[B-Greek] Once For All Time - Luke 18:9-14
Richard Ghilardi
qodeshlayhvh at juno.com
Sun Jul 12 19:45:34 EDT 2009
Hi Carl,
Thanks for the apology. I gladly accept it recognizing the humble spirit
in which you offered it. I also thank you for the clarifications.
Clarification is always good. I trust it will be of some benefit to the
other list members. For my part, I clearly understood your arguments the
first time you presented them. The fact that in your clarifications you
have not budged one millimeter from the stance you took in your previous
post confirms to me that I have not misunderstood you. Unlike you, I will
not rehash my arguments and objections here again. They were clear and
telling when I made them. And they stand not only unrefuted but even
unanswered.
However, I must take issue with you on another point which I have not
addressed hitherto. But you have raised it repeatedly in your posts and
yet again in your most recent one. I was silent on this point because I
was unsure what to think. I shall be silent no longer. I'm speaking of
the connection with Paul, of course.
What I am about to write will come as no news to anyone on this list. I
write it for the record. (And there is a record, isn't there?)
Luke was a travelling companion of Paul. He walked with him. He ate with
him. He rested with him. He knew good times of fellowship with Paul and
he suffered hardship and persecution with him. Perhaps he even ministered
to Paul physically with his medical skills. Luke was Paul's co-laborer in
the work of proclaiming the gospel in all the cities and towns where they
travelled. Luke was an intimate disciple and friend of the Apostle Paul.
Undoubtedly he had heard Paul preach and teach many, many times both
publicly and privately, perhaps even on the road. If Luke did not learn
the gospel from Paul, certainly he received a deeper knowledge of it from
Paul. So Luke surely learned the "Pauline doctrine of justification"
right from the "horse's mouth" so to speak. And as surely Luke learned
the profound signifcance that Paul attached to all the words in the *DIK-
family. It's not possible that when Luke came to write his gospel years
later that he simply forgot all that his beloved teacher had taught him,
nor that he considered it irrelevant to his task. In his gospel Luke uses
DIKAIW in its various forms more than all the other gospels combined,
most often in the mouth of Jesus. And he uses the other *DIK- words at
least as often.
None of this constitutes proof that Luke used DIKAIW with the same
cluster of meanings and the same significance as Paul. But it does create
a very strong presumption in favor of this position. Therefore, the
burden of proof falls upon you, Carl, and those like you, to show that
Luke used the word in a sense significantly different from that of Paul.
Before I close, I have one more question for you, Carl.
In this context, Lk 18:9-14, is DEDIKAIWMENOS (or DIKAIWQEIS, if you
will) the semantic equivalent of DIKAIWSAS hEAYTON - "having proven
himself righteous" / "having justified himself"? If not, what's the
difference between the two?
Yours in His grace,
Richard Ghilardi - qodeshlayhvh at juno.com
West Haven, Connecticut USA
____________________________________________________________
Get your dream car or truck. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTLa8sTeRS1S9QdthicgGy43MyHVNSDB4fXXMyyYofit7jDw2OS6Y4/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list