There are difficult verses which we have no satisfactory solutions. Here is one such verse in 1 John. I usually trust the KJV more because it follows the original more but this time, it is less satisfactory.
My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things
Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God (1 John 3:18-21).
The problem lies in verse 20. Let's look at the Greek original.
ὅτι ἐὰν καταγινώσκῃ ἡμῶν ἡ καρδία, ὅτι μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ θεὸς τῆς καρδίας ἡμῶν καὶ γινώσκει πάντα.
There is an ὅτι in front of God and is not translated in KJV. RSV translates it.
whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything (RSV).
The Chinese translation adds an extra clause to smooth out the meaning.
縱然我們的心責備我們，我們還可以安心，因為天主比我們的心大，他原知道一切。【思高】
The extra clause is a paraphrase of the last part of verse 19, "we can still be assured". Moreover, it translates the "For if" into "Even if".
The Chinese translation assumes that John meant to say that we love not in words but in deed and in truth. So our deeds assure our conscience before God. Even if, for some reasons, our conscience condemns us, we can still be assured because God is greater than our conscience and knows everything, even things unknown to our conscience. What can we make out of this?
We acted out our charity in truth and our conscience was assured. Why then would our conscience condemn us? Perhaps later, "bad" things emerged or we learned new things which contradicted our previous good intention. So our conscience was disturbed and we regretted what we had done with good intention. But John assured us that we don't have to regret because God is greater than our conscience.
That is what I can make out. Do you have other explanations?
My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things
Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God (1 John 3:18-21).
The problem lies in verse 20. Let's look at the Greek original.
ὅτι ἐὰν καταγινώσκῃ ἡμῶν ἡ καρδία, ὅτι μείζων ἐστὶν ὁ θεὸς τῆς καρδίας ἡμῶν καὶ γινώσκει πάντα.
There is an ὅτι in front of God and is not translated in KJV. RSV translates it.
whenever our hearts condemn us; for God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything (RSV).
The Chinese translation adds an extra clause to smooth out the meaning.
縱然我們的心責備我們，我們還可以安心，因為天主比我們的心大，他原知道一切。【思高】
The extra clause is a paraphrase of the last part of verse 19, "we can still be assured". Moreover, it translates the "For if" into "Even if".
The Chinese translation assumes that John meant to say that we love not in words but in deed and in truth. So our deeds assure our conscience before God. Even if, for some reasons, our conscience condemns us, we can still be assured because God is greater than our conscience and knows everything, even things unknown to our conscience. What can we make out of this?
We acted out our charity in truth and our conscience was assured. Why then would our conscience condemn us? Perhaps later, "bad" things emerged or we learned new things which contradicted our previous good intention. So our conscience was disturbed and we regretted what we had done with good intention. But John assured us that we don't have to regret because God is greater than our conscience.
That is what I can make out. Do you have other explanations?
I read on and found some logical flaws in John's epistle.
John gave us a good piece of advice. Test every spirit.
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).
He also gave us a criterion to test the spirits.
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God (1 John 4:2).
Fair enough. Jesus is the Word become flesh (John 1:14). The possible logical flaw follows.
and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God (1 John 4:3a).
When we set a condition on a group of candidates, we narrow down the number of candidates. "Confessing that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" is a condition. From verse 2, it is obvious that spirits which confess Jesus form a subset of all spirits of God. Which means there are spirits of God which do not confess Jesus. This contradicts verse 3a, unless the 2 sets are identical. That is the set of spirits which confess Jesus is equal to the set of all spirits of God. Mathematically, if the two sets are infinite, the situation would be worse. For example, there are an infinite number of even numbers and of course the set of all natural numbers (i.e. odd numbers, even numbers and zero) is also infinite. However, the set of natural numbers is NOT bigger than the set of even numbers! The reason is simple. For each and every number you find in the set of natural numbers, I can find a corresponding matching even number! Theologically, I do not know how to argue for equality of the set of spirits which confess Jesus and the set of all spirits of God. I speculate that actually all spirits have once been of God because God creates everything. However, some spirits for some reasons refuse to confess Jesus. They abuse their freedom and exclude themselves from God. So, all spirits of God are divided into 2 camps. Still both camps, one which confesses Jesus and the other which does not, are of God!
John gave us a good piece of advice. Test every spirit.
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are of God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).
He also gave us a criterion to test the spirits.
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God (1 John 4:2).
Fair enough. Jesus is the Word become flesh (John 1:14). The possible logical flaw follows.
and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God (1 John 4:3a).
When we set a condition on a group of candidates, we narrow down the number of candidates. "Confessing that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" is a condition. From verse 2, it is obvious that spirits which confess Jesus form a subset of all spirits of God. Which means there are spirits of God which do not confess Jesus. This contradicts verse 3a, unless the 2 sets are identical. That is the set of spirits which confess Jesus is equal to the set of all spirits of God. Mathematically, if the two sets are infinite, the situation would be worse. For example, there are an infinite number of even numbers and of course the set of all natural numbers (i.e. odd numbers, even numbers and zero) is also infinite. However, the set of natural numbers is NOT bigger than the set of even numbers! The reason is simple. For each and every number you find in the set of natural numbers, I can find a corresponding matching even number! Theologically, I do not know how to argue for equality of the set of spirits which confess Jesus and the set of all spirits of God. I speculate that actually all spirits have once been of God because God creates everything. However, some spirits for some reasons refuse to confess Jesus. They abuse their freedom and exclude themselves from God. So, all spirits of God are divided into 2 camps. Still both camps, one which confesses Jesus and the other which does not, are of God!
A little further on, a similar logical flaw emerges.
We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us (1 John 4:6a).
What conclusion can we draw from a statement such as "Whoever knows God listens to us."? I think we can only say "Whoever does not listen to us does not know God and thus is not of God". How did John draw the conclusion that "he who is not of God does not listen to us"?
Once again, "whoever knows God" is a subset of "people who listen to us". I would argue in this way.
Don't we carry the mission to preach to people who do not know God? Won't such a mission a waste of energy if these people will never listen to us? Therefore, there must be people who do not know God and still listen to us. That is why people who know God are a subset of people who listen to us. The two sets can never be identical. But John stated as if the 2 sets of people were identical. It was logically flawed.
Perhaps we should return to the Greek original and argue from there.
We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us (1 John 4:6a).
What conclusion can we draw from a statement such as "Whoever knows God listens to us."? I think we can only say "Whoever does not listen to us does not know God and thus is not of God". How did John draw the conclusion that "he who is not of God does not listen to us"?
Once again, "whoever knows God" is a subset of "people who listen to us". I would argue in this way.
Don't we carry the mission to preach to people who do not know God? Won't such a mission a waste of energy if these people will never listen to us? Therefore, there must be people who do not know God and still listen to us. That is why people who know God are a subset of people who listen to us. The two sets can never be identical. But John stated as if the 2 sets of people were identical. It was logically flawed.
Perhaps we should return to the Greek original and argue from there.
Dear Lord, once again, I have been too rational. I pray that I do not love in tongue, but in deed and in truth. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment