Re: [TruthTalk] Re:APRIL FOOLS DAY???

[Knpraise]

OK.  Let's start over.  

David says:

I asked a simple question
and I am surprised that you are going to such extremes to defend what
you said without simply quoting a translation that renders it the way
you do.  It's not a big deal.  I just hoped you would look for a
translation that rendered it the way you read it, and not finding that,
perhaps you would reconsider your position.

I say:
Since I was explaining my understanding on the grammatical application of the present tense,  I did not and do not see it necessary to finding a translation that actually says  "If we say we are having no sin ..."   I made no claim regarding translations. Your quote of Mounce (immediately below) makes my point, does it not?  

Your quote:
Because you quoted Mounce, let me quote him concerning the presentactive indicative verb.  "The present active indicative verb in Greek isbasically the same as in English.  It describes an action that usuallyoccurs in the present.  It can be either a continuous ("I am studying")or undefined ("I study") action.  We recommend using a continuoustranslation by default, and if it does not fit the context switch to theundefined." (My, John's , emphasis)

I say:
It seems that you use Zodhiates to counter Mounce:  "Zodhiates
says that the present tense indicative mood refers to contemporaneous
action, and in moods OTHER THAN THE INDICATIVE, it refers to continuous
or repeated action."

That is fine with me. Would you agree that Mounce's opinion is the more popular?  


I have included some of my words and they seem to be in agreement with Mounce, since he is a primary source of my opinion.  I wrote:  

"Present indicative active gives us activity WITH NO END IN VIEW.  That does not mean the action is on going but it can mean that  --   and very often does. With that admission, I guess I am allowing a works theologian to go his own way.   Do you have reference material that condemns "my" application of the greek tense? "

Now, that is what was said.  I am speaking of "context" when I allowed  for a difference of opinion in my statement.  

David writes:
Kittle tells us that this is all continuous action.   
Where?  Can you give me a reference?  How about quoting exactly what he
says.

My response:
I would not have quoted Kittle without reference in mind.   Vol I, page 307

"The diabolical character of sin is herein expressed (i Jo 1:8,10 ..)  The situation has not come to an end but still continues."  

I might add more of Kittle:

p307  "The new situation becomes effective in love, which is the total opposite of [amartia] "  Law is not the contrast but love.  

And this is most interesting.  Kittle reminds us that John is speaking of the sins of the community  !!!  Perhaps he refers to the fact that the verbs in 1:8 are Ist  person plural.   

Does any of this help, David.

One additional point.  I would venture to guess that no one in this list has a theology that is so simple as to be destroyed with the confusion of a single point.  You surmised that I might change my position if I failed to answer your challenge.  There are many reasons for my belief in salvation by faith and sanctification by consideration.  I am sure that is true for you as well  --  you have a well developed system of theology. Our Mormon friends, likewise.  But, of course, sometimes there is that single hot button that brings the house down.   

John