• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

My Gospel by Paul

Sorn

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2018
1,381
316
62
Perth
✟215,910.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
How does 2 Tim 2:15 show there is “more than one message in the Bible?

15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

Your speaker on the YouTube, again just quotes verses out of context and does not address what contradicts, his interpretation of the verses he quoted. He started with: Matt. 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,[a] drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.

How does this interpretation not contradict what Jesus did, going to a city in Samaria and spending days there preaching? (John 4:1-26)

Or Peter going to Samaria, just after Stephen’s stoning before Paul comes on the scene?

Matt. 10 is prior to Christianity, and it is Jesus sending naivest disciples, out to make way His coming to teach, so they were not ready to approach Gentiles and Samaritans, so Jesus tells them to stay away from then, and we can add “for now”.

The “command” in Matt. 10 is for early on in Christ’s ministry and not something now and forever more, “do not go to the Samaritans and Gentiles.”

Every verse must be researched in lite of all other verses to come up with the very best interpretation or you will just have a ton of “exceptions”.
Its very interesting & telling that when the passage you provided is hovered over with the mouse it shows this:
1693753995571.png

Notice how it has the word 'dividing' in it. Yet when you quote it it has remarkably changed to this :
"a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth."

So you couldn't use the word as it was but had to change it to say something that agrees with your viewpoint.
You can't accept that the Bible may be actually be saying 'there is 1 msg for one group & another msg for another'. Learn to discern the 2 msgs.
So to you it can only be, not 'separate the word correctly' but 'treat it rightly' or harmonize it, when if that is what the author wanted to say he could have used far clearer language than 'dividing'.

As to Samaria, Samaritans were Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish descendants. Jerusalem Jews & Samaritans had several doctrinal disagreements. Samaritans had intermarried (against Mosaic law). They were despised & considered unclean (even worst then gentiles because they were Jews) by the Pharisees. Samaritans worshiped the same God, YHVH as all Jews did. They accepted Torah. But, only the 1st 5 books.

Jesus was passing by & after His encounter with the woman the people cam out and were eager to hear Him so He taught them but that does not change the fact that His primary purpose was to be there for the Jews, to reach out to them as their Messiah if they would recognize Him & accept Him which they did not. A short diversion in His preaching was not going to Jeopardize that or alter it & the Samaritans would still not be the ones to take the msg to the Gentiles, that was for Paul to do.

"and we can add “for now”. " You are adding to or changing scripture in order to fit what you want to see again.


 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Its very interesting & telling that when the passage you provided is hovered over with the mouse it shows this:
View attachment 335566
Notice how it has the word 'dividing' in it. Yet when you quote it it has remarkably changed to this :
"a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth."

So you couldn't use the word as it was but had to change it to say something that agrees with your viewpoint.
You can't accept that the Bible may be actually be saying 'there is 1 msg for one group & another msg for another'. Learn to discern the 2 msgs.
So to you it can only be, not 'separate the word correctly' but 'treat it rightly' or harmonize it, when if that is what the author wanted to say he could have used far clearer language than 'dividing'.

As to Samaria, Samaritans were Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish descendants. Jerusalem Jews & Samaritans had several doctrinal disagreements. Samaritans had intermarried (against Mosaic law). They were despised & considered unclean (even worst then gentiles because they were Jews) by the Pharisees. Samaritans worshiped the same God, YHVH as all Jews did. They accepted Torah. But, only the 1st 5 books.

Jesus was passing by & after His encounter with the woman the people cam out and were eager to hear Him so He taught them but that does not change the fact that His primary purpose was to be there for the Jews, to reach out to them as their Messiah if they would recognize Him & accept Him which they did not. A short diversion in His preaching was not going to Jeopardize that or alter it & the Samaritans would still not be the ones to take the msg to the Gentiles, that was for Paul to do.

"and we can add “for now”. " You are adding to or changing scripture in order to fit what you want to see again.



The word incorrectly translated "dividing" 1 Tim 2:15 in good old King Jimmy is orthotomeo, ortho=straight tomeo =cut. It has nothing to do with dividing. Here are the correct words for divide/dividing διαιρέω 1 Cor 12:11, μερισμός Heb 4:12 μερίζω Luk 12:13 diamerizō Luk 22:17.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ViaCrucis
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,588
29,147
Pacific Northwest
✟815,369.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
For Lutherans there is a five hundred year old understanding of what St. Paul means by ὀρθοτομοῦντα, and it simply means to properly interpret Scripture. And within Lutheranism that proper interpretation, aka hermeneutic, is understood as the Law-Gospel Dialectic.

The Law-Gospel Dialectic can be summaraized as follows:

God's word is, in a sense, comprised of two words, or two things God says to us. Commandments (aka Law) and Promises (aka Gospel).

There is what God commands, which is His Law; and there is what God promises, Gospel, Good News.

This Dialectic can be seen in one of the earliest things Martin Luther ever said, in his 1518 Heidelberg Disputation, "The Law says 'Do this' and it is never done. Grace says 'believe this' and it is already done."

In the context of the Heidelberg Disputation this is, Luther has explained that human works simply never can gain man any righteousness before God, because of the problem of sin. So, in fact, good works though having the appearance of righteousness are, because of sin and without faith, in fact mortal sins. On the flip side the works of God may not have the appearance of good (namely the suffering and death of Jesus Christ), but are nevertheless truly good and save us. So that human works cannot save; but the works of God do in fact save. Human arrogance, because of sin and the pride of the flesh and his desire for glory seeks righteousness in his own works, but his own works avail him nothing toward his being righteous before God; on the converse it is only by the work of God through the suffering and cross of Jesus Christ that does render a person righteous before God.

So the Law of God--what He commands--is indeed right and good, the good works of man do not fulfill the Law of God; only the singular righteous work of Jesus Christ, who suffered and died for us, fulfills the righteous Law of God; and it is only by grace alone which gives to sinful men the righteousness of Jesus--received by faith alone--that renders a person just before God.

So whenever the Scriptures say "Do" we understand here God's righteous commandment. But whenever the Scriptures say "Believe" we have here the good promise of God concerning what He Himself has done for us already; for He gives freely what He promises, and this is received by faith alone, passively. So Luther would, later in his life when making an analogy for faith call it the empty hands of a beggar. The hands are empty, doing nothing, but into those empty hands God gives every good and gift, and the hands passive receive it doing nothing to earn it. So is faith the empty and passive reception of what God gives.

From this, the theologians of the Reformation would then speak of the Three Uses of the Law.

1) The Law commands what is good and right, giving us the objective righteousness of God.

2) Since the Law commands what is good and right, and we see what is objectively righteous in it, when we look at ourselves through the Law--as though a mirror--we behold in ourselves our total failure and inability to do what is good and righteous. And thus the Law shows us that we are, in fact, sinners. Sinners who cannot do anything to attain righteousness by our works and efforts by seeking obedience to the Law; and paradoxically, that the harder we try to be obedient the more sinful we find ourselves to become. This, as the Apostle says in Romans 7, " Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure." (Romans 7:13)

3) For the one who has faith, the Law remains the standard of life; not for justification (for it cannot and does not do that), but as the rule which guides and instructs us in new obedience born of grace. So the commandment given is that I should love my neighbor as myself, and though by my works I do not fulfill it so as to be righteous before God on account of sin; nevertheless my neighbor still requires food to fill his hungry belly, and water to quench her thirst, clothing and shelter to warm them and protect them from the elements. And so the way of the Christian is to be fashioned and ordered by a life of horizontal righteousness toward our neighbor, which exists solely by the grace of God and the freedom which comes from our salvation.

God, having attained and achieved for us what we could never attain or achieve, grants to us new life in Christ, life which is a free gift, and a life which is lived by the Spirit, in freedom and love; not toward lawlessness by kills faith, but toward fulfilling the royal law of love, as a follower and disciple of Jesus Christ invited and called to carry his/her cross in this world.

For God alone saves us, justifying us freely by His grace, by the perfect and finished work of Jesus Christ alone (Gospel). And now we, with an conscience awakened by God, with the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, as a new creation in Jesus walking in love and obedience by cooperating with God--not for our justification, but as disciples of Jesus, as followers of Jesus, as a people who take Jesus seriously in this world, and are called to desire God's will. That our prayer, "Your kingdom come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven" should not be prayed in vain. In other words, sanctification. The ongoing work of God in our lives conforming us to Christ, which shall continue until it is finished--on the Last Day. For "He who began a good work in you will continue that good work until the day of the Lord Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6). Perfection is never our possession in this life, but it is God's accomplishment at the resurrection of the dead. For now "we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." (1 Corinthians 13:12) In this life we carry a cross, warring against the old man (1 Peter 1:14), hoping for that time when the earth shall be full of justice (2 Peter 3:13).

We are, therefore, simul iustus et peccator, both saint and sinner. The old and the new in conflict; the lusts and passions of the flesh which we must flee from by seeking refuge in Christ. trusting in Him alone for forgiveness, whose suffering, death, and resurrection alone saves us and justifies us before the Father.

So that there needs to be a preaching of both Law and Gospel. The Law to condemn our flesh and lusts, and call us to repentance, that we should then behold the love and grace of God in Christ and cling only to Him, for His Gospel is peace, and the power to save all who believe.

And in this we find that the whole of Scripture declares to us Jesus Christ and our desperate need for Him, and that in Him alone is our refuge and salvation.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The word incorrectly translated "dividing" 1 Tim 2:15 in good old King Jimmy is orthotomeo, ortho=straight tomeo =cut. It has nothing to do with dividing. Here are the correct words for divide/dividing διαιρέω 1 Cor 12:11, μερισμός Heb 4:12 μερίζω Luk 12:13 diamerizō Luk 22:17.

If it translates to straight cut, dividing is a more accurate English word than handling, would you agree?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If it translates to straight cut, dividing is a more accurate English word than handling, would you agree?
If a Greek speaker/writer wanted to say "dividing" why would they not use either of the two words which I quoted, which do in fact mean "divide" both were used elsewhere in the NT and have never been questioned?
Greek has been the language of the Eastern Greek orthodox church, since its inception. Here is how orthotomeo is translated in the Eastern Orthodox Bible EOB
"Work hard to present yourself as approved by God, as a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth."​
Link to EOB
Here is the definition from Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich lexicon, one of, if not the most highly accredited lexicons available.
ὀρθοτομέω (ὀρθός, τέμνω) found elsewh. independently of the NT only Pr 3:6; 11:5, where it is used w. ὁδούς and plainly means ‘cut a path in a straight direction’ or ‘cut a road across country (that is forested or otherwise difficult to pass through) in a straight direction’, so that the traveler may go directly to his destination (cp. Thu. 2, 100, 2 ὁδοὺς εὐθείας ἔτεμε; Hdt. 4, 136 τετμημένη ὁδός; Pla., Leg. 7, 810e; Plut., Galba 24, 7; Jos., C. Ap. 1, 309) Then ὀρθοτομεῖν τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας would prob. mean guide the word of truth along a straight path (like a road that goes straight to its goal), without being turned aside by wordy debates or impious talk 2 Ti 2:15. For such other mngs. as teach the word aright, expound (it) soundly, shape rightly, and preach fearlessly, s. M-M.—DELG s.v. τέμνω. TW. Spicq.
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 722.​
 
Upvote 0

bling

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Feb 27, 2008
16,816
1,925
✟992,605.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Its very interesting & telling that when the passage you provided is hovered over with the mouse it shows this:
View attachment 335566
Notice how it has the word 'dividing' in it. Yet when you quote it it has remarkably changed to this :
"a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth."
Many a translation use words like, "handling the word" so how are you defining "rightly dividing the word"?
So you couldn't use the word as it was but had to change it to say something that agrees with your viewpoint.
You can't accept that the Bible may be actually be saying 'there is 1 msg for one group & another msg for another'. Learn to discern the 2 msgs.
So to you it can only be, not 'separate the word correctly' but 'treat it rightly' or harmonize it, when if that is what the author wanted to say he could have used far clearer language than 'dividing'.

As to Samaria, Samaritans were Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish descendants. Jerusalem Jews & Samaritans had several doctrinal disagreements. Samaritans had intermarried (against Mosaic law). They were despised & considered unclean (even worst then gentiles because they were Jews) by the Pharisees. Samaritans worshiped the same God, YHVH as all Jews did. They accepted Torah. But, only the 1st 5 books.
Where are you finding anywhere, "the Samaritans were Jews"? And if they were why did Jesus tell them not to go to them?
Jesus was passing by & after His encounter with the woman the people cam out and were eager to hear Him so He taught them but that does not change the fact that His primary purpose was to be there for the Jews, to reach out to them as their Messiah if they would recognize Him & accept Him which they did not. A short diversion in His preaching was not going to Jeopardize that or alter it & the Samaritans would still not be the ones to take the msg to the Gentiles, that was for Paul to do.

"and we can add “for now”. " You are adding to or changing scripture in order to fit what you want to see again.


I am adding my ideas but I cannot make it part of scripture. It is not in there, but that does not mean it is not in their future, because we know it was in their future (they would go to the Samaritans and Gentiles, so that is why it was just at that time and not forever more.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If a Greek speaker/writer wanted to say "dividing" why would they not use either of the two words which I quoted, which do in fact mean "divide" both were used elsewhere in the NT and have never been questioned?

That was actually not my question to you, the scholars who translate into the KJV are experts in both Greek and English, and if they decided that divide is the correct word, I am fine.

I am just asking you, would you agree that to use the word divide is much clearer/closer than the word handle, if the actual meaning is straight cut?
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,723
2,918
45
San jacinto
✟207,617.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That was actually not my question to you, the scholars who translate into the KJV are experts in both Greek and English, and if they decided that divide is the correct word, I am fine.

I am just asking you, would you agree that to use the word divide is much clearer/closer than the word handle, if the actual meaning is straight cut?
The lexicon entry Der Alte provided from BDAG demonstrates that "handle" is the better translation because the word was used not for separating into parts but going in the correct direction. Though regardless, building an entire theological system off of a single word is seriously misguided to say the very least.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The lexicon entry Der Alte provided from BDAG demonstrates that "handle" is the better translation because the word was used not for separating into parts but going in the correct direction. Though regardless, building an entire theological system off of a single word is seriously misguided to say the very least.

What does BDAG stands for?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That was actually not my question to you, the scholars who translate into the KJV are experts in both Greek and English, and if they decided that divide is the correct word, I am fine.
I am just asking you, would you agree that to use the word divide is much clearer/closer than the word handle, if the actual meaning is straight cut?
I see you did not bother reading the sources I quoted. There are 2 Greek words in the NT used 2 times each which actually do mean "divide" "dividing" why would a Greek writer not use the common words instead use a word that does not actually mean divide? Had you bothered to actually read the quote there were examples where orthotomeo were used in ancient writings e.g. "plainly means ‘cut a path in a straight direction’ or ‘cut a road across country (that is forested or otherwise difficult to pass through) in a straight direction’, so that the traveler may go directly to his destination." There is absolutely no way anyone can derive "dividing" from that.
The "dividing" I have read was "rightly dividing" is a supposedly dividing the OT from the NT. Here's what I think your pastors/teachers/leaders have told you that orthtomeo means dividing and if one questions one thing they were taught then they have to think what have I been taught that is wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich

Okay I read the quote that he used earlier

ὀρθοτομέω (ὀρθός, τέμνω) found elsewh. independently of the NT only Pr 3:6; 11:5, where it is used w. ὁδούς and plainly means ‘cut a path in a straight direction’ or ‘cut a road across country (that is forested or otherwise difficult to pass through) in a straight direction’, so that the traveler may go directly to his destination (cp. Thu. 2, 100, 2 ὁδοὺς εὐθείας ἔτεμε; Hdt. 4, 136 τετμημένη ὁδός; Pla., Leg. 7, 810e; Plut., Galba 24, 7; Jos., C. Ap. 1, 309) Then ὀρθοτομεῖν τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας would prob. mean guide the word of truth along a straight path (like a road that goes straight to its goal), without being turned aside by wordy debates or impious talk 2 Ti 2:15. For such other mngs. as teach the word aright, expound (it) soundly, shape rightly, and preach fearlessly, s. M-M.—DELG s.v. τέμνω. TW. Spicq.
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 722.

Care to explain where in this quote actually implied that the term handling is clearer to illustrate straight cut?
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see you did not bother reading the sources I quoted. There are 2 Greek words in the NT used 2 times each which actually do mean "divide" "dividing" why would a Greek writer not use the common words instead use a word that does not actually mean divide? Had you bothered to actually read the quote there were examples where orthotomeo were used in ancient writings e.g. "plainly means ‘cut a path in a straight direction’ or ‘cut a road across country (that is forested or otherwise difficult to pass through) in a straight direction’, so that the traveler may go directly to his destination." There is absolutely no way anyone can derive "dividing" from that.
The "dividing" I have read was "rightly dividing" is a supposedly dividing the OT from the NT. Here's what I think your pastors/teachers/leaders have told you that orthtomeo means dividing and if one questions one thing they were taught then they have to think what have I been taught that is wrong.

Care to explain where in this quote actually implied that the term handling is clearer to illustrate straight cut?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What does BDAG stands for?
The author's names Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich. BDAG lexicon represents 120-160 years of combined scholarship. In the definition I highlighted in blue the sources the authors consulted in determining the correct definition.
 
Upvote 0

Fervent

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2020
6,723
2,918
45
San jacinto
✟207,617.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Okay I read the quote that he used earlier



Care to explain where in this quote actually implied that the term handling is clearer to illustrate straight cut?
The quote shows that "straight cut" is idiomatic refering to making paths clear for travellers. It does not mean to cut up the Bible, but to make known what the Bible teaches to audiences. Since this is an idiomatic statement, there isn't likely to be a nice English equivalent word that both gives the same idea and has the same meaning. Handling makes it clearer that what's in mind is how the Bible is used as a tool rather than giving the idea that the Bible is supposed to be chopped into pieces.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Okay I read the quote that he used earlier
Care to explain where in this quote actually implied that the term handling is clearer to illustrate straight cut?
Did you not read what you quoted? Did you read the quote from EOB I quoted, above? That is the definition the native Greek speaking scholars determined when they translated the Greek. Again my question why would Greek writers use a word that does not mean divide when they had two Greek words which do actually mean "divide"?
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Handling makes it clearer that what's in mind is how the Bible is used as a tool rather than giving the idea that the Bible is supposed to be chopped into pieces.

Exactly which part of the quote implies this? Could you quote actual sentence?

ὀρθοτομέω (ὀρθός, τέμνω) found elsewh. independently of the NT only Pr 3:6; 11:5, where it is used w. ὁδούς and plainly means ‘cut a path in a straight direction’ or ‘cut a road across country (that is forested or otherwise difficult to pass through) in a straight direction’, so that the traveler may go directly to his destination (cp. Thu. 2, 100, 2 ὁδοὺς εὐθείας ἔτεμε; Hdt. 4, 136 τετμημένη ὁδός; Pla., Leg. 7, 810e; Plut., Galba 24, 7; Jos., C. Ap. 1, 309) Then ὀρθοτομεῖν τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας would prob. mean guide the word of truth along a straight path (like a road that goes straight to its goal), without being turned aside by wordy debates or impious talk 2 Ti 2:15. For such other mngs. as teach the word aright, expound (it) soundly, shape rightly, and preach fearlessly, s. M-M.—DELG s.v. τέμνω. TW. Spicq.
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 722.
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
13,072
1,401
sg
✟273,259.00
Country
Singapore
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Did you not read what you quoted? Did you read the quote from EOB I quoted, above? That is the definition the native Greek speaking scholars determined when they translated the Greek. Again my question why would Greek writers use a word that does not mean divide when they had two Greek words which do actually mean "divide"?

I did read the quote a number of times, and nothing in that passage appear to imply than handle is a more accurate word to use.

Is that your own interpretation from that passage, or was it something they are saying?
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old. when FDR was president
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
29,117
6,148
EST
✟1,123,613.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I did read the quote a number of times, and nothing in that passage appear to imply than handle is a more accurate word to use.
Is that your own interpretation from that passage, or was it something they are saying?
It appears you adamantly refuse to consider anything which varies from what you have been taught. I have stated my reasoning more than once. The EOB by native Greek speaking scholars translates it "handling." That should be enough. There are two words which actually mean divide used in the NT why would the writer use a word that does not mean "divide" if that is what he meant? What exactly in 2 Tim 2:15 is being divided from what other something?
 
Upvote 0