Greek help with Romans 8:27 ?

[Enow]

The ESV does not say that the Holy Spirit is speaking in a tounge. If you go back and read what was posted you'll see that, Fee a commantator is the one that said that it was a tounge, not the Spirit speaking in a tounge. The Spirit does not speak in a tounge or tounges, they are gifts of the Spirit, not attributes of His.

Sorry for confusing you with the commentator... but as we go along, it appears you are in agreement with Fee and also my earlier perception that you seem to think tongues can be used for praying.

John 16:13 in any Bible you choose, tells us how the Holy Spirit will speak and not speak. He can only speak what He hears therefore He cannot utter His own intercessions even though He has them because they are unspeakable.

ESV's Romans 8:26-27 written as it is, testifies wrongly that we can hear His intercessions as groanings but not in words.

The reason he said that is because Paul said that we do not know what to pray in verse 26 and he also says there is a tounge for pray in I Corinthians 14:13-15 "

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret.14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.15 What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also."

This tounge has not one thing to do with other men's lips, it has everything to do with one personal prayer life and our spirit praying.

Well, you are certainly the first tongue speaker trying to explain those verses as using tongues as a gift for praying even though all the manifestations of the Spirit which also includes tongues, is being manifested by the Spirit.

So... not really jiving here.

Most tongue speakers use those references, ignoring Paul's words in applying it to mean the Holy Spirit is praying.

But you acknowledged and try to say that tongues is a gift given by the Spirit and we can somehow apply it whenever our spirit moves us to, is that correct? So how can Romans 8:26-27 apply to 1 Corinthians 14:13-15 when it is the Spirit's intercessions? It cannot.

Either the tongues is manifested by the Holy Spirit or once again, you guys are not understanding what is being written in 1 Corinthians 14:13-15 and that reference should include verse 12 for what Paul is talking about.

1 Corinthians 14:[SUP]12 [/SUP]Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. [SUP]13 [/SUP]Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. [SUP]14 [/SUP]For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. [SUP]15 [/SUP]What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

So Paul is saying that whenever any one speaks in tongues as manifested by the Holy Spirit, they should pray that some else may interpret what they are saying by the Holy Spirit so that they may understand & that tongue as interpreted, would be fruitful also to the tongue speakers once he understands it.

That is not a reference saying that tongues can be used in prayer.

The ESV never said that the Spirit

intercedes for the saints of His own will, you really need to read verse 27 of the KJV or ESV. KJV "And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God." ESV "And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." Both thge ESV and the KJV say that the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. So you made a big deal out of a straw man that you set up so you could knock it down, but you did not read even the KJV to see that the Spirit's intercedes for us according to God's will, not of His own accord.

Actually, you are not seeing how different the ESV is saying as OPPOSING the KJV.

The very fact that it is in according to the will of God would lean towards there being only one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5 as He is the only One at that throne of grace: Hebrews 4:12-16 for us to come to God the Father by.

The only uncorrupt word of God are the Greek and Hebrew

manuscripts and any translation of those manuscripts into English is more of a commantary of those manuscripts in translation form. There is no way to have a direct translation of the Greek or Hebrew into the English language. The closest direct translation you can get from the Greek is the Latin or Spanish, the closest direct translation you can get of the Hebrew manuscripts. Would be another middle eastern-semitic language like Arabic or Aramaic.

All English translations are missing something in translation.

Even in English, saved believers are missing how different the KJV is to modern Bibles in keeping in line with the truths in His words of John 16:13 in all Bibles.

Even scholars of the day are not seeing the truth in His words to spot the grammatical error at all in Romans 8:27 of the ESV or the NIV or others.

 

[trofimus]

I am not sure how you can establish the O.T. verses as referring to the Father. John 5:39-40 has testified that the scripture testifies of the Son.

OT verses are about Father, because Son was not revealed so massively in the OT, even though some verses can be . So its more natural and probable these are about Father.

But I have no problem with saying it is the Son.

I do thank you for confirming that it is not "the Spirit" in the conclusion of that verse in Romans 8:27.

I am not sure what you mean by the conclusion of the verse. I am talking about the beginning of the verse, the part in bold. The one who examines the hearts can be Son.

But "he who intervenes" is Spirit, in my opinion, because of the sentence´s structure.

"The one who examines the hearts (Father or Son) is knowing the intention of the Spirit, that he (the Spirit) intervenes for saints according to God (Father or Son)."

 

[MarcR]

Can you give another verse to support that is the rule in practice?

I can scan the page from Dana and Mantley 'A Manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament' or a Page from my Seminary 'Greek'

class notes by Dr. Harrop.

 

[Enow]

OT verses are about Father, because Son was not revealed so massively in the OT, even though some verses can be . So its more natural and probable these are about Father.

But I have no problem with saying it is the Son.




I am not sure what you mean by the conclusion of the verse. I am talking about the beginning of the verse, the part in bold. The one who examines the hearts can be Son.

But "he who intervenes" is Spirit, in my opinion, because of the sentence´s structure.

"The one who examines the hearts (Father or Son) is knowing the intention of the Spirit, that he (the Spirit) intervenes for saints according to God (Father or Son)."

Okay. That is the second time I misread you for which I disagree with you of your opinion that verse 27 concludes with "the Spirit" as the ESV & NIV & others does have it written that way as being the "he" of the KJV that intercedes in according to the will of God.

It really is in God's hand to cause the increase. Well, it is not my thread so...

 

[Enow]

I can scan the page from Dana and Mantley 'A Manual Grammar of The Greek New Testament' or a Page from my Seminary 'Greek'

class notes by Dr. Harrop.

Then let me ask YOU this; And I mean for YOU to ask Jesus for the actual message of both of those verses.

Romans 8:[SUP]26 [/SUP]Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

If I read that verse 26 testifying that the Holy Spirit has intercessions but cannot utter them, then would I not wonder how His intercessions can be known to God the Father? Would that not let me read the next verse as testifying to Another in how the intercessions of the Spirit's are known to God the Father? If I cut out the first portion of that verse....

[SUP]27 [/SUP]And he that knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

Does that not make it clearer that verse 27 is about Another Person rather than the Spirit that knows the mind of the Spirit for that conclusion of that verse 27 to be that Person other than the Spirit??

When cutting out "searcheth the hearts", of what that Other Person is doing that ALSO knows the mind of the Spirit, does that not make that clearer that verse 27 is a testimony about the Son that knows the mind of the Spirit ending with "because the Son maketh intercessions according to the will of God"?

In any event, I disagree with those scholars.

Thanks for sharing. It would be interesting to see how the author of this OP will decide on how that verse 27 is to end when there are different answers to his OP in how that verse should end. I can only hope he takes it to Jesus & ask Him too, because it really is on God to cause the increase. I cannot reason it any more than that by His grace & by His help.

 

[trofimus]

Romans 8:[SUP]26 [/SUP]Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

If I read that verse 26 testifying that the Holy Spirit has intercessions but cannot utter them...

The verse does not say that the Spirit cannot express it, but that His groanings are not expressible (for us).

The Holy Spirit can express his will without any problem:
"While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."
Acts 13:2

"But when they hand you over, do not worry about how or what you are to say; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to say. "For it is not you who speak, but it is the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.
Mt 10:20

So it is not that He cannot talk, but that His groanings for us are too deep for us. Deep spiritual realities cannot be put to human words. Many prophets had this problem with expressing what they saw or heard.

 

[MarcR]

Then let me ask YOU this; And I mean for YOU to ask Jesus for the actual message of both of those verses.

Romans 8:[SUP]26 [/SUP]Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

If I read that verse 26 testifying that the Holy Spirit has intercessions but cannot utter them, then would I not wonder how His intercessions can be known to God the Father? Would that not let me read the next verse as testifying to Another in how the intercessions of the Spirit's are known to God the Father? If I cut out the first portion of that verse....

[SUP]27 [/SUP]And he that knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

Does that not make it clearer that verse 27 is about Another Person rather than the Spirit that knows the mind of the Spirit for that conclusion of that verse 27 to be that Person other than the Spirit??

When cutting out "searcheth the hearts", of what that Other Person is doing that ALSO knows the mind of the Spirit, does that not make that clearer that verse 27 is a testimony about the Son that knows the mind of the Spirit ending with "because the Son maketh intercessions according to the will of God"?

In any event, I disagree with those scholars.

Thanks for sharing. It would be interesting to see how the author of this OP will decide on how that verse 27 is to end when there are different answers to his OP in how that verse should end. I can only hope he takes it to Jesus & ask Him too, because it really is on God to cause the increase. I cannot reason it any more than that by His grace & by His help.

As I said earlier you argued your position very convincingly.

However, All languages have a set of rules of grammar and syntax which are part of the language.

If an individual decides not to follow those rules; he is then speaking another language that only he understands.

Definitions are arguable within the range of accepted usage of any word.

Grammar and syntax rules are not arguable or the language looses all structure and people can no longer communicate.

 

[MarcR]

Then let me ask YOU this; And I mean for YOU to ask Jesus for the actual message of both of those verses.

Romans 8:[SUP]26 [/SUP]Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

If I read that verse 26 testifying that the Holy Spirit has intercessions but cannot utter them, then would I not wonder how His intercessions can be known to God the Father? Would that not let me read the next verse as testifying to Another in how the intercessions of the Spirit's are known to God the Father? If I cut out the first portion of that verse....

[SUP]27 [/SUP]And he that knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

Does that not make it clearer that verse 27 is about Another Person rather than the Spirit that knows the mind of the Spirit for that conclusion of that verse 27 to be that Person other than the Spirit??

When cutting out "searcheth the hearts", of what that Other Person is doing that ALSO knows the mind of the Spirit, does that not make that clearer that verse 27 is a testimony about the Son that knows the mind of the Spirit ending with "because the Son maketh intercessions according to the will of God"?

In any event, I disagree with those scholars.

Thanks for sharing. It would be interesting to see how the author of this OP will decide on how that verse 27 is to end when there are different answers to his OP in how that verse should end. I can only hope he takes it to Jesus & ask Him too, because it really is on God to cause the increase. I cannot reason it any more than that by His grace & by His help.

To give an example:

If a text reads 'He ran.'; and I insist it means 'He will run', I am no longer speaking English regardless how similar the words may sound.

 

[garee]

God is not a man as us. He uses human terms as immutable attributes to show his work of faith that he works in the believer.

One faith, one God, one Spirit... one and same one God.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

 

[posthuman]

Well, it is not my thread so...

no, it is. i made this for you, and for me, so we could both be enriched, and for everyone.

 

[posthuman]

ESV's Romans 8:26-27 written as it is, testifies wrongly that we can hear His intercessions as groanings but not in words.

this is a reference to 8:26 -- a separate matter than 8:27.
i don't mind to put it here; i'd like to hear from people who understand Greek about it too, in the interest of right & full comprehension. why should i mind?

the question is multipart:

(1) whether

[TABLE="class: maintext, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]4726 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]stenagmois[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"]στεναγμοῖς[/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]with groanings[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]N-DMP[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: strongsnt"]215 [e][/TD]
[TD="class: translit"]alalētois[/TD]
[TD="class: greek2"]ἀλαλήτοις·[/TD]
[TD="class: eng"]inexpressable.[/TD]
[TD="class: pos"]Adj-DMP
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

ought to be necessarily understood as a description of something definitively noiseless, completely inaudible in physical terms.

(2) if renditions of this descriptor into English which deviate from how it is translated in the KJV contradict (1) in that they translate this in a way that should necessarily be understood either by incontrovertible implication or construction as in any way audible

(3) if any understanding of this which could in any way be construed as audible, i.e. as "speaking" to our hearing constitutes heresy by contradicting John 16:13

(3.5) if John 16:13 would in fact be contradicted by such a reading - a question equivalent to (1) must be asked about John 16:13​

(4) whether "expressible" is in the first place in reference to the expression of the Spirit which intercedes, or in reference to human expression, as though to repeat in mortal speech those things which the Spirit utters in intercession, referred to herein as "groanings" - a question that could possibly address & unravel any objection made in (1-3)

 

[posthuman]

So it is not that He cannot talk, but that His groanings for us are too deep for us.

tangential verse --

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
(1 Timothy 4:1)​

whether this should be understood as audible speech ((i don't see that it should be necessarily so, either here or in Romans 8:26 ?)) it's certain from this i think, that it isn't heresy to refer to what the Spirit expresses as "speech" and that the Spirit certainly is able to "speak" to us in such a way that mortal man can comprehend clearly what He "saith"

i point this out to bring up

(5) that if Romans 8:26 being translated for example "with wordless groans" ((NIV)) constitutes heretical contradiction to John 16:13, shouldn't 1 Timothy 4:1 even moreso be damnable since it reads -- in KJV no less -- that the Spirit expressly saith ??

why or why not?

 

[posthuman]

Anyway, just pointing out what our fellow brother is posting here so that there is no mistake for why clarity was asked for in understanding Romans 8:26-27 by the OP in regards to another topic in another thread.

thanks for that chiming in

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
so far --

i certainly don't agree with Fee. this is not about glossolalia as far as i comprehend it. i don't think that's supportable at all.

i'm convinced in agreement with what Trofimus has written here regarding who it is that searches the heart in the first part of v.27 -- many passages in the O.T. ((which Trofimus provided a number of)) clearly identify YHVH as "the one who searches the hearts" -- and i do not dispute that multiple passages in the N.T. which you provided identify Jesus Christ in the same way, and the Spirit also. i consider this ((yet another)) proof that Christ is God, for "there is One God" and the Spirit is the Spirit of that same One. that all three are described with the same unique omnipotence is a trinitarian evidence.
with regard to who in particular is being referenced in the first part of v. 27, as Trofimus put, i believe the primary indication is that it is YHVH the Father, but that there isn't a significant deviation from the meaning if one takes this to mean Jesus Christ the Son.

it seems established that the "he" in the latter part of v.27, he that intercedes, is the Spirit, in accord with it being expressly stated that the Spirit intercedes in v. 26, and with the syntactical rules Marc pointed out, and with the good understanding of the whole that Old Hermit provided.

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
an interesting thing that develops from this is that if we take "he" that searches the heart to be a reference to Jesus Christ, we have, beautifully, the whole trinity in synergy here:

And He ((The Son)) that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He ((The Spirit)) maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God ((The Father)).​

 

[NayborBear]

hi -- this came up in another thread, and i was looking for clarification from someone who understands Greek grammar.

Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
(Romans 8:26-27, KJV)​

the accusation is made that "grammatical error" which introduces heresy is made in verse 27 in the NIV, which reads:

And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.​

particularly, that it should not say "the Spirit intercedes" because the interpretation given along with the accusation is that the "he" who searches the hearts and knows the mind of the Spirit is the same "he" that intercedes in the last part of the verse.

i understand that the Greek doesn't literally say "the Spirit intercedes" in v. 27 -- though it quite literally says that in v. 26.
i assume that the NIV translators made this change just to clarify the text in English, with the understanding that the one spoken of making intercession in v. 27 is the same one making intercession in v. 26

anyway -- what does the Greek support -- is the NIV correct in making this assumption, or should "he" making intercession in v. 27 be the same "he" that searches the hearts ((to my mind obviously YHVH, Jeremiah 17:10))?

thanks

I'd sooner trust my mother in law, then the NIV, PH.

 

[Enow]

As I said earlier you argued your position very convincingly.

However, All languages have a set of rules of grammar and syntax which are part of the language.

If an individual decides not to follow those rules; he is then speaking another language that only he understands.

Definitions are arguable within the range of accepted usage of any word.

Grammar and syntax rules are not arguable or the language looses all structure and people can no longer communicate.

It would be valid if another example in scripture can be shown that this was the actual grammar and syntax rule.

As it is, the identity in the conclusion of that verse 27 has to be the One at the beginning of that verse 27 as knowing the mind of the Spirit, especially in light of the term "because" which testify of Another as deviating from the Person spoke about in verse 26 which was the Spirit.

If the whole verse 26-27 was about the Spirit, why the injection of the word "because" id it is the same testimony about Him?

So I do not believe the scholars did their job right "if" they made the mistake of assuming the Person spoken of in verse 27 is the same One spoken of in verse 26 in applying their grammar and syntax rule, especially when most modern Bible versions has ended that verse 27 of the "he" with being "the Spirit". Then I would call that making up grammar and syntax rule based on a mistake in errant modern Bible versions.

If those scholars cannot show another verse that is contrary to the English grammar & syntax rule, then I will have to say the scholars all throughout history has made up that grammar & syntax rule as assumed for the Greek because of errant modern Bible versions.

 

[MarcR]

It would be valid if another example in scripture can be shown that this was the actual grammar and syntax rule.

As it is, the identity in the conclusion of that verse 27 has to be the One at the beginning of that verse 27 as knowing the mind of the Spirit, especially in light of the term "because" which testify of Another as deviating from the Person spoke about in verse 26 which was the Spirit.

If the whole verse 26-27 was about the Spirit, why the injection of the word "because" id it is the same testimony about Him?

So I do not believe the scholars did their job right "if" they made the mistake of assuming the Person spoken of in verse 27 is the same One spoken of in verse 26 in applying their grammar and syntax rule, especially when most modern Bible versions has ended that verse 27 of the "he" with being "the Spirit". Then I would call that making up grammar and syntax rule based on a mistake in errant modern Bible versions.

If those scholars cannot show another verse that is contrary to the English grammar & syntax rule, then I will have to say the scholars all throughout history has made up that grammar & syntax rule as assumed for the Greek because of errant modern Bible versions.

Every verse in the New Testament follows this rule.

 

[Enow]

To give an example:

If a text reads 'He ran.'; and I insist it means 'He will run', I am no longer speaking English regardless how similar the words may sound.

All I can say is that the grammar and syntax rule of the English has been found throughout all of scripture but suddenly the Greek as one entirely different for one verse? I have to say they used the errant translation of most modern Bible to come up with that grammar & syntax rule which hardly follows the pattern for the whole Bible.

Jesus Christ is the only One at that throne of grace for us to have access to God the Father by; Hebrews 4:12-16

The man Christ Jesus is the only Mediator between God and men; 1 Timothy 2:5

The prayer system is set up in this way... only the Son can answer prayers so that the Father may be glorified in the Son for answered prayers;

John 14: [SUP]6 [/SUP]Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.....[SUP]13 [/SUP]And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. [SUP]14 [/SUP]If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

The Holy Spirit assists in Jesus answering prayers BUT the Spirit gives the Son all the glory for answered prayers and for His workmanship in our lives with the fruits of the Spirit. John 16:13-15 & Philippians 1:6,11

Since His intercessions are unspeakable, that means the Holy Spirit cannot give His intercessions to God the Father; Another has to do it by knowing the mind of the Spirit BECAUSE "He", as in Jesus Christ, intercedes for the saints in according to the will of God as previously stated above to the role of the only Mediator between God and man as all power has been given unto Him in heaven and on earth.

Matthew 28:[SUP]18 [/SUP]And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

May God cause the increase.

 

[Enow]

no, it is. i made this for you, and for me, so we could both be enriched, and for everyone.

Thanks, but I meant this was your question for this OP. I knew the answer already, thanks to Him.

 

[Enow]

Every verse in the New Testament follows this rule.

It follows the English Grammar rule as far as I can see.

I do not believe the Greek Grammar is one where you speak of one person doing something to another person and then end with as if the other person was the one that was doing it.

 

[Enow]

The verse does not say that the Spirit cannot express it, but that His groanings are not expressible (for us).

That means no sound at all, and certainly cannot be displayed. Then you "sort of" contradicted yourself below.

The Holy Spirit can express his will without any problem:
"While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them."
Acts 13:2

"But when they hand you over, do not worry about how or what you are to say; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to say. "For it is not you who speak, but it is the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.
Mt 10:20

So it is not that He cannot talk, but that His groanings for us are too deep for us. Deep spiritual realities cannot be put to human words. Many prophets had this problem with expressing what they saw or heard.

The two references you have given are examples of the Holy Spirit speaking what He hears.

Now you sound as if His groanings can be expressed but are too deep for us to put in human words. When something cannot be expressed, it cannot be displayed. It is not limited to words, but to anything in sound. What cannot be expressed ... cannot be expressed.