# Hilarious Giving 2 Cor 9:7



## TheSeer

2 Cor 9:7 says "...God loves a cheerful giver." A recent teaching that seems to be popping up is "hilarious" giving. For example, Rick Warren uses it in lesson 6 of his 40 Days of Community program. The explanation is that the word translated as "cheerful" is hilaros, which is the root of "hilarious". Therefore, we should be giving "hilariously". 

A defintion of hilarious I find on the web is 
""¢	marked by or causing boisterous merriment or convulsive laughter; "hilarious broad comedy"; "a screaming farce"; "uproarious stories" 
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn"

"convulsive laughter" is quite a bit different than cheerful!

So, my question for everyone is whether "hilarious" is a proper representation of the meaning of Scripture? And, if it is, why wasn't it translated that way to begin with in KJV etc.? Am I off base in thinking this is yet another "new" teaching designed to tickle the ears?


----------



## alwaysreforming

I've heard this too, and I'm not convinced. I think the problem lies when people "commenting" on the Scriptures try to make too much out of etymology, or the root of the word and where it comes from. It is very easy to do, and when you do it, everybody is in awe over your "deep understanding of the Scriptures".

Its kind of like saying, "Well, since the word "tip" actually means "To insure promptness", it is actually supposed to be given UP FRONT and not at the end of the meal!

You see? Its a "new teaching", its novel, and nobody's ever heard it before so you get a lot of mileage out of it. However, in practical sense, this is not how the word "tip" is used and to claim that is origin backs up your new teaching is misguided.

So what if we get the English word "hilarious" from that particular Greek word. Does it really translate into that particular application? I think not. I think we're getting our "ears tickled" as you said.

Etymology is not always the best way to interpret a certain word out of the Scriptures. Its more important to know HOW the word was used in its contemporary setting (in my opinion), because that is how the hearers would interpret the word, generally.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia

It is the root-word fallacy.


----------



## alwaysreforming

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> It is the root-word fallacy.



It took me 165 words to say what you said in 6! What's that famous quote about brevity?


----------



## brymaes

> It is the root-word fallacy.



Yeah, defining a word based on it's English cognate is a tactic of first-year Greek dropouts!


----------



## Herald

> _Originally posted by SharperSword_
> 
> 
> 
> It is the root-word fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, defining a word based on it's English cognate is a tactic of first-year Greek dropouts!
Click to expand...


I love a good English cognate on a cold winters eve. Oh...I mean cognac. Sorry. Wrong etymology.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

> _Originally posted by alwaysreforming_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> It is the root-word fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It took me 165 words to say what you said in 6! What's that famous quote about brevity?
Click to expand...


Brevity is the soul of wit. (Shakespeare)


----------



## gwine

Kind of like the Greek word dynamos, which means power. So we should say the Christ will come in explosions?



> Yeah, defining a word based on it's English cognate is a tactic of first-year Greek dropouts!



That's where I am at in Greek. Some have the gift of language, others can barely handle their mother tongue.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia

Kinda like baptizo.


----------



## TheSeer

Thanks everyone for your replies. Rick Warren used the "hilarious giving" teaching in lesson 6 of his "40 Days of Community" program. We're a "host" home. This is my first exposure to Warren's teachings, and so far I'm unimpressed. We got in trouble the first week when my wife took issue with Warren's statement that if you don't have love, it doesn't matter what you believe. I can't wait till the last meeting is over - its been a rough 5 weeks so far.


----------



## fredtgreco

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by alwaysreforming_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> It is the root-word fallacy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It took me 165 words to say what you said in 6! What's that famous quote about brevity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brevity is the soul of wit. (Shakespeare)
Click to expand...


Atque dicas:

Brevitas et claritas.


----------



## daveb

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> It is the root-word fallacy.



Good catch.


----------



## brymaes

> Kinda like baptizo.



Actually, root fallacy and cognate fallacy are slightly different...

(I'm a Baptist who doesn't argue about mode...)

[Edited on 11-3-2005 by SharperSword]


----------



## Jeremy

I believe that PDR is up to about 20 million copies sold now...

everyone loves it!!



I didn't know that the teachings of Christ's followers would be so well received...
Last time I checked, Jesus said...

"Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." - Luke 6:26

(My reference to PDL goes back to the initial post about Rick Warren.)

[Edited on 11-3-2005 by Jeremy]


----------



## Robin

> _Originally posted by TheSeer_
> 2 Cor 9:7 says "...God loves a cheerful giver." A recent teaching that seems to be popping up is "hilarious" giving. For example, Rick Warren uses it in lesson 6 of his 40 Days of Community program. The explanation is that the word translated as "cheerful" is hilaros, which is the root of "hilarious". Therefore, we should be giving "hilariously".



Of course, Warren is going to press this teaching. He is the one laughing all the way to the bank! (....erp....did I say that?)



Robin


----------



## TheSeer

> _Originally posted by SharperSword_
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda like baptizo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, root fallacy and cognate fallacy are slightly different...
> 
> (I'm a Baptist who doesn't argue about mode...)
> 
> [Edited on 11-3-2005 by SharperSword]
Click to expand...


Hey guys, this is The Seer's wife. Great posts so far, but please clarify for me: what is the "root fallacy" and what is the "cognate fallacy" please? I get the gist of the root fallacy but I'm clueless about the cognate fallacy, unless that was just a joke, in which case, of course, haha!


----------



## Robin

> _Originally posted by alwaysreforming_
> I've heard this too, and I'm not convinced. I think the problem lies when people "commenting" on the Scriptures try to make too much out of etymology, or the root of the word and where it comes from. It is very easy to do, and when you do it, everybody is in awe over your "deep understanding of the Scriptures".
> 
> Its kind of like saying, "Well, since the word "tip" actually means "To insure promptness", it is actually supposed to be given UP FRONT and not at the end of the meal!
> 
> You see? Its a "new teaching", its novel, and nobody's ever heard it before so you get a lot of mileage out of it. However, in practical sense, this is not how the word "tip" is used and to claim that is origin backs up your new teaching is misguided.
> 
> So what if we get the English word "hilarious" from that particular Greek word. Does it really translate into that particular application? I think not. I think we're getting our "ears tickled" as you said.
> 
> Etymology is not always the best way to interpret a certain word out of the Scriptures. Its more important to know HOW the word was used in its contemporary setting (in my opinion), because that is how the hearers would interpret the word, generally.



Chris has some very solid points here!

I think Chris meant to say we are best-off to consider how the word was used in its own context and how the original hearers would have understood it.

The point Scripture is making is that tithing is NOT required: we gain no merit by doing it; God loves a giver with a free-conscious, giving from a sense of gratitude and trust in the Lord. Not giving out of coercion. 

Hmmmm.....I wonder if Rick Warren's marketing tactics are coercive? Hmmmmm....


----------



## alwaysreforming

> _Originally posted by TheSeer_
> 
> 
> 
> _Originally posted by SharperSword_
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda like baptizo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, root fallacy and cognate fallacy are slightly different...
> 
> (I'm a Baptist who doesn't argue about mode...)
> 
> [Edited on 11-3-2005 by SharperSword]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hey guys, this is The Seer's wife. Great posts so far, but please clarify for me: what is the "root fallacy" and what is the "cognate fallacy" please? I get the gist of the root fallacy but I'm clueless about the cognate fallacy, unless that was just a joke, in which case, of course, haha!
Click to expand...



The "Root Fallacy" says that you can determine what a word is supposed to mean by looking at the different roots or parts that make up the word. I'm racking my brain trying to think of an English example and drawing a blank. Maybe someone could post one to make the point clear. You could say the word "Comfort" is made up of the roots "com"=with, and "fort"=strength, therefore "comfort" may mean "with strength". (Although we usually don't use it like that anymore). However, sometimes you put two roots together like that, and it has NO relation to what the word actually means.

And the "Cognate Fallacy", I believe, is when the root of the foreign word is the same as the root of the English word and therefore we equate the two words in meaning. Sometimes the two (or many times) MAY have a similar meaning, but this isn't always the case.


----------



## Robin

> _Originally posted by alwaysreforming_
> The "Root Fallacy" says that you can determine what a word is supposed to mean by looking at the different roots or parts that make up the word. I'm racking my brain trying to think of an English example and drawing a blank. Maybe someone could post one to make the point clear. You could say the word "Comfort" is made up of the roots "com"=with, and "fort"=strength, therefore "comfort" may mean "with strength". (Although we usually don't use it like that anymore). However, sometimes you put two roots together like that, and it has NO relation to what the word actually means.



Starbuck's ad campaign this month is "Comfort, by the Cup."

Depending on if you order a triple espresso, the meaning applies. If you ordered a chai, it wouldn't. Right?

(impishly) 

r.

[Edited on 11-3-2005 by Robin]


----------

