debt not sin

[kokigami]

I am hoping this is the appropriate place to post this. I know some here have done a bit more scholarly research into the historical language of the Christian Texts than I, so I am curious as to the take on this. It is, I am afraid, kinda vague and short of details. I suspect that is, in part, because the professor is trying to flog his upcoming book. Still, what of the basic premise.

In summary , Prof. Hudson (U of MO, KC) is arguing that Jesus Message was about debt not about "sin" as we think of it today. And that the modern view of "Sin" as tied to the fleshy desires, was a redirect by the oligarchs of past to protect the Oligarchy. Now, I am not asking here to get opinions on whether debt forgiveness (a major theme of his argument) is a a good or bad policy. Just whether his historical grounding is solid enough to warrant further research, or if his is standing on mud and if so, how wet is  it.
LInky here.
 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

It's interesting.  I'm not able to say how valid it is.  

[Dan56]

17 hours ago, kokigami said:

In summary , Prof. Hudson (U of MO, KC) is arguing that Jesus Message was about debt not about "sin" as we think of it today. And that the modern view of "Sin" as tied to the fleshy desires, was a redirect by the oligarchs of past to protect the Oligarchy. Now, I am not asking here to get opinions on whether debt forgiveness (a major theme of his argument) is a a good or bad policy. Just whether his historical grounding is solid enough to warrant further research, or if his is standing on mud and if so, how wet is  it.
LInky here.
 

 

Imo, a bunch of bologna... Debt has a double meaning, debt as used in the Lords Prayer has nothing to do with financial indebtedness, but is related to transgressions against God. Being guilty of sin is a debt. Jesus didn't die for monetary debt, but paid the price for our sins, which are moral and spiritual transgressions against the law, and its these sinful debts that are wiped clean. This is completely different from a Jubilee, where monetary debts are erased.

Edited January 5, 2018 by Dan56

[kokigami]

2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Imo, a bunch of bologna... Debt has a double meaning, debt as used in the Lords Prayer has nothing to do with financial indebtedness, but is related to transgressions against God. Being guilty of sin is a debt. Jesus didn't die for monetary debt, but paid the price for our sins, which are moral and spiritual transgressions against the law, and its these sinful debts that are wiped clean. This is completely different from a Jubilee, where monetary debts are erased.

so, first point, are the words the same?  I ask because, if I recall, you are one of the people who learned a bit of the ancient tongues in your quest. 

Edited January 5, 2018 by kokigami
to expand on the thought.

[mererdog]

"ὀφείλημα, ὀφειλητος, τό (ὀφείλω), that which is owed;

 

a. properly, that which is justly or legally due, a debt; so for מַשָּׁאָה, Deuteronomy 24:12 (10); ἀφιέναι, 1 Macc. 15:8; ἀποτίνειν, Plato, legg. 4, p. 717 b.; ἀποδιδόναι, Aristotle, eth. Nic. 9, 2, 5 (p. 1165a, 3). κατά ὀφείλημα, as of debt, Romans 4:4.

 

 

b. in imitation of the Chaldean חוב or חובָא (which denotes both debt and sin), metaphorically, offence, sin (see ὀφειλέτης, b.); hence, ἀφιέναι τίνι τά ὀφειλετα αὐτοῦ, to remit the penalty of one's sins, to forgive them, (Chaldean חובִין שְׁבַק), Matthew 6:12. (Cf. Winer's Grammar, 30, 32, 33.)"

 

http://biblehub.com/greek/3783.htm

Edited January 5, 2018 by mererdog

[Dan56]

On 1/5/2018 at 1:48 AM, kokigami said:

so, first point, are the words the same?  I ask because, if I recall, you are one of the people who learned a bit of the ancient tongues in your quest. 

 

Imo, yes, sins are debts, meaning shortcomings in the service to God. While debt and sin are different words, debts used figuratively can refer to sin. In fact where Matthew 6:12 uses "And forgive us our debts" , Luke 11:4 says; "And forgive us our sins". 

[mererdog]

On 1/6/2018 at 2:12 AM, Dan56 said:

In fact where Matthew 6:12 uses "And forgive us our debts" , Luke 11:4 says; "And forgive us our sins". 

Although Luke also says "For we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us."

Which is interesting, in that it puts sin against God on the same level as debts between each other. No?

Edited January 14, 2018 by mererdog

[Dan56]

18 hours ago, mererdog said:

Although Luke also says "For we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us."

Which is interesting, in that it puts sin against God on the same level as debts between each other. No?

 

I wouldn't say "on the same level", sin is sin, but we can't expect God to forgive us if we refuse to forgive others.. Its like expecting God to love us even though we hate everyone else. "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." (Matthew 6:14-15). The parable of the Unforgiving Servant spells it out in Matthew 18:21-35.
 

[mererdog]

5 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

I wouldn't say "on the same level", sin is sin, but we can't expect God to forgive us if we refuse to forgive others.. Its like expecting God to love us even though we hate everyone else.

So, what you seem to be saying is that God is only as good as we are, and it is therefore unrealistic to hold Him to a higher standard. I'm fairly certain that isn't what you are trying to say.

 

I know there are people I love who do not love me. I have had to forgive people for being unwilling to forgive me. To my way of thinking, both love and forgiveness must be unconditional, or they are not what they are purported to be.

 

Lets pretend you owe me a dollar, and I say "If you tear up the one dollar IOU cuchulain gave you, I'll tear up the one dollar IOU you gave me."

As I see it, that isnt forgiveness, but simply an accounting trick where one person's debt is used to pay another person's debt. A sort of robbing Saint Peter to pay Saint Paul, if you will. 

 

My basic position is that to make forgiveness conditional is to say "I will cancel the debt, as long as you pay it off first."

 

Any of that sound unreasonable?

Edited January 15, 2018 by mererdog

[Dan56]

5 hours ago, mererdog said:

So, what you seem to be saying is that God is only as good as we are, and it is therefore unrealistic to hold Him to a higher standard. I'm fairly certain that isn't what you are trying to say.

 

I know there are people I love who do not love me. I have had to forgive people for being unwilling to forgive me. To my way of thinking, both love and forgiveness must be unconditional, or they are not what they are purported to be.

 

Lets pretend you owe me a dollar, and I say "If you tear up the one dollar IOU cuchulain gave you, I'll tear up the one dollar IOU you gave me."

As I see it, that isnt forgiveness, but simply an accounting trick where one person's debt is used to pay another person's debt. A sort of robbing Saint Peter to pay Saint Paul, if you will. 

 

My basic position is that to make forgiveness conditional is to say "I will cancel the debt, as long as you pay it off first."

 

Any of that sound unreasonable?

 

God is good, we aren't, so its very realistic to hold Him to the highest plane.

The bible doesn't teach to forgive those who forgive you, but to forgive those who repent of their trespasses against you.

From my biblical understanding, both love and forgiveness are conditional. 

 

In your scenario, its not robbing Peter to pay Paul. Our debt (sins) against God have already been paid for, but it is contingent on our willingness to forgive others as God has forgiven us. Its just saying that we can't expect God to forgive us of all our faults, while we refuse to forgive anyone ourselves. We wouldn't be a follower of his example, but a hypocrite.

 

"I will cancel the debt, as long as you pay it off first.".. No, our debts (sins) were already paid in full on Calvary, and it was paid unconditionally for anyone who willingly accepts it.

[kokigami]

On 1/6/2018 at 3:12 AM, Dan56 said:

 

Imo, yes, sins are debts, meaning shortcomings in the service to God. While debt and sin are different words, debts used figuratively can refer to sin. In fact where Matthew 6:12 uses "And forgive us our debts" , Luke 11:4 says; "And forgive us our sins". 

to me, it looks like they are using the words interchangeably. It is interesting, since popular scholarship sets the dates for those two gospels as being about the same time. 

[mererdog]

10 hours ago, kokigami said:

to me, it looks like they are using the words interchangeably. It is interesting, since popular scholarship sets the dates for those two gospels as being about the same time. 

One explanation I saw floated is that the intended audience for Luke would not understand the metaphor. It makes me wonder whether I am misunderstanding any metaphors in Luke.

[mererdog]

23 hours ago, Dan56 said:

, and it was paid unconditionally for anyone who willingly accepts it.

So it is unconditional, as long as you meet the conditions. Like something that is free, provided you pay for it.

[mererdog]

23 hours ago, Dan56 said:

We wouldn't be a follower of his example, but a hypocrite.

Hypocrisy seems to be the sort of thing that requires forgiveness. It also seems like a fairly universal human trait. If I refuse to forgive those who seem hypocritical, who is left to forgive?

[Dan56]

1 hour ago, mererdog said:

So it is unconditional, as long as you meet the conditions. Like something that is free, provided you pay for it.

 

Its unconditional in the sense that you can't pay for it and you can't earn it.. Its conditional because you must receive it.. If you were drowning and someone threw you a life preserver, the only condition to saving your life is your willingness to accept it. That's the essence of John 3:16, everlasting life is promised to whosoever believeth. An unconditional offer to any who will receive it.

 

58 minutes ago, mererdog said:

Hypocrisy seems to be the sort of thing that requires forgiveness. It also seems like a fairly universal human trait. If I refuse to forgive those who seem hypocritical, who is left to forgive?

 

A hypocrite is someone who says one thing and does another, its knowing what's right but going the opposite direction. God doesn't forgive hypocrites until they repent, and neither should we... jmo

[micha_el]

I can't claim to have done any scholarly research but I have always understood that debt and sin are used meaning the same thing. some translations of the Lord's prayer say " forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" and another says " forgive us our transgressions as we forgive our transgressors". it could also be expressed as "forgive us our injuries as we forgive those who injure us" etc. there are many ways to say that same thing. so it's my belief that Jesus full well meant sin and not financial obligations. however do keep in mind that He also taught that we should "give to Caesar what is Caesar's' , that we must be charitable, that if we are sued for our coat we should give our shirt also, etc. so forgiving others of their financial debt to us would seem to be a very pleasing thing in the sight of our Lord. as to salvation being a free gift I think Luke chapter 14 explains that it is a reward rather than a free gift. Jesus states the "cost of being his disciple" and I think that shows that it is a reward for our faithful following of Him and that it's not at all a gift. Jesus taught in parables so I'm not sure if He meant this as verbatim literal or if He was trying to give us pause to stop and take a good hard look at what we would have to endure as His followers. but I am certain that He was stating again that we would have to deny ourselves and give up our lives; that we would have to seek Him and not the things of this world. as I said before I am certainly no scholar and am submitting my opinion based upon my understanding. I may full well be wrong.

Praise be to our Lord and King for revealing Himself to us and may we gain in knowledge and wisdom of His will.

[kokigami]

On 1/16/2018 at 12:02 PM, Dan56 said:

 

Its unconditional in the sense that you can't pay for it and you can't earn it.. Its conditional because you must receive it.. If you were drowning and someone threw you a life preserver, the only condition to saving your life is your willingness to accept it. That's the essence of John 3:16, everlasting life is promised to whosoever believeth. An unconditional offer to any who will receive it.

 

 

A hypocrite is someone who says one thing and does another, its knowing what's right but going the opposite direction. God doesn't forgive hypocrites until they repent, and neither should we... jmo

Not really what unconditional means. I think the more accurate analogy is someone offering to throw a life preserver, if you promise fealty, but withholding it if you don't. Once a life preserver is in the water, it doesn't matter what one thinks of the the thrower. 

On 1/27/2018 at 2:05 PM, micha_el said:

I can't claim to have done any scholarly research but I have always understood that debt and sin are used meaning the same thing. some translations of the Lord's prayer say " forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" and another says " forgive us our transgressions as we forgive our transgressors". it could also be expressed as "forgive us our injuries as we forgive those who injure us" etc. there are many ways to say that same thing. so it's my belief that Jesus full well meant sin and not financial obligations. however do keep in mind that He also taught that we should "give to Caesar what is Caesar's' , that we must be charitable, that if we are sued for our coat we should give our shirt also, etc. so forgiving others of their financial debt to us would seem to be a very pleasing thing in the sight of our Lord. as to salvation being a free gift I think Luke chapter 14 explains that it is a reward rather than a free gift. Jesus states the "cost of being his disciple" and I think that shows that it is a reward for our faithful following of Him and that it's not at all a gift. Jesus taught in parables so I'm not sure if He meant this as verbatim literal or if He was trying to give us pause to stop and take a good hard look at what we would have to endure as His followers. but I am certain that He was stating again that we would have to deny ourselves and give up our lives; that we would have to seek Him and not the things of this world. as I said before I am certainly no scholar and am submitting my opinion based upon my understanding. I may full well be wrong.

Praise be to our Lord and King for revealing Himself to us and may we gain in knowledge and wisdom of His will.

As we have pretty scant info on what Jesus taught, and that, a bit conflicted, I am led to wonder if he actually taught in parables, or if he was so oft mis represented that parables are the best we can make of it.

 

On a side note, anyone see the BBC doc on Jesus lost years? It is on my to do list.

 

[Key]

3 hours ago, kokigami said:

Not really what unconditional means. I think the more accurate analogy is someone offering to throw a life preserver, if you promise fealty, but withholding it if you don't. Once a life preserver is in the water, it doesn't matter what one thinks of the the thrower. 

As we have pretty scant info on what Jesus taught, and that, a bit conflicted, I am led to wonder if he actually taught in parables, or if he was so oft mis represented that parables are the best we can make of it.

 

On a side note, anyone see the BBC doc on Jesus lost years? It is on my to do list.

 

No. Didn't know about it. Would like to see that, myself.

[kokigami]

On 1/30/2018 at 5:40 AM, Key said:

No. Didn't know about it. Would like to see that, myself.

Wasn't great, and less to do with the lost years than the post crucifixion years, based upon the theory that he travelled to the far east during the lost years. Back to regularly scheduled program.

 

[Dan56]

On 1/30/2018 at 2:00 AM, kokigami said:

Not really what unconditional means. I think the more accurate analogy is someone offering to throw a life preserver, if you promise fealty, but withholding it if you don't. Once a life preserver is in the water, it doesn't matter what one thinks of the the thrower. 

 

 

My point in the analogy was that the life preserver was already thrown, nothing was withheld. It wasn't predicated on a promise, or any assurance that a victim would accept it. Its the same with salvation, given unconditionally for anyone who would accept it. An offer can be unconditional, but not automatically implemented if ignored or rejected.  If I offered to rent or loan you a car for a month free of charge, and your response was "no" because you didn't want or like that type of car, my offer was still unconditional, it was you who assigned conditions.