to God’s holy people in Ephesus, who are faithful followers of Christ Jesus.”

The NIV beautifully sees the καί as epexegetical and writes, “To God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus.”

The HCSB removes all doubt. “To the faithful saints in Christ Jesus at Ephesus.”

The point is that καί has a range of meaning, and you can’t always just stick in “and” and move on.

This also illustrated the myth of translations not being interpretive. If you just went word for word and translated with “and,” you would suggest there are two groups of people, and in my view of Pauline theology that is not possible.

When does καί not mean “and”? (Eph 1:1) | Bill Mounce

 

[stunnedbygrace]

NASB. “To the saints who are at Ephesus and who are faithful in Christ Jesus

That’s not NASB, its the 1995 NASB.
Im not a scholar so someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but in the translation you are quoting, the words “who are” are in italics, which means they were added by translators. Normally, I wouldnt say it, but in NASB, according to my understanding, the goal was to,as closely as possible, render an exact word for word translation. So in italics words are…what the translators consider to have been implied in the Greek, not what was actually there.
So it doesn’t mean the way you are seeing it is wrong but it also doesn’t mean the way daveH or I see it is wrong. We don’t know which side is wrong. It could go either way. So then, you look for other verses and the whole of scripture to see which way it takes you to figure out: are all believers really exactly the same and are holy or are two groups being greeted? And if you come to the conclusion you were seeing it right, are you saying you are holy/sinless? Or are you saying one can be be holy while sinning?

What you seem to be saying by the rest of your post is that you are not faithful and only the holy are faithful. In which case, you, Johann, are not faithful, since you have your flesh still ruling you. And of course no man would need to pick up his cross and follow if his flesh were NOT still alive.
Which begs the question, can you trust God/have faith at different growth levels and God still make a place for you or are only the holy given eternal life? Jesus said if you believe Him you will never die, so where did a thought ever come that you must be holy and never sinning in the flesh to be saved? God forgives sinners, doesn’t He? It says He died for us WHILE we were in our sins. It also says if we forgive those who trespass against us that God will forgive us. We are told to take the lowest place, stay humble, refuse to judge. Since the holy would already BE doing those things, WHO is being spoken to when scripture GIVES that training in what righteousness is and says pick up your cross?

In downgrading holiness to include all believers, whether weaned yet or not, whether crucified yet or not, whether sinning or not, we have made a problem that cannot be twisted to fit anything. It’s a Frankenstein. It does not lead anywhere.
And it’s unnecessary.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

The translations all see correctly (in my opinion) that this cannot be two groups of people.

If all the translations see it correctly, then why do many, including the ones I listed, render it in wording that suggests they are not the same group?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

When Paul would give them heck in one of his letters, was he giving holy men of God heck? Or was he giving those still carnal heck? And if there were no such thing as being no longer carnal/no longer ruled by your flesh, why would he even mention - you are still worldly, you are yet carnal?
And if, as you say, there is no state of sinlessness, why would Paul give them heck for acting carnally?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Good morning, by the way. I just jumped in without even a how ya doing! Lol. I guess it shows my eagerness to speak with you.

 

[Johann]

That’s not NASB, its the 1995 NASB.
Im not a scholar so someone can correct me if I’m wrong, but in the translation you are quoting, the words “who are” are in italics, which means they were added by translators. Normally, I wouldnt say it, but in NASB, according to my understanding, the goal was to,as closely as possible, render an exact word for word translation. So in italics words are…what the translators consider to have been implied in the Greek, not what was actually there.
So it doesn’t mean the way you are seeing it is wrong but it also doesn’t mean the way daveH or I see it is wrong. We don’t know which side is wrong. It could go either way. So then, you look for other verses and the whole of scripture to see which way it takes you to figure out: are all believers really exactly the same and are holy? And in that case, are you saying you are holy/sinless? Or are you saying one can be be holy while sinning?

As for וְ and הֶאֱמִ֖ן H539 be firm בַּֽ in יהוָ֑ה H3068 YHWH וַ and יַּחְשְׁבֶ֥הָ H2803 account לֹּ֖ו to צְדָקָֽה׃ H6666 justice

Gen 15:6 וְהֶאֱמִ֖ן H539 ve·he·'e·Min And he believed בַּֽיהוָ֑ה H3068 Yah·weh; in the LORD וַיַּחְשְׁבֶ֥הָ H2803 vai·yach·she·Ve·ha and he counted לּ֖וֹ H0 lo צְדָקָֽה׃ H6666 tze·da·Kah. it to him for righteousness


Exo_16:23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

Exo_19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.

Exo_22:31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.

Exo_30:32 Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured, neither shall ye make any other like it, after the composition of it: it is holy, and it shall be holy unto you.

Exo_30:37 And as for the perfume which thou shalt make, ye shall not make to yourselves according to the composition thereof: it shall be unto thee holy for the LORD.

Exo_31:14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

Lev_11:44 For I am the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Lev_11:45 For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

Listen to some anointed preaching as opposed to "the digital hagiosune" of Epi.

Do I sin? Yes?
Do I sin like the unbeliever? No.
Besides, you and I have proven and debunked "sinless perfection" and at this latter stage in our lives.

Are we as holy as YHVH?
No.
Are we clothed with Christ's righteousness?
Yes.
Job 29:14
Verse Concepts
“I put on righteousness, and it clothed me;
My justice was like a robe and a turban.

Revelation 19:8
Verse Concepts
It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

Isaiah 61:10
Verse Concepts
I will rejoice greatly in the Lord,
My soul will exult in my God;
For He has clothed me with garments of salvation,
He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness,
As a bridegroom decks himself with a garland,
And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

Isaiah 59:17
Verse Concepts
He put on righteousness like a breastplate,
And a helmet of salvation on His head;
And He put on garments of vengeance for clothing
And wrapped Himself with zeal as a mantle.

Isaiah 11:5
Verse Concepts
Also righteousness will be the belt about His loins,
And faithfulness the belt about His waist.

Isaiah 64:6
Verse Concepts
For all of us have become like one who is unclean,
And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment;
And all of us wither like a leaf,
And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Psalm 132:9
Verse Concepts
Let Your priests be clothed with righteousness,
And let Your godly ones sing for joy.

Zechariah 3:4
Verse Concepts
He spoke and said to those who were standing before him, saying, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” Again he said to him, “See, I have taken your iniquity away from you and will clothe you with festal robes.”

Revelation 3:4
Verse Concepts
But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

Source: 9 Bible verses about Clothed With Righteousness
Now this is not a topic to be "exhausted" overnight......

Nor can we know the incomprehensible YHVH, only what is illuminated in Scriptures by the Spirit and no "new" revelation.


This is holy ground, we should not be presumptuous and foolish like Ananias and Sapphira

More divine speech and less words we should desire.

Can a dictionary define what holiness or love is?

I sincerely hope you will give this video clip a listen, or forbear.

 

[Johann]

Good morning, by the way. I just jumped in without even a how ya doing! Lol. I guess it shows my eagerness to speak with you.

It is 3.00 PM here in south Africa.

How am I doing? I am listening to a sister with way too many questions, hither and thither, no offense.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You see these things I don’t know where you get them from. It seems to me that if you get angry it’s someone else’s fault…
You can not control someone else’s tongue and you likewise can not blame someone else’s tongue for your tongue.
you just have to accept that everyone is ruled by their flesh, including you, and ask for what you see you lack.
The way God works is to change you first, not anyone else.
If you’re waiting for someone else to be nice before you’ll be nice, you’ll be still waiting 10 years from now. You don’t have because you don’t ask is quite true.

But this got me thinking of the news and how all these talking heads all say what, or who, the problem is when it’s the flesh that’s the problem. Always. I know unbelievers aren’t going to see their lack and so pray for what they need, but we sure can get disgusted enough with it all to do so!

Much of what you say is pretty good. Your last two sentences are gold. I enjoy reading your posts sis.

 

[CadyandZoe]

That is why I prefer the word saints here instead of Holy. A Saint is anything lower than God. For man to become more like God is to become a saint. That term and its true meaning was Robbed from the church with the reformation teaching that all believers are saints.

Well, Okay. But remember the word "saint" comes from the Latin word "sanctus" and it means "holy". The word literally means "holy one."

I very much appreciated your observation of Ephesians chapter one and the distinction between "saints" and the "faithful." And even though I have translated through Ephesians 3 or 4 times, I somehow missed that. I tend to gloss over phrases like that, not really giving them much thought.

I have often wondered whether Paul speaks about faithful Jews as "saints" in some contexts. I have not proven that idea so I can't say one way or the other but it might explain his usage here, especially since he continues to maintain the Jew/Gentile distinction until verse 1:13 where he masterfully argues for the unification of both Jew and Gentile in Christ through the Spirit.

So, thanks for that observation.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

How am I doing? I am listening to a sister with way too many questions, hither and thither, no offense.

You just haven’t found the questions yet! :)

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Well, Okay. But remember the word "saint" comes from the Latin word "sanctus" and it means "holy". The word literally means "holy one."

I very much appreciated your observation of Ephesians chapter one and the distinction between "saints" and the "faithful." And even though I have translated through Ephesians 3 or 4 times, I somehow missed that. I tend to gloss over phrases like that, not really giving them much thought.

I have often wondered whether Paul speaks about faithful Jews as "saints" in some contexts. I have not proven that idea so I can't say one way or the other but it might explain his usage here, especially since he continues to maintain the Jew/Gentile distinction until verse 1:13 where he masterfully argues for the unification of both Jew and Gentile in Christ through the Spirit.

So, thanks for that observation.

I didn’t notice that Dave says there a saint is anything lower than God. but even he doesn’t believe that so…maybe just incomplete wording.
Hah! Maybe Dave has some of my same confusions off and on.

 

[CadyandZoe]

If all the translations see it correctly, then why do many, including the ones I listed, render it in wording that suggests they are not the same group?

I can't answer for sure, but our men's group is studying through Paul's epistle to Timothy where Paul lists the qualifications for particular elders who will also teach the church. In his second epistle to Timothy he says this.

You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 3 Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 2 Timothy 2:1-3

This seems to imply that some men might not be qualified to teach based on the fact that they are unreliable or unfaithful at times. Timothy is to seek out "faithful men" who will be able to teach others.

If Paul has two groups in mind, in the first chapter of Ephesians, perhaps the larger group is "saints" and among that larger group there exists "faithful men" who teach.

If true, perhaps we can paraphrase it this way, "Paul, to the saints who live in Ephesus and those faithful men who lead you . . ."

I don't know. I am thinking through this out loud because I know there are some pretty smart people here.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I didn’t notice that Dave says there a saint is anything lower than God. but even he doesn’t believe that so…maybe just incomplete wording.
Hah! Maybe Dave has some of my same confusions off and on.

Well, if that is where you live, believe me when I say, I am living just down the street. (figuratively speaking of course. :)

 

[Episkopos]

I can't answer for sure, but our men's group is studying through Paul's epistle to Timothy where Paul lists the qualifications for particular elders who will also teach the church. In his second epistle to Timothy he says this.

You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 3 Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 2 Timothy 2:1-3

This seems to imply that some men might not be qualified to teach based on the fact that they are unreliable or unfaithful at times. Timothy is to seek out "faithful men" who will be able to teach others.

If Paul has two groups in mind, in the first chapter of Ephesians, perhaps the larger group is "saints" and among that larger group there exists "faithful men" who teach.

If true, perhaps we can paraphrase it this way, "Paul, to the saints who live in Ephesus and those faithful men who lead you . . ."

I don't know. I am thinking through this out loud because I know there are some pretty smart people here.

This is an interesting way of seeing what Paul wrote. I think there is something to it. Of course if Paul had in mind ONLY leaders then he would have said that...because he respected the leaders in a given place. However, I think your idea fits into the narrative...although it doesn't explain all of it.

I think we have lost the idea of what a saint is. For the Catholics, there are almost no saints...and they only exist if THEY say so. Then there's the Protestants who have everybody being a saint. Clearly each of these is mistaken.

The saint is the one who walks in holiness...an example to the flock. The faithful see things and behave with the proper balance of humility and faith. The faithful are submitted to God and those who walk in holiness. Since the ones who are being taught are not (yet) holy, they need for those who can relate to them (among the faithful) to teach them. Of course a saint is also meant to be faithful...so there's that.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

View attachment 28029

Listen to some anointed preaching as opposed to "the digital hagiosune" of Epi.

I have read every book I ever found by Tozer. He has helped and encouraged me very much. And I have heard this recording too. I listened to it again from the point where you had it paused, but it doesn’t seem like you even listened to it… Tozer literally SAYS he had only met a few men that had that “something different.“ He doesn’t himself claim it. So even Tozer disagrees with you. UNLESS I am seriously NOT understanding you.

Do I sin? Yes?
Do I sin like the unbeliever? No.
Besides, you and I have proven and debunked "sinless perfection" and at this latter stage in our lives.

okay…so you murder someone in your heart and it even proceeds to the outside of your cup too and you murder the person for all to see. How is that sinning differently than an unbeliever who murders inwardly and then outwardly the same exact way as you have. How is it you say you do not sin like the unbeliever?

You and I have not debunked together sinlessness…you believe there is no state of sinlessness possible and I DO believe it’s possible. Likely? Probably not, given our very weak and compromised state. But possible.

Are we as holy as YHVH?
No.

Are you partially holy? What does not “as holy” mean? Does it mean…I’m almost as holy as God? Does it mean I’m halfway as holy as God? One-third as holy?

Are we clothed with Christ's righteousness?
Yes.

Im not part of that we. I’m not as unbendingly sure of everything as you are (but then, a short time ago you were just as unbendingly sure of Calvinism, so that might deserve some consideration as concerns your certainties versus your criticism of the “waffling” of others) but I am pretty darn certain I am covered in His Blood but have not yet entered into or walked in His holiness in order TO be clothed in His spotless righteousness.
Walk by trust, yes. Believe a thing just because you (or even most men) say it? Not so much.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Sinless perfection has taken this Forum by force, correct? Epi and most of the prominent members, yes?

I only ever see a few who see what he says or agree by scripture that it’s true. So no, I wouldn’t say any prominent members agree that it’s a possibility to walk in Gods holiness. It certainly hasn’t taken over the whole forum.

 

[David H.]

Well, Okay. But remember the word "saint" comes from the Latin word "sanctus" and it means "holy". The word literally means "holy one."

I very much appreciated your observation of Ephesians chapter one and the distinction between "saints" and the "faithful." And even though I have translated through Ephesians 3 or 4 times, I somehow missed that. I tend to gloss over phrases like that, not really giving them much thought.

I have often wondered whether Paul speaks about faithful Jews as "saints" in some contexts. I have not proven that idea so I can't say one way or the other but it might explain his usage here, especially since he continues to maintain the Jew/Gentile distinction until verse 1:13 where he masterfully argues for the unification of both Jew and Gentile in Christ through the Spirit.

So, thanks for that observation.

By Saying a saint is less than God, I am saying a saint first and foremost is submitted to God fully. A saint is a term that is applied to those who are servants of God.... God is Holy, we grow in holiness and godliness by our submission and surrender of our will to the will of God by yielding to the work of the spirit in us. We are His workmanship (Eph. 2:10). That way we cannot boast about our works, But rather give glory to God for his work in us. God's Love is perfected in us (1 John 4:12)

I have read every book I ever found by Tozer. He has helped and encouraged me very much. And I have heard this recording too. I listened to it again from the point where you had it paused, but it doesn’t seem like you even listened to it… Tozer literally SAYS he had only met a few men that had that “something different.“ He doesn’t himself claim it. So even Tozer disagrees with you. UNLESS I am seriously NOT understanding you.

Tozer helped me to form and articulate the views I am presenting here. He Spoke about the saints more than any modern writer. I Agree with you, he is not familiar with Tozer at all.

I think we have lost the idea of what a saint is. For the Catholics, there are almost no saints...and they only exist if THEY say so. Then there's the Protestants who have everybody being a saint. Clearly each of these is mistaken.

This is how reactionary religion causes the opposite extreme. "Catholic Church Bad, therefore all Catholic teaching bad" Then they tie things like distinguishing between the faithful and the saints out as Catholic Dogma when it was not meant to be done. For 1500 years the church as we knew it (flawed as it was) distinguished between the saints and the faithful.... it Got corrupted into the veneration and paying of indulgences to the saints, which no true saint wants in this life, nor in death, So in reacting to this, The reformers through the baby out with the dirty bathwater. It is a pride thing if you ask me to claim all believers are saints. It creates complacency, and a lack of desire to mature Spiritually, and creates Spiritual blindness.

 

[Johann]

I only ever see a few who see what he says or agree by scripture that it’s true. So no, I wouldn’t say any prominent members agree that it’s a possibility to walk in Gods holiness. It certainly hasn’t taken over the whole forum.

There is a miscommunication

 

[stunnedbygrace]

God is Holy, we grow in holiness

Am I being too picky to ask you to expand this?