[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) Webb webb at selftest.net
Wed Apr 18 12:46:25 EDT 2007
[] aa [] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) TOUS DI AUTOU PISTOUS EIS QEON TON EGEIRANTA AUTON EK NEKRWN KAI DOXAN AUTWi DONTA hWSTE THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA EINAI EIS QEON Question: Before I looked at it closely in Greek, I’d always assumed thatthis is saying that the people’s faith is ultimately in God-reading the “sothat” as a logical “so that”, rather than a causal “so that”. But I’mstarting to think that the last phrase here is the equivalent of hINA THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA Hi/WSIN EIS QEON Sometimes hINA and hWSTE seem to straddle the telic/purposive andecbatic/resultive senses, and I’m wondering if this is one of them-whetherPeter is saying that God has raised Jesus from the dead and given him gloryso that (and with the end result that) you would come to believe in God. Or is it as I had always assumed-that Peter is saying that belief in Christultimately resolves to belief in God? Or??Webb Mealy
[] aa[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Apr 18 13:12:55 EDT 2007
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) [] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) On Apr 18, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Webb wrote:> TOUS DI AUTOU PISTOUS EIS QEON> > TON EGEIRANTA AUTON EK NEKRWN> > KAI DOXAN AUTWi DONTA> > hWSTE THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA EINAI EIS QEON> > > > Question: Before I looked at it closely in Greek, I’d always > assumed that> this is saying that the people’s faith is ultimately in God-reading > the “so> that” as a logical “so that”, rather than a causal “so that”. But I’m> starting to think that the last phrase here is the equivalent of> > > > hINA THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA Hi/WSIN EIS QEON> > > > Sometimes hINA and hWSTE seem to straddle the telic/purposive and> ecbatic/resultive senses, and I’m wondering if this is one of them- > whether> Peter is saying that God has raised Jesus from the dead and given > him glory> so that (and with the end result that) you would come to believe in > God.> > Or is it as I had always assumed-that Peter is saying that belief > in Christ> ultimately resolves to belief in God? Or??I think “OR” is just about right here. Koine Greek has ceased to observeany clear distinction between purpose and result constructions. JerryReimer has just remarked regarding adnominal genitive phrases, so herewe may well think that subjective factors are likely to decide our preferencefor reading a particular construction as one of purpose or one of result.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) Webb webb at selftest.net
Wed Apr 18 13:26:56 EDT 2007
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) [] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) Granting the qualifications you mentioned, are you inclined to take thehWSTE as rather more logical in force (= “Therefore, in principle, yourfaith and hope are in God”), or causative/resultive (= “As a result of God’saction in raising Christ from the dead and glorifying him, your faith andhope are in God”)? Or are these two senses possible to read at the sametime? If you’re not happy with either one of those characterizations, howwould you render the verse?Webb—–Original Message—–From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:13 AMTo: WebbCc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSubject: Re: [] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)On Apr 18, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Webb wrote:> TOUS DI AUTOU PISTOUS EIS QEON> > TON EGEIRANTA AUTON EK NEKRWN> > KAI DOXAN AUTWi DONTA> > hWSTE THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA EINAI EIS QEON> > > > Question: Before I looked at it closely in Greek, I’d always > assumed that> this is saying that the people’s faith is ultimately in God-reading > the “so> that” as a logical “so that”, rather than a causal “so that”. But I’m> starting to think that the last phrase here is the equivalent of> > > > hINA THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA Hi/WSIN EIS QEON> > > > Sometimes hINA and hWSTE seem to straddle the telic/purposive and> ecbatic/resultive senses, and I’m wondering if this is one of them- > whether> Peter is saying that God has raised Jesus from the dead and given > him glory> so that (and with the end result that) you would come to believe in > God.> > Or is it as I had always assumed-that Peter is saying that belief > in Christ> ultimately resolves to belief in God? Or??I think “OR” is just about right here. Koine Greek has ceased to observeany clear distinction between purpose and result constructions. JerryReimer has just remarked regarding adnominal genitive phrases, so herewe may well think that subjective factors are likely to decide our preferencefor reading a particular construction as one of purpose or one of result.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Apr 18 15:49:54 EDT 2007
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21) [] PNEUMATI THEOU: Meaning of Genitive On Apr 18, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Webb wrote:> Granting the qualifications you mentioned, are you inclined to take > the> hWSTE as rather more logical in force (= “Therefore, in principle, > your> faith and hope are in God”), or causative/resultive (= “As a result > of God’s> action in raising Christ from the dead and glorifying him, your > faith and> hope are in God”)? Or are these two senses possible to read at the > same> time? If you’re not happy with either one of those > characterizations, how> would you render the verse?This probably won’t satisfy you, but I think I would simply not endeavorto disambiguate the ambiguous; I’d make it ” … so that your faith and hopeare directed toward God.”> —–Original Message—–> From: Carl W. Conrad [mailto:cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu]> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:13 AM> To: Webb> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Subject: Re: [] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)> > > On Apr 18, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Webb wrote:> >> TOUS DI AUTOU PISTOUS EIS QEON>> >> TON EGEIRANTA AUTON EK NEKRWN>> >> KAI DOXAN AUTWi DONTA>> >> hWSTE THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA EINAI EIS QEON>> >> >> >> Question: Before I looked at it closely in Greek, I’d always>> assumed that>> this is saying that the people’s faith is ultimately in God-reading>> the “so>> that” as a logical “so that”, rather than a causal “so that”. But I’m>> starting to think that the last phrase here is the equivalent of>> >> >> >> hINA THN PISTIN hUMWN KAI ELPIDA Hi/WSIN EIS QEON>> >> >> >> Sometimes hINA and hWSTE seem to straddle the telic/purposive and>> ecbatic/resultive senses, and I’m wondering if this is one of them->> whether>> Peter is saying that God has raised Jesus from the dead and given>> him glory>> so that (and with the end result that) you would come to believe in>> God.>> >> Or is it as I had always assumed-that Peter is saying that belief>> in Christ>> ultimately resolves to belief in God? Or??> > I think “OR” is just about right here. Koine Greek has ceased to> observe> any clear distinction between purpose and result constructions. Jerry> Reimer has just remarked regarding adnominal genitive phrases, so here> we may well think that subjective factors are likely to decide our> preference> for reading a particular construction as one of purpose or one of> result.> > > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243> cwconrad2 at mac.com> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/> > > —> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad2 at mac.comWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
[] “Your faith and hope are in God” (1 Pet. 1:21)[] PNEUMATI THEOU: Meaning of Genitive
hey Jared I know you promised us a great exegesis on this one but was too busy at the time or something. What happened to this passage? Can you give us your proper translation from the Greek and your theology that follows the text? Thanks!
Troy Day I had forgot about that, I apologize sir! I wouldn’t call it great, I am just a man looking for the intent and trying to follow the Spirit. I will post a link when I get to my laptop.
Also I believe I was referring to another chapter in 1 Peter 3:21.
1 Peter 1:21 Faith in God is through Jesus, as God’s manifested provision for sin. There is no other avenue of salvation (John 5:23; 14:6; 1 John 2:23), whether for those coming to God or those continuing with Him. The grammatical construction of the words so that your faith and hope are in God (hœste followed by the infinitive of eimi) expresses result rather than purpose. The Father’s resurrection and glorification of Jesus results in faith and hope being in God as people believe through Jesus. Faith and hope are directed toward, or focused on God.
Why does Peter emphasize this? One is saved only by faith in Christ. Yet the desire to live a godly life springs from a real hope in God—that He will keep His promise to ultimately save and reward them.
RichardAnna Boyce this OP was specifically posted for Jared Cheshire and his interpretation on water baptism in the context Not just a general talk on 1 Pet 1:21 I am not sure if this was the correct verse as Jared posted several from 1 Pet by mistake There was also a timely comment by Link Hudson on the meaning of the verse but I cant find it to repost and could have been non-related to the water baptism question
Troy Day, now you are jogging my memory. LOL I was exhausted and busy that night and probably shouldn’t have been commenting on FB in that state. But I will post the link to 1 Pete 3:21 and I will also look at 1:21 because I am not sure I have covered that yet in my studies.
Thank you for pointing this out I will check on 3:21
Troy Day Just got my notes uploaded to my drive. Here is the link.
I use the Strong’s #s in my notes but don’t rely strictly on Strong’s. There are other sources I also use to try to ascertain the proper grammar and definitions of the words used in our speech today. I am by no means a Greek scholar, just doing the best I can,
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RskfIRI32H3XuUnBMi6Aj0vC1vXWrYKq/view?usp=sharing
Strong is kind of a basic level but oh well I was more interested on your actual translation of the verse
Troy Day I uses strong’s mostly as a reference to see how words were translated in other places, and also it is a useful tool that can help connect to other useful sources. Stong’s is fine as long as you realize it’s limitations.
Right on – Strongs does NOT offer the best translation
agreed
As far as 1 Pete 1:21 goes, it doesn’t specifically talk about baptism, but can be used to help understand the model
Because they believe in the God that brought Him (Jesus) out of the dead, (burial/baptism) and have given it (the resurrection into new life) to you, that your faith be, and the hope is in God
Great Scripture. Who by Him do believe in God. (Only by Him , and what He did for us at the Cross that we are able to Believe in God. ) Who raised Him (Christ) up from the dead ( His Resurrection, was was guaranteed insomuch as He Atoned for all sin —Romans 6:23. | and gave Him Glory; that your Faith and Hope might be in God. (Faith in the Resurrected Lord Jesus Who died for us. )