Kolasis / kolasin / correction some help needed, please

[MVincent]

I'm going to be talking to some guys at church about universalism and decided to dot a few Is.  My first stop was Matt 25:46 and the idea that kolasis would be better translated as "correction".

So I go to Bible hub, selct the verse and click interlinear and get this:

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/25-46.htm

which suggests that the word is actually "kolasin". 

Clicking on "2851" takes you to Strong's page for kolasis and a meaning of "correction".  And Thayer's gives "correction, punishment, penalty".

All well and good.

However, there are sites around the web that come to a different conclusion.  For example:

http://www.forananswer.org/Matthew/Mt25_46.htm

which has:

The word translated "punishment" reflects the common meaning of the word in Koine Greek (see Grammatical Analysis, below, for more details).  The word occurs in over 130 documents contemporary with the Greek New Testament, and in all cases, the translation "punishment" is correct.

and the analysis mentioned as:

KOLASIS (2851)
Punishment (BAGD, Moulton & Milligan, TDNT, Vine)
Correction, punishment, penalty (Thayer)
Chastisement, correction, punishment (LS).
To punish, with the implication of resulting severe suffering (Louw & Nida)

Moulton & Milligan, BAGD, and Thayer list dozens of occurrences of KOLASIS in late classical and early Christian documents, and cite "punishment" as the proper translation in each case.  There are no other meanings listed for KOLASIS in any of these lexicons.  Here is just one example from Moulton and Milligan:  "for the evil doers among men receive their reward not among the living only, but also await punishment (KOLASIN) and much torment" (Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 840).

And also the YLT, which is my usual first stop when looking into the Greek uses "punishment" - which is not helpful when I want to use it to show "eternal" is a poor translation.

So my questions:

1)  Is the word as "kolasin" important?

2)  Do the claims made by the guys at "for an answer" have grounds for saying what they say?


The problem is that during the conversation with the guys at church, I may show the meaning and correction and they just show another lexicon with a meaning as punishment, then its a battle over who has the heaviest dictionaries.

Thanks for your help,

Mike

[Seth]

I believe all the words are important, but I wouldn't have a conversation like that with "kolasin" as your central point, because you are right, the English language has 60,000 words in common use, where ancient Greek, I think is about 8,000? This leaves plenty of room for connotation games, like how the word "krino" becomes both "judgment" and "damnation." Both have different connotations.

I actually believe that there is a punishment reserved for those who do not receive Christ, but it's one that has been with us since Adam brought sin into the world: the carnal mind. That is the judgment that Christ came to save mankind from, death, both physical and spiritual.

I don't believe it lasts forever, for the last enemy to be destroyed is death.

[WhiteWings]

http://home.online.nl/spamfree/Lake/pruning.html

[rosered]

http://home.online.nl/spamfree/Lake/pruning.html

  Really nice site ,  Good job ,  you do that WW? 

[joeteekay]

Yes a good site for further study. Thanks   :dsunny:

[eaglesway]

Excellent resource. I can refer those who oppose as well as those who seek to go  to it :o)

[WhiteWings]

http://home.online.nl/spamfree/Lake/pruning.html

  Really nice site ,  Good job ,  you do that WW?

I just write down what I learned otherwise I forget it again  :laugh: (btw I gave you the link on Nathan's site long ago)

What you see on the part of the site about the Lake is that it's impossible to prove anything with a single word, verse or even passage. For me the Bible is about statistics. Yeah, I know just reading that word gets many uncomfortable and especially in combination with the Bible.
I'll try to explain why I made that statement.
We all know that lexicons quite often state several meanings for a word which can have several reasons:
1- Theological bias.
2- The lexicon is too old.
3- Too old or new word meaning.
4- It's correct to have several definitions

#1 That one is clear, I think

#2 It was always thought the NT was written normal Greek and the translators applied grammar rules for that type of Greek to a quite different kind of Greek. In 1895 Adolf Deissmann discovered that the NT was written in Koine Greek, which had a quite different set of grammar rules. That basically means that any lexicon written before that time can't be fully trusted.

#3 We all know the meaning of words change. The best example is the word gay. It used to mean happy/cheerful but we all know it has a far different meaning today. Right now I'm checking my Merriam-Webster dictionary. Quality scholarship according to many. It lists both homosexual and happy. We all know the current meaning of gay, so we won't be confused. Merriam-Webster isn't wrong; the correctly state those meanings. But may Biblical lexicons are wrong or deceptive. It's clear that Bible students only want to know how the Apostle who penned down a Greek word understood it. Not how a Greek person living a 1000 years before or after him understood that word. So, imo, any lexicon listing those meanings is either deceptive or bad scholarship unless dates are listed.
The word torment (also on the site) is a prime example of that. All those meanings you read in Strong are correct. The word does mean, sadistic torture; just not at the time when the Bible was written. Scroll halfway down and look for 288 in yellow. It had the meaning with UR people favor "testing gold with a black stone". As the lexicon shows in 288AD it began to take on the meaning of checking calculations. Then, even later it got the meaning of torture.

#4 I don't feel like explaining this one because time has proven it's a waste of time. But the summary is this. The whole Bible is a wedding covenant which started in Gen 3:21. Satan has been busy ever since and made mirror convenants. The point is several key Hebrew words got total opposite meanings. Picking the right meaning for that particular verse requires more than simply opening a lexicon.

So back to my statistics statement. As I tried to explain above, we simply don't have perfect lexicons for various reasons. So, imo, we have to accept that in quite a few verses we will be unable to pinpoint the exact meaning of a word. So we are stuck with 2 or maybe 3 possible meanings. Those meanings can be debated until eternity, but then we still don't know. Jesus quite often retold the same concept with different examples. Let's assume He explained something by 3 teachings. One teaching involved animals, the other grain and yet another is about coins. All of the teachings are vague due to disputes of word meanings, but all agree the teachings are clearly about salvation. So they all tell the same story and therefore don't contradict. While the meaning of a single teaching could be debated due uncertainties in lexicons, it will get much harder when grouping all 3 teachings because it will expose contradicting entries in the lexicon. By weeding out the wrong ones the probability of the remaining ones being the correct ones increases. If we manage to narrow down one word to one meaning we often unlock the teaching and with that the other two. And those other two teachings will define the underlaying words.
I hope that makes sense to someone....

[God Chaser]

A picture is worth a thousand words!

In my Matt 25:46 debates, I always cite info and post these pictures from this website first! I then ask them to explain the pictures to me... The response I typically get is  :eek: then  :dunno2: then  :Chinscratch: then  :eek: then   :flamebreath: :flamebreath:

http://mercynotsacrifice.blogspot.com/2008/01/ur-view-of-early-church-fathers.html

[WhiteWings]

The above basically also my answer to MVincent. You won't be able to prove your view with one word. And even if you got them totally cornered with your explanation they pull out another hell, verse with yet another disputed word. When you can't answer that one they are right and you and your heretical teachings are wrong.

[WhiteWings]

Clement insists that punishment in Hades is remedial and restorative, and that punished souls are
cleansed by fire. The fire is spiritual, purifying13 the soul. "God's punishments are saving and
disciplinary (in Hades) leading to conversion, and choosing rather the repentance than the death of the
sinner, (Ezek. xviii, 23, 32; xxxiii: II, etc.,) and especially since souls, although darkened by passions,
when released from their bodies, are able to perceive more clearly because of their being no longer
obstructed by the paltry flesh." 14


He again defines the important word kolasis our Lord uses in Matt. xxv: 46, and shows how it
differs from the wholly different word timoria used by Josephus and the Greek writers who believed
in irremediable suffering. He says: "He (God) chastises the disobedient, for chastisement (kolasis) is
for the good and advantage of him who is punished, for it is the amendment of one who resists; I will
not grant that he wishes to take vengeance. Vengeance (timoria) is a requital of evil sent for the
interest of the avenger. He (God) would not desire to avenge himself on us who teaches us to pray for
those who despitefully use us (Matt. v: 44). 15 Therefore the good God punishes for these three causes:
First, that he who is punished (paidenomenos) may become better than his former self; then that those
who are capable of being saved by examples may be drawn back, being admonished; and thirdly, that
he who is injured may not readily be despised, and be apt to receive injury. And there are two
methods of correction, the instructive and the punitive, 16 which we have called the disciplinary."

The English reader of the translations of the Greek fathers is misled by the indiscriminate
rendering of different Greek words into "punish." Timoria should always be translated "vengeance,"
or "torment;" kolasis, "punishment," and paideia "chastisement," or "correction."

[rosered]

I just write down what I learned otherwise I forget it again   (btw I gave you the link on Nathan's site long ago)

   Well yes , now that you mention it I do have it still infavorites  , But WW , You really have added a great deal since !! :thumbsup:

  And I do understand your stance on a  Marriage covenant  , it makes perfect sense to me !

   The   pattern of a blessed  union   between   God and His  church / ecclasia  /body / Bride         Chosen people[?] for lack of a better word  :sigh:  and  its offspring   etc .. 

  I Love your explainations !    its helped  clarify   your stance /pov     

Again good job Tony  gathering[into Christ]  and not scattering  data [Word of God ]  :winkgrin:

[MVincent]

The above basically also my answer to MVincent. You won't be able to prove your view with one word. And even if you got them totally cornered with your explanation they pull out another hell, verse with yet another disputed word. When you can't answer that one they are right and you and your heretical teachings are wrong.

Thanks for your answers, WhiteWings, they are very useful.

I agree with what you say about proofs - my aim for the discussion is not so much to prove the case for UR with just one verse, I plan on a bigger debate than that, but to use the dubious translation to eternal punishment to unsettle their convictions as it did with me.  It took me about a year to go from seeing the dodgy translation to accepting UR.  I wouldn't expect much different from these guys.

What is the difference between kolasin and kolasis?  Is there any?

Thanks,

Mike

[MVincent]

A picture is worth a thousand words!

In my Matt 25:46 debates, I always cite info and post these pictures from this website first! I then ask them to explain the pictures to me... The response I typically get is  :eek: then  :dunno2: then  :Chinscratch: then  :eek: then   :flamebreath: :flamebreath:

http://mercynotsacrifice.blogspot.com/2008/01/ur-view-of-early-church-fathers.html

I love those pictures and the text on that website - I think I'll use them.

Thank you.

Mike

[eaglesway]

some foundations for proving UR are available at  www.hell-is-a-myth.webs.com

[MVincent]

some foundations for proving UR are available at  www.hell-is-a-myth.webs.com

Thanks for the link, Eaglesway.

Mike