Therefore: 4 Greek Words

0:01 All right. Last week we finished Psalm eighty three, at least I think we did. If I remember, I think we finished it. I was not in great shape. We had to kind of go through that last part really quick, but we kind of finished up Psalm eighty three. I know we're still working on Eschatology. But once we finished Psalm eighty three, I started thinking, so, what what should we do? What should we do next? I started trying to come up with some ideas, and then I would realize, well, wait a minute, it's August. I'm like, okay, August is somewhat significant, right, Obviously in pop culture, August the sixteenth, this is important because that was the day Elvis died.

0:44 All right, So we got, all right, that's pop culture. But August the seventh, twenty twenty two. August the seventh, twenty twenty two, right inside this building, sometime after twelve pm is we we finished a sermon on the Book of Romans, and then the next week we began a series on law and Gospel because I felt that Romans led us to this discussion on law and gospel. And then, in fact, I still state this the most important series I've ever done in my entire history of teaching is the series I did on Long Gospel, and that now has over one hundred hours of teaching on the proper distinction between law and Gospel. Over one hundred hours I spent working on it. And we're still not done with that series, but I've been working on ninety percent of it.

1:37 Oh well, about eighty percent of it occurred on the podcast, but I spent so much time making sure everyone knew the proper distinction between law and gospel. So I was thinking, well, since August twenty twenty two was the last message in Romans, is there any way to kind of ease back into Romans or at least see what we can do some more work on the Book of Romans, Because we made it pretty far. We made it through like I think ten chapters of the book. We did pretty good and covering most things, but clearly there's some things we need to continue on. So I was like, well, what should I do? What should I do? What should I do?

2:17 So I was thinking about it, and then it was like four five o'clock in the morning and I had Fundamental Broadcasting Network on and I don't know what the program was. I don't know what who the speaker was, but he mentioned something about the word Therefore and the Book of Romans. I can't tell you what he said. I don't know what his point was, but as soon as he said it, my mind just started thinking, well, there for you Therefore has used a lot in the Book of Romans. It's used a lot, in fact, depending on who you listen to, somewhere between twenty seven to thirty three times. And I'm like, okay, that's that could be cold. That would be an interest way to get back to the Book of Romans, right, because if we look at the their force and the Book of Romans, we would go from chapter one all the way to the end of the book and we would cover all the mat Okay, I say, I said, maybe I can do something with this. Maybe I can do something with this.

3:14 So I threw out kind of an assignment for the podcast on Therefore, told everyone to look them all up, read each one, write down kind of what it's Therefore. I gave a bunch of different things to work on, and I said, okay, there's kind of an introduction. So then I started, you know, kind of doing a little bit of work. Got a I got a few emails in regards to this. One of the emails read this way they found thirty three times and they said, there, I'm really interested. This is what one person said. He said, I'm really interested to look at building an argument in Aristotle's rhetoric. And I was like, oh, well, that's okay.

3:57 The therefour is interesting, but Aristotle's rhetoric, I'm like, Okay, that's kind of fascinating because there's a lot of discussion and history about how much of Christianity was influenced by Aristotle's philosophy. Okay, all right, Does Paul use Aristotle's building an argument idea and how he structured the Book of Romans? All right? And does everyone know Aristotle's rhetoric? No, okay, right. Aristotle's rhetoric. He argues that to build an argument you use the following ethos, meaning credibility. Right, and Paul will set at the beginning of Romans sets up his credibility to be able to articulate his argument. Then pathos, which is an emotional appeal where Paul uses emotional appeal in the Book of Romans, And then lagos, which is a logical appill where he uses logic and a logical structure through the Book of Romance, and I'm like, okay, well that's that's kind of fascinating. So I started working on that, and I'm like, okay, I think I could go through each section of the Book of Romans and I think I could show, oh, there's Ethos, there's Pathos, there's logos.

5:12 I think I think I could do that. Okay, that could be interesting, all right. But then I was like, well, stay focused on on the their force. Stay focused on the therefore all right, but I thought it was interesting that someone would point that out. They went on into their email to say, I wonder how much training Paul had as a Greek and rhetoric. All right, well that's a good question. Then it says most of these referring to the their force, most of these are syllogistic transitions. And I was like, oh right, so we could look at their furs as a syllogistic transition. I'm like, okay, that I may have to do a lot of work on that one. I know Aristotle's rhetoric more than I know syllogistic transitions. I'm like, okay, I'm going to have to do some work on it. But I'm like, okay, I could work on that. So I kept trying to and I'm like, you know what, all of these are important concepts and how the Book of Romans is put together, but the thereforores, I'm gonna stay with that because that's just an easy way for us to get right back into the text. And then maybe as we're doing that, we definitely will come back to the syllogistic transitions, because there's an argument that the thereforce all are syllogistic transitions, and then there's an argument that the thereforce are not always syllogistic transitions. So I'm like, okay, that could be interesting.

6:37 So what we are going to begin today is a work on Therefore. How we're going to go through all the their force and the Book of Romans all right. I don't know how long it will take us, but that's what we're going to do. But before we do that, we have to do some you know, introductory work. Now. I did some of the introductory work on the podcast, but we're going to kind of do a proper introduction. And what we're going to attempt to do here and I did not even realize this, but let's look up some verses you won't notice this at first, but look at I don't know why I keep wanting to say the Book of Revelation, but the Book of Romans. Look at Romans chapter two, verse one. Now, just before we before you look at it, just remember this, all right, Depending on how you count it, there's somewhere between twenty seven and thirty three times in the Book of Romans that the word therefore appears. This number will slightly be different, and it will vary depending on the translations, as different versions might use synonyms like so or then, and some instances where the original Greek word often translated as therefore appears, so we may have some differences in translation by utilizing King James or new King James, or somewhere between twenty seven and thirty three. All right, okay, And I don't know why there's some discrepancy, but there seems to be somewhere around that time. Did you find a number? Sarah? Okay,

8:12 King James? Okay? All right? So so again, somewhere we have at least twenty seven times. I think most can agree at a minimum twenty seven. All right, so here, but go ahead and look at Romans two to one, Romans two to one. I'm gonna read these sometimes I have you do this, But to start out, I'll read these Romans two one. Everybody there Therefore in the King James, everybody see that therefore thou art inexcusable, Oh man, whosoever thou art that judgest, for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judgest doest the same things.

8:56 Look at Romans three twenty eight. Romans three twenty eight. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Romans five eighteen. Okay, right, yeah, the NV is gonna have some slightly different ways of saying it, but it's the same concept, all right. Five eighteen. We have therefore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men onto justification of life. And then look at Romans thirteen two.

9:56 Romans thirteen to two. The King James has whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. All right. Four verses where the word therefore appears. Now, typically in church you would get something like, whenever you see therefore, you have to ask what is it there for? And then you kind of look at the verses before and the verses after, and you draw some kind of conclusion. It's pretty simple and pretty straightforward. Well, we I whenever we You know, I've tried to always do this in all the years have been teaching. Is when we cover something the first time, the first time you cover it is only laying foundation for the second time we cover it, And the second time we cover it is only laying down more foundation for the third time, so that we continue to build and build and build and build and build and build and build. Right, that's the way it's supposed to work. And I supposed to just get a simple answer and be happy with it. There's always more to it. Well, in this particular case, it would be easy for us to miss this. But someone pointed out that those four verses where the word therefore appears four different Greek words. Now that immediately tells me stop and

11:27 let's consider why. Right, that's interesting to me. Right, that's it. That should be interesting to any good Bible student, Right, any good Bible student should be like, well, why why is he using four different Greek words? And then that that would raise a question, right, is are they do these four Greek words represent a different purpose and using therefore does the therefore have a different or a slightly different purpose, a different meaning. So I started working on the Greek words. Now, first I was a little perplexed and confused, because if you look at those four Greek words in which we're going to be looking at them, that's what we're going to be doing this morning. For some reason, AI was telling me there was another Greek word and I could not find it. I was like, what where is Ai finding this Greek word? I could not figure it out right, So I kept challenging. I had to keep challenging AI, like I don't where is this Greek word? Finally it acknowledged that, hey, you're right, it's not there. It's barely used in the New Testament, and it's definitely not found in the Book of Romans.

12:40 I don't know why it was where it was pulling it from, but it was irritating me. So I think, to the best of my ability that the words that we have will represent the Greek word that is usually translated therefore and the Book of Romans, and we'll look at each four. But what I want to I want to use I want to use this example of my back and forth with Ai to make a practical point, because this is very, very very important. Right. There are times where the Greek word is very significant, can we agree? And there are other times where it doesn't seem to have as much significant as maybe as people would like it too. What drives me crazy is how many times pastors will make a huge deal out of a Greek word and come to find out every conclusion and every point they make about it is absolutely fraudulent. Remember we covered this and we studied this, remember the whole that's when Jesus is restoring Peter and he asked him do you love me? And all the pastors make a big deal.

13:47 Well there's filet, oh, there's a gape, there's these different juices of love, and then they make a big deal. And remember what we did is we looked up every use of like agape and every youth of oh and the others, and what did we find out? Does anyone remember what we found out? That was very frustrating. They're sometimes used this synonymous and it's not like agape always means this. That was all bogus and a lie. And I've heard that preach. You've all heard it preach. I've heard it preach, and we're like why that? It makes me angry. So one of the things that bothers me is when there was a time that for many Christians, I mean, come on, let's just go and be honest. Well, first, most churches are not going to sit there and go well, for the next three weeks, we're going to look up every use of the word agape, right, So that's already number one. And if a church won't do that, then who has to do it? If the church is not going to do it, then who's responsibility would it be to do that? It would be your responsibility because you're supposed to be judging what is preached. But nobody in the pew wants that responsibility, do they, Okay, Well, if nobody in the pew's going to take the responsibility and no one in the pulpit takes the responsibility, then what is the end result? In churches all across the United States of America, everyone lives in a perpetual state of ignorance saying things that are absolutely fraudulent about God's word,

15:18 and nobody seems bothered by it. It should tick you off because how are you going to know the truth right because and you know why pastors do that, because they just get a commentary and what the commentary says, they just repeat. And what makes it so frustrating is almost inevitably, what do they not tell you that they got that from a commentary on page fifty two? So then everyone thinks it's authoritative when it's not authoritative. See what drives me crazy is so many times the people into pew trait in some cases treat the preacher as if it's a fact, you know, magisterial authority. And then there's other times that the pastor can't speak because then they question everything. The pastor says, I don't know what the balance is. Well, the balance really is is the people in the pew are supposed to be doing all the work, because you're the one supposedly judging what is preached, But nobody in the pew actually wants to do the work.

16:21 People in the pew will criticize, they just won't put forth the effort that requires a lot of work. So if therefore has There are four different Greek words translated therefore in the Book of Romans, someone needs to take the responsibility to do what try to figure out? Why? All right? So I'm not saying that we're going to come to some amazing revelation here, But if it's the word of God, then don't you think it's important to try to figure out? I think it's important to try to figure out. So are you ready? Now? I wish this is the one time I can't stand when we don't have an internet connection here, because if we did, this would be a very a lot easier for everyone to look everything up in the blue letter Bible app and we could. You know, I like being able to do that. So, but we're not going to be able to have some of that freedom. But we're still going to make the most out of it. So is everyone ready?

17:14 All right? So? In the Book of Romans, the word therefore is used multiple times, often serving as a key transition that connects doctrinal teaching with practical application. The Greek words translated as therefore in various parts of Romans, are you ready for this indeed reflect slightly different nuances. So at least one source argues that the different Greek words show a kind of a different a nuance. There's something slightly different. Now we'll have to determine if that is true or not true. Okay, all right, so is everybody ready to try to work on this one. Look at Romans three twenty eight. Romans three twenty eight, Romans three twenty eight. Everybody there, and what do you see in Romans three twenty eight? Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

18:25 All right, Now, this Greek word, we would typically if you were going to write out the transliteration, it would be oeu n. That would be the transliteration, and it would be oon. All right. Now, this is used five hundred and twenty six times, five hundred and twenty six times. It is translated all kinds of different ways. All right, We're not going to go through all the different ways. Therefore, then so and now wherefore, but a lot of different ways? All right? Now own the strong's definition. There's not a lot here to go with, truly. Now likewise, then then therefore verily, wherefore there's not a lot here. We do know this. This is the most common word translated as therefore in Romans. According to at least one source, this Greek word oon right and Romans three twenty eight. It indicates a strong logical conclusion or inference from what has been previously stated. It is used to link sections of philological argumentation or to transition from doctrine to exhortation. Now, that's a We're going to get in much more detail about each Greek word, but that's kind of a basic idea.

19:51 So the idea of oon is it's the most common, all right, in Romans, and it typically indicates a strong logic conclusion or inference. Right, it's sometimes it's typically used to link sections of philological examination or argumentation to a transition from doctrine to exhortation. Right, does that? Everybody got that? One? Is that pretty simple? Right? So when it comes to ouon simply, but now now we're gonna we're gonna give the simple and then we're gonna come back and then add two. All right, has everybody got that? So if you want to, if you're doing notes, you just may want to refer to this as kind of the summary of the Greek words. This is a very brief summary here and then we'll build on each one, all right.

20:42 I don't want you to feel like I'm just gonna be repetitive, but we're gonna We're gonna kind of go in a circle so that we can at least get through them. Does that make sense? I kind of want you to understand what I'm trying to do here, right, So first one is oon right and Romans three twenty eight is a good example of it. Right, sounds good? So as we go through all the therefores, what will we do for everyone? We will make sure we identify which Greek word is being used? Okay, because once we know the slight differences for each one, what can then we do? We can? Then it may give us a clue to how Paul is using the therefore, which could impact how we interpret the therefore? All right? Does that make sense? Now? Typically we just ask what is it there for? Here we're trying to understand why the therefore? What Greek word was used to give us the there for?

21:40 And the first one is own it's the most common one. Typically it's used as a logical it's giving a strong logical conclusion or inference. It's it's used to link sections of philological argumentation to us transition to doctrinal exhortation. Everyone got that one, right. The next one. Look at Romans two to one. Romans two to one. Therefore thou art an excusable, oh man, whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another? Uh, For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judges doest the same thing?

22:27 All right, now this one. The transliteration for this one would be d io d io, which I would want to pronounce like d oh, right, But I after listening to some pronunciations, it's da or da, right, which is weird because there's another Greek word that almost sounds the very same as da da, And so I was like, well, is this the same Greek word? So there was a little bit of confusion, But that seems to be the correct way to pronounce this one. And Romans two to one would be da something along those lines. Right, it's used fifty three times, and through which thing consequently for which cause? Therefore? Wherefore is kind of the basic idea?

23:16 Wherefore or an account of Now with dia it is the word is translated therefore, but with a slightly different emphasis. It is often used to draw a more emphatic or summarizing conclusion, sometimes with a sense of inevitability. All right, So it's only used fifty three times, and it's got a it's used to draw more emphatic or summarizing conclusion with a sense of inevitability, right right, Well the old Testament would be Hebrew, right, yeah, all right, so what do what? Okay? Yeah, only six times in Romans. All right, and we'll go and over time we'll find all the places it's used in Romans. All right, so you see the slight difference already, ooon, carry the idea of what a logical conclusion linking sections of philological augmentation or argumentation to a transition to doctrinal exhortation dia or dia would be.

24:33 It is more, it has a it's a more emphatic or it's a summarizing conclusion with a sense of inevitability. This is inevitable, right, so that that immediately when you say what is that? Therefore, therefore you got to take into consideration these different Greek words are giving different emphasis, meaning that there's a high probability if this proves to be significant you know what that would mean that there's a high probability we've probably been wrong and how we've handled these most of our Christian lives, which would be very frustrating if it proves to be the case. I'm not seeing it that is, but it could be. Yeah, well, when we go we're going to go through all of them.

25:20 We'll know, right when we go through all of them, will know, so that that's the important case. All right, the next one, look at Romans five eighteen. All right, Oh, I probably shouldn't turn there. I was just going to make you guys read it. Romans five eighteen. All right, Romans five eighteen, what do we have? Therefore, as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men onto justification of life. This one is aurah right are a are uh? And it is used fifty one times in the New Testament, Right Sarah?

26:10 Do you know how many times in the Romans? Eleven times? So I used eleven times in the Book of Romans. And I mean there's a lot here. Oh r A A R A R A. If I cansider a spell correctly, that would be the transliteration a r a all right, and the kind of strongest definition. There's a lot of ideas here through the idea of drawing a conclusion a particle denoting an inference more or less decisive what manner man, no doubt, perhaps so b then therefore truly wherefore often using connection with other particles, all right, kind of giving the idea the outline of biblic useage therefore so when wherefore it doesn't give us a lot of ideas. And in the Book of Romans, the Greek word here are are a is used several times, typically translated therefore so then or consequently, this word is employed to draw a logical or in conclusion from what has been previously stated.

27:27 So it's drawing a logic logical conclusion, or it's trying to show you, hey, based on this, this is what is being inferred. Okay, yeah, I think I think that's typically the way we've handled most of them. I think that's typically all right. I've I could go through the different places, the key places where ara is used in the Book of Romans, I will not. Basically, this is how one source says aura is used in Romans to draw a conclusion based on previous arguments or statements. It often serves to underscore the logical consequences or implications of Paul's philological arguments. The word helps Paul transition from explaining doctrinal points to applying these points in a practical way. Right, Unlike some of the other ones, which might connect broader sections or themes, are often points to very specific or immediate consequences, making it a crucial word for understanding Paul's line of reasoning throughout the letter. So it draws a distinction that some of the other Greek words right might connect a broader section or theme, or are often points to very specific or immediate consequences. All right, everybody got that one? All right? So the first one is oon right,

29:04 Romans three twenty eight. It's the most common indicates a strong logical conclusion inference for what has been previous stated at links sections of theological argumentation to doctrine to a doctrinal exhortation. All right. The next one is dia right, Romans two to one. This word is translated, therefore it's slightly different emphasis. It draws a more emphatic or a summarizing conclusion with a sense of inevitability. All right, a uh, which we've looked at it. Typically it's used to draw conclusion based on previous arguments. It often serves to underscore logical consequences or implications. It can it often points to something more specific, immediate. It's a crucial word for understanding Paul's line of reasoning throughout the letter. So again, slightly different, just slightly different. Some of the those are radically are big.

30:01 There's sometimes some of them there's bigger differences. This one has as much more similar than some of the others. But okay, right then that takes us to Romans thirteen two. Romans thirteen two. This is one I'm probably going to say completely incorrectly, but that's okay. Romans thirteen two, where we read whosoever therefore resisted the power resisted the ordinance of God, and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. All right, now, this one, the transliteration, if you're writing it out, would be ho st hh h O ste.

30:46 Now anytime I just click quickly look at the transliteration, I want to say haste, okay, but it's not haste it's host a, host a, all right, host Ay, that's the best I can come up with, right right, host a. It is used eighty three times in the New Testament, Sarah, how many times in Romans? Five? Okay, So it's not used a lot in Romans, used a lot in the New Testament, but not a lot here Strong's definition so too. Thus therefore, in various relations of inso much it goes through a couple of things, Paul uses host a, and in some English translations, though it can be rendered as so then or consequently or consequently all right. Host a is a conjunction that typically expresses result or consequence, often emphasizing the natural or inevitable outcome of what has been stated.

31:57 It is a bit more flexible than some of the other Greek terms translated is therefore, and it can often imply a stronger sense of resulting or effect. It is not just drawing a logical conclusion, but indicating that what follows is a direct and necessary result of what has been previously described. So this one is not just drawing a logical conclusion. It's saying, hey, this is almost necessary. It has to happen. It's it's it's a more stronger implication. Does that make sense? The other one is like, hey, here's here's the logical result. This is saying this has to happen. This, this must be the case. Right, Okay, so what's the first one? Oon right, Romans three twenty eight.

33:02 Kind of what is that? It's it's the most common. Just make sure you remember that. And then basically, if we're kind of giving an easy summary, this one is a strong logical conclusion, right, and it usually links sections of philological argumentation to doctrinal exhortation. Right, everybody got that? That's what next? Dia right, Romans two to one. It's kind of a slightly different emphasis. It often draws a more emphatic or summarizing conclusion with a sense of inevitability. Everybody got that one? Then? Ara? Right? It remember this one has I've got a lot more on this one.

33:48 I tried to try to you summarize this one. But it draws conclusions based on previous arguments. It often serves to underscore the logical consequences. Okay. It helps Paul transition from explaining doctrinal points to applying these points. But typically with r the main thing is it typically deals with more specific immediate consequences, not a broader section. Okay, and then host a Roman's thirteen to two, and this one it's expressing the result or a consequence, the natural, inevitable outcome.

34:36 It's not so much drawing a logical conclusion, but indicating that what follows is a direct and necessary result of what has been previously described. All right, everybody got those? All right? Now that's the simple that's the simple summary, so that you have at least a simple idea whenever you're reading the Book of Romans and you see therefore, what is the first thing you need to do? Determine which Greek word is being used? Then remember that that Greek word may be making a kind of a unique emphasis. That you need to find that unique emphasis so you have a better understanding of what therefore is there for. Okay, But now we're going to expand on the different usages of how these appear. All right, So let's start with number one, which was oon. Right, Okay, we're gonna go with oon. Okay, I've got my notes are all separated and have to kind of scroll back up. All right, all right, here we go. So the Greek words translated as Therefore, in the Book of Romans, we know all of them now right oon, dia arah host all right, each have slightly different nuances. And here is a compare of these words. The first one is un all right.

36:03 This is most commonly used word for therefore in Romans. It indicates a strong logical connection between what has been said and what follows. It often connects large sections of Paul's argumentation, especially when moving from doctrine to practical application. All right, So for example, look at Romans five to one. All right, Romans five to one, and what do you find there? All right? Therefore, okay, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, it says. Now they offer kind of an example of the nuance. This Greek word serves as a general connector making logical inference. Is that follow naturally from the previous statements. It often marks a transition from one major idea to another. With n Paul's philological discourse.

37:14 All right, so it's bringing one section to another section. And there's a good use of it, right, because that's a pretty major significant shift. Right Therefore, being justified by faith, meaning what is he referring back to all of the arguments the entire section where it's about being justified by faith. So this therefore is connecting a major section with what follows, right, So this Greek word tends to connect larger sections, so meaning for this therefore, especially if you see this Greek word, you probably need to You're not just going to be able to go back to the previous verse. You may have to go back to an entire section. Does that make sense? All right? All right? So that that will probably be the major nuance to that, to that one, all right? Everybody got that one? Is that offer a little bit more insight? Maybe? Okay, hopefully we'll keep building on these. Well, we're gonna keep going in circles until we build and build and build, until you really understand what these Greek chords are. All right. The second one, so there's oon. The second one is dia, all right, and we'll go back down here. Uh. Dia The word is less frequent than oon and tends to draw more

38:45 emphatic or summarizing conclusions. Dia emphasizes the reason or cause, often summarizing a point before moving to the conclusion or result. So dia emphasizes the re or cause, sometimes summarizing a point before moving to the conclusion, so it may be more offering a summary. Does that make sense? All right? So example, we looked at look at Romans two to one. We've looked at it now multiple times. Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges everybody?

39:31 See that? All right? Now? The nuance here is it emphasizes causality and inevitability more than oon drawing attention to the necessary outcome or consequence of the previous discourse. All right, So if you look at Romans two to one, what is it saying here? Therefore art thou inexcusable? Its bringing a summary, right, and it's inevitable. Hey, based on what I just said, what if the inevitable result, you are without excuse? So and when it comes to what is he referring to? How we judge other people? And why are we inexcusable? We're guilty? Right, So it's kind of summarizing an inevitable conclusion. Does that make sense? Does? Does everybody kind of see the emphasis there? It's causality, it's inevitability, it's the consequence. It's not so much a logical flow it's much more like hey, Like, for example, if I spend an hour saying, hey, you're a center. You're a center.

40:48 You're a center, You're a center in thought word, indeed, you're a center by what you do and what you feel. Then what should be the inevitable conclusion? It's gonna be hard for you to go around judging other people. Is whatever you judge them for, you probably have done it. Even if you've not done the action, you probably have been guilty of it internally. So that probably should change the way we judge people. Correct, that's kind of the argument. Does everyonet to see that? All right? So there's un there's dia. Now what's the next one? What's the third? Great word? Arah? Right now. Aura is used to indicate a conclusion or consequence that follows directly from what has just been said. It tends to emphasize the immediate and direct nature of the result, often making a sharper or more pointed conclusion. All right, this is the more immediate context, right, not the broader section. Look at Romans eight one. There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ.

42:03 Jesus R is typically more focused on drawing a specific conclusion or pointing out direct implications, especially the context of individual or practical outcomes of philological points. So R wants us to get very practical whatever the philological point is. Now, it wants to get practical. And what's the practical point that they're trying to make in that particular verse Paul's making, there's now no condemnation that is practical, that is immediate. It's not about some it's about it's about that outcome. All right. Therefore, there is now no condemnation. It's very practical, it's very immediate, it's very sharp, it's very direct. Does that make a little bit more sense? Okay, what's the next one? Host Ay? Right? This word is used to express result or consequence, often emphasizing the practical or observable effect of what has been discussed. It can also mean so that highlighting the resulting action or state. Look at Romans thirteen to two. Therefore, depending on how it's reads, some translations, is that whoever therefore, who's whoever? Therefore this

43:33 translation therefore, whoever resists the authorities, resist what God is appointed, and those who will resist will incur judgment. Now host Ay is more action oriented indicating the direct and inevitable result of a preceding statement. It is less about logic and more about showing the direct outcome or effect. This one is not worried about the logic. This is worried about what What is practical? Right? What is action oriented? So according to Roma thirteen two, what is the practical action? Look at Roma thirteen two? What is the practical action? Yeah, there we go, the practical. It's just very direct, right, don't resist? What the authority? Why you will incur judgment?

44:32 Is that? Know? What the verse is? Yeah, it's very practical. It's not so much logical, it's action. It's action oriented, right, don't resist? Does everyone kind of see that difference. It's less about a logical inference and more about showing the direct outcome or effect. All right, so let's summarize now these differences. Right, let's summarize them. Okay, now we've sut we did a quick overview, then we built upon it. Right, are you experts yet? Now let's summarize them. Let's see if we can get these down. Look, we're not going to leave here until you know these all right, you're ready.

45:12 What's the first Greek word? Oon? Right. This is a general connector logical inference broad transition. Everybody like that general connector logical inference, broad transition. And when we say broad transition, what does that mean? It's transition a large section to a new section. Meaning when you see ooon, what do you have to do? You may have to go further back to establish where the section starts. And then therefore we'll show you where the section ended, right or transitioned? Right?

45:58 Does that make sense? Is that one good? All? Right? Next one? Dia emphatic summarizing stresses causality and inevitability. Dia is emphatic. It summarizes, It stresses causality and an evitability. If I can say the word correctly, right, does that make sense? So for this one, what you're not so much doing? What going all the way back looking at the major section? You're looking? What? What is it? It's emphasized, there's an there's something emphatic here. It's summarizing, and it's stressing causality and inevitability. There's a cause. So what's the cause?

46:47 What is inevitable here? About this one? Right? What's the third one? Arah? Right? Now? This one is sharp direct conclusion or consequence, immediate implication, sharp direct conclusion or consequence immediate implications. This is a direct This one almost indicates why a direct conclusion A direct conclusion. All right, you see that? Right? Then what's next? Host a right? It is a result or effect, often highlighting action or outcome, and very practical consequence. It's practical, it's action. It's a result or effect. All right, allre you ready, we're gonna do a test. Do I give a test out? Now, I'm gonna hand out paper. All right, everybody ready, don't don't look at your notes. Let's see if we can do so. Let's see if we can do it. First, Greek word, right, Okay. I wish we had the blue letter Bible app to say it correctly, but okay, right, you get it? Okay, what is it? Large sections? Right?

48:13 What else? Logical conclusions? You'll go ahead and look if you need to theology to doctrine, okay, most common logic sections broad logic theology to an exhortation. Right, those are kind of the basic things with tune right. Next, no dia idea emphatic summarizing causality and inevitability. Right, Causality and inevitability are you good. A right third arako? No idea is what we just did? Now? Arera okay? All right? Sharp?

49:08 Direct conclusions, practical consequences, immediate implications, remember, immediate implications? All right? Got that? And a next hostay okay? Hostay all right? Result or effect? Action right, practical action. I think what else did we have down? Yeah? Practical consequences right now, here's a summary of this. Each of these Greek words add a layer of meaning to Paul's arguments in Romans, helping to clarify how the various stillological and practical points he makes are connected to each other. Understanding these nuances can deepen the interpretation of the text by highlighting the specific way Paul intends his readers to see the relationship between his ideas. I will argue that, in our what ten chapters of studying Romans, we missed those nuances? We probably missed the nuance. I think we probably did a decent job getting the basic idea. But now when we go back and look at all of them, what are we going to look for? Now we're gonna look for that nuance. We're gonna try to see if that Greek word now gives us hmm. We kind of missed that right there. Now, let's see if we can catch on to that. All right? Does that make sense? All right?

50:41 While these nuances might not always dramatically change the basic meaning, understanding them can provide a deeper appreciation of how Paul structures his arguments in Romans. All right. And I wanted to get us to syllogistic transition. I wanted to get to all right, but we're not gonna be able to get this logistics transition. I will at least introduce it this way, all right, So there are the four Greek words. Again. AI wanted to offer another one. And finally, I don't know where it was pulling that Greek word from. I think it was because there's another Greek word that sounds almost like dia. It's almost like it sounds the same, but it's not in Romans. Okay, So I don't know why it was pulling from it. But after we clarified that those four seem to be correct. If anyone finds a different one than that's okay. But those are the four, we can at least say this. Those four seem to be the major ones. And what we'll we know before we're done we'll find out if there's another one, will we not? Okay, all right, we will find out if there's another one, all right, out of the twenty seven and the King James or thirty three, maybe in the new King Jake, depending on how you're looking them up.

51:53 We're gonna find out if these are used anywhere else, are we not? Sarah already has how many times each one is used, and I don't know if that at that equal twenty seven, but we're gonna assume that it did. True. Oh, good point. That's a good point. That's used a lot, that one is, just But what when we find that therefores we'll be able to determine? Oh wait a minute, we have a therefore here with a different Greek word, So if we we in other words, we're gonna say, well, we'll be checking our work. Does that make sense? So that's always a good thing, So so what we will do that? But some argue that the therefore paul uses the therefore as a syllogistic trans transition, all right, And and a syllogistic transition refers to a logical progression from one statement to another idea, all right. A syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning that consists of three parts a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. So a syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning that consists of how many parts three? What is the three major premise, minor conclusion? The transition between these parts is crucial to

53:27 ensure the reasoning is sound and valid. So if it's a syllogism, and it's a syllogistic transition, then it can be a transition between what major, minor conclusion. So some will argue, well, if we see that, therefore, if it's a part of a syllogism, then we have to figure out is that therefore moving us from the major to the minor, or from the minor to the So then you could be linking a bunch of the their force could be linking. In other words, then you would see like, there's there's a therefore between the major and the minor, there's a therefore between the minor and the conclusion. So then what would you do with the their force? Figure out where the major, what the major premise is, then identify the minor, and then identify the conclusion. That would be a whole different ballgame, right, That would be more than just going hey, therefore just fire. No, you would be like no, that therefore is taking you back to the major premise. Now it's moving to the minor premise.

54:40 Now the next therefore is moving to the conclusion. That would be grouping a large section of the Book of Romans. Does that make sense? And then the next one would start with what then find the major premise, go to the minor, go to the conclusion. Now there are I found arguments that therefore basically is always a syllogistic transition, and then I found arguments that that's not always the case, which would make it very difficult then to try to work through does that make some sense? All right? And then we could go through a major premise to a minor premise. That would be a transition. A minor premise to a conclusion would be a transition. All right, Okay, So like for example, we could if we if we looked at this just I'll just finish this part up the transit. So a major premise to a minor premise.

55:36 This transition occurs when you move from a general statement the major premise to a specific instance or example, the minor premise. For example, major premise all humans are mortal. Minor premise Socrates is a human, all right? Okay, The transition here is logical because it'll applies the general about humans to a specific individual. Right, So the major is what all humans are mortal, the minor Socrates is a human, all right? Then the minor premise to a conclusion. Right after establishing the minor premise. The next transition is to the conclusion, which logically follows from the two premises put together.

56:22 So Socrates is a human, therefore he is mortal, all right. See how it put It takes the two premises and then it concludes them in a logical way. Does that make sense. The transition here is based on the application of the general to the specific, leading to a conclusion. Now that would dramatically change. That would be very critical if it's And remember, at least one emailer said, maybe go back to his email. His email said, his email said most of these he had already looked at all of the therefors are like syllogistic transitions, I said this, and therefore that is true. So su at least one listener has already determined that most of these are syllogistic, Right, I'm going to be I'm gonna say we will wait and see. So now what's our responsibility now when we look at the their force. Now we have two jobs, right, we actually have three jobs. Right. Our first job is to determine what what is the Greek word and how what is it emphasizing? Right? Second, we have to determine is this using is this therefore a syllogistic transition for a syllogism? Meaning? Then what we got to go find the major minor and the conclusion. That's going to be difficult, is it not? And then the third part is simply to figure out what well what we always say, what

57:57 is there therefore? There for? Right? Just the basic idea? Okay, so what is Paul trying? Why is Paul using it? There for? Wait? So we can go from a very These have very broad implications, do they not? The third is more simple. Everyone will say, well, therefore, what is it therefore? And we'll throw out something simple and we typically do what move on? Rarely does anyone stop going, wait a minute, this is a syllogistic transition. This has We've got to find the syllogism, all right, So then you stop and ask everyone, Okay, everyone, if this is a syllogistic transition, then what would be the next question? Someone identify the major premise, all right, now? Someone identify the minor. Now, someone identify the conclusion that you probably have never heard that ever in your entire life in church? Okay, right? What? Oh?

58:51 And by the way, what is the Greek word and what is it's signifying? Now? Remember the different Greek words could still be a part of the syllogists. In other words, no one Greek word would eliminate it from being a syllogistic transition. To identify a syllogistic transition, you have to do what try to determine if there's a major minor premise that comes, you know, or if there's a major premise before it or a minor premise before it. Right, and again, if it's syllogistic, though it would connect, how many sections it would connect, the major to the minor and the minor to the conclusion? Right? Would That would be very important because what do we have a tendency to do with with the Book of Romans or with any of the of biblical texts. Not only do we take verses out of context, we almost sometimes take a chapter and forget to connect it to what comes before.

59:53 And sometimes we'll connect it to what comes before, just saying well, in the previous chapter Paul was saying this, and then but then we almost immediately tea the next chapter almost disconnected from the previous. Right, it's inevitable. Well, if Paul is utilizing things like Aristotle's rhetoric, if he's using that, right, well, that that's you know, he's using ethos pathos lagos, that that's that there's a whole structure to that. Does everyone understand that? And if he's using syllogism, well that you got to have a whole new set of skills of how to interpret that. We we so reduce the Bible to very like verses and and and rarely. Well, first of all, remember the verse idea is so detrimental to hermoneutics. Can everyone agree to that? It's like, absolutely, it's anathema. Verses are great for what look up and memorization?

1:00:55 What are they absolutely anathema to understanding? That destroy understanding? Right? And so that's what always drives me crazy, Like whenever, if we're over there and Paul says all Israel will be saved, and then immediately someone wants to start arguing, well, then you've got to like, well, wait a minute, Okay, do you want to argue here? Do you want to really work on this, because to work on this is going to require what Okay, well, where did the argument begin? Paul didn't just out of the blue say Oriols is going to be saved and you come along and because that doesn't fit your theology, you want Israel to be the church? Or how did you come up with this conclusion?

1:01:36 Where does the argument begin? Where is Israel first mentioned in the Book of Romans? Right? Would that not be where you would start? Does he make a major premise about Israel? Does he make a minor premise? Is this the conclusion of the matter. If it's the conclusion, if he's using a syllogism, don't come to me arguing about whether Israel's the church or not. No, you go prove to me where the major premise was, where the minor premise was, because this would appear to be somewhat the conclusion. But you don't even know what a syllogism is. Somebody you want to argue about it. See, that's the stuff that makes it so frustrating with dealing with the Bible and arguing with people. Right, on one hand, what do you want to avoid We'll get practical here and we'll end. Well, you don't want to You want to avoid saying, well, since I know what a syllogism is, or I know what a syllogistic transition is, or since I know Aristotle's rhetoric and I know that it has ethos, pathos and lagos, you can use that almost in an arrogant way where you shut down all arguments. Right, You don't ever want to do that. Right, that's bad. Everyone understands that. But because that's true in any subject. If you have the subject somewhat mastered and someone starts arguing with you, it's very quick to do. What say, just stop talking to me, just shut up, just leave me alone. You don't even know what you're talking about. And sometimes that can be bad because even though they may be arguing or bringing up a point that seems to make no sense, sometimes

1:03:09 you got to step back from their inarticulate way of describing it, because they still may be onto something and you can't be so arrogant just to ignore it. So what do you have to do. No matter how much they argue, no matter if they insult you, you still have to go back and do what you got to go back and do the work. Going Okay, who cares what they're going to do, I'm gonna have a notebook full because I'm going to work on this, Right, I'm gonna work on and we're going to find a way to come to a conclusion, even if that means spending six months looking up to every use of the word Israel. Right. I went and do that because we were arrogant, thinking we already knew the answer. We did that to ensure that we would know the answer. Right. Okay, So you can't allow that to happen, Right, you don't want it to become well, you just stop all challenges. That's bad, right, No matter how inarticulate, no matter how ignorant, no matter how aggravating someone may be, you still have to take it into consideration. On the other hand, the people should realize that in many cases, when they're dealing with the Bible, they have no clue what they're talking about. They are ignorant, they are foolish, they are not trained, they are not educated, and they should have a little bit of humility before they start yelling and arguing at you about what they've not studied for five seconds. On one hand, you can't let arrogance take over, But on the other hand, you

1:04:41 can't in your ignorance become You can become arrogant in your knowledge, and you can become arrogant in your ignorance. Correct arrogance. Sometimes we think arrogance is only for those who have the knowledge. You know, ignorant people can be arrogant because they're too ignorant to know that they don't know. What always make the joke, what's the purpose of education? To show you what you don't know? Right? Is to show us what we don't know. So we now we can talk about Romans now in a way other people can't. Right, Hey, Romans could be utilizing Aristotle's rhetoric to build an argument. Look, here's where Paul used athos pathos logos. Oh, look at us, we've figured it out. Whether does that make it that we cannot allow that to do? What make us arrogant?

1:05:42 What should it do? It should make us go? Wow, maybe we've missed understood Paul? Correct, Hey, Paul could be using a syllogism. Wow, that would change the way I read Romans. That's just not to make us arrogant, that's to make us do what work harder. Correct, Hey, there are four different Greek words? What should that do? Man? I need to know these Greek words? How long? How many years have I missed this? Right? It should always bring about humility, not arrogance. Okay, and just remember if someone doesn't know any of that stuff and they started making some argument about a verse in Romans, it's easy to be wide. Well, I can't speak for you. It can be easy to be dismissive, just like you know what, you don't even know what you're talking about. Just leave me alone. But you can't do that. You gotta be like, Okay, that is such a dumb argument. But okay, all right, I'm gonna work on it. I'm gonna do the work.

1:06:46 What did I do with Saw eighty three? It all started because of a sermon series. They did thirty three parts on Saw eighty three, and I don't think they ever once covered Saw eighty three. And they kept arguing that it was about some future Middle East war? Why because at times they came across so oh, just irritating. I could have been I could have done what with the sermon? I could have just dismissed it and go, well, we know more than that. But what did I do instead? Did I get irritated? Yes? Did I get frustrated? Yes? Did I offer criticism? Yes? But what else did we do? How long we spent almost the entire summer of twenty twenty four studying SAW eighty three? And did we not take that thing apart every way imaginable? Yes? We did? Right? Now?

1:07:36 What does that does that mean? The next time we hear something different about Saw eighty three? We should say we already studied it. No, what do I always say? Previous study has how much value? Presently zero? We would start over? Well, we now have learned a little bit about syllogism, We've learned a little bit about Aristotle's rhetoric, and we've learned about four Greek words. Right, if we ever go back, if we're ever in the Book of Romans again, will we take that knowledge of those four Greek words and use it again? Know? What would we do look them up again? Why would we look them up again? Even though we just spent an hour studying it?

1:08:21 Just to verify, to double check, make sure we didn't miss anything, because if you don't, you because this is what happens. Someone will learn that and then, for the rest of their Christian life will say, these are the four Greek words that are translated. Therefore, I am not going to rely on this next time. You know why? Because what if I got it wrong this time? Then I would just get it wrong next time. We have to be in a perpetual state of being humbled and acknowledging what we know and what we don't know. All right, So does that impact the way we've looked at Romans? Well, we'll guess what wolf do. We'll find out because next time we'll start where. Where's the first therefore found? Is it two to one? This was a big debate. Uh, I struggled with this week. Everyone goes to two to one?

1:09:17 Is there another one? Look at chapter one, verse twenty four. For some reason, most of the lists they skipped this one, right, Romans one twenty four? You have therefore or wherefore you have? Where? Four? Okay? What do you have therefore? Yeah? The new King James has therefore and it's the it's the dia, is it not? Yeah? I don't know why it's it's it's removed for most many a list of when I looked at all the therefore, I'm like, why is Romans one twenty four not there?

1:09:58 But the new King James says and even as okay, and then the King James uses an even as they so all right, But so I think we're gonna start with Romans one. Okay, I'm gonna start there, right. Has everybody got any issue with that? Or are we good? Because it is it is one of the four Greek words? Is it not? Okay? I wanted to make sure. I want to make sure, all right, So what we'll do, This is how we'll do it. We'll look at the text, we'll do kind of a summary, we'll kind of look at the significance. Then we'll do an analysis and a summary. Okay, and then that meaning we're gonna look at a lot and then we're gonna look at the outline of the main lessons. We're gonna do that for every single one, every single one, which will mean which will force us to do what We're gonna have to look at all the things that come before and what comes immediately after.

1:11:05 So this is by the time we're done. We're going to basically have gone back through the entire Book of Romans, so we'll see how much you remember from two years ago. Okay, okay, but it'll be a review without being a review, all right, so I think that'll be positive. That sound good. So if you want to start well for the net, just start reading all the therefore is in the Book of Romans and trying to make yourself familiar with what's going on, and then we'll see what we can find. All right, we'll stop right there. Lord, we come before you this morning. Lord, we thank you for being in a church where we could do this type of thing. Many places this would not go over very well or even be well received, or people would just get frustrated with it, not thinking it's important. Lord, I hope that we never forget every single word is there for a purpose, Every single word is therefore a reason. In many cases we miss the purpose, we miss the reason, and then we misinterpret your word.

1:12:09 Forgive us for every single time we have done that. Forgive us for every time that we will do it in the future. But help us continue to strive to understand your word and to take it seriously. And we asked this in Jesus name, and God's people said