My friend: A.T. need not claim to be a scholar of koine, he is!
The One who consumed death/ thanantos into Himself, has earned the right to walk thru doors or anything else He so desires!
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What does this passage mean?
- Thread starter FineLinen
- Start date
My friend: A.T. need not claim to be a scholar of koine, he is!
The One who consumed death/ thanantos into Himself, has earned the right to walk thru doors or anything else He so desires!
According to my dictionary, ancient Greek ἐν with the dative (as here) means "in, at, on, between, among, during, within, by means of, with, through, upon, by dint of" ─ which we might simplify as "in relation to".
So: "in relation to the name of Jesus every knee should bow" seems clear enough, and explains the translation "at".
Paul's Jesus is the gnostic demiurge ('craftsman'), a major angel or spirit figure who existed in heaven with God and who created the material universe (1 Corinthian 8:6) (having those qualities in common with the Jesus of John (John 1:3), but not the Jesuses of Mark, Matthew or Luke).
Last edited:
I know of only One Jesus Christ, the Master out of the Being of the Living God. Each of the four Gospel writers expressed Him. St. John towered above each of them as one in deep union & knowledge, leaning in communion upon His breast.
St. Paul, out of a blinding experience of intervention by the living Christ, touched dimensions within the heavenlies, that produced visions of grandeur not simply in remarkable letters of Canon but in words that could not be uttered.
The koine κάμπτω κάμπτω; future καμψω; aorist ἐκαμψα; indicates the exercise of bowing before Him is one flowing out of total surrender to Him as a worshipper and in/en union with the Name of all names. This is no maybe or could or should but total union with all it means to be IN Christ Jesus.
"Not perfunctory genuflections."
If you read the text with an open mind, you'll find that the Jesuses of Paul and the authors of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John present five distinct Christologies and not less than three incompatible models. The Christian custom of insisting they conform to a single description only creates a sixth description incompatible with the other five,
The author of John took much the same gnostic view as Paul, Jesus as an angel or spirit (the demiurge) who existed in heaven with God and who, having created our material universe, then became the intermediary between the material (us beings who exist in the universe) and God, pure but remote spirit. However, the Jesus of Mark was an ordinary Jew until at his baptism he was adopted by God on the model of David's adoption Psalm 2:7, and the Jesuses of Matthew and of Luke did not pre-exist but came into existence by divine insemination.
Or at least, that's what the NT says,
firedragon
Veteran Member
In.
Yet, I doubt the English rendering actually matters. At or in, you get the picture that the verse simply is saying that inomati eesous or name of Jesus which means "in his name".
But Im curious to understand what your take on this is and what difference it would make.
Hi there Fire D.: There is nothing of this glorious One, the anoma iēsous , that will not come under His sway. The dimension of this sway is everything in heaven & earth, & yes the underworld. The radical all of pas.
Perhaps one does not see the difference with the two wee words, but the net result has profound difference.
The difference is forced subjection, or one flowing out of all that being in/en Jesus Christ means; the net result being unwilling surrender of a conquered individual, or worship in union with the Name, not perfunctory genuflections.
firedragon
Veteran Member
Sorry, but in your post above I understood your greek better than your English. Its too far above my command of English.
By Anoma Eesous you meant Name of Jesus. I think it should be Onoma tou eesau.
I have a difficult time understanding anything in the world's most expansive language (English) or koine. In fact there is very little I have begun to grasp in all the vast wonders that creep into my being.
"hina en anoma iēsous pas gony kamptō epouranios kai epigeios kai katachthonios"
Strong's Greek: 2424. Ἰησοῦς (Iésous) -- Jesus or Joshua, the name of the Messiah, also three other Isr.
Last edited:
Clara: much thanks for your thoughts. The bowing and confession is not one of rote or a magic formula if you will.
Definition of rote
1: the use of memory usually with little intelligence.
2: mechanical or unthinking routine or repetition.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The confession, rather, is one flowing out of worship in/en the Name of all names, and all that being in that Name implies.