This doesn't answer the question. Furthermore, your answer ignores the verb μερίζω and the second half of the BDAG definition dealing with the result of measuring. See the BDAG article for μερίζω, under 2(b), where the following translation for this passage is given: "according to the measure of the limit (or area) that God has assigned us" (p. 632). What is "the measure .. which God hath distributed"? It's another way of saying "proportion". "Measure" would also be perfectly acceptable (the NET does a good job with this: "each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned").

"measure of faith" is nonsensical. There is no suggestion anywhere in the text that gifting is related to a quantity of faith. I'm used to people craving any justification for a traditional reading but not from you.

In my mind it's six one way and half a dozen the other whether it is translated "measure" or "proportion". More importantly, this question is not about the translation of that word, but rather about the sentence structure overall.

The sentence structure and the words in the sentence are indivisible (when done correctly). When you get them right the sentence makes sense and is good Greek.

"μέτρον πίστεως" = measure of faith (or faithfulness). Am I missing something? Are you challenging the translation of πίστις? That's the literal reading of these Greek words....

It is referring to a "measuring tool of faith". If you have the gift of teaching you measure it one way but if you have the gift of giving you measure it another way. Paul is saying not to compare apples to oranges.

2Co 10:12 For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.

Paul does not measure his own success by the success of those before him. Instead he limits his list of accomplishments to only what he did himself, not padded with the previous labor of others. 2Co 10:16 To preach the gospel in the regions beyond you, and not to boast in another man's line of things made ready to our hand.

You're ignoring the second half of the BDAG definition which explicitly lists Romans 12:3 in the same context as "the result of measuring, quantity, number" and gives the translation "as God has apportioned the measure of faith" (p. 644). If you want to offer a novel translation, go for it. But don't cite a source as evidence of it that explicitly does not agree with you (BDAG). That's simply misleading and dishonest scholarship.

BDAG is the authority for the identification of distinct usages of the koine vocabulary but is "just another man" when it comes to application. Well, not "just another man" but in this area I'm okay disagreeing with BDAG albeit not without some trepidation. But look at the word usage! It is all about measuring devices (ie: methods)!

Again, "measure (in the sense of quantity) of faith" is void of any meaning in this context.

Well this phrase is loaded in history (hence the KJV "rule of faith" (which I believe is anachronistically reading later Church history into the text), A.K.A. "analogy of faith"), but I think your distinction is missing the point personally. The word is actually used for "proportion" (or ratio of one thing to another) in Greek mathematics and logic - so having that context is important. This led to the development of the "regula fidei" in Christian thought (reflected in the KJV translation).

youtube.com/watch?v=6nwj8nAYEM4

Well, looks like you're not too interested in discussing this. It's fine to propose something new (although this isn't generally the venue for it). But please don't cite a source as evidence that actually disagrees with you without a caveat to that effect.

@Ruminator I'd love to continue this discussion despite the snarky video, if you're willing

because I don't believe this translation of the Greek precludes your interpretation

It's just a little more nuanced

but if not interested in discussing, no biggie

I enjoy studying and discussing the texts, hence why I'm here

I'm certainly interested, Dan. In fact, I appreciate you taking the time as I respect your skills very much.

@Ruminator cool stuff (PS I thought the tradition video was funny - if intended that way- awesome)

Double duty, but yes, funny

so i think you are commingling the interpretation and application of the passage with its translation

which is inevitable

everyone does this - myself included

but you are taking an additional step and changing the literal translation to accomodate your interpretation

here is how I read it

I think you would (mostly) agree

I would like to know where I deviate from the literal translation though.

starting with vv. 1-2, note he is speaking to a plural audience: the church in Rome

"your bodies" (τὰ σώματα ὑμῶν) is plural

sacrifice (θυσίαν) is singular

Plural/singular: Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

yes

v. 2 gives us our first "hint" of a ratio of sorts

be transformed... so that you may discern/test the will of God

I hope you aren't going to suggest he's saying that it is "the percentage of faith"

i think you may be bringing some a priori theological perspective to this that has an aversion to something here

I don't see any math in verse 2

but hear me out

there is a relationship of some sort between being transformed and being able to discern God's will

"a new way of thinking"

be transformed ... so that (εἰς) you may test the will of God

renewal of the nous

BDAG has pretty good article on νοῦς

As if they had it right before and now they have to get that back?

we can go with mind/intellect for now but it's a lot deeper than that

Or "make new"?

well it's presented in opposition / distinction to being conformed to this age

or world if you prefer

Right, don't think the old way but in the new way

so the implication is that being "transformed by renewal of the nous/intellect" is somehow opposed to being "conformed to this age"

Yup

and that this transformation is a necessary precursor to being able to test/examine/discern God's will

with me so far?

or disagree with any of this?

More or less

ok, then he goes on by preceding his statement with "by the grace given to me"

I don't think he's saying your mental transformation has to be completed before you can begin to evaluate things but go on

moi?

Oh, okay

by the grace given to me

it's dative

@Ruminator I agree, I think there is some proportionality to this. To the degree that you are transformed, you can discern/examine God's will

if not at all, then you have no discernment (and actually conform to this age)

I figured you did

Just being picky in case

@Ruminator but you do too, no? You just said that you don't believe the transformation must be completed before you can begin to evaluate things, which implies there is some process at work in which one progresses, no?

He's simply saying "Don't think the way the lost think, think in God's new approach

ok, that's an interpretation, but the text makes a relationship between transformation and discerning/examining

it could be all or nothing (be transformed (final) or you can't discern)

or it could be a process (to the degree you have been transformed, you can discern the will of God)

That would be ideal

He's being more practical, I think

ok but you don't have to change the translation to support that (my main point)

i am here discussing the translation of a language that has morphological, grammatical, and syntactical rules

rules can be broken

but generally are followed to be understood

that is a different context altogether, and another text

let's stick to this one for a minute

simply to not go on many bunny trails

so anyhoo, the text creates some relationship here, either all-or-nothing or proportional

then Paul explicitly begins with the caveat "by the grace given to me"

and he says to "everyone" to not think too highly of themselves

but instead to let thinking conduce to sober-mindedness

Possibly related: Eph 3:7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

as God has apportioned a measure of faithfulness to each"

again, different context - let's stick to this text

but yes related

Alright, so this is where we part company

"a measure of faithfulness to each" is, to my mind, meaningless drivel

so how you translate πίστις is important

literally μέτρον πίστεως

a measure of faith/fulness

Not in my book

so we have the verb μερίζω

ONLY if you approach the text with that as a given

literally meaning to "separate into parts / divide, make an allotment, deal out, assign, apportion"

i disagree

the verb here is the kicker

μέτρον πίστεως

ὡς ὁ θεὸς ἐμέρισεν μέτρον πίστεως

as God has apportioned a measure of faithfulness to each"

"as God has distributed a measuring device of faith"

the verb itself indicates some sort of division / apportionment

Or an allotment

but the quantity of what is being measured

Hang on one sec...

it simply doesn't fit the context nor is there any precedent for such a translation.

Have you read Greek outside of the NT? Out of curiosity?

sorry, go ahead....

This is the relevant part: ② distribution, apportionment (Aeneas Tact. ln. 27; Polyb. 31, 10, 1; SIG 1017, 16 [III b.c.]; TestJob 46:1; Josh 11:23; Philo, Poster. Cai. 90) ἁγίου πνεύματος μερισμοί distributions of the Holy Spirit, i.e. of the various gifts proceeding from the Holy Spirit Hb 2:4. AcPl Ha 8, 18 κατὰ … μ. λαμβάνοντες//Ox 1602, 22 κατὰ μ. λαβόντες//BMM recto 22–24.—DELG s.v. μείρομαι II. M-M.

note 2(b), BDAG specifically addresses this passage:

BDAG is wrong

BDAG can be wrong, no?

@Ruminator absolutely it can, I can point to at least one example where I disagree

Well hopefully you'll soon have two

:)

my issue here is that you are departing from the plain sense and way the word is used elsewhere

which would imply Paul here used the word in a way that would be nonsensical to his audience without explaining it

call it "tradition"

but words have meaning in context

and when paired with that verb, the meaning is pretty clear

I need to locate a post... give me sec...

ok, but if you would allow me to continue, i believe the context supports this

I couldn't find it. Spirit is a fluid. That is why he uses the word

The gifts don't come in boxes.

@Ruminator ? so that would be the liquid itself being measured then

still not a measuring device

PS I disagree with that interpretation, but interesting

mostly because spirit is not in the context

but let's keep going

i see we will likely not see eye to eye

In English we translate pneumata as "gifts" but...

but i think what i show you will still be helpful, even if you discard portions of it (pun intended) :P

:)

ok I see your point then, but by that logic a butterfly is an airborne dairy product

etymology is not an indicator of meaning in context

but let's keep rolling

paul leads with indicating what he is about to say is "by the grace given" to him

so the apportionment, if you will, is determined by God

By which he is referring to his apostleship

as the following statement says

he goes on to point out there are many members in the one body

Eph 3:7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

that have different functions

again, you keep citing stuff from other contexts

Keep going...

i'm focusing on the actual language of this text

we can interpret it in light of his other statements

but it's a discipline to first observe before we interpret and apply

Sorry I interupted

no prob

so he goes on to indicate we have different grace-gifts

or gracious gifts

according to grace given us

so here again is a relationship

κατὰ τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσαν ἡμῖν == according to the grace given to us

That's a tricky sentence to me

but this is not measuring individual giftas

gifts

remember our plural audience

and the focus on allotment/measure is the difference between the gifts

so the issue here is not that someone has a different measure of grace and so they have a weaker gift

As in "quantity"?

but instead, the allotment has to do with which gifts

"as he wills"

sorry, different context

I think I agree so far

I already explained the silent verb issue in my answer, so won't repeat that here

but insert that all here haha

moving on from that, then, v. 6 clearly uses the word "proportion" (ἀναλογίαν)

κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῆς πίστεως == according to the proportion of faith/fulness

That is void of meaing

while you may argue what you will about μέτρον, ἀναλογία is a "proportion"

One sec...

siding with translating πίστις as "faithfulness" (breaking with the traditional interpretation as simply "faith")

I think your issue here is you may be making this all about salvation/soteriology (a highly Protestant and anachronistic way of reading this text in my opinion)

but we could get into a huge discussion of the whole point of Romans

plenty of ink has been spilled on this in the past - but I certainly break with tradition in this arena (if tradition == western Christianity, especially Protestantism)

i.e. each gift is accompanied by a distribution of commitment or fidelity adequate for implementing the gift [s. Ro 12:3 ὡς ὁ θεὸς ἐμέρισεν μέτρον πίστεως]) Ro 12:6. For the understanding of πίστις here in the sense of ‘the Christian faith’ s. πίστις 3.

"fidelity to the Christian faith"

yes

Prophesy must be evaluated by its consistency with the faith.

no

yes and no i mean

depends if i am understanding correctly

May I reference other Pauline writings on the gifts?

can we hold off for just a minute?

Of prophesy?

Oka

yes, but let's get through this real quick

I'm not going past v. 6

so almost done

I'm all ears

so all in context

plural audience here

one body, many members

he is speaking to EVERYONE

(in this audience)

God has apportioned a measure of faithfulness to each, and we have difference functions in the body and different gifts according to grace given to us

if prophecy, then to the proportion of faithfulness (given by God)

he sets this up speaking of being transformed and discernment of god's will (with a relationship between the two)

here is a quote from Hermeneia commentary you will love:

so it could be interpreted as you say, even if we leave "measure" as is

hopefully this makes sense

Well I do love the quote.

But it is speaking of "measuring rods" not of "measuring cups".

the members themselves are the measuring devices (commensurate to their transformation)

So I think it agrees with me but not with the quanitity thing

which is explained as their "measure of faithfulness"

they are synonymous

haha my point is

the translation is still "measure of faith", but the interpretation still kinda works

BUT

Hermeneia agrees with you

so i wanted to share

Here is their translation:

now citing that would be much more powerful for your argument

I do so appreciate your sharing that with me.

I will add it to my answer.

the key thing with that interpretation is that it relies on throwing out the verb μερίζω

which i disagree with

so he takes the stance that the verb was not originally there

in which case your reading works

but if μερίζω is present, then your reading would not make sense

so you have to deal with the textual criticism here

and adopt a (very) minority reading of the text

It works because of the fact that the distribution of the xarismata is the allotment of a fluid

1) you are taking a word found in letter to corinth and not in letter to Rome

It's still Paul

the combination of the verb with the word just wouldn't make sense

2) it still doesn't work in context

Paul writing about the gifts

we'll have to agree to disagree unless you can find the article that elaborates on that argument in much more depth

Or rather, the influences of the spirit

One thing I'm sure of, a "mathematical ratio of faithfulness that God gave" makes no sense, "transformed" or not.

It's a word salad.

again, i think it refers to distinguishing between functions/gifts

and the proportion of faithfulness to exercise them

Paul is providing a new way of thinking about how to value the gifts

Not too high, but just right

IF one's faithfulness results in better gifts then it changes the whole story

Okay, well again, I so appreciate your taking time to beat this thing to death together.

but to give you more fodder (i like taking both perspectives)

your better argument is focusing on audience

paul is addressing everyone" / *all in his audience

παντὶ τῷ ὄντι ἐν ὑμῖν

We don't have to agree on everything nor all at once. I'll take your discomfort with how I handle merizo very seriously.

if someone's self-image depended on the quantity of faith (again, I don't agree with this interpretation of πίστις here), then one might be entitled to thinking of themselves more highly than they ought

which is at odds with what Paul just said

Exactly

The gifts are according to the grace of God

But we think wisely about "performance" when we apply the proper criteria which is different for each gift

Instead of comparing ourselves with others

but "measure" is, I believe, ambiguous (in Greek as in English)

your interpretation is valid

IE: Using others (who have completely different gifts and callings) as our measuring stick instead of the criteria Paul lays out.

but there is no need to translate it into the text

so i am reading Hermeneia and it's making me question my own stance here

they actually make an argument using this verb

Is that available online?

so you could keep the verb and still use "measuring rod"

no it's quite expensive too

i can quote it

Lol

Figures

:)

FYI I deleted most of my comments on your answer since they were all migrated into chat

you may wish to do the same

the link to the chat room will remain

so we will be able to go back and see all comments

cleans up the comment history

Well I'm in complete agreement with Hermenia.

I'll delete all my comments.

Again, thanks so much and have a great evening.

no prob

i would only consider one thing more

perhaps ask a new question and self-answer about the translation of metron

only because that is not really the question being asked here

you don't have to

Good idea; I'll do that.

but likely to get more upvotes

at least you'll get one from me!

Nice

on the question and answer

as it reads, it seems more you had a point to make about metron and you used this question as an occasion to make it

trust me - i love learning stuff like this and discussing it

It is the key

rather than answering the question

Yup, me too

but this is a Q&A site

not a discussion forum

it can be frustrating at times because it's like approaching the text with your arms tied behind your back

Any wineskin is confining, but this site strikes a pretty good balance

but i think the discipline is well worth it

I agree

My only real complaint is the anonymous down votes - yuck

post link to question and answer when you're done as a reminder to me to go back and vote

Anonymous, unexplained down votes

Post it here?

On the chat?

Okay, will do

@Ruminator yes, here in chat

well i should lay down my cards on DV's

:P

that is my opinion

I'm fading. Until next time...

@Ruminator not sure if you have access to NT Wright's Kingdom NT, but here is how he translates this:

vv. 3,6: "Through the grace which was given to me, I have this to say to each one of you: don't think of yourselves more highly than you ought to think. Rather, think soberly, in line with faith, the true standard which God has marked out for each of you.... Well then, we have gifts that differ in accordance with the grace that has been given to us, and we must use them appropriately. If it is prophecy, we must prophesy according to the pattern of the faith."

Here's the link to the new question: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/34842/…

I think I'll wait and provide my answer only if I don't obtain a satisfactory one from anyone else.

Again, thanks for the koinania.

Wright makes "the Christian faith" the one ruler for all the gifts whereas Paul's point (and his examples that follow) is that each gift requires its own measuring device because they are all different. For example, the quality of "giving" is measured in how free the giving is from "strings attached" (IE: "simplicity"). But I think he's closer than most.

@Ruminator well, if you want - I'll take a stab at it ;)

@Ruminator same - you've made me reconsider my interpretation of this passage

it is difficult because a lot of commentaries read later ideas into this text, especially in v. 6 concerning the regula fidei ("rule of faith" (KJV), "analogy of faith")

@Ruminator yeah, I thought it was interesting as a third approach I hadn't even considered

@Ruminator your question actually ties this to sober-mindedness, which actually I think is a wordplay

If you're up for it, I'd love it if you did answer. I think you have a better handle on the issue of juxtaposing "apportion" with "metron" than I do and why that might have influenced translators.

And now you have me curious about the word play.

regula fidei, as a creed, is, of course to my mind, just Catholic shenanigans.

@Ruminator originally it was just a fancy term for an early Christian creed

see

@Ruminator well the word play points me more towards interpreting measure in 12:3 as "limit"

but it doesn't require it

the wordplay is using the stem φρον- ("think, be minded") in four ways in this section of the letter

(it also shows up in 11:20, 25)

but this wordplay shows up a lot in the language outside of the NT as well, in a way the readers would have been familiar with (Socrates, Homer)

but with the addition of linking it to sober, I could write PAGES to explain it all haha

I don't have time

and it's tricky because I disagree with the Hermeneia commentators but find a lot of their background information helpful

they seem to bring a strong Protestant theological backdrop to the text that I don't share

but a simplified answer could come just from this quote:

but they precede this with pages of discussion about "the classical concept of sobriety"

For me, the quotes last night were spot on and less diffuse than the Jewett one but post as you see fit. We all see partially.

(From a unique point of view)