> General Discussions
Unequally yoked believers
Slim:
--- Quote from: gmik on November 19, 2006, 02:04:46 PM ---Lets not forget Slim in our prayers!!!
--- End quote ---
Yeah, don't forget to pray for me :D, I need all the help I can get. BTW one of the nice things about getting cancer is all the people I know are nicer to me. I especially like getting kisses from my previously mean spirited 17 year old daughter. And if I get people praying for me too, well getting cancer isn't as bad as I thought.
pstrevnglstchrls:
Well once again we misunderstand the english language. Not, unequally are the two words described together. Unbeliever describes alone what Not and unequally combined we are to be. If you disagree go to a english teacher and ask them about the sentence. Yes the rest of the scripture might imply what the rest of the world thinks but if you really read the rest of the passage it asks questions and never really answers them. How can we put it on ourselves to answer questions for the bible. The first question is what has darkness to do with light, well the light hasthe right and power to turn the dakness into light powerful. Aint it powerful that Jesus became equally yoked together with unbelievers and turned them into believers?
hillsbororiver:
--- Quote from: pstrevnglstchrls on November 20, 2006, 06:01:17 PM ---
Well once again we misunderstand the english language. Not, unequally are the two words described together. Unbeliever describes alone what Not and unequally combined we are to be. If you disagree go to a english teacher and ask them about the sentence.
--- End quote ---
Not if the English teacher was familiar with the common usage of Old and Middle English, remember these King James verses are not in the modern language.
Here is some history of the English language taken from H.L. Mencken (1880–1956) in his book The American Language written in 1921.
The Double Negative
Like most other examples of “bad grammar” encountered in American the compound negative is of great antiquity and was once quite respectable. The student of Anglo-Saxon encounters it constantly. In that language the negative of the verb was formed by prefixing a particle, ne. Thus, singan (=to sing) became ne singan (=not to sing). In case the verb began with a vowel the ne dropped its e and was combined with the verb, as in noefre (never), from ne-oefre (=not ever). In case the verb began with an h or a w followed by a vowel, the h or w of the verb and the e of ne were both dropped, as in noefth (=has not), from ne-hoefth (=not has), and nolde (=would not), from ne-wolde. Finally, in case the vowel following a w was an i, it changed to y, as in nyste (=knew not), from ne-wiste. But inasmuch as Anglo-Saxon was a fully inflected language the inflections for the negative did not stop with the verbs; the indefinite article, the indefinite pronoun and even some of the nouns were also inflected, and survivors of those forms appear to this day in such words as none and nothing. Moreover, when an actual inflection was impossible it was the practise to insert this ne before a word, in the sense of our no or not. Still more, it came to be the practise to reinforce ne, before a vowel, with na (=not) or naht (=nothing), which later degenerated to nat and not. As a result, there were fearful and wonderful combinations of negatives, some of them fully matching the best efforts of Lardner’s baseball players. Sweet gives several curious examples. 97 “Nan ne dorste nan thing ascian,” translated literally, becomes “no one dares not ask nothing.” “Thaet hus na ne feoll” becomes “the house did not fall not.” As for the Middle English “he never nadde nothing,” it has too modern and familiar a ring to need translating at all. Chaucer, at the beginning of the period of transition to Modern English, used the double negative with the utmost freedom. In “The Knight’s Tale” is this:
He nevere yet no vileynye ne sayde
In al his lyf unto no maner wight.
2
By the time of Shakespeare this license was already much restricted, but a good many double negatives are nevertheless to be found in his plays, and he was particularly shaky in the use of nor. In “Richard III” one finds “I never was nor never will be”; in “Measure for Measure,” “harp not on that nor do not banish treason,” and in “Romeo and Juliet,” “thou expectedst not, nor I looked not for.” This misuse of nor is still very frequent. In other directions, too, the older forms show a tendency to survive all the assaults of grammarians. No, it doesn’t,” heard every day and by no means from the ignorant only, is a sort of double negative. The insertion of but before that, as in “I doubt but that” and “there is no question but that,” makes a double negative that is probably full-blown. Nevertheless, as we have seen, it is heard on the floor of Congress every day, and the Fowlers show that it is also common in England. 98 Even worse forms get into the Congressional Record. Not long ago, for example, I encountered “without hardly an exception” in a public paper of the utmost importance. 99 There are, indeed, situations in which the double negative leaps to the lips or from the pen almost irresistibly; even such careful writers as Huxley, Robert Louis Stevenson and Leslie Stephen have occasionally dallied with it. 100 It is perfectly allowable in the Romance languages, and, as we have seen, is almost the rule in the American vulgate. Now and then some anarchistic student of the language boldly defends and even advocates it. “The double negative,” said a writer in the London Review a long time ago, 101 “has been abandoned to the great injury of strength of expression.” Surely “I won’t take nothing” is stronger than either “I will take nothing” or “I won’t take anything.”
The entire article plus links to more research can be found here;
http://www.bartleby.com/185/45.html
Here is 2 Corinthians 6:14 in some other translations;
Rotherhams
2Cor 6:14 Be not getting diversely yoked with unbelievers: For what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
New International Version
2 Cor 6:14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
Amplified Bible
2Cor 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers [do not make mismated alliances with them or come under a different yoke with them, inconsistent with your faith]. For what partnership have right living and right standing with God with iniquity and lawlessness? Or how can light have fellowship with darkness?
I hope this helps, His Peace and Wisdom to you,
Joe
eggi:
pstrevnglstchrls,
I'm not a native English speaker but I do understand most, if not all, of the English I read. Sometimes I may need to refer to a dictionary, but then again, who doesn't? The scripture in question (2Co 6:14) is talking about how we should not keep company with unbelievers. You suggested that it is saying that we should keep company with people who are not believing, so that they might become believers. You refer to the ministry of Christ and ask:
--- Quote ---Aint it powerful that Jesus became equally yoked together with unbelievers and turned them into believers?
--- End quote ---
It IS powerful. Jesus Christ IS powerful. Are you just as powerful? Can you resist all the temptations in the way Christ did it? This is why Paul is saying:
A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. (Gal 5:9 KJV)
and
But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. (1Co 5:13 KJV)
It is clear that Paul is talking about separating ourselves from unbelievers who are trying to bring in something which isn't acceptable.
Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2Co 6:14-18 KJV)
However, Paul is not saying that we should interact only with believers (meaning that we should separate from the rest of the world):
I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. (1Co 5:9-11 KJV)
So, we may be a light to unbelievers, and in the same time, be careful as to who we keep close company with. It is clear that Paul is warning us against having spiritual relationships with fornicators and detractors. This doesn't prevent us from being a light to those around us.
God bless you and keep you,
Eirik
pstrevnglstchrls:
the scriptures say I live yet not I christ liveth in me and the life that I live I now live by faith of the son of God. So it is not I who am equally yoked with unbelievers but the Lord Jesus Christ who lives in me that becomes equally yoked with them and shows them the truth of the gospel. this truth of the gospel unequally yoked is always referred to as marriage. This is the one reason the lost hate christians is because the Christian think they are better in thier attitude of I cant become equally yoked together with you. Just like the Jew of old thinking that the gentile Dog has no place with them such as the christian saying I cant be equally yoked with you. So what you are saying is that bad is greater than good whoa darkness is greater than light. You folks can translate the bible any way you want to fit what someone else taught you. Cool the word of God says not unequally yoked which is equally yoked just ask a grammar teacher and if they say it dont mean that i stand corrected
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version