Note how the meaning (word slide) goes from "good speaking" and "flattery" to that of "blessing" in the modern English sense.

The "flattery" is sometimes of the nature of "opinion", same as "glory", or "value", same as "honor".

In creating puns, one often has to make up words or slide the pronunciation of the words to fit the context.

As an expert in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Latin, Paul sometimes uses puns to convey his intended meaning.

Jesus also uses puns but those can be harder to detect as the translation of Aramaic into Greek does not always include the pun.

The context is near the end of the last chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans. Paul is spending specific greetings, etc., to those on Rome. Let us pick up in the previous verse.


I remember some Sunday School teachers, pastors and others spending what seemed an excessive amount of time on this verse. Once the following four verses are appreciated one can see why one might want to spend a lot of time on this verse - to avoid getting in too much of a discussion of the following verses. Here they are, one at a time.

There are those who create "divisions" and "offenses" that should be "marked" - as in "taken notice of".

The "divisions" have to do with splitting a group into two (or more) parts.

The "offenses" is the Greek word for "stumbling block" is in creating obstacles to what is to be accomplished.

What type of "divisions" and "offenses" are being identified? The type of "divisions" and "offenses" are being identified are those that are "contrary" or "beyond" the "doctrine" which had been "learned" - that is , as taught to them by Paul.

Whatever those are, they should be "avoided" as in "eschewed" or "not followed" or "condoned" or "promoted".

There is a Dilbert cartoon that I remember, but not the exact words. It goes something like the following.

• The boss announces at a meeting that such and such a behavior is no longer legal (as in not tolerated)
• Wally then asks if that behavior was legal before (as in tolerated before).

The connection to the above verse is the following question, and it has to do with how one parses the sentence structure.

Here is the question.

Is it acceptable to cause "divisions" and "offenses" if one does it according to the "doctrine" they had been taught? Assume it is the correct "doctrine" as taught by Paul.

This could happen if, say, the leadership of the church were teaching a false "doctrine". It could happen if all or part the congregation were condoning or promoting a false "doctrine".

Let us continue.

The "they" appear to be those causing "division" and "offenses". They are not serving the doctrine taught by Jesus but serving their own purposes - their "belly" as one would refer to food, wealth and other things satisfying to the "they".

The "they" use "good words" and "fair speeches" to "deceive" the "simple".

In the security field, it is recognized that about 80% of security problems or issues come from inside the organization, not as external threats.

More: Inside security threats

The "they" appear to be inside the church. There are two primary categories for the "they" (not mutually exclusive, could be both).

• The leadership of the church.
• All others in the church.

Let us try to narrow down the choices.

Which "they" are more likely to be serving their own "belly"? One new pastor at a church I attended told me, when asked about helping to teach, that he got into the ministry so he could be the one speaking - not others. It eventually became apparent that he wanted to mix in his own ideas with the Bible without having to answer (to the congregation or others) for any inconsistency of those ideas (in his sermons) with what the Bible actually says.

For some, their belly might be honor and glory instead of just wealth or power.

For some, it is promulgating their own ideas - as appears to be included in what Paul is saying.

It might be related to the saying that "misery loves company" or that evil men like darkness and company in that darkness. As the pastor in the example above is fond of saying, we are "better together". It is not clear from the Bible where this might be inferred.

Paul appears to have made up the modern Greek word "χρηστολογίας" (hree-sto-lo-Y-as) ≈ "good words, useful words" as in "expedient words". This made-up word has two parts.

• The suffix is the modern Greek word "λόγος" (LO-gos) ≈ "word" and from which we get English words such as "logic" and words ending in "-ology"
• The prefix is the modern Greek word "χρηστός" (hree-STOS) ≈ "useful" where "useful" is as in "good".
• The modern Greek word "χριστός" (hree-STOS) ≈ "Christ, anointed one" .

In the ancient Greek, this might be expressed as "expedient explanations" or "expedient rationale".

Today, the words for "Christ" and "useful" would be pronounced the same, but at that time there was some small distinction between the way the words were pronounced.

So, in this verse, Paul uses "Christ" first and then "useful" as a prefix for "words". The "they" are using "useful" Christ-like "words" but not actually the words of "Christ".

How many church leaders say "good words" to the congregation rather than "Christ's words"?

For more information, see the following: 2 Timothy 4:1-5 The moving ethics of tinnitus and itching ears

In the KJV, the second word,used by Paul in Romans 16:18 is "fair speeches". This is the modern Greek word "ευλογία" (ev-lo-Y-a) ≈ "good words, blessing, praise" which is composed of two parts.

• The modern Greek prefix "ευ" (ev) ≈ "good".
• The modern Greek word "λόγος" (LO-gos) ≈ "word" and from which we get English words such as "logic" and words ending in "-ology"

The word means, literally, "good word" and is the source of the English word "eulogy".

• The Latin word "beati" ≈ "happy, fortunate, blessed" and is the origin of the English word "beatitude" and the name of the "Beatitudes".

Latin has one word for which Greek has two separate words for "happy" and "fortunate" which, in English, are lumped together as "blessed".

The Latin word "benedixit" ≈ "blessed" which is the source of the English word "benediction".

The Latin word "benedico" ≈ "speak well of" and is from two Latin parts.

• The Latin word "bene" ≈ "well" and is the source of the English word "benefit".
• The Latin word "dico" ≈ "speak" and is the source of the English words "diction", "dictionary", etc.

So the "fair speeches" comes from the Greek word for "good words" or "blessings".

Have you ever heard a pastor or speaker tell the congregation that they are "blessed"?

Today calling someone "simple" has the connotation of being "simple minded" or "not very smart".

In Amish areas of country, the Amish are sometimes called "plain folk".

The term "simple" in the KJV is the modern Greek word "άκακος" (A-ka-kos) ≈ "not bad, not evil" and has the connotation of those people who are not trying to be bad or evil but will believe what their teachers tell them - that is, perhaps too trusting.

In the LXX (Septuagint), the Greek word used here for "simple" has the idea of those with "integrity".

As I was growing up, I realized that whenever someone added the phrase "for the good of the people" it was almost always not "for the good of the people" but good for them personally (in some way).

How can someone "know nothing at all"? Can the know that?

More: Ignorance of agnostic lack of belief

The Greek double negative comes through in the Old English Wessex Gospels but has disappeared in the Middle English Tyndale translation.

More: Do not no way use double negatives

Note the change from the hard "g" to the softer "y" sound from Old English to Middle English.

More: Germanic g to English y

Paul uses a pun contrasting "Christ words" with "useful words" or "good words" and then, telling others that they are "blessed" using, again, "good words".

The interesting part of these verses is when one allows the "they" to include not just the followers in the church, but the church leaders as those who may be causing "division" and "offenses".

For completeness, the following two verses in this four verse sequence are as follows.

In this verse, we have the common change that appears in Revelation of changing "quickly" to "shortly" or "soon".

As in Revelation, the change is from "when it happens it will happen quickly" to "it will happen soon".

Of course, since many of these things have not happened in two thousand years, there are a number of views that can be taken.

• The Bible is wrong about this idea of it happening "soon".
• The translators were wrong about how they translated the original text.
• What the Bible says and what has happened in history needs to be altered to (somewhat) plausibly fit together