Saturday, November 14, 2015

POTUS: "... innocent civilians ..."

My initial knee jerk reaction to this phrase was something like, "Ha!  He clearly is not knowing his Christian theology, since there are none who are innocent".  It can only be that we are innocent with respect to crime A, but not that we are innocent on any absolute scale, unless you are a leftwing politician.

But then my Greek language syntax class lecture just offered up Romans 3:23 -

"For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Which in Greek is:

"πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον καὶ ὑστεροῦνται τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ"

The verb for sin is "ἥμαρτον", which they have kindly pointed out is in the Aorist tense:

"The aorist is used here, leaving the action in some sense undefined.  However, it is an equally true statement that: "all sin" (present-customary) and "all have sinned" (perfect-past action with continuing results). Therefore, the choice of the aorist by Paul was used to emphasize one aspect or possibly to say less (or to stress the fact of humanity's sinfulness) than the present or perfect would have done.  However, any of these three tenses could have been used to describe the human condition.  an author's portrayal is thus selective at times and simply brings out the aspect that he wants to emphasize at the time rather than giving the full-orbed reality of the event."

Clearly I must have sinned since I have 90 pages of this to go through this weekend, along with the lecture and the homework.

So where are we?  Perhaps I should stop before I make too many more mistakes.


Max Coutinho said...

Hi Looney,

How interesting: I was thinking about the same thing this morning "are we really innocent? Are there really innocent civilians?" and then I stopped myself because I remembered that Bin Laden used to say that no western civilian is innocent when they elected their murderous leaders...Obviously, I still got a lot of reflection to do as well.


Looney said...

I do like the libertarians approach to this. They likewise observe that we all have evil tendencies, thus, they argue that we have no right to legislate on morals. Or to put it another way, they argue that we have a moral duty to make laws which restrain the evil of making laws to restrain evil and promote morals.

So yes, I agree that the whole topic is quite perplexing!

Max Coutinho said...


lol oh? So basically, the libertarians use morals to legislate against evil sense of morality?
Oy oy oy...

Have a blessed weekend

Looney said...

Max, do have a wonderful weekend as well. I am jealous that yours is starting before mine!