Hot, Cold or Lukewarm?

[Smalcald]

Well it is one way of looking at cold, and I don't think it is invalid at all. Although I think the way I was thinking of lukewarm, it does not mean almost faithful, or almost there, it means a blindness which does not produce repentance, thus the Lord needs to smack their eyes open to get their attention, and thus the need for the severe letter and tone.

No, it's a language. It either is or isn't...there is not a "varied way" to look at it.

What? Oh Ak you know better than that language is rich, varied and always with subtleties of meaning and context. The word you are discussing is not cold though. so I don't see any sort of straightforward interpretation here about exactly what is meant by cold at

[Kabowd]

Well it is one way of looking at cold, and I don't think it is invalid at all. Although I think the way I was thinking of lukewarm, it does not mean almost faithful, or almost there, it means a blindness which does not produce repentance, thus the Lord needs to smack their eyes open to get their attention, and thus the need for the severe letter and tone.

No, it's a language. It either is or isn't...there is not a "varied way" to look at it.

What? Oh Ak you know better than that language is rich, varied and always with subtleties of meaning and context. The word you are discussing is not cold though. so I don't see any sort of straightforward interpretation here about exactly what is meant by cold at

See my previous post..

[Fiosh]

Oh I think fiosh and I just cross posted the same idea!

That's ok, smalcald, there's safety in numbers!

[apothanein kerdos]

Well it is one way of looking at cold, and I don't think it is invalid at all. Although I think the way I was thinking of lukewarm, it does not mean almost faithful, or almost there, it means a blindness which does not produce repentance, thus the Lord needs to smack their eyes open to get their attention, and thus the need for the severe letter and tone.

No, it's a language. It either is or isn't...there is not a "varied way" to look at it.

What? Oh Ak you know better than that language is rich, varied and always with subtleties of meaning and context. The word you are discussing is not cold though. so I don't see any sort of straightforward interpretation here about exactly what is meant by cold at

No, certain things in Greek are not varied. That's a myth. Not everything is. Such as in English, some things are varied, others are not. That is merely post-modernism seeping into our interpretation of language. Likewise, I'm showing the two are a connecting thought. I'm saying this shows Jesus is wishing they were BOTH hot AND cold...not "either or."

[Gerioke]

All this arguing over hot and cold when it is luke warmness that is the issue.

[Kabowd]

At this point, I maintain what I stated in post #20. And yeah...I don't think I was too quick to judge at all. Unfortunately.

[apothanein kerdos]

All this arguing over hot and cold when it is luke warmness that is the issue.

One can't understand lukewarm until we understand what "hot" and "cold" are.

[Smalcald]

"Because if we follow the Greek definitions for "rather" and "nor" we understand He was literally saying "I wish you were cold, or I wish you were hot, but you are neither". Thus, it doesn't matter what "cold" means....we can conclude Christ wished that we would be EITHER hot OR cold. Cold could not be "lost" or bad because He would never wish that."

You have made several major jumps here; none of them are totally supported. I agree and we don't need a Greek lexicon to understand that Christ said very specifically that He would prefer them to be hot or cold rather than lukewarm.

But I would disagree on your interpretation, there is nothing worse than a person who does not believe they need repentance, and indeed a person who is lost and feels the need for repentance, who is cold toward Christ is actually closer to Christ than a charlatan Christian. This actually fits perfectly with the teachings of Christ. Who did Christ save His most severe condemnation for? The whores, the thieves, the drunkards none of whom knew God at all, all were totally lost, BUT they felt the need for the Gospel, they knew they were sinners in need of healing, no they were not condemned by Christ because they had a chance. But the Jewish religious leaders with their theology, their pride, their loud public prayers (they probably were the first to pray at football games), their pretend piety, this is who He held his harshest condemnation for, because they were blind they didn't think they needed to repent, thus He smacked them with harsh language, because indeed He hoped for their salvation, just as He hoped for the salvation of the Church in this letter.

I think the bible uses complex language, and I think Christ provides us with interesting insights, this is one of those passages.

[Gerioke]

All this arguing over hot and cold when it is luke warmness that is the issue.

One can't understand lukewarm until we understand what "hot" and "cold" are.

I live in Canada. I've dealt with both extremes on a yearly and sometimes daily basis. Everybody seems to agree for the most part on luke warm. What else is there to understand?

[Fiosh]

Hey, ak, can we take another go at this?

"It actually is important for us to determine what Christ means by "cold nor hot" because this effects the application of the verse. I would submit further evidence that because "nor" (oute) is a conjuction, it means "both" not "either/or." In other words, in the first half of the sentence, Jesus is saying, "You're not cold and likewise you're not hot..." This is the first part...they are neither refreshing or showing a zeal for the Lord. Jesus says that He would prefer they at least have one of these attributes, because then they would be useful. Saying "cold" refers to absolute denial of God and that lukewarm is somewhere in between doesn't fit in the context. Verse 17 shows us their sin; apathy and contentment; this would be "cold" if we took cold to mean what everyone is saying it means. "

Now, I'm no expert at exegesis (not even sure I spelled it right) but I'm not following you.

1. You said: "nor" (oute) is a conjuction, it means "both" not "either/or

My Strong's has "neither or nor"

So, in effect, nor means nor. Simple enough.

Jesus says, " ...you are neither cold nor hot". He is telling the Laodiceans that they are not hot and they are not cold. Ok.

2. Verse 17: "For you say..." preceded by "...because you are lukewarm..."

This refers back to "I will spit you out of my mouth"....which refers back to "because you are lukewarm".

Therefore, because they say they are in need of nothing (presumably including what Jesus offers) they are lukewarm.

All that being said, it really has nothing to do with the meaning of cold.