Need some biblical insights on the term: the "many" and the "all" .

[mharrell08]

I've read that study by Ray. He doesn't say anything about the words "polus polos" IIRC. My question was, why does Paul use two different words? Was he making some kind of point by it, or was it just a change of style? It was just a question, I'm sorry if I annoyed you.

The greek word for 'all' is 'pas':

Excerpt from 'Does All Mean All' (http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5605.0.html):

You will notice that I did not say, does scripture 'say' God will save all.  There is a reason for that.  I know all of us here believe God will save all of humanity.  I know we all believe that fervently and we base it on the scriptures. 
But today I'm going to play, not the devil's advocate, but the theologian's advocate.  I want you first of all to give me some scriptures that state emphatically that God will save everybody.
Okay 1 Tim 4:10, let's turn there and I'm going to play the theologian's advocate and we'll see what we come up with.  This is the verse we have at the bottom of Bible-truths.com. 

1 Tim 4:10  For to this we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

Now what is it about that scripture that would make you think that God will or have to save all?  What is in there, what word?  All.  The word all, right?  Wrong, pale face.  You don't understand hermeneutics or this good stuff taught in the seminaries of this world. So it's wrong.  The word 'all' can mean - all, completely, totality or as many as.

So they say, 'well yes He is the living God who will save as many men, as He will save, however many that is.  Those that come to Him out of free will choice and accept Christ.  Yes He will save that many, that all.  The word pas in the Greek, that's how many He will save, as many as He will save.  He will especially save believers for sure, because God so loved the world, that whosoever believes on His Son will be saved.  You will receive eternal life if you believe.  Certainly the believers and all men who are not believers, but maybe will be believers in the ages to come, through this church age and however many there are.  The all, the pas, the many will be saved too, but not everyone.'

Where did you get the words 'polous, polous'?

Marques

[Lupac]

"Polus polos" is G4183, the words translated "many" in Romans 5:19. (It should be "THE many".) It's seems the KJV translators added quite a few key words to Romans 5:18-19. Here's how YLT has it:

So, then, as through one offence to all men it is to condemnation, so also through one declaration of `Righteous' it is to all men to justification of life;
for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the one, shall the many be constituted righteous.

Does anyone have the CLV on their PC? What does it say? My original question still stands. Why would Paul switch from "pas" to "polus polos" in the same sentence? Is he talking about two different groups of people, or something? Ray says to pay attention to the all words. I was just wondering what you thoughts are.

[mharrell08]

"Polus polos" is G4183, the words translated "many" in Romans 5:19. (It should be "THE many".) It's seems the KJV translators added quite a few key words to Romans 5:18-19. Here's how YLT has it:

So, then, as through one offence to all men it is to condemnation, so also through one declaration of `Righteous' it is to all men to justification of life;
for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the one, shall the many be constituted righteous.

Does anyone have the CLV on their PC? What does it say? My original question still stands. Why would Paul switch from "pas" to "polus polos" in the same sentence? Is he talking about two different groups of people, or something? Ray says to pay attention to the all words. I was just wondering what you thoughts are.

Rom 5:19  For even as, through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners, thus also, through the obedience of the One, the many shall be constituted just." [CLV]

Lupac,

Paul is not talking about 2 groups of people, it's all the same continuing thought from verse 18. USAGE is the key to understanding the words that are translated.

I didn't ask the question 'What difference does it make?' to be flippant but really what DIFFERENCE does it make? The 'offense of one' from verse 18 is the same 'by one man's disobedience' from verse 19...Paul is almost repeating himself in these 2 verses, there is no difference.

If you want to 'pay attention to all the words', then great. But don't forget about all the words in the statement as they help define the word you are keying in on. Remember USAGE is the key in understanding the words being translated. We rely on usage to help our understanding that 'aion/aionios' is properly translated 'eon/eonian' but throw this same principle to the wind to understand other scriptures.

I don't mean to offend you Lupac, I really don't. But pay attention to WHAT Paul is saying in these 2 verses and that will help in understanding that it makes no difference (in this passage, not every scripture) regarding all & many.


Hope this helps,

Marques

[Nelson]

Members:

I did not want to come off as 'snappy' in the comments above. But I was annoyed because the FIRST response in this thread referenced a bible study by Ray which answers the question of 'all' and 'many'. As I stated then, this study answers these questions thoroughly and AFTER one reads/listens to it, then ask with a particular statement or comment in mind.

A discussion is when 2 or more parties talk AND LISTEN to one another. It can be annoying when the listening part is ignored but only talking, talking, talking. I was going to post this in Roy Martin's 'Expectations' thread, but I think a balanced discussion should be expected on a DISCUSSION board, not people talking without listening.


Thank you,

Marques

Marques,

I don't think you're being 'snappy' at all. One of the great values in these threads is learning. When I answered I was answering the original question as I saw it, not claiming I'm correct, especially having read through the other answers. So, I personally have benefitted from this thread as a learning experience.

No single individual has a monopoly on the truth and we can all learn from the spiritual insight of some, even the mistakes of others. Sometimes there's more to a thread than meets our own individual eye, but I do understand that some threads get out of hand and arguments and debates begin to rage edifying no-one.

The theme of this thread started and really that should be the main point of discussion in order to avoid it branching into unrelated topics which should really be started in new threads. One thing I know for certain though, I'd not like to be a moderator on this or any other board that discussed the scriptures.

Thanks folks, I stand corrected.

• "He who keeps instruction is in the way of life, But he who refuses correction goes astray" (Pr 10:17)

Grace and peace to you and yours.

Nelson

[Vangie]

Lupac,
Try to see the forest, not just the trees.

[Lupac]

But if you don't carefully study the trees, you can hardly say the forest is there at all... (Just me trying to be deep.) I think I understand now.