Help with Greek please.

[Carl Emerson]

Luke 3:14 and Matt 10:16.

In both cases the KJV seems to depart from an accurate rendering of the Greek.

These verses are being sited to put a case for Christian Pacifism.

Luke 3:14

This verse is not commanding soldiers to refrain from violence as some are claiming. It refers to low paid soldiers not extorting money from folks by intimidating them. Agree or not???

Matt 10:16

NASB Matt 10:16 reads "Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves.

The literal greek means unmixed (meaning pure) so the suggestion of not doing harm is not there. This blends with Jesus driving out the money changers with pure motive.... Agree or not???

Appreciate you guys being there as my Greek is rudimentary.

 

[ewq1938]

Appreciate you guys being there as my Greek is rudimentary.

It's really not a Greek or translational issue. Neither verse speaks of pacifism. One tells soldiers not to commit crimes and one is about being wise and good Christians.

 

[Carl Emerson]

It's really not a Greek or translational issue. Neither verse speaks of pacifism. One tells soldiers not to commit crimes and one is about being wise and good Christians.

Yes but the claim is that soldiers are no longer to be violent. Compare KJV to NASB

And in the second verse the emphasis is on gentle rather than innocent - again the claim that Christians cant be forceful at times and still in righteousness (think Jesus and the money changers)

I have had to forcefully restrain a person with a knife, she was later wonderfully saved. I am told this was not Christian as I should have been gentle...

These questions came from a thread here...
Yes, murder CAN be justified...

Sadly this became a verse war and I was roundly condemned.

 

[ewq1938]

Yes but the claim is that soldiers are no longer to be violent. Compare KJV to NASB

Well, the verse is about the soldiers not abusing their power to commit crimes. That has nothing to do with the role of soldier to fight in wars.

And in the second verse the emphasis is on gentle rather than innocent - again the claim that Christians cant be forceful at times and still in righteousness (think Jesus and the money changers)

They are just misapplying the verse towards something it does not speak about.

I have had to forcefully restrain a person with a knife, she was later wonderfully saved. I am told this was not Christian as I should have been gentle...

These questions came from a thread here...
Yes, murder CAN be justified...

Sadly this became a verse war and I was roundly condemned.

People tend to forget that we are to imitate Christ and he returns as a violent warrior that kills many people (some say all humanity). While I don't see his immortal saints killing anyone, they are a part of the army that comes with him and who shall help him rule with a rod of iron and a rod of iron isn't meek and forceless.

 

[public hermit]

This verse is not commanding soldiers to refrain from violence as some are claiming. It refers to low paid soldiers not extorting money from folks by intimidating them. Agree or not???

Agree.

The literal greek means unmixed (meaning pure) so the suggestion of not doing harm is not there. This blends with Jesus driving out the money changers with pure motive.... Agree or not???

akeraios (adj.) From Liddle-Scott: entire, unharmed, of cities or countries; or uncontaminated, guileless for persons.

I don't see much value in trying to use these passages to support pacifism.

 

[public hermit]

I have had to forcefully restrain a person with a knife, she was later wonderfully saved.

Wow, she must have been pretty violent. A knife? At any rate...

I think I see what you're getting at. One can be guileless (akeraios) and yet, due to circumstances, end up harming another. Let's say you are physically defending the helpless and injure the attacker in the process. The intent was not to harm but to protect; nonetheless, in the act of protecting the helpless, someone was harmed. One can remain guileless throughout that whole situation. Guileless is more along the lines of unpretentious, genuine, artless, not intending to deceive, etc.

 

[ewq1938]

Wow, she must have been pretty violent. A knife? At any rate...

I think I see what you're getting at. One can be guileless (akeraios) and yet, due to circumstances, end up harming another.

And a Dove is not a predator so does not go out with any intent to harm anyone. Something like a Hawk would be much different.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Mmmm... then you don't support serving in the military?

 

[public hermit]

And a Dove is not a predator so does not go out with any intent to harm anyone. Something like a Hawk would be much different.

That's true, if the image of the dove is meant to capture (strictly) non-violence. In conjunction with akeraios, the sense seems to be more general like "innocence" or "guileless." Does not physically intervening when I see a child being abused by an adult somehow preserve my innocence? The example I gave in post #6 was meant to capture a scenario where both not-intentionally harming another and akeraios obtain. Or, to look at it the other way, I could be non-violent and yet have every intention of deceiving another (not being guileless).

 

[ewq1938]

That's true, if the image of the dove is meant to capture (strictly) non-violence. In conjunction with akeraios, the sense seems to be more general like "innocence" or "guileless." Does not physically intervening when I see a child being abused by an adult somehow preserve my innocence?

Yes and Doves will fight to protect their children and their own lives as best they can.

 

[Athanasius377]

I wonder what our Greek scholars have to say @Radagast or @Der Alter have to say. Especially since we are dealing with a passage in Luke. They should be around shortly. My Greek is rudimentary too or too rudimentary.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Thanks all who have helped so far.

It seems that folks who grasp onto these two verses to support 'Christian Pacifism' are drawing a long bow...