That's why it's called grace.

[twin1954]

This is a blatantly false statement. I have studied the context with great care and discussed it and its implications in this thread, including in my very accurate answer to a question by Hammster:





There are two possible interpretations of Titus 2:11.

“For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,”

Or

“For the grace of God has appeared to all men, bringing salvation”

So far in this thread, only the first of these two interpretations have been discussed. The second is found in the KJV which departed from the interpretation found in both the Bishops’ Bible and the Geneva Bible. For now, we can continue discussing the first of these two interpretations.



These statements are not true. As I posted in posted above,















As I have posted above, basic rules of both Greek and English prove that you are severely mistaken.



I am NOT interpreting the sentence out the context of the chapter, and I am interpreting the expression πασιν ανθρωποις in the same manner in which it is used in ALL occurrences of it the New Testament (see post #65).

Once more you are deflecting in order to misdirect what I said. I never said that the words didn't mean "all men" for they clearly do. What you need to answer is what I said about the subject, verb and indirect object of the verb. That was my argument. Instead of trying to defend yourself and accuse me of false accusations just show where I am in error in the grammar and syntax of the Greek if you can. I don't believe you can do that. "all men" are both in the dative case and are the indirect object of the verb appeared. Tied to the following verses it is clear that your interpretation and singling out the verse as though it stands alone is false.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

What you need to answer is what I said about the subject, verb and indirect object of the verb. That was my argument. Instead of trying to defend yourself and accuse me of false accusations just show where I am in error in the grammar and syntax of the Greek if you can. I don't believe you can do that. "all men" are both in the dative case and are the indirect object of the verb appeared. Tied to the following verses it is clear that your interpretation and singling out the verse as though it stands alone is false.

I did not address your “grammar and syntax of the Greek” because, as I showed in the “deflecting” posts above, those points are irrelevant to this thread and I saw no point in needlessly embracing you. However, since you insist, I shall address them.

First of all, let us get the facts correct regarding grammar itself. Grammar is the study of the systematics of language. Syntax is the study of the branch of grammar that deals with the formation of phrases and sentences. Accidence is the study of the branch of grammar that deals with the inflection of words.

The actual subject is the grace of God and the verb is has appeared. The word bringing salvation is an adjective and is in the nominative which agrees with the noun/subject and describes what the grace of God does.

Agreed.

The words all men are in the dative which shows a personal interest in the subject but they are the indirect object of the verb appeared.

This is severely incorrect,

The words πασιν ανθρωποις are in the dative case. The adjective πασιν is in the dative case because it modifies a noun in the dative case, that noun being the word ανθρωποις. The word ανθρωποις is in the dative case because it is the indirect object of a verb that is to be understood in the sentence but for reasons of Greek syntax does not actually appear in the Greek text (but it does appear in the English translation because of English syntax)—that is, the verb ‘bringing.” In order for the word ανθρωποις to be the indirect object of the verb επεφανη, it is necessary to interpret Titus 2:11 as it is in the KJV,

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

However, in this thread, Titus 2:11 has been consistently interpreted as it is in the NASB,

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

In this latter interpretation in English, the noun ‘salvation’ is the direct object of the verb ‘bringing;’ and ‘men’ is the indirect object of the same verb.

 

[Hammster]

I hate to keep bringing this up, but if PG is correct, Paul is preaching universalism. The only way out of it is eisegesis.

 

[twin1954]

I did not address your “grammar and syntax of the Greek” because, as I showed in the “deflecting” posts above, those points are irrelevant to this thread and I saw no point in needlessly embracing you. However, since you insist, I shall address them.

First of all, let us get the facts correct regarding grammar itself. Grammar is the study of the systematics of language. Syntax is the study of the branch of grammar that deals with the formation of phrases and sentences. Accidence is the study of the branch of grammar that deals with the inflection of words.



Agreed.



This is severely incorrect,

The words πασιν ανθρωποις are in the dative case. The adjective πασιν is in the dative case because it modifies a noun in the dative case, that noun being the word ανθρωποις. The word ανθρωποις is in the dative case because it is the indirect object of a verb that is to be understood in the sentence but for reasons of Greek syntax does not actually appear in the Greek text (but it does appear in the English translation because of English syntax)—that is, the verb ‘bringing.” In order for the word ανθρωποις to be the indirect object of the verb επεφανη, it is necessary to interpret Titus 2:11 as it is in the KJV,

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

However, in this thread, Titus 2:11 has been consistently interpreted as it is in the NASB,

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

In this latter interpretation in English, the noun ‘salvation’ is the direct object of the verb ‘bringing;’ and ‘men’ is the indirect object of the same verb.

I know what grammar, syntax and accidence mean. According to Dana and Mantey (pg. 59) in the introduction of syntax they define accidence as dealing with the structural form of words while syntax deals with the grammatical relation between words. So there is no need for you to give me a lesson in what each means.

Now we know that soterios is an adjective. An adjective modifies a noun and agrees with the noun it modifies in gender, number and case. While the word soterios is a predicate adjective it agrees in gender, case and number with the noun charis which means grace. (Sorry I don't have Greek font so I have to transliterate) Therefore it is in direct connection to the noun charis.

A parallel verse which carries the same idea is found in 2Tim. 1:9-10.

Your interpretation, while technically allowable, causes the context to make no sense and implies, as has been stated, universalism. Normal Greek syntax makes all men the indirect object of the verb appear rather than the understood verb bringing.

Just so others might know, the KJV is not the only translation that gives my interpretation. The LITV, NIV, YLT and the EMTV all have the same translation that I give. So in matters of doctrinal controversy knowledge of the Greek usually solves no difficulties. It is as much a matter of interpretation as any other language.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

I know what grammar, syntax and accidence mean. According to Dana and Mantey (pg. 59) in the introduction of syntax they define accidence as dealing with the structural form of words while syntax deals with the grammatical relation between words. So there is no need for you to give me a lesson in what each means.

Okay.

Now we know that soterios is an adjective. An adjective modifies a noun and agrees with the noun it modifies in gender, number and case. While the word soterios is a predicate adjective it agrees in gender, case and number with the noun charis which means grace. (Sorry I don't have Greek font so I have to transliterate) Therefore it is in direct connection to the noun charis.

We all know this, so what your point in mentioning it?

A parallel verse which carries the same idea is found in 2Tim. 1:9-10.

These verses have no relevance to this discussion.

Your interpretation, while technically allowable, causes the context to make no sense and implies, as has been stated, universalism.

“My interpretation” is not only “technically allowable,” it is THE interpretation held by the very great majority of scholars specializing in the Pastoral Epistles, and if you are familiar with the current academic literature on the Pastoral Epistles you know this to be true.

Normal Greek syntax makes all men the indirect object of the verb appear rather than the understood verb bringing. If that were true, the correct translation would be that found in the KJV, and that translation is NOT the translation being discussed throughout this thread.

Just so others might know, the KJV is not the only translation that gives my interpretation.

Okay—now I understand where you are coming from. In post #98 you began arguing for the alternate rendering of Titus 2:11 that is found in the KJV and in a footnote in the NRSV (as I noted in post #99) even though in post #76 you entered into this thread and gave a post by Hammster a double thumbs-up—a post in which he quoted Titus 2:11saying, “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,”.

The LITV, NIV, YLT and the EMTV all have the same translation that I give.

The New Testament in the LITV, YLT and the EMTV is translated from essentially the same corrupt Greek text as is the KJV, and hence these translations have no standing in the academic community. Moreover, the translations themselves all have very serious problems that are well known and that have kept these translations from having a wide acceptance by the general public.

The 1984 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. “

However, the “corrected” 2011 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.”

My interest in this thread is in the majority rendering of Titus 2:11, and I have no interest in further discussing the alternate rendering—a rendering that the very great majority of scholars specializing in the Pastoral Epistles and publishing today in peer-reviewed biblical journals believe to be incorrect.

 

[twin1954]

Okay.



We all know this, so what your point in mentioning it?



These verses have no relevance to this discussion.



“My interpretation” is not only “technically allowable,” it is THE interpretation held by the very great majority of scholars specializing in the Pastoral Epistles, and if you are familiar with the current academic literature on the Pastoral Epistles you know this to be true.



Okay—now I understand where you are coming from. In post #98 you began arguing for the alternate rendering of Titus 2:11 that is found in the KJV and in a footnote in the NRSV (as I noted in post #99) even though in post #76 you entered into this thread and gave a post by Hammster a double thumbs-up—a post in which he quoted Titus 2:11saying, “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,”.



The New Testament in the LITV, YLT and the EMTV is translated from essentially the same corrupt Greek text as is the KJV, and hence these translations have no standing in the academic community. Moreover, the translations themselves all have very serious problems that are well known and that have kept these translations from having a wide acceptance by the general public.

The 1984 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. “

However, the “corrected” 2011 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.”

My interest in this thread is in the majority rendering of Titus 2:11, and I have no interest in further discussing the alternate rendering—a rendering that the very great majority of scholars specializing in the Pastoral Epistles and publishing today in peer-reviewed biblical journals believe to be incorrect.

And of course none of those "scholars" have a theological bent nor are liberal in their so-called scholarship right? I have no use for "academics" who use their education to discredit truth. You use the academics often but I have yet to see you acknowledge who any of them are so that their theological bent can be checked out. I am not saying that you have never done it but that I have never seen you do it.

I trust that the Spirit of God will guard His truth and protect the hearts and minds of His people from the tripe your so-called academics spout.


BTW the KJV has been held as valid a translation as any other by all those who hold truth higher than intellectualism and academia. I have had some experience with academia and know of few who care about truth more than their own egos. Most are in it for the accolades of their "peers" and often take credit for the work done by those under them. Academia is a dirty business full of men and women who couldn't actually make it in the real world. Many academic's thought processes are so far out of the bounds of reality that common sense is beyond them. Just because someone has spent time and money on an education in order to put a PHD behind their name and can quote from books and so-called scholars doesn't give them any credibility.

Also my oldest daughter is a PHD in nursing education and is on faculty at the University of Kentucky. Needless to say she is a rare exception to all that I just said.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

And of course none of those "scholars" have a theological bent nor are liberal in their so-called scholarship right?

Who are you talking about? Let’s have some names and documentation to back up the allegations that you have cloaked in questions.

You use the academics often but I have yet to see you acknowledge who any of them are so that their theological bent can be checked out. I am not saying that you have never done it but that I have never seen you do it.

I have in my CF posts cited by name scores of scholars internationally known for their contribution to their respective fields of study. As for scholars of the Pastoral Epistles, I shall list the names of some of my favorites:

Collins, Raymond F.
Ellicott, Charles J.
Fairbairn, Patrick
Johnson, Luke Timothy
Knight III, George W.
Lock, Walter
Mounce, William D.
Plummer, Alfred
Towner, Phip H.

The truth is the truth regardless of the heart or disposition of the man who speaks it or writes it, and regardless of the heart or disposition of the publisher. Conversely, falsehoods and wrong interpretations are falsehoods and wrong interpretations regardless of the heart or disposition of the man who speaks them or writes them, and regardless of the heart or disposition of the publisher. Moreover, the truth is the truth whether it is taught by a conservative or liberal Christian. The very same thing applies to falsehoods and wrong interpretations. For me, there is nothing, absolutely nothing more important than the truth about God and His word, and I am not too proud to learn it from a liberal Protestant or a conservative Roman Catholic—as my list makes evident.

I trust that the Spirit of God will guard His truth and protect the hearts and minds of His people from the tripe your so-called academics spout.

How can any man be so full of hatred and contempt for Christians who have devoted their lives to the study of the Scriptures so that others may share in the knowledge with which they have been blessed by God? Most certainly I have NEVER seen in the academic world such hatred and contempt for anyone!

I have had some experience with academia and know of few who care about truth more than their own egos. Most are in it for the accolades of their "peers" and often take credit for the work done by those under them. Academia is a dirty business full of men and women who couldn't actually make it in the real world. Many academic's thought processes are so far out of the bounds of reality that common sense is beyond them. Just because someone has spent time and money on an education in order to put a PHD behind their name and can quote from books and so-called scholars doesn't give them any credibility.

I have lived in academia most of my life, and I know for a fact that the picture that you have painted of it is a product of hatred and contempt rather than objective observations.

 

[classicalhero]

Does Paul have to give full theological treatise every time he talks about salvation? Apparantely so after what we are discussing about a small statement he makes, when you are just discussing what he said in that pithy statement, while not considering the rest of his writing to get the full picture.

 

[now faith]

Quote Twin :Just so others might know, the KJV is not the only translation that gives my interpretation. The LITV, NIV, YLT and the EMTV all have the same translation that I give. So in matters of doctrinal controversy knowledge of the Greek usually solves no difficulties. It is as much a matter of interpretation as any other language

The 1984 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. “

However, the “corrected” 2011 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

UN QUOTE
In your referencing corrupted text from the King James,it seems the NIV was just as corrupt until 2011.

Titus: 2. 11. For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men. King James

Besides the use of people rather than men,even though that criticism would be over stating the obvious.

The original translation supports Calvinism better than the improved one.


bring
\ˈbriŋ\
verb
: to come with (something or someone) to a place
: to cause (something or someone) to come
: to cause (something) to exist, happen, or start

of·fer (ô′fər, ŏf′ər)
v. of·fered, of·fer·ing, of·fers
v.tr.
1.
a. To present for acceptance or rejection; proffer: offered me a drink.
b. To put forward for consideration; propose: offer an opinion.
c. To present in order to meet a need or satisfy a requirement: offered new statistics in order to facilitate the decision-making process.
d. To present as an act of worship: offer a prayer.
e. To propose as payment; bid: offered only half what I was asking for the car.
2.
a. To make available; afford: The situation offers us the opportunity to learn more.


As we see the definition of bring it is used more in conjunction with a person or persons.

Offer is used in the form of a relative pronoun,bring a verb or action.

To offer allows for a free will choice yea or nay.

 

[tall73]

BUT WHAT DID HE SAY BEFORE AND AFTER THIS!??!?!?!??!

The context may support what PrincetonGuy has outlined about the grammar. Yes he gives a list of instructions to various groups within the Christian community. However, he also notes the purpose of this list of instructions at times.

Tit 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

Tit 2:7 In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,
Tit 2:8 Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.


Tit 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

The various groups in the church were to live Godly lives so that the gospel would be attractive. Who is it that would be blaspheming, the people mentioned in the church, or those looking on? Who would it be adorned for, primarily? So some of these instructions may be to make the gospel attractive to those looking on. And it is in that context that we get the grace of God appearing to all men.
Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men
Tit 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

Those in the church have learned from this grace that they should live righteously in this present word.

 

[twin1954]

Quote Twin:The New Testament in the LITV, YLT and the EMTV is translated from essentially the same corrupt Greek text as is the KJV, and hence these translations have no standing in the academic community. Moreover, the translations themselves all have very serious problems that are well known and that have kept these translations from having a wide acceptance by the general public.

The 1984 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. “

However, the “corrected” 2011 edition of the NIV reads at Titus 2:11,

UN QUOTE
In your referencing corrupted text from the King James,it seems the NIV was just as corrupt until 2011.

Titus: 2. 11. For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men. King James

Besides the use of people rather than men,even though that criticism would be over stating the obvious.

The original translation supports Calvinism better than the improved one.


bring
\ˈbriŋ\
verb
: to come with (something or someone) to a place
: to cause (something or someone) to come
: to cause (something) to exist, happen, or start

of·fer (ô′fər, ŏf′ər)
v. of·fered, of·fer·ing, of·fers
v.tr.
1.
a. To present for acceptance or rejection; proffer: offered me a drink.
b. To put forward for consideration; propose: offer an opinion.
c. To present in order to meet a need or satisfy a requirement: offered new statistics in order to facilitate the decision-making process.
d. To present as an act of worship: offer a prayer.
e. To propose as payment; bid: offered only half what I was asking for the car.
2.
a. To make available; afford: The situation offers us the opportunity to learn more.


As we see the definition of bring it is used more in conjunction with a person or persons.

Offer is used in the form of a relative pronoun,bring a verb or action.

To offer allows for a free will choice yea or nay.

You quoted PG and put my name to it. Would you please correct this?

 

[twin1954]

How can any man be so full of hatred and contempt for Christians who have devoted their lives to the study of the Scriptures so that others may share in the knowledge with which they have been blessed by God? Most certainly I have NEVER seen in the academic world such hatred and contempt for anyone!

I have no hatred and contempt for Christians at all.
2Cor. 11:13-15

I have lived in academia most of my life, and I know for a fact that the picture that you have painted of it is a product of hatred and contempt rather than objective observations.

Then you have either lived in a bubble or are willfully blind. Or perhaps you fit right in.

 

[now faith]

You quoted PG and put my name to it. Would you please correct this?

Sorry about that should be corrected now.

 

[Skala]

Does Paul have to give full theological treatise every time he talks about salvation? Apparantely so after what we are discussing about a small statement he makes, when you are just discussing what he said in that pithy statement, while not considering the rest of his writing to get the full picture.

The context matters because the word "salvation" doesn't mean the same thing every time, and it isn't always referring to our justification (legal standing before God) either.

As a word, "salvation" simply means "deliverance".

Observe:

"She will be saved through child-bearing" 1 Tim 2:15

In this verse, eternal salvation from sin, death, and hell isn't what the author is talking about.

For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Phil 1:19

Here, salvation isn't referring to justification, it's referring to deliverance from the chains that Paul is in, as he is imprisoned at the time of writing.

So the question is, salvation from what? Deliverance from what?

What does the grace that visits people in Titus 2 deliver them from?

Titus 2:12-14 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

so, what does this grace deliver those people from?

1) ungodliness
2) worldly passions
3) not having self-control
4) wickedness
5) impurity
6) non-eagerness to do what is good / eagerness to do what is bad

 

[twin1954]

Does Paul have to give full theological treatise every time he talks about salvation? Apparantely so after what we are discussing about a small statement he makes, when you are just discussing what he said in that pithy statement, while not considering the rest of his writing to get the full picture.

Which is why I gave the reference to 2Tim. 1:9-10 as a parallel verse. It says essentially the same thing as Paul says in the verse in question. Moreover if what some think to be the translation and doctrinal implication of Titus 2:11 is true then most of what Paul wrote in his other epistles are in direct contradiction.