From: Jim West (jwest@highland.net)
Date: Tue Jul 11 2000 - 17:31:34 EDT
At 08:11 PM 7/11/00 +0000, you wrote:
>
>James 1:13
>
>
>MHDEIS PEIRAZOMENOS LEGETW hOTI APO QEOU PEIRAZOMAI
>hO GAR QEOS APEIRASTOS ESTIN KAKWN
>PEIRAZEI DE AUTOS OUDENA
>
>I can not see the reasoning, or logical conclusion, to James' argument as it
>relates to the phrase "hO GAR QEOS APEIRASTOS ESTIN KAKWN."
why are you looking for "logic" in the greek/western sense of the word from
a writer that isnt interested in "logic" but "truth"? The truth James here
expresses is in contradistinction to the truth his pagan neighbors accepted-
i.e.- that Zeus (god) was the tempter as well as the helper. He is using
rabbinic argumentation-- from the greater to the lesser. If the greater is
true then it follows that the lesser is true--- so he states it like this:
A- God is not subject to temptation
B- God doesnt tempt anyone
- therefore- when you are tempted you arent tempted by God.
A- is the "greater" leg of the triangle-- God- who is greatest of all, is
not subject to temptation. All would most likely agree with this.
B- is the "lesser" leg of the triangle- God doesnt tempt you if he himself
cant be tempted for God doesnt do to you what he himself does not endure.
C- Therefore the simple truth follows that when you are tempted- its source
isnt God.
Now you might expect that James would word it in this order-- but in
Rabbinic argumentation the conclusion is offered first and not last. (you
greek/westerner you-- wanting th proof before the conclusion!!!!) :-)
In short- James is a Rabbi and he writes like one. He argues like one. And
he demonstrates truth like one-- not like a philosopher from Athens.
>I do not see the connection. The fact that God cannot be tempted does not
>seem to relate to whether or not I may think God is tempting me.
Because you are a modern westerner- influenced so profoundly by your
heritage that in many cases you dont even see the influence operative- as it
is here.
Become a first century Jew and you will have no problem at all understanding
what James says.
>In fact, I
>might respond, "Yes, I agree. God himself cannot be tempted by evil, but
>that is not my accusation. I am saying that God appears to be tempting me to
>evil."
>
>
>I suspect that the resolution to this will involve, to some extent, a better
>understanding of the force of APEIRASTOS.
No- you have rightly understood this verb. It is the interpretive matrix
which has escaped you.
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Last question: IAKWBOS
>
>Why is this James, and not Jacob?
AHHHHHHH-- Because we are westerners and we prefer our anglicized
pronunciation to an accurate rendering of the text itself......
sadly.
Best,
Jim
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
jwest@highland.net
http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:31 EDT