Hebrews 6:4-6

[Brother Bob]

Your point? I doubt I'll like what your implying here.

My point is that it has been ok for those old Theologians for many many years. They used it to teach and preach. I always been leary of someone who just found out something "new" in the Scriptures. I have found it better when you think you have made a great discovery to wait a while. If you remember the Scriptures it says "he that lacketh wisdom let him ask of God". Maybe we both be better off doing just that.
have a nice day,
Bob

 

[Brother Bob]

James take it up with the whole world of "translators". Somehow, I would much rather agree with them. Too bad you two were not around when they first translated.


BTW James;
Brandon said "no one" is saying that kai could not mean if in the Greek in certain instances but he is wrong. You said it never meant "if".

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

Quote: My point is that it has been ok for those old Theologians for many many years. They used it to teach and preach. I always been leary of someone who just found out something "new" in the Scriptures. I have found it better when you think you have made a great discovery to wait a while. If you remember the Scriptures it says "he that lacketh wisdom let him ask of God". Maybe we both be better off doing just that.
have a nice day,
Bob

No great discovery here Bob, just grammar.

 

[Jarthur001]

James take it up with the whole world of "translators". Somehow, I would much rather agree with them. Too bad you two were not around when they first translated.

I'll help you out here Bob.

A concordance looks at the words used in the translation, in this case English, and tells you what word in the Greek it was translated from. "If" is list in Strongs, for "if" is in the KJV. But when you look at the Strongs hard copy, you will find the Greek does not support this word in this case

A Lexicon starts with the Greek and gives the closes English word that can match. "If" is never found under the Greek word "kai" in any lexicon I have read.

 

[Brother Bob]

The very first published Greek text of the New Testament used the word (IF)

And then came James

Textus Receptus, or "Received Text," (abbreviated TR) is the name we use for the first published Greek text of the New Testament. For many centuries, it was the standard text of the Greek Bible. The name arose from the work of the kinsmen Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir, who said of their 1633 edition, "Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum" -- "So [the reader] has the text which all now receive."

 

[Jarthur001]

James take it up with the whole world of "translators". Somehow, I would much rather agree with them. Too bad you two were not around when they first translated.


BTW James;
Brandon said "no one" is saying that kai could not mean if in the Greek in certain instances but he is wrong. You said it never meant "if".

"ei kai" or "kai ei" would indeed be "if". But this is not found in this case.

Phl 2:17

 

[Brother Bob]

Somebody found it and they still using it today according to the translated song I posted from Greek to English. Face it James you don't accept the KJV or the Textus Receptus or the Geneva Study Bible and several others.

Textus Receptus, or "Received Text," (abbreviated TR) is the name we use for the first published Greek text of the New Testament. For many centuries, it was the standard text of the Greek Bible. The name arose from the work of the kinsmen Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir, who said of their 1633 edition, "Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum" -- "So [the reader] has the text which all now receive."

They all use "if" as kai.

 

[Jarthur001]

The very first published Greek text of the New Testament used the word (IF)

And then came James

Textus Receptus, or "Received Text," (abbreviated TR) is the name we use for the first published Greek text of the New Testament. For many centuries, it was the standard text of the Greek Bible. The name arose from the work of the kinsmen Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir, who said of their 1633 edition, "Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum" -- "So [the reader] has the text which all now receive."

it does not Bob. You read it...you posted it. It is not in the TR

You like strongs...go look up the hard copy. not there...sorry

 

[Jarthur001]

Somebody found it and they still using it today according to the translated song I posted from Greek to English. Face it James you don't accept the KJV or the Textus Receptus or the Geneva Study Bible and several others.

that is a lie. The KJV is what I use. You have no idea what I feel about TR. But as been show...all greek texts agree with the TR. None of them have it...not even the TR. Sorry about your luck Bob.

They all use "if" as kai.

TR does not...KJV...yes it does

I need to do some work. You guys can have fun with Bob. I think he needs a nap.

Just a joke Bob...put down that gun.


later

In Christ...James

 

[Brother Bob]

(Greek NT - Textus Rec.) Hebrews 6:6 kai parapesontaV palin anakainizein eiV metanoian anastaurountaV eautoiV ton uion tou qeou kai paradeigmatizontaV

Have fun with me.

James is acting stupid.

As you can see the "kai" for "if" was and is in the first Greek text published of the NT.

 

[Brother Bob]

Brandon; 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?

you hath he quickened = "come" in Greek and if He was talking to the dead then the translation wasn't too bad being they would have to be made "alive" to come (a verb in Greek)

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

Not to go too far off-topic but the example in Ephesians 2:1 is that the KJV translators decided to "bump" "hath he quickened" in 2:5 up to v. 1 (and still keep it in v. 5 too) because they thought it would be better English grammar if they did that. Paul purposely leaves the verb down at v. 5, and I see no need to supercede what he wrote in Ephesians to make "better" English like the KJV translators did. We stand on their shoulders Bob.

 

[Brother Bob]

What does the first Greek text published say? The Textus Receptus?

It says the same as "come"

και υμας οντας νεκρους τοις παραπτωμασιν και ταις αμαρτιαις

I cannot explain why they did it but the translation is not that bad. They did do it as a "group" and not just an individual. I do see the connection between v.1 and v.5 though. I might of done the same thing if it were me, don't know for sure.

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

"and you being dead in trespasses and sins"

Where's the "come" in your quote? More importantly where is the "hath he quickened" in your quote? (Hint, it's not in the TR version of this verse or any other Greek text or extant manuscript of Ephesians 2:1).

I see no reason to insert part of v. 5 in v. 1, but you are free to let the KJV translators' decision supercede what's in the text itself.

I'm no maverick Bob in how I take Hebrews 6:6 (or Eph 2:1 for that matter), but you would have to go beyond English translations (other than the NET Bible) and Strong's to see that.

 

[Brother Bob]

Where's the "come" in your quote?

καιυμαςονταςνεκρουςτοιςπαραπτωμασινκαιταιςαμαρτιαις

Andyouhath he quickened who weredeadin trespassesandsins

"hath he quickened"

5607. on (oan)​

including the feminine ousa (oo'-sah); and the neuter on (on) present participle of eimi; being

be, come, have.

see GREEK eimi

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

Man, if you admit knowing nothing of Greek why do you keep doing this. eimi doesn't mean "hath he quickened." It doesn't even mean that in the KJV of Ephesians 2:1 because "ontas" shows up in the KJV as "were."

Either you know Greek or not, but in this thread you straddle the fence. If it's profitable for understanding the Bible then do the hard work and really learn it instead of cut and paste jobs accompanied with word studies.

 

[Brother Bob]

ovtac means "hath he quickened". It comes from Strongs, what else do you want. Is Strongs a bad reference?

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

If Strong's does indeed support you, then it is a bad source in this respect and is just plain wrong. The KJV translators put "quickened" in Ephesians 2:1 because they felt that the verb in v. 5 (which is not a form of eimi by the way) needed to be up front for good English, not because "ontas" is in v. 1.

 

[Brother Bob]

The title "God" I restore to "Elohim" because the word God is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word Elohim. Elohim means "Mighty One(s)". God also happens to be the name of an idol mentioned in scripture

Is this true and if so are we calling God by the wrong name?

If Strong's does indeed support you, then it is a bad source in this respect and is just plain wrong. The KJV translators put "quickened" in Ephesians 2:1 because they felt that the verb in v. 5 (which is not a form of eimi by the way) needed to be up front for good English, not because "ontas" is in v. 1.

My understanding is they looked at the "context" and what changes were made were in conjunction with the context of the scripture?

 

[Brandon C. Jones]

oh Bob, your last post looks like an OP. If you post it as one perhaps you'll get some responses there.