It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anankē, What is it, and is it Anything We Need To Be Concerned About?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I was mentioning on the "Afraid of Hell" thread that I ordered a book through Amazon, from a West Palm Beach used book dealer, Paul and the Stoics by Dr Troels Engberg-Pedersen, who was a Lecturer in New Testament Studies, University of Copenhagen, when this book was published ten years ago. He is now a full professor. The University of Copenhagen web site says, Professor, Department of Biblical Exegesis.
Very academical and scholarly book which I like but give me headaches. I got that in the mail today and opened it to page 300 and immediately was confronted by a list of Greek terms which were in the common discourses of those ancient philosophers, and that happened to be the same topics discussed by Paul. Trying to get some background on what these were, I found a web site which is an on-line book from 1955, which discusses the first term in that list. I got to reading that and quickly ran into this seemingly overarching concept which governed all these things that were auxiliatory, to put it in my terms, to this one thing, Anankē. It took me a couple minutes to figure out even what the word was because it was in a format, neither Greek, or Roman, but trying to simulate the Greek spelling, using roman letters, such as using a y in the place of gamma. I was able to work it out in my Lexicon, and then to look up a verse that was listed in the definition, and then copy the transliteration on an on-line Interlinear, then Google that.
Now that I know what the word even is, now what? The shocking thing to me was, here is this fundamental Greek philosophical word coming out of the mouth of Jesus, and why did I not know that?

Alas, and woe! To the cosmos there is this thing, the Anankē, and don't let it crush you!

Paraphrased, but read it yourself, in Mathew18:7.
An irresistible cosmic force. Hmm, and it makes me wonder, that guy, Lucas, it seems the truth of it is that he had Joseph Campbell create a great mythological story to base his movies on, and you get this main character with the name, Anakin . The force? It is a form of this very ancient Greek word which all philosophy of the stoics hangs on.

edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
hey that's really cool thanks for bringing this to light I'm going to have to keep this word around


very interesting I'll try to keep an eye out for other writings it is used in



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Paraphrased, but read it yourself, in Mathew18:7.


I think paraphrased may be an understatement. I've checked Matt 18:7 in 10 different Bible translations and not one even comes close to what you've stated.

When one reads it in context based on the surrounding verses, what you've stated makes even less sense.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Very interesting. S&F for your efforts. I admittedly don't have enough knowledge on this subject to make any intelligent responses given your opinions and research; however, I look forward to researching this for myself and retracing your steps. Perhaps I will find myself at the same conclusion. I hope you're able to elaborate further on this.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by bozzchem
 

I was reading it from the Greek.
That's why I said, look it up yourself.
The main thing I wanted to get across was that the word is there in the first place and would have been recognized for what it was, when he said it, though we seem to be rather ignorant of the very existence of the word, today, unless you were a student of Greek philosophy, which I was not, apparently, until today.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoSphere
Very interesting. S&F for your efforts. I admittedly don't have enough knowledge on this subject to make any intelligent responses given your opinions and research; however, I look forward to researching this for myself and retracing your steps. Perhaps I will find myself at the same conclusion. I hope you're able to elaborate further on this.
I actually wanted to get into a lot of what Pedersen has written, but this was what I could afford right now, which is a used (though in perfectly pristine condition, as it turned out, one of these books that people think sounds good but can't quite get to reading) copy of one of his earlier works. I wanted to see if I could make sense of this before investing in the more expensive newer ones. I want to elaborate on these topics I only eluded to in the OP, and plan on that, as I progress.
I could begin by starting to list these concepts I found on page 300, which just happened to be where I opened it, but there was a heading there saying, Conclusions, so I thought I would take a look.
Syneidesis- which is, conscience.
I will see if I can quote something on this from, Conscience in the New Testament: A Study of Syneidesis in the New Testament, in the Light of Its Sources and with Particular Reference to St. Paul, with Some Observations regarding Its Pastoral Relevance Today.

THE connotation of a word outside the N.T., and prior to or
contemporary with it, must always be of prime significance for
its understanding within the N.T. Conscience is one of the few
important Greek words of the N.T. that have not had imported
into them, through use by the LXX, a colouring from the Hebrew
experience and outlook of the O.T.
What he is saying is that we need to look at the Greek sources to see what the meaning of the word is, rather than looking at the Old Testament.

edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Not sure what you are saying. Anankē is a necessary restraint or binding for purpose in a time of distress. You misquoted the verse below as well. The term is also found in these passages:

First, the Matthew 7 verse in context.

7 Woe unto the world because of occasions of stumbling! for it must needs be that the occasions come; but woe to that man through whom the occasion cometh!

8 And if thy hand or thy foot causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: it is good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire.

9 And if thine eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is good for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire.

Matthew 18:7 N-NFS
BIB: τῶν σκανδάλων· ἀνάγκη γὰρ ἐλθεῖν
NAS: blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks
KJV: for it must needs be
INT: the offenses! For necessary For to come

Luke 21:23 N-NFS
BIB: ἔσται γὰρ ἀνάγκη μεγάλη ἐπὶ
NAS: for there will be great distress upon the land
KJV: great distress in
INT: there shall be For distress great upon

Romans 13:5 N-NFS
BIB: διὸ ἀνάγκη ὑποτάσσεσθαι, οὐ
NAS: Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection,
KJV: Wherefore [ye] must needs be subject,
INT: wherefore necessary [it is] to be subject, not

1 Corinthians 9:16 N-NFS
BIB: μοι καύχημα, ἀνάγκη γάρ μοι
NAS: of, for I am under compulsion; for woe
KJV: for necessity is laid upon
INT: to me boasting; for necessity For me

1 Thessalonians 3:7 N-DFS
BIB: πάσῃ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ καὶ θλίψει
NAS: in all our distress and affliction
KJV: affliction and distress by your
INT: each-every the necessity and tribulation

Hebrews 9:16 N-NFS
BIB: διαθήκη, θάνατον ἀνάγκη φέρεσθαι τοῦ
NAS: a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death
KJV: a testament [is], there must also of necessity be
INT: [there is] a testament, [for the] death [it is] necessary to come in of the

Hebrews 9:23 N-NFS
BIB: Ἀνάγκη οὖν τὰ
NAS: Therefore it was necessary for the copies
KJV: [It was] therefore necessary that the patterns
INT: [It was] necessary Therefore the


edit on 14-10-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
I will quote (literally transcribing by hand from the printed page) from Four Theses, which is a sub-heading in Conclusions, page 301, from Paul and the Stoics.

Nor have I been concerned to do what others have recently done with great success: analyze particular passages in the letters to show how these reflect a Paul who actively participated in the moral philosophical discourse of his day, though also (as everybody did) with his own special emphases.This has been done for topics ranging from specific concepts (like syneidēsis, adiaphora, exousia, autarcheia, eleutheria and more) to broader themes (like diatribe style, exhortation more generally and more). Instead I have attempted to show that there is a single, basic thought structure that is formulated in both Stoic ethics and in Paul.
So, there we have some of the basics laid out, and enough to make me realize that I didn't know some seemingly important concepts. Eleutheria seemed familiar in that I would take note of it when I saw different forms of it in the NT text. Wikipedia says, Liberty, a type of freedom.
edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 

You misquoted the verse below as well.
No because I was not quoting anything, I was making an interpretive translation on the fly. I said so and I don't know why you can not get that.
The concept is there, and my point is that normal translations deemphasise the significance of the concept behind the words they are translating.

There are things, these things are inevitable, there is some force making these things be there, we can't do anything to prevent these things from being there. . .,then warnings given.
edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60


The force? It is a form of this very ancient Greek word which all philosophy of the stoics hangs on.

From the usages that SuperiorEd laid out, it seems to be 'necessity' or 'inevitability'. Maybe the concept of 'Fate'.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by jmdewey60


The force? It is a form of this very ancient Greek word which all philosophy of the stoics hangs on.

From the usages that SuperiorEd laid out, it seems to be 'necessity' or 'inevitability'. Maybe the concept of 'Fate'.
from Bible Helps,

["In classical Greek many words take their stem from anank-. The verb anankazō denotes the outward influence or pressure exerted by someone upon another. . . . At times there is implied in anankazō the idea of 'force,' thus it can even mean 'to torture' someone" (Liddell-Scott).]
This is very preliminary stuff I came up with, over a short time. I need to look into these various concepts and see what they mean, in a more detailed way.

Word Origin
from ana and agchó (to compress, press tight)
from NAS Exhaustive Concordance.
Fate is one of the things that comes to mind. I started thinking about that two days ago while studying the Greek concept of demons, or bad spirits, that deliver the pronouncements of the Fates.
edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60

So what is the Greek word for 'fate'?

Stoic physics and cosmology
According to the Stoics, the universe is a material, reasoning substance, known as God or Nature, which the Stoics divided into two classes, the active and the passive. The passive substance is matter, which "lies sluggish, a substance ready for any use, but sure to remain unemployed if no one sets it in motion."[16] The active substance, which can be called Fate, or Universal Reason (Logos), is an intelligent aether or primordial fire, which acts on the passive matter:



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 
Here's some further definition on the word, Anankē

[IE; the primary idea in Hellenic thought: inevitability as an inherent component of human experience and indicating that over which one has no control]-1. constraining/compelling force, necessity, constraint: w. e~ under pressure
Frederick William Danker. The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Kindle Location 503). Kindle Edition.

Notice the bit: the primary idea in Hellenic thought.
The fates must be involved, somehow, I would imagine, seeing how before I found out about this, I would have said Fate would have been primary.

edit on 14-10-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 




"There are things, these things are inevitable, there is some force making these things be there, we can't do anything to prevent these things from being there. . .,then warnings given."


There is a way to understand the linguistics used in scripture.

The first step is to read the scripture one word at a time from the original language and a lexicon. The problem here is the same problem you run into with the English language: Words have more than one meaning depending on usage. The first step is to gain an accurate translation. This has been done with our current translations. No need to paraphrase as you did. This only muddies what has already been accomplished by scholars.

The second step is to rightly divide truth by context. The way to accomplish this is with Hermeneutics. These are laws originating with Hermes (Thoth) in Egypt. He was most likely Enoch form the Bible. The Seven Rules of Hillel are to be employed in all cases in scripture.

The two forces you are referring to are the two spirits God set in place to govern free will. You are correct that in these last days, the balance of the spirit of darkness is being loosed. This is what scripture refers to as the separation of the sheep and the goats. When it says that the love of many shall wax cold and that brother will be divided against father and sister, it is referring to the division caused by corruption in the heart of man.

When God started creation, the first task was to divide the light from the darkness. This process continues. We are all charged with this task as we live your lives.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by SuperiorEd
 

The two forces you are referring to are the two spirits God set in place to govern free will. You are correct that in these last days, the balance of the spirit of darkness is being loosed. This is what scripture refers to as the separation of the sheep and the goats. When it says that the love of many shall wax cold and that brother will be divided against father and sister, it is referring to the division caused by corruption in the heart of man.
You would have to show me how you arrived at TWO forces.
"Rightly divide" in your post sounds like orthotomeó, from 2 Timothy 2:15. It seems to be the only place it is found in the NT. Do you know of any other use of this term?



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Hillel is the Rabbi for Paul and Simeon in the NT. Two spirits are the Holy Spirit of God (Consciousness of love) and the spirit of darkness (Satan / Belial). We choose which consciousness to follow. One is of God and the other is of the world. This can be found throughout the pages of the Bible or you can read it in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Dead Sea Scrolls LINK to Two Spirits Reference




edit on 15-10-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60


You would have to show me how you arrived at TWO forces.

What SuperiorEd linked to was The Community Rule from Dead Sea scrolls. The two forces are all through that particular book.


The nature of all the children of men is ruled by these (two spirits), and during their life all the hosts of men have a portion in their divisions and walk in (both) their ways. And the reward for their deeds shall be, for everlasting ages, according to whether each man's portion in their division is great or small. For God has established the spirits in equal measure until the final age, and has set everlasting hatred between their divisions. Truth abhors the works of falsehood, and falsehood hates all the ways of truth. And their struggle is fierce in all their arguments for they do not walk together.

- - IV Community Rule
The Dead Seas Scrolls in English, G.Vermes, 1968, pg 77

The verse from the OP may reflect something like this:

The Angel of Darkness leads all the children of righteousness astray, and until his end , all their sins, iniquities, wickedness, and all their unlawful deeds are caused by his dominion in accordance with the mysteries of God. Every one of their chastisements, and every one of the seasons of their distress, shall be brought about by the rule of his persecution; for all his allotted spirits seek the overthrow of the sons of light.

But the God of Israel and His Angel of Truth will succor all the sons of light.

- - Ibid. pg 76

I can't read from a book and type onto the keyboard for very long, it goes on to say that He (this God of Israel) created both the Angel of Light and Angel of Darkness, and determined that all human activities are directed by these two. He (this God of Israel) loves the one and hates the other.

edit on 15-10-2011 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Interesting thread man...

I will give my inturpretation to the verse...

7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

My take on this verse would be... Offences will come because at times we will all stumble... but when we stumble we do not have to fall... By judgement you stumble on the path... So woe to the man that stumbles on his path... for he can fall far from the path through his judgements...

Oh right, and the star wars reference... I've actually heard that Starwars was a message sent from God lol...

It was an interesting comparison actually... Notice...

Jedi...

JEsus DIsciple...




posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon


My take on this verse would be... Offences will come because at times we will all stumble... but when we stumble we do not have to fall... By judgement you stumble on the path... So woe to the man that stumbles on his path... for he can fall far from the path through his judgements...

Actually, it seems that Jesus is warning teachers specifically


2 Jesus called a little child to himself, and set him in their midst, 3 and said, "“Most certainly I tell you, unless you turn, and become as little children, you will in no way enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. 4 Whoever therefore humbles himself as this little child, the same is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. 5 Whoever receives one such little child in my name receives me, 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be better for him that a huge millstone should be hung around his neck, and that he should be sunk in the depths of the sea.

7 “Woe to the world because of occasions of stumbling! For it must be that the occasions come, but woe to that person through whom the occasion comes!

He goes away from the Dead Sea Scroll version of metaphysics and goes into a personal ethic, "woe to you who cause little ones to stumble." If there is some angel of darkness so what? You (teacher) are not exempt from responsibility for your own actions. The Father doesn't want any little one to perish. vs 14.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 



He goes away from the Dead Sea Scroll version of metaphysics and goes into a personal ethic, "woe to you who cause little ones to stumble." If there is some angel of darkness so what? You (teacher) are not exempt from responsibility for your own actions. The Father doesn't want any little one to perish. vs 14.


quite true though i believe this lesson was meant for anyone who can understand it... Teach a child to hate, and he will carry it with him through out his life... because that child will believe what was instilled upon him as a child...

If you teach anyone something that is untrue and they believe it... is it not your fault that he stumbles? Now in teaching a child to stumble he will continuously stumble on said stumbling block until they see beyond that falsehood... If they do at all... So how much more are you responsible for teaching a child incorrectly...




new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join