Jarthur001
Active Member
Brother Bob said:
Bob,
I was not removed. I was never there. You posed the greek yourself. IT IS NOT THERE!! what more can be said? If you show me it in the greek, i'll be happy for ya.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Hebrews 6:4-6
- Thread starter saturneptune
- Start date
- Status
Bob,
I was not removed. I was never there. You posed the greek yourself. IT IS NOT THERE!! what more can be said? If you show me it in the greek, i'll be happy for ya.
Brother Bob
New Member
Why is everyone else wrong James and you are right? Why don't you want that word IF to be in there when the Lord put it there James?
Parallel Verses
KJV:If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
WBS:If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they {d} crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
(d) As men that hate Christ, and as though they crucified him again, making a mockery of him to all the world, to their own destruction, as Julian the Apostate or backslider did.
6:6 If they shall fall away. Apostasize from the faith.
To renew them unto repentance. He is so far fallen that he has no capacity left for repentance. Judas the Apostate sorrowed, but his sorrows became despair. There was remorse but not repentance.
(IF)= και παραπεσοντας παλιν ανακαινιζειν εις μετανοιαν ανασταυρουντας εαυτοις τον υιον του θεου και παραδειγματιζοντας
http://original.biblebrowser.com/greek/2531.htm
apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words
and, also, both, but, even, for, IF, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.
Parallel Verses
KJV:If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
WBS:If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they {d} crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
(d) As men that hate Christ, and as though they crucified him again, making a mockery of him to all the world, to their own destruction, as Julian the Apostate or backslider did.
6:6 If they shall fall away. Apostasize from the faith.
To renew them unto repentance. He is so far fallen that he has no capacity left for repentance. Judas the Apostate sorrowed, but his sorrows became despair. There was remorse but not repentance.
(IF)= και παραπεσοντας παλιν ανακαινιζειν εις μετανοιαν ανασταυρουντας εαυτοις τον υιον του θεου και παραδειγματιζοντας
http://original.biblebrowser.com/greek/2531.htm
2532. kai (kahee)
apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words
and, also, both, but, even, for, IF, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jarthur001
Active Member
Brother Bob said:
You keep posting translations. It is in many translations, but it is not in any greek. That is it for me. I wouldn't mind if it was there, for it would be easy to understand. But the fact is...it is not there. Post 1000 translations, and its still not in the greek. It has nothing to do with me....it has all to do with if you can find it.
Believe what you want Bob.
Brother Bob
New Member
Amazing all the Bible translators, Strongs believe its there but not James.
This is a verse of a Greek song translated by a Greek on a Greek forum by the name of eki.
You will see that the word και is IF in the English language. I guess the translators knew what they were doing after all.
Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως και τώρα αν σε δω θα σου πω σ αγαπώ,but If I See You Now I Will Still Say To You "i Love You"
If anyone wants to believe otherwise then so be it. I just hate for someone to put up laughing faces at me and call me ignornant in one place and it turns out that he is the one who is wrong.
This is a verse of a Greek song translated by a Greek on a Greek forum by the name of eki.
You will see that the word και is IF in the English language. I guess the translators knew what they were doing after all.
Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως και τώρα αν σε δω θα σου πω σ αγαπώ,but If I See You Now I Will Still Say To You "i Love You"
If anyone wants to believe otherwise then so be it. I just hate for someone to put up laughing faces at me and call me ignornant in one place and it turns out that he is the one who is wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
So, this is the correct quote IMO from the KJV.
Hebrew 6:4-6
4: For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5: And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6: If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Hebrew 6:4-6
4: For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5: And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6: If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Well, I'll try ("Sigh!"), but I really expect to only :BangHead:. Am I wrong in my expectations?Brother Bob said:
How am I doing so far? Did'jall notice they are all exactly the same, in this phrase? Not even one letter of controversy, here?? There are two words in 'Koine Greek', that I'm aware of, that are normally rendered as "if", depending on the Greek 'mood'. They are "εαν" (uncertainty) - #1437, and "ει" (certainty) - #1487 in 'Strong's' numbering system, for some who don't have quck access to'Thayer' or 'Bauer'. Did you notice either of the two "ifs" in any of the above citings, or did I overlook it, somehow?
BTW, "και" is translated as "and" (#2532), and "παραπεσοντας " is the aorist participle ("τας" is the participle ending) of "παραπιπτω" - to fall aside (#3895), (or fall away, Biblically). Thus "και παραπεσοντας " means and should read "and having fallen aside" (or fallen away).
As well as many that don't, there still are several versions that do more or less get it right, here. Among them are the TNIV (don't know why the NIV didn't), WYC, NIRV, HCSB, DARBY, YLT, ASV, and NASB.
Here are three of those:
YLT: and having fallen away, again to renew [them] to reformation, havingcrucified again to themselves the Son of God, and exposed to public shame.
DARBY: and have fallen away, crucifying for themselves [as they do] the Son of God, and making a show of [him].
HCSB: and who have fallen away, because, [b] to their own harm, they are recrucifying the Son of God and holding Him up to contempt.(D)
And I would add, there is a parallel passage speaking of this 'shaming' of the Lord, in Hebrews 10:20-32.
I fully agree, with the general tenor of these posts, that this is in no way talking about losing one's eternal salvation. It is a once, for all time, event. We, are "born again" when we believeth in Him". We receive everlasting life. We are not, and nowhere does Scripture ever say this, born again, and again, and again, and again, and ag..., as regards our eternal salvation. Nor do we receive 'everlasting life' until we sin again, or until we sin twice, or three times, or fifty-three times or how-many-times-ever, or until we 'sin a sin', that is 'rated', as opposed to a 'One', a 'Magnitude Two or Three or Four, or Five or Six', such as astronomers rank stars.
Brother Bob has often mentioned a "sin unto death". Can a Christian do this? Yep! In addition, we may or may not be 'judged' in this life, by the Lord, but He certainy may. And we must all appear before the 'bema'. More judgment, there, as well. So there are several ways the Lord might judge any of us. I would assume He can well accomplish this.
FTR, I'd say over 95% of the time, I use first the NKJV at around 90-92% of the time, guessing, and secondly, the KJV at probably 5-7%, for a total of at least 97% of the time. The reason is that my personal Bible is now an NKJV, which I had to acquire when my 'good' KJV wide margin was taken from my cab, some years ago. But as in any other version, it (neither) is not perfect, nor was it "cast in stone". But as a whole, they NKJV is among the best ones I can find, IMO. Should I buy another, to put side by side, it will probably be an HCSB, one I am finding more and more to like about each time I check it.
Ed
Last edited by a moderator:
You might consider, that 'modern day Greek' is not the 'Koine Greek' as used in the Bible, any more than 'Ancient Greek', 'Classic Greek', or 'Attic Prose' were the same as the Koine Greek . I agree that a modern understanding of the language could be helpful. But I would not take it as 'definitive', by any stretch.Brother Bob said:
FTR, I did a quick read of Thayer, without seeing any Biblical examples of "kai" rendered as "if". I admit, I did not read carefully through all three pages, but I did scan them.
Ed
Sorry, not so. If you have a "hard copy" Strong's and look up "if" at Heb. 6:6, you will note that it does not have a number following it. That means there is not 'textual' basis for the word, it having been supplied by the translators, or is an 'inflexional', explanatory, or auxillary word used in English, assuming one is looking at an English Version or Concordance. Sorry to disappoint any in this. BTW, is there such a thing as a "Strong's" version, outside of 'Bible helps'? Strong was an outstanding Concordance gatherer, as obviously was Young. But if he was a translator, I'm not familiar with it, although it could be, I guess.Brother Bob said:
Ed
Last edited by a moderator:
Jarthur001
Active Member
Indeed....Strong's 1st edition- 35th edition (and most likely beyond the 35th edition)page 511, 1st column...about half way down.EdSutton said:
Ed you brought up Thayer's Lexicon which list the usage as ( and, also, even, indeed, but). I have said all I need to say on this. There is just no Greek support. When I took up this study years ago, it was not there. I'm sure it did not just pop in there in the last 10-15 years.
Barns...Verse 6. If they shall fall away. Literally, "and having fallen away." "There is no if in the Greek in this place--' having fallen away.'" Dr. J. P. Wilson.
JFB 6. If—Greek, "And (yet) have fallen away"; compare a less extreme falling or declension
Last edited by a moderator:
Brandon C. Jones
New Member
I'll back up JArthur on the "if" controversy. I wrote my M.Div. thesis on this subject and the English verses 4-6 are all one sentence. Any attempts to rip this phrase "having fallen away" out of its syntactical context is a mangling of the passage. The people who have fallen away are the same as those who were "enlightened," "tasted," etc. Translators have put the "if" there, but not for firm grammatical reasons. In my opinion, "tous" before "enlightened" governs the following five participles--even "fallen away" and all describe the subject of the sentence. The fifth participle should not be detached from the preceding ones and given a different status in the sentence.
The preceding three participles in this Greek sentence all lack the article and the two participles that precede "having fallen away" are also preceded by a kai. For one to isolate the last participle of this construction and give it such a rogue translation is not warranted by the text itself; there are no clues in the text for the translator(s) to justify giving it a dramatically different translation than the ones that precede it. If this last participle is adverbial (that is if the "if" is right), what is the argument against making the second, third, and fourth participles adverbial too? What's the difference? It seems the difference is not one of syntax but content, which is hardly a good reason to translate something differently than similar elements in the same sentence.
I believe that this sentence shows an approximate Granville-Sharp construction (see Wallace, 633). The author of Hebrews uses "hapax" to only qualify "enlightened" and I believe that the usage of "te" instead of "kai" (hence the approximate G-S construction) after "enlightened" shows a connection that swings both ways and ties the four adjectival participles that follow in a way in which they are all qualifying what the author means by "enlightened" and at the same time tying the subject of the sentence together as one group described by 5 adjectival participles. Thus, isolating the "kai" before the last adjectival participle in this construction and giving it a totally different reading than the other four without any other clues in the Greek text (like an "ei" or "ean" and/or the presence of an apodosis that makes sense in the text-the argument for "if" in verse 6 lacks both things) and giving it a conditional sense is unwarranted by the text and seems to show the theological bends of the translator(s) rather than a good reflection of Greek syntax.
However, to see this one would have to know more than word studies and Strong's and look at the syntax of the Greek sentence (vv. 4-6). I can't answer why many translators argue for the "if" in verse 6, but I think they're wrong. In the end, grammer and syntax can get you to narrow down options and sometimes (more often in the OT) a choice has to be made with a nearly-equal option being rejected by the translator(s). I don't even think using "if" in v. 6 is an example of this because grammar and syntax should rule out such a reading of "having fallen away."
Blessings,
BJ
The preceding three participles in this Greek sentence all lack the article and the two participles that precede "having fallen away" are also preceded by a kai. For one to isolate the last participle of this construction and give it such a rogue translation is not warranted by the text itself; there are no clues in the text for the translator(s) to justify giving it a dramatically different translation than the ones that precede it. If this last participle is adverbial (that is if the "if" is right), what is the argument against making the second, third, and fourth participles adverbial too? What's the difference? It seems the difference is not one of syntax but content, which is hardly a good reason to translate something differently than similar elements in the same sentence.
I believe that this sentence shows an approximate Granville-Sharp construction (see Wallace, 633). The author of Hebrews uses "hapax" to only qualify "enlightened" and I believe that the usage of "te" instead of "kai" (hence the approximate G-S construction) after "enlightened" shows a connection that swings both ways and ties the four adjectival participles that follow in a way in which they are all qualifying what the author means by "enlightened" and at the same time tying the subject of the sentence together as one group described by 5 adjectival participles. Thus, isolating the "kai" before the last adjectival participle in this construction and giving it a totally different reading than the other four without any other clues in the Greek text (like an "ei" or "ean" and/or the presence of an apodosis that makes sense in the text-the argument for "if" in verse 6 lacks both things) and giving it a conditional sense is unwarranted by the text and seems to show the theological bends of the translator(s) rather than a good reflection of Greek syntax.
However, to see this one would have to know more than word studies and Strong's and look at the syntax of the Greek sentence (vv. 4-6). I can't answer why many translators argue for the "if" in verse 6, but I think they're wrong. In the end, grammer and syntax can get you to narrow down options and sometimes (more often in the OT) a choice has to be made with a nearly-equal option being rejected by the translator(s). I don't even think using "if" in v. 6 is an example of this because grammar and syntax should rule out such a reading of "having fallen away."
Blessings,
BJ
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
Again, it seems to me the Greek would know much better than all those who are trying to learn Greek. I find it very interesting that the word IF was by a Greek himself and several translators many years ago. I don't know when the modern Greek has its beginning but some of these translations are very old. I will post the song again translated by a Greek into English.
Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Amazing all the Bible translators, Strongs believe its there but not James.
This is a verse of a Greek song translated by a Greek on a Greek forum by the name of eki.
You will see that the word και is IF in the English language. I guess the translators knew what they were doing after all.
Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως και τώρα αν σε δω θα σου πω σ αγαπώ,but If I See You Now I Will Still Say To You "i Love You"
According to Ed's posts of translations it means they did fall away which would be against OSAS.
He posted three translations showing "and have fallen away" and I posted several which stated "if they shall fall away".
Maybe Ed and James are right but not according to some pretty smart people.
Ed; says not so, Well you can go read the translations for yourself and it is so in the translations and also it is so in Strongs when used with "they" as in "if they" shall fall away to renew them again.......... As a matter of fact I posted them.
KJV:If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
WBS:If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they {d} crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
(d) As men that hate Christ, and as though they crucified him again, making a mockery of him to all the world, to their own destruction, as Julian the Apostate or backslider did.
6:6 If they shall fall away. Apostasize from the faith.
To renew them unto repentance. He is so far fallen that he has no capacity left for repentance. Judas the Apostate sorrowed, but his sorrows became despair. There was remorse but not repentance.
(IF)= και παραπεσοντας παλιν ανακαινιζειν εις μετανοιαν ανασταυρουντας εαυτοις τον υιον του θεου και παραδειγματιζοντας
Now, we have these bright men disagreeing with each other and seems to me we have to choose which one we think is right. Those who translated many years ago or Ed and James. Even the "Textus Receptus" agrees that και means "IF in Greek.
I hope someone on here know some Greek people who are still up to date in Greek and ask them if "kai " means "IF" in Greek language when used with "they".
Originally Posted by Brother Bob
Amazing all the Bible translators, Strongs believe its there but not James.
This is a verse of a Greek song translated by a Greek on a Greek forum by the name of eki.
You will see that the word και is IF in the English language. I guess the translators knew what they were doing after all.
Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως Τώρα πια δεν πηγαίνουμε μαζί σχολείο,now We Don't Go To School Together
τώρα πια δεν καθόμαστε στο ίδιο θρανίο,now We Don't Seat At The Same Desk
τώρα πια δεν μου δίνεις το βιβλίοnow You Don't Give Me The Book Anymore
όμως και τώρα αν σε δω θα σου πω σ αγαπώ,but If I See You Now I Will Still Say To You "i Love You"
According to Ed's posts of translations it means they did fall away which would be against OSAS.
He posted three translations showing "and have fallen away" and I posted several which stated "if they shall fall away".
Maybe Ed and James are right but not according to some pretty smart people.
Ed; says not so, Well you can go read the translations for yourself and it is so in the translations and also it is so in Strongs when used with "they" as in "if they" shall fall away to renew them again.......... As a matter of fact I posted them.
KJV:If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
WBS:If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they {d} crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame.
(d) As men that hate Christ, and as though they crucified him again, making a mockery of him to all the world, to their own destruction, as Julian the Apostate or backslider did.
6:6 If they shall fall away. Apostasize from the faith.
To renew them unto repentance. He is so far fallen that he has no capacity left for repentance. Judas the Apostate sorrowed, but his sorrows became despair. There was remorse but not repentance.
(IF)= και παραπεσοντας παλιν ανακαινιζειν εις μετανοιαν ανασταυρουντας εαυτοις τον υιον του θεου και παραδειγματιζοντας
2532. KJV:If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
WBS:If they shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
Now, we have these bright men disagreeing with each other and seems to me we have to choose which one we think is right. Those who translated many years ago or Ed and James. Even the "Textus Receptus" agrees that και means "IF in Greek.
I hope someone on here know some Greek people who are still up to date in Greek and ask them if "kai " means "IF" in Greek language when used with "they".
Last edited by a moderator:
Brandon C. Jones
New Member
Bob, the argument is not whether "kai" can be translated as "if" in any place at any time. The argument is why kai should be translated as "if" in this last of a string of 4 virtually identical participles in Hebrews 6:4-6 (two of which are also preceded by kai). Why should the fifth participle be translated as an adverbial conditional and get "if" while the others do not? Is there something in the text itself to back you up? Make your case for that beyond the roll call of English translations that do it. Good translations should not be judged by convention in my opinion. Furthermore, the translation of modern songs with little if any parallel to the sentence under discussion in Hebrews is not very relevent in your case.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
There is this scripture that to me says they can't fall along with several others. I think that would be the best argument that kai means if than anything.
Eph 1:13In whom ye also [trusted], after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Now, to believe it says "and they fall" means that God can't keep His people from falling. I am no Greek translator but those who furnished the translated Bible for us to study were and seems if I am making a mistake that they made it over and over and over. Don't make sense. Would someone please tell me why it means so much to you that it don't mean "if". You are telling me that I should disgard all the former translators and after all these years some of you have figured it out that it don't mean "if".
Last edited by a moderator:
Brandon C. Jones
New Member
Well Bob you at least openly confirmed my accusation that people want this to say "if" for reasons foreign to the text itself. You're conflating biblical theology with translation. The level of harmonizing the content of different passages of Scripture with one another is the task of theology not translation. This is not a new thing, though, many manuscripts differ from one another by good-intentioned scribes trying to harmonize content between passages.
Besides, if one does not translate this as "if" why do you assume it means one can lose her salvation? That's not necessarily in the text, and one would have to study the book of Hebrews itself to make that case (especially noting the OT parallels and the salvation status of those who did not enter into the Land of the Promise like Moses but were still saved). Once again, all of this work is done on a theological level and should not drive one's translating of the text.
As to "disregarding" translators, well we stand on their shoulders Bob. We should learn from their mistakes as those who follow us should learn from our mistakes. Should we keep the KJV's insertion of "you hath he quickened" in Ephesians 2:1 when there's no good reason for them to put it there? If not, then why keep "if" if there's no good reason that they put it there?
We condemn translations that replace what they think it should mean theologically without proof in the text itself. Consider the New World translation of John 1:1 "and the word was a god." They can make arguments that anarthrous predicate nominatives are always indefinite. They could cite parallel texts and perhaps songs in modern Greek, but none of that matters if they can't argue for their translation from the text of John 1:1 itself and the book of John as a whole.
It seems your argument is similar to theirs except you also have the argument of the convention of previous translations. If you think that supercedes the content of the text itself than you are free to believe that Bob; I won't stop you.
BJ
Besides, if one does not translate this as "if" why do you assume it means one can lose her salvation? That's not necessarily in the text, and one would have to study the book of Hebrews itself to make that case (especially noting the OT parallels and the salvation status of those who did not enter into the Land of the Promise like Moses but were still saved). Once again, all of this work is done on a theological level and should not drive one's translating of the text.
As to "disregarding" translators, well we stand on their shoulders Bob. We should learn from their mistakes as those who follow us should learn from our mistakes. Should we keep the KJV's insertion of "you hath he quickened" in Ephesians 2:1 when there's no good reason for them to put it there? If not, then why keep "if" if there's no good reason that they put it there?
We condemn translations that replace what they think it should mean theologically without proof in the text itself. Consider the New World translation of John 1:1 "and the word was a god." They can make arguments that anarthrous predicate nominatives are always indefinite. They could cite parallel texts and perhaps songs in modern Greek, but none of that matters if they can't argue for their translation from the text of John 1:1 itself and the book of John as a whole.
It seems your argument is similar to theirs except you also have the argument of the convention of previous translations. If you think that supercedes the content of the text itself than you are free to believe that Bob; I won't stop you.
BJ
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
Brandon;
You are not only disagreeing with me and matters not why I say it is "if". But why all the Greek dictionaries saying that it means "if" while in conjuction with I suppose "they".
Here is another Greek dictionary and not Strong's that says the same thing and talking about the very verse we are discussing and I doubt if they have a hidden reason for it but maybe you know of one.
Greek
kai <2532>
kai kai
Pronunciation:kaheeOrigin:apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative forceReference
rtSpch:conjunctionIn Greek:kai 6856, [kai] 16, [kai 7, [[kai 5, kai] 1In NET:and 5402, Then 315, also 220, but 176, So 168, He 116, Now 72, too 62, When 62, Even 59, They 53, yet 41, or 33, 33, Both 20, Thus 8, along 5, The 4, nor 4, with 3, indeed 3, Furthermore 2, Though 2, forty-two 2, As 1, to 1, eighteen 1, forty-six 1, powerful 1, than 1, associated 1, by 1, else 1, Neither 1, without 1, thirty-eight 1, Consequently 1, answered 1, For 1, not 1, because 1, hence 1, Just 1, on 1In AV:and 8173, also 514, even 108, both 43, then 20, so 18,and 8173, also 514, even 108, both 43, then 20, so 18, likewise 13, not tr. 350, misc 31, vr and 1Count:9251Definition:1) and, also, even, indeed, but apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also
a cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in
connection (or composition) with other particles or small words:-and,
also, both, but, even, for, IF, or, so, that, then, therefore, when,
yet.
You can back up who ever you want but maybe you could tell me how much more of the Bible I need to throw away or change? I am nobody when it comes to translating Greek to English, but I am quoting a lot of "somebodies" and how are they all wrong. Another thing, they lived closer to the actual "happening" than you or I.
You are not only disagreeing with me and matters not why I say it is "if". But why all the Greek dictionaries saying that it means "if" while in conjuction with I suppose "they".
Here is another Greek dictionary and not Strong's that says the same thing and talking about the very verse we are discussing and I doubt if they have a hidden reason for it but maybe you know of one.
Greek
kai <2532>
kai kai
Pronunciation:kaheeOrigin:apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative forceReference
rtSpch:conjunctionIn Greek:kai 6856, [kai] 16, [kai 7, [[kai 5, kai] 1In NET:and 5402, Then 315, also 220, but 176, So 168, He 116, Now 72, too 62, When 62, Even 59, They 53, yet 41, or 33, 33, Both 20, Thus 8, along 5, The 4, nor 4, with 3, indeed 3, Furthermore 2, Though 2, forty-two 2, As 1, to 1, eighteen 1, forty-six 1, powerful 1, than 1, associated 1, by 1, else 1, Neither 1, without 1, thirty-eight 1, Consequently 1, answered 1, For 1, not 1, because 1, hence 1, Just 1, on 1In AV:and 8173, also 514, even 108, both 43, then 20, so 18,and 8173, also 514, even 108, both 43, then 20, so 18, likewise 13, not tr. 350, misc 31, vr and 1Count:9251Definition:1) and, also, even, indeed, but apparently, a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes alsoa cumulative force; and, also, even, so then, too, etc.; often used in
connection (or composition) with other particles or small words:-and,
also, both, but, even, for, IF, or, so, that, then, therefore, when,
yet.
You can back up who ever you want but maybe you could tell me how much more of the Bible I need to throw away or change? I am nobody when it comes to translating Greek to English, but I am quoting a lot of "somebodies" and how are they all wrong. Another thing, they lived closer to the actual "happening" than you or I.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brandon C. Jones
New Member
Bob, I'll restate this once and then drop it. No one is arguing that kai does not mean "if" because sometimes it does in the right syntactical constructions. I am saying what is your support for it meaning "if" IN THIS SYNTACTICAL CONSTRUCTION and why are those factors also not present in the preceding two participles in the Greek sentence that are structurally identical to this one. What are the factors in the text itself that support that translation?
Your bold comment is not well taken by me, a saved sinner just like you who is trying to be faithful to Christ. I want to know and love God, and I want to do my best to be faithful to him. You are free to let previous translations supercede factors in the text itself for your preferred translation., I am free to support my translation with the text itself that supercedes the convention of previous translations.
I make no attempt "to throw away" or change anything in the text itself and perhaps your comment is a signal for me to stop this discussion.
My first post told you how the somebodies are wrong in my opinion. I don't look down on them at all because we stand on their shoulders. I simply raised the issue that they don't have a case for "if" in the text itself; those someboies are imperfect just like us Bob.
good day
BJ
Your bold comment is not well taken by me, a saved sinner just like you who is trying to be faithful to Christ. I want to know and love God, and I want to do my best to be faithful to him. You are free to let previous translations supercede factors in the text itself for your preferred translation., I am free to support my translation with the text itself that supercedes the convention of previous translations.
I make no attempt "to throw away" or change anything in the text itself and perhaps your comment is a signal for me to stop this discussion.
My first post told you how the somebodies are wrong in my opinion. I don't look down on them at all because we stand on their shoulders. I simply raised the issue that they don't have a case for "if" in the text itself; those someboies are imperfect just like us Bob.
good day
BJ
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Amen, Brother Ed -- Preach it! :thumbs:Ed Edwards said:
As can be seen from the structure of the argument,
the proposition to be proved false is in the logical form
of an 'IT-THEN' type statement. Both the 'if' and the 'then'
are implied by the type Logic (called here GREEK LOGIC) and
neither the Greek Language nor the English Language require
the physical presence of 'if' and 'then' though both are always
logically (virtualy?) there.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brother Bob
New Member
Well Brandon you at least acknowledge that kai can mean "if" in Greek. The bold type was in no way being rude but was to draw your attention to the sentence. You have to have a thick skin on here to debate and if everyone was as you then there would never be any need for bold type but I don't know everyone.
There are so many words that one can question in the translation that we would have our heads so bottled up we wouldn't know anything.
If we as a Christian don't believe that God had a hand in the Scriptures from the beginning of their existance until now then we are in deep trouble..
Noticed I am the only one you said anything about the bold type! You seem a little tender.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brandon C. Jones
New Member
Quote:There are so many words that one can question in the translation that we would have our heads so bottled up we wouldn't know anything.
Actually, this is not the case Bob
Quote: If we as a Christian don't believe that God had a hand in the Scriptures from the beginning of their existance until now then we are in deep trouble..
Your point? I doubt I'll like what your implying here.
I do have pretty thick skin but loathe the ad hominem lazy posts that come up here quite often. Stick to the issues, which is not my attempt to get anyone to "throw away" or "change" this Scripture or any other parts of Scriptre.
Actually, this is not the case Bob
Quote: If we as a Christian don't believe that God had a hand in the Scriptures from the beginning of their existance until now then we are in deep trouble..
Your point? I doubt I'll like what your implying here.
I do have pretty thick skin but loathe the ad hominem lazy posts that come up here quite often. Stick to the issues, which is not my attempt to get anyone to "throw away" or "change" this Scripture or any other parts of Scriptre.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jarthur001
Active Member
Brother Bob said:
Bob....lets try this another way.
What does the word concordance mean to you?
What does the word lexicon mean to you?
Do you feel they have the same meaning?
- Status