2. The Meaning of Sanctification - Enter His Rest
2. The Meaning of Sanctification - Enter His Rest
2. The Meaning of Sanctification - Enter His Rest
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Note again: “And having found certain disciples, he said to them.” Here the “having<br />
found” is likewise the aorist participle. If we should translate that Paul said something to<br />
the disciples when he found them, we should mean actually after he found them; for he<br />
had to find them before he could say anything to them. <strong>The</strong> point insisted on here is that<br />
the real meaning is the same in all these cases. Paul came to Ephesus after he passed<br />
through the upper coasts. He spoke to the disciples after he found them, and these<br />
disciples were asked whether they had received the Holy Ghost after they had believed.<br />
To change the form <strong>of</strong> the question: Does the main verb (”did ye receive?”) refer to a<br />
time after that <strong>of</strong> the participle (”having believed”) or co-incident with it? A. T.<br />
Robertson, who was one <strong>of</strong> the foremost New Testament Greek scholars <strong>of</strong> our time,<br />
taught New Testament Greek for many years and was familiar with the Papyri<br />
Manuscripts which forced a rewriting <strong>of</strong> Greek grammar and a recasting <strong>of</strong> the exegesis<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Greek New Testament. <strong>His</strong> famous and massive grammar <strong>of</strong> the Greek New<br />
Testament was written in the light <strong>of</strong> the papyri discoveries and the Koine.<br />
It is true that Dr. Robertson thought the time <strong>of</strong> the main verb here (”did you receive?”)<br />
and <strong>of</strong> the participle (”having believed”) to be coincident, but in his crystal honesty he<br />
gives us good reason to think otherwise. He says, “<strong>The</strong> antecedent use furnishes the<br />
largest number <strong>of</strong> instances.” Here he means that in the majority <strong>of</strong> cases in the New<br />
Testament the participle (”having believed”) refers to a time antecedent to the main verb<br />
(”did ye receive?”) And he quotes from J. H. Moulton: “<strong>The</strong> participle naturally came to<br />
involve past time relative to that <strong>of</strong> the main verb.” [57] Again quoting from Dr. Robertson:<br />
“Antecedent action. This is the usual idiom with the circumstantial participle.<br />
This is indeed the most common use <strong>of</strong> the aorist participle.” As examples he cites: Matt.<br />
4:2; 27:3, 5; Mark 1:31; Col. 1:3-4; Acts 17:31; Heb. 1:3. <strong>The</strong> reader <strong>of</strong> Greek can easily<br />
find the participles and verbs here. For the English reader, here is a hint as to how to find<br />
them. Matthew 4:4 in the Greek reads “and having fasted . . . afterward he hungered.’<br />
Examples <strong>of</strong> simultaneous action are given by Dr. Robertson as follows: Luke 5:4; Matt.<br />
2:8; 22:1; 27:4; Acts 15:8. Scrutiny <strong>of</strong> these texts proves that the time <strong>of</strong> the main verb<br />
and participle is identical. But some texts in the New Testament seem doubtful. How<br />
shall one decide? Dr. Robertson says very candidly: “In many examples only exegesis can<br />
determine whether antecedent or coincident action is intended as in Hebrews 9:1<strong>2.</strong>” [58]<br />
We praise the candor <strong>of</strong> a great Christian scholar who admits that the translator’s beliefs<br />
must influence his translation at times. He also suggests that the decision involves a<br />
question <strong>of</strong> judgment, and not some intricacy <strong>of</strong> the Greek language. James M<strong>of</strong>fatt,<br />
another great Christian scholar, is equally candid and fair. He says in the introduction to<br />
his translation <strong>of</strong> the Bible: “A real translation is in the main an interpretation.” [59]<br />
And people who can read Greek prize M<strong>of</strong>fatt for his brilliant interpretations <strong>of</strong> familiar<br />
texts.<br />
Often these interpretations introduce ideas never heard <strong>of</strong> before in that connection. In the<br />
“when” translation, however, we have an interpretation fully in harmony with the modern<br />
Protestant church tradition that holds that the Holy Spirit baptism is received at the<br />
instant <strong>of</strong> regeneration.<br />
Nevertheless, this interpretation is at variance with the ancient Catholic tradition, which,<br />
as could be shown by dozens <strong>of</strong> quotations, has always held that the gift <strong>of</strong> the Holy Spirit<br />
is received after regeneration, that is, after baptism where baptism is believed to effect, or<br />
at least coincide with, regeneration. Review the history <strong>of</strong> confirmation for evidence.<br />
<strong>The</strong> point is conceded by <strong>The</strong> Expositor’s Greek Testament, which while it translates<br />
“when” instead <strong>of</strong> “since” does admit that as disciples these men were real Christians<br />
before receiving the Holy Ghost. “<strong>The</strong> question was whether they had received the Holy