How Things Get Lost

 

Knowing the wrong turns is necessary for finding our way, and therein lies the positive message.

A post a couple of days back talked about the decline of Christian morality. I’d like to think it is as strong as ever and maybe just drowned out by the noise. But I have noticed some things slipping away ever so slowly. A good example of something that has slipped away is charity.

The word charity originally meant Christian love, so when the subjects of King James read, “And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity,” the greatest of these was Christian love. Somewhere along the line, charity was taken over and used — and I have to wonder perhaps abused — to the point it no longer meant Christian love. The meaning has more or less changed to where now it is just voluntary giving. It could be given begrudgingly without a smidgeon of care or may be solely for the purpose of maxing out the tax advantage, but it will be charity. On that note, Christian love is listed on Schedule A of the IRS 1040 — no wait, that’s charity. Just isn’t quite the same.

Charity used to be Christian love and it was passed out by churches, and I think that still happens. Actually, I know it does. But we lost a good word. The modern translation says, “and the greatest of these is love,” and that’s true. It’s just not as true as before.

Now there arose a new people who knew not charity, nor whence it came.

That’s how things get lost.

Scripture from The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2009. Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems Inc.

Image by CCXpistiavos from Pixabay.

Published in Religion & Philosophy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 7 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Chuck Thatcher
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    You have touched on one of my griefs:  To read agape and think phileo is to lose a lot.  Similarly, to read phileo and think agape is also misleading. They are not the same, and anybody saying otherwise is just, IMO, seriously wrong

    BTW I don’t read, speak or think in Koine Greek.

    You likely know this, but CS Lewis wrote a book, “The Four Loves”, wherein he discusses the four words used in Greek but nowadays all translated love.  Good read.

     

    • #1
  2. Lawst N. Thawt Coolidge
    Lawst N. Thawt
    @LawstNThawt

    Chuck (View Comment):

    You have touched on one of my griefs: To read agape and think phileo is to lose a lot. Similarly, to read phileo and think agape is also misleading. They are not the same, and anybody saying otherwise is just, IMO, seriously wrong

    BTW I don’t read, speak or think in Koine Greek.

    You likely know this, but CS Lewis wrote a book, “The Four Loves”, wherein he discusses the four words used in Greek but nowadays all translated love. Good read.

    I may have read it but lost most of my library once.  I don’t think I had it, but I have read a book only to realize I’ve read it before.  But I can say it is on my list, just in case, as are all of Lewis’s writings.

    Along the same lines is philanthropy which originally was used for the love of God for humanity and applied most often to Christ as the example and now is simply the love of humanity and the application seems limited to the wealthy.

    • #2
  3. Steven Galanis Coolidge
    Steven Galanis
    @Steven Galanis

     

    Lawst N. Thawt (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    You have touched on one of my griefs: To read agape and think phileo is to lose a lot. Similarly, to read phileo and think agape is also misleading. They are not the same, and anybody saying otherwise is just, IMO, seriously wrong

    BTW I don’t read, speak or think in Koine Greek.

    You likely know this, but CS Lewis wrote a book, “The Four Loves”, wherein he discusses the four words used in Greek but nowadays all translated love. Good read.

    I may have read it but lost most of my library once. I don’t think I had it, but I have read a book only to realize I’ve read it before. But I can say it is on my list, just in case, as are all of Lewis’s writings.

    Along the same lines is philanthropy which originally was used for the love of God for humanity and applied most often to Christ as the example and now is simply the love of humanity and the application seems limited to the wealthy.

    • #3
  4. Chuck Thatcher
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Lawst N. Thawt (View Comment):

    Chuck (View Comment):

    You have touched on one of my griefs: To read agape and think phileo is to lose a lot. Similarly, to read phileo and think agape is also misleading. They are not the same, and anybody saying otherwise is just, IMO, seriously wrong

    BTW I don’t read, speak or think in Koine Greek.

    You likely know this, but CS Lewis wrote a book, “The Four Loves”, wherein he discusses the four words used in Greek but nowadays all translated love. Good read.

    I may have read it but lost most of my library once. I don’t think I had it, but I have read a book only to realize I’ve read it before. But I can say it is on my list, just in case, as are all of Lewis’s writings.

    Along the same lines is philanthropy which originally was used for the love of God for humanity and applied most often to Christ as the example and now is simply the love of humanity and the application seems limited to the wealthy.

    I had never considered the word philanthropy before!  Thank you!

    • #4
  5. Chuck Thatcher
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Lawst N. Thawt (View Comment):
    I may have read it but lost most of my library once.  I don’t think I had it, but I have read a book only to realize I’ve read it before.

    I suppose the advantage of losing ones library is getting to reread all the keepers!  Just read Flavel’s “Keeping the Heart” only to discover I’ve read it (twice) before.  And if anyone is interested in that book, I strongly suggest obtaining an older hard copy while assiduously avoiding the Kindle version in “modern” language.

    • #5
  6. Lawst N. Thawt Coolidge
    Lawst N. Thawt
    @LawstNThawt

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Lawst N. Thawt (View Comment):
    I may have read it but lost most of my library once. I don’t think I had it, but I have read a book only to realize I’ve read it before.

    I suppose the advantage of losing ones library is getting to reread all the keepers! Just read Flavel’s “Keeping the Heart” only to discover I’ve read it (twice) before. And if anyone is interested in that book, I strongly suggest obtaining an older hard copy while assiduously avoiding the Kindle version in “modern” language.

    Kindle tip on older books, is there may be a kindle version that doesn’t show up unless you search by title and then change the sort to lowest price because those versions are usually less kindle-like and maybe $0.99 or even $0.00.   I have found several older versions this way or the version I was trying to find.

    Another source for old books in a somewhat digital format is Google Books.  Some may have a couple of dozen different scans of the same book, different editions, or translators.   One tip on digitized copies is to compare the index to the number of pages and scan through as I have found them that had missing pages.  

    • #6
  7. Chuck Thatcher
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    I found one where the publisher had made “minor” edits that completely eliminated something like a fourth of the book (Pink’s “Sovereignty of God”).  So even with hard copy one should have a care.

    • #7
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.