Clear said : “I am not sure at what point in history the interpretation and doctrine of “easy believe-ism” of "belief without repentance" first appears and becomes a popular religious movement apart from the more original doctrines, but this “easy believeism” interpretation does not appear in the earliest textual descriptions of Christian interpretation. For example, in early Judeo-Christianity, BilliardsBall could NOT BE saved with the greatest reward from God without attempting to be obedient to God's directives. Those who were willfully disobedient and defied God were not given the same reward as those believers who willfully attempted obedience to God in the early Christian worldviews. It is only in modern interpretation and religious theory, that one can be disobedient, unrepentant and defiant to God, and yet, still be rewarded by God with the same reward as those who were willfully obedient to God. “ (post # 113)
BilliardsBall responded : “ Hi, you've made this point already on this thread. (post # 116)
I have had to point out multiple times that your modern theories which you create with modern English interpretations forced onto ancient texts written by ancient individuals are quite different than the interpretations those ancients described. Your Christianity is quite different than that of the earliest Christians.
I’ve also asked you multiple times why your interpretation is preferred over ancient Christians who lived in the earliest Christian movement (without any answer). Why is your modern Christianity with its modern interpretations to be preferred over the earliest and most authentic Christianity with their ancient interpretations?
This IS however, the first time that I have pointed out that your specific modern theory that one can, if they initially, sincerely believe in Jesus will still be rewarded and blessed if they later come to repudiate their belief and and both defy God and be disobedient to God and do indescribably despicable moral acts. This is differs from early Christianity since, in their worldview, those Christian who defied God were NOT rewarded the same as those who were repentant.
In authentic early christian interpretation, you could not, as a backsliding Christian, defy and repudiate God and abuse, rape and murder multiple children and still be rewarded the same as a Christian who attempts to act morally and avoids such evil actions.
BilliardsBall said : " Repentance, by the way, in the Greek, means to change one's mind. Of course one would have to change one's mind to trust Jesus. If I don't trust Jesus, I can only trust myself to enter Heaven. Thus, the problem." (post # 116)
The Koine Greek word "Μετανοεω" in its various forms and uses HISTORICALLY meant much more than to simply change one’s mind (like asking for chocolate ice cream and changing ones mind and asking for vanilla instead. It had much more profound religious meaning to the ancient Christian (and others) in their texts. It applied to a change of attitude; a transformation; an actual change in nature from one nature, to another nature (whether towards God or in other ways). Let me give examples from early Milligan papyral examples from Koine Greek by individuals who actually used this term .
The Base meaning of Μετανοεω referred to a deeper change of nature
We have many examples of the normal use of Μετανοεω, in many examples from early Papyri from these earliest periods and it is typically rendered, in its most basic form, to "repent". For example, when in papyri P Tebt ii. 424.5 (late iii a.d.) one man tells another “ ει μεν επιμενις σου απονοια, συνχε(=αι)ρω σοι ει δε μετανοεις, συ οιδας, (ι.ε.“...if you persist in your folly, I congratulate you : if you repent, only you know “). Though In Menandrea p. 12:72 it is true that the translation seems to mean a “change of mind”, it is more than “repent” and more than a simple change of a simple and single choice, but instead, Μετανοεω indicates a complete change of attitude, spiritual and moral, towards God. (Milligan).
For example, Aristeas (in 188) describes God as “μετατιθεις εκ της κακιας [και] εις μετανοιαν αξεις” “turning [men] from their wickedness and leading them to amendment.” It is NOT merely a decision, but a change in men that is occuring. In ZNTW, Wrede describes the translation of μετανοια in the NT as “nicht Sinnesanderung, sondern Busse” , that is, μετανοια is “not [simply] changing the type of sin, rather [real] repentance” (my translation).
Lactantius also (of Div. Inst. Vi. 24. 6) uses latin resipiscentia, as a “coming to one’s senses, resulting in a change of conduct.” A common thread in such uses is that an actual change in the base nature of the person is involved. This underlying context is part of the compounded component words making up "μετανοια".
μετα-νοια and the meanings of it's base compound words
The greek word rendered “repent” is compounded from the two words “Νοεω” / english “mind” and “Μετα” / english “change”. Each word has historical context and ancient meaning. Consider the meaning the ancients themselves attached to these two words in creating the word "μετα-νοια".
"Νοεω" / english “mind” applied to thoughts and emotions and considerations, judgments, etc and thus meant much more than simple “cognition” or a “preference” like preferring chocolate over vanilla…
For example, “...νοων και φρονων..." was commonly used in legal wills in pre-roman and roman periods. For example, the Petr. Papyrus I. 16 (1)42 ( of b.c. 237) uses the phrase “ ...ταδε διεθετο νοων και φρονων Μενιππος...” when the testator is claiming to be “....sane and in his right mind...” in his own will. The testator is not simply describing a belief or "choosing a preference", but he is characterizing the quality of his entire thought processes, his perceptions and his understandings, that they are sound.
Christian P Oxy I 104.4 (of 96 a.d.) and 491.2 (of 126 a.d). display the very same language, used in the very same manner. BGU 1.114.i.9 (of 117 a.d) also uses the term to describe general "perception" and "understanding" in the very same way. P. Par 63.11.61 (of 165 b.c.) uses the term to describe one mental “purpose” or goal. All of these demonstrate what the term meant to and how it was used by very the individuals who used the term, and in the very early time periods when it was used, and in the very language in which it was used.
Such textual witnesses of actual usage demonstrate that the “mind” that is being “changed” in "Μετανοεω" / english “repent” is NOT referring to a simple change in a simple choice, but of the way one thinks and feels and perceives. It is an actual change in the nature of thinking itself that is referred to. Even in Modern Greek, when one uses “Νοιωθω”, they are not speaking of “mind” per se, but rather they are referring to what is “perceived” and what is “felt” and what is “noticed”.
Thus, when one sees "νοηματα" in a greek New Testament text, and it’s rendered “thoughts” (in an English bible), as Heinrici (in Meyer8) points out, it is used in the sense of the “mind” itself and it’s “reason” rather than simple “thoughts” or a simple decisions that are implied.
These historical contexts should be considered when one thinks about what it meant to the ancient Christians to “repent”, using Μετανοεω as a “change of nature" rather than as a simple "changing one's mind” about a decision. The historical implication went much deeper than that.
Considering Μετα in the context of a change (from one condition to another)
Consider for example, what it meant to “change” something, almost anything, by compounding a word, almost ANY word, with the Koine Greek word “μετα”.
The genitive uses ordinary meaning was not simply “with”, but always there are two (or more) actors involved. One (or more) thing acted “in company with” another.
If I say “I went with mom to the store”, there are two actors involved. Thus, for example, when P Eleph 1.15 (of 311 b.c.) says “...τοις μετα Δημητριας,... “ it means “...those acting WITH Demetria,...”. P Tebt I.35.10 (of 111 b.c.), “...ος κ[α]ι μεθ υμων υπο την εντολην ε υπογραφει,... “ is rendered “... who shall append his signature to the edict together WITH yours... “. When P Amb ii.135.24 (of early ii.a.d.) says “ ....ερρωσθαι σε ευχ[ομαι] μετα των τεκν[ω(ν)]..., it is rendered “...I pray for your health and for that of your children... “
In this context, there is always one thing acting in concert with another thing. Just as when one spoke of μετανοια as a “change of mind” had a deeper meaning, when one spoke of μετανοια in the case of accepting the gospel WITH the mind, the context is that of full acceptance with the heart and full purpose, rather than merely with actions. The mind, as the seat of intelligence, of feeling and emotion and of perceptions and choice is, in this religious context, to act in concert with the religious conviction. In NONE of these typical uses, is μετανοια merely a simple change of mind one makes with a food choice or a beverage flavor during lunch.
Thus, in this context of doing a thing with one's mind and heart, in this usage, Μετα also refers to the manner in which a thing was carried out.
For example, in P. Petr ii.19 (ia)2 (of iii b.c.), when a prisoner wrote a petition saying “...αξιω σε μετα δεησεως και ικετειας ουνεκα του θεου και καλως εχοντος,.... “, it meant “ I beseech you WITH PRAYER AND SUPPLICATION in the name of God and of fair play “ . The use of "Μετα" of "Μετα-νοεω" in this case applied to the very manner in which an action is performed.
For the early Christian, religion and worship and interactions with fellow men were to be done with the mind and heart, with full and correct purpose, acting in no hypocrisy.
A simple Christian example might be simply “to do a thing right” (properly or in accordance with a religious norm). P Oxy I. 123.15 (of iii/iv a.d.) has an example from this papyri where the text says : “.... let him remember when he enters that he must wear the proper dress, that he may enter prepared... “ / “ εισβαινων ουν μετα της αισθητος [εσθητος] γνωτω ο ερχομενος ινα ετοιμος εισβη,...”. (the text indicates those entering were ordered to wear cloaks...).
This same application of doing a thing in a certain manner applied to mental states or emotions or feelings. For example P. Amh II.133.11 (early ii a.d.) speaks of a thing done "...with great difficulty...” (using "...μετα πολλων κοπων...), indicating a thing to be done “according to” a certain standard such as one’s degree of knowledge and understanding. Thus, if a man knows to do good and does it not…. then he could “repent” and do it “....μετα της εαυτου γνωμης...“ (“…according to your knowledge...”) as this example from P Tebt I.27.32 (of 113 b.c.) uses the term.
The instrumental useage of μετανοεω (i.e. “by means of the mind”) is noted in multiple examples from early papyri as well (P Lond (of iii a.d.) / 46.65 (of iv a.d.) / BGU III 909.8 (of 359 a.d.), etc). Such useage is closely aligned with the Semitic literal translation of “in connection with” such as in Proleg p. 106 or P. Amh II. 135.15 (of early ii. a.d.). IF "with the mind" meant, "with the heart" (as in modern language), then such uses parallel and support moral context of how one is to engage Christianity "with the heart" (i.e. with full purpose and with no hypocrisy and with conviction).
I can give other examples from papyri of these uses from BGU, OGIS, etc if anyone is interested. I am a bit tired of offering examples from early papyri.
The reason to use early Greek Koine papyri from ancients that actually USED Koine Greek is to show how the ancients themselves used these terms; what the terms actually meant to THEM.
Just as Μετανοεω also meant “with the mind” (i.e. it’s feelings, thoughts, intentions, purposes, etc) as well; the word meta took on formulaic use such as “μεταΒιας” (english "with effort") in the same ways that “with kind regards” became a formulaic end to letters nowadays.
The point in looking at Μετανοεω (change of mind) in the context of ancient usage, is to show that in the early context and actual ancient usage, even in common textual use, to "change one’s mind" involved a process of a profound change of the very nature of our thoughts and actions and what we think and what we do. Μετανοεω was not simply a simply change of a simple and single choice, but, it involved a change from one nature to another nature.
Adding Koine Greek "μετα" to other words also demonstrates a similar pattern.
For example, Μεταβαλλομαι is not merely “move” (though it is rendered as “move” in English), but it involves an actual change of place, a transfer from one place or level to an entirely different place or level just as μετανοια represented a change of thinking, a transfer and "meta-morphosis" from one level of thinking and acting to another level.
A similar modification is made to μεταγω in that it becomes, not merely a movement, but a transfer from one place to another, just as μετανοια referred to a process change in the mind from one nature to another nature.
Please let me know if you want examples for these last words (or other examples) from the early papyri. I have them but it is TWO o'clock in the morning and I’m getting very tired.
I suppose I can quit giving examples since it is clear that Μετανοεω / change of mind / heart / purpose / goals / perception / nature, etc. is the religious context underlying the use of this term.
Without actual, real, and authentic “repentance” / Μετανοεω as the ancients used the term, in early Christianity, neither BilliardsBall (nor all of the rest of us) could be saved with the highest reward God gives to individuals. Certainly, those Christians who turned and became evil could not expect the same reward and those who continued to attempt to be obedient to God. It’s past 2 am, I have to stop.
Clear
εισισιτωω
I noticed mistakes and I'll have to reformat and fix errors tomorrow night, fairly late. I simply don't have time now.
P.S. It is 7-12 and I have re-formatted the text and gotten rid of mistakes (I was very tired when I first wrote). Hopefully I repaired all of the mistakes I made. Clear
BilliardsBall responded : “ Hi, you've made this point already on this thread. (post # 116)
I have had to point out multiple times that your modern theories which you create with modern English interpretations forced onto ancient texts written by ancient individuals are quite different than the interpretations those ancients described. Your Christianity is quite different than that of the earliest Christians.
I’ve also asked you multiple times why your interpretation is preferred over ancient Christians who lived in the earliest Christian movement (without any answer). Why is your modern Christianity with its modern interpretations to be preferred over the earliest and most authentic Christianity with their ancient interpretations?
This IS however, the first time that I have pointed out that your specific modern theory that one can, if they initially, sincerely believe in Jesus will still be rewarded and blessed if they later come to repudiate their belief and and both defy God and be disobedient to God and do indescribably despicable moral acts. This is differs from early Christianity since, in their worldview, those Christian who defied God were NOT rewarded the same as those who were repentant.
In authentic early christian interpretation, you could not, as a backsliding Christian, defy and repudiate God and abuse, rape and murder multiple children and still be rewarded the same as a Christian who attempts to act morally and avoids such evil actions.
BilliardsBall said : " Repentance, by the way, in the Greek, means to change one's mind. Of course one would have to change one's mind to trust Jesus. If I don't trust Jesus, I can only trust myself to enter Heaven. Thus, the problem." (post # 116)
The Koine Greek word "Μετανοεω" in its various forms and uses HISTORICALLY meant much more than to simply change one’s mind (like asking for chocolate ice cream and changing ones mind and asking for vanilla instead. It had much more profound religious meaning to the ancient Christian (and others) in their texts. It applied to a change of attitude; a transformation; an actual change in nature from one nature, to another nature (whether towards God or in other ways). Let me give examples from early Milligan papyral examples from Koine Greek by individuals who actually used this term .
The Base meaning of Μετανοεω referred to a deeper change of nature
We have many examples of the normal use of Μετανοεω, in many examples from early Papyri from these earliest periods and it is typically rendered, in its most basic form, to "repent". For example, when in papyri P Tebt ii. 424.5 (late iii a.d.) one man tells another “ ει μεν επιμενις σου απονοια, συνχε(=αι)ρω σοι ει δε μετανοεις, συ οιδας, (ι.ε.“...if you persist in your folly, I congratulate you : if you repent, only you know “). Though In Menandrea p. 12:72 it is true that the translation seems to mean a “change of mind”, it is more than “repent” and more than a simple change of a simple and single choice, but instead, Μετανοεω indicates a complete change of attitude, spiritual and moral, towards God. (Milligan).
For example, Aristeas (in 188) describes God as “μετατιθεις εκ της κακιας [και] εις μετανοιαν αξεις” “turning [men] from their wickedness and leading them to amendment.” It is NOT merely a decision, but a change in men that is occuring. In ZNTW, Wrede describes the translation of μετανοια in the NT as “nicht Sinnesanderung, sondern Busse” , that is, μετανοια is “not [simply] changing the type of sin, rather [real] repentance” (my translation).
Lactantius also (of Div. Inst. Vi. 24. 6) uses latin resipiscentia, as a “coming to one’s senses, resulting in a change of conduct.” A common thread in such uses is that an actual change in the base nature of the person is involved. This underlying context is part of the compounded component words making up "μετανοια".
μετα-νοια and the meanings of it's base compound words
The greek word rendered “repent” is compounded from the two words “Νοεω” / english “mind” and “Μετα” / english “change”. Each word has historical context and ancient meaning. Consider the meaning the ancients themselves attached to these two words in creating the word "μετα-νοια".
"Νοεω" / english “mind” applied to thoughts and emotions and considerations, judgments, etc and thus meant much more than simple “cognition” or a “preference” like preferring chocolate over vanilla…
For example, “...νοων και φρονων..." was commonly used in legal wills in pre-roman and roman periods. For example, the Petr. Papyrus I. 16 (1)42 ( of b.c. 237) uses the phrase “ ...ταδε διεθετο νοων και φρονων Μενιππος...” when the testator is claiming to be “....sane and in his right mind...” in his own will. The testator is not simply describing a belief or "choosing a preference", but he is characterizing the quality of his entire thought processes, his perceptions and his understandings, that they are sound.
Christian P Oxy I 104.4 (of 96 a.d.) and 491.2 (of 126 a.d). display the very same language, used in the very same manner. BGU 1.114.i.9 (of 117 a.d) also uses the term to describe general "perception" and "understanding" in the very same way. P. Par 63.11.61 (of 165 b.c.) uses the term to describe one mental “purpose” or goal. All of these demonstrate what the term meant to and how it was used by very the individuals who used the term, and in the very early time periods when it was used, and in the very language in which it was used.
Such textual witnesses of actual usage demonstrate that the “mind” that is being “changed” in "Μετανοεω" / english “repent” is NOT referring to a simple change in a simple choice, but of the way one thinks and feels and perceives. It is an actual change in the nature of thinking itself that is referred to. Even in Modern Greek, when one uses “Νοιωθω”, they are not speaking of “mind” per se, but rather they are referring to what is “perceived” and what is “felt” and what is “noticed”.
Thus, when one sees "νοηματα" in a greek New Testament text, and it’s rendered “thoughts” (in an English bible), as Heinrici (in Meyer8) points out, it is used in the sense of the “mind” itself and it’s “reason” rather than simple “thoughts” or a simple decisions that are implied.
These historical contexts should be considered when one thinks about what it meant to the ancient Christians to “repent”, using Μετανοεω as a “change of nature" rather than as a simple "changing one's mind” about a decision. The historical implication went much deeper than that.
Considering Μετα in the context of a change (from one condition to another)
Consider for example, what it meant to “change” something, almost anything, by compounding a word, almost ANY word, with the Koine Greek word “μετα”.
The genitive uses ordinary meaning was not simply “with”, but always there are two (or more) actors involved. One (or more) thing acted “in company with” another.
If I say “I went with mom to the store”, there are two actors involved. Thus, for example, when P Eleph 1.15 (of 311 b.c.) says “...τοις μετα Δημητριας,... “ it means “...those acting WITH Demetria,...”. P Tebt I.35.10 (of 111 b.c.), “...ος κ[α]ι μεθ υμων υπο την εντολην ε υπογραφει,... “ is rendered “... who shall append his signature to the edict together WITH yours... “. When P Amb ii.135.24 (of early ii.a.d.) says “ ....ερρωσθαι σε ευχ[ομαι] μετα των τεκν[ω(ν)]..., it is rendered “...I pray for your health and for that of your children... “
In this context, there is always one thing acting in concert with another thing. Just as when one spoke of μετανοια as a “change of mind” had a deeper meaning, when one spoke of μετανοια in the case of accepting the gospel WITH the mind, the context is that of full acceptance with the heart and full purpose, rather than merely with actions. The mind, as the seat of intelligence, of feeling and emotion and of perceptions and choice is, in this religious context, to act in concert with the religious conviction. In NONE of these typical uses, is μετανοια merely a simple change of mind one makes with a food choice or a beverage flavor during lunch.
Thus, in this context of doing a thing with one's mind and heart, in this usage, Μετα also refers to the manner in which a thing was carried out.
For example, in P. Petr ii.19 (ia)2 (of iii b.c.), when a prisoner wrote a petition saying “...αξιω σε μετα δεησεως και ικετειας ουνεκα του θεου και καλως εχοντος,.... “, it meant “ I beseech you WITH PRAYER AND SUPPLICATION in the name of God and of fair play “ . The use of "Μετα" of "Μετα-νοεω" in this case applied to the very manner in which an action is performed.
For the early Christian, religion and worship and interactions with fellow men were to be done with the mind and heart, with full and correct purpose, acting in no hypocrisy.
A simple Christian example might be simply “to do a thing right” (properly or in accordance with a religious norm). P Oxy I. 123.15 (of iii/iv a.d.) has an example from this papyri where the text says : “.... let him remember when he enters that he must wear the proper dress, that he may enter prepared... “ / “ εισβαινων ουν μετα της αισθητος [εσθητος] γνωτω ο ερχομενος ινα ετοιμος εισβη,...”. (the text indicates those entering were ordered to wear cloaks...).
This same application of doing a thing in a certain manner applied to mental states or emotions or feelings. For example P. Amh II.133.11 (early ii a.d.) speaks of a thing done "...with great difficulty...” (using "...μετα πολλων κοπων...), indicating a thing to be done “according to” a certain standard such as one’s degree of knowledge and understanding. Thus, if a man knows to do good and does it not…. then he could “repent” and do it “....μετα της εαυτου γνωμης...“ (“…according to your knowledge...”) as this example from P Tebt I.27.32 (of 113 b.c.) uses the term.
The instrumental useage of μετανοεω (i.e. “by means of the mind”) is noted in multiple examples from early papyri as well (P Lond (of iii a.d.) / 46.65 (of iv a.d.) / BGU III 909.8 (of 359 a.d.), etc). Such useage is closely aligned with the Semitic literal translation of “in connection with” such as in Proleg p. 106 or P. Amh II. 135.15 (of early ii. a.d.). IF "with the mind" meant, "with the heart" (as in modern language), then such uses parallel and support moral context of how one is to engage Christianity "with the heart" (i.e. with full purpose and with no hypocrisy and with conviction).
I can give other examples from papyri of these uses from BGU, OGIS, etc if anyone is interested. I am a bit tired of offering examples from early papyri.
The reason to use early Greek Koine papyri from ancients that actually USED Koine Greek is to show how the ancients themselves used these terms; what the terms actually meant to THEM.
Just as Μετανοεω also meant “with the mind” (i.e. it’s feelings, thoughts, intentions, purposes, etc) as well; the word meta took on formulaic use such as “μεταΒιας” (english "with effort") in the same ways that “with kind regards” became a formulaic end to letters nowadays.
The point in looking at Μετανοεω (change of mind) in the context of ancient usage, is to show that in the early context and actual ancient usage, even in common textual use, to "change one’s mind" involved a process of a profound change of the very nature of our thoughts and actions and what we think and what we do. Μετανοεω was not simply a simply change of a simple and single choice, but, it involved a change from one nature to another nature.
Adding Koine Greek "μετα" to other words also demonstrates a similar pattern.
For example, Μεταβαλλομαι is not merely “move” (though it is rendered as “move” in English), but it involves an actual change of place, a transfer from one place or level to an entirely different place or level just as μετανοια represented a change of thinking, a transfer and "meta-morphosis" from one level of thinking and acting to another level.
A similar modification is made to μεταγω in that it becomes, not merely a movement, but a transfer from one place to another, just as μετανοια referred to a process change in the mind from one nature to another nature.
Please let me know if you want examples for these last words (or other examples) from the early papyri. I have them but it is TWO o'clock in the morning and I’m getting very tired.
I suppose I can quit giving examples since it is clear that Μετανοεω / change of mind / heart / purpose / goals / perception / nature, etc. is the religious context underlying the use of this term.
Without actual, real, and authentic “repentance” / Μετανοεω as the ancients used the term, in early Christianity, neither BilliardsBall (nor all of the rest of us) could be saved with the highest reward God gives to individuals. Certainly, those Christians who turned and became evil could not expect the same reward and those who continued to attempt to be obedient to God. It’s past 2 am, I have to stop.
Clear
εισισιτωω
I noticed mistakes and I'll have to reformat and fix errors tomorrow night, fairly late. I simply don't have time now.
P.S. It is 7-12 and I have re-formatted the text and gotten rid of mistakes (I was very tired when I first wrote). Hopefully I repaired all of the mistakes I made. Clear
Last edited:
