A Woman of Chayil: Far Above Rubies by Jane Carole Anderson

[Drake]

OBW,

I'm pretty sure that the life that the Spirit gives is not that which may be found in a Bud.

Drake

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Drake

I'm pretty sure that the life that the Spirit gives is not that which may be found in a Bud.

And like so many lately, you miss the point.

I would agree with your statement. But it does not cause there to be a definition of "zoe" that is exclusive and peculiar to scripture. Both potentially fall within what was called "zoe" back in turn of the era Greece and beyond.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by OBW

And like so many lately, you miss the point.

I would agree with your statement. But it does not cause there to be a definition of "zoe" that is exclusive and peculiar to scripture. Both potentially fall within what was called "zoe" back in turn of the era Greece and beyond.

Is the life that the Spirit gives zoe?

That is the point. You drew a false equivalence with a beer.

Drake

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Drake

Is the life that the Spirit gives zoe?

That is the point. You drew a false equivalence with a beer.

Drake

Actually, you do not properly understand what I said. I said that the process of "going for all the gusto you can get," which was used in a beer commercial, was describing going for zoe. A full life. More than just breathing and filling space. More than just working and getting a paycheck.

I did not equate them. Lee did by insisting that zoe is simply God's life.

But the life that the Spirit gives is not simply zoe. Neither is zoe simply God's life.

The life that the Spirit gives is God's life. In terms of ability to achieve or experience zoe, having God's life is a definite plus. But it is arguable that there are a whole lot of people with God's life that are not currently experiencing zoe, though they could. But having God's life is a plus because it can help us to look past the "momentary affliction" or other hindrance to what would be called zoe and thereby do more than just live biologically and psychologically.

But zoe is not simply God's life. That is just not so. It is something else. But it is able to help us in achieving zoe. And to experience zoe when others would not. And to bear up under hardship when no one would pretend that things are very "zoe."

The false equivalence here your simplication that the life that God gives is zoe. The problem with the statement is that zoe is a very human life. It is very achievable without God, otherwise the word would not have existed before the Bible for use in the Bible.

Zoe is the fullness of life (human life). God's life is not the fullness of human life. It is God's life. But having God's life is clearly a plus in getting to the fullness of human life.

And if you want to remain stuck with Lee's "zoe is just God's life" mantra, don't bother responding. I'm not impressed with purely "theological" definitions that most likely did not exist at the time of writing.

[Drake]

OBW"The life that the Spirit gives is God's life."

Right. And what is the Greek word used for life that the Spirit gives?

Drake

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Drake

OBW"The life that the Spirit gives is God's life."

Right. And what is the Greek word used for life that the Spirit gives?

Drake

Provide the verse. I did a quick search and the use of the word "life," even when coupled with God does not make reference to the life of God, but rather to the life that we obtain. You can make an argument that this means that it is the adding of the life of God that is actually being talked about. But in the examples I came up with, I do not find any such reference. Rather, it is clear that we are given life, eternal life, etc., but I don't find "God's life" defined.

And while I would expect that the word used for it would be zoe, that would not be because it is God's life and that is the definition, but because the life that God has could hardly be described as other than the fullest of lives.

But despite that, even if all the other verses make reference to man having or experiencing zoe, it does not say that they are experiencing God's life, but life (my living) that is zoe.

That still does not define zoe as exclusively God's life.

You need to ask yourself why it is that you are stuck on the idea that if it is zoe it is God's life. There is nothing found in the Bible that makes any such claim. The world was not missing the word "zoe" until it started being used for the purpose of describing God's life.

No. Zoe was fullness of life. Or all that life is. Not just the biology or psychology. You are stuck on an A is B therefore B is A logic error. Just as the Rangers are a baseball team (not talking hockey today), but "baseball team" is not simply the Rangers. In the same way, God's life is clearly zoe, but zoe is not simply God's life. Therefore, even in the Bible, unless it is clearly talking about God's life, and not our life (as it was, is, or could be) zoe does not mean God's life. It just means fullness of life.

Now is when you ignore me and ask another "zoe simply means God's life" question.

[OBW]

Drake,

One more thing to consider. Even if you successfully argue that some of the verses are talking about our life when the life of God is added, it is still talking about the life that we live as a result of that, not the life that God lives. In gospel terms, it is a sales pitch. It is telling you how much better YOUR life could be. God gives excellent life.

BTW. All of the life that we have came from God. So why don't we have zoe all the time?

The answer is because zoe is not an ingredient. It is a state of being. Bios is something that is. It is tangible. While psuche is not so tangible, it is still the working of our being in the way that we operate as living humans. But zoe is how you live as a biologically and psychologically alive person. Is your whole living mundane or is it zoe. Is it full.

God's life is surely full. But it is not the definition of zoe. Or full. A very good example. But not the definition.