Jesus walking over the sea

[Goinheix]

This reminds me of a child that screams "I'M TELLING" when he doesn't get his way.



Anyway,

peripateō is a verb and means to walk.
epi is a preposition meaning upon, on, at, by, before, over, against, at, across, to.... Propositions as usual have many meanings. Here, the meaning is on. Jesus walked on the....

thalassa means "sea" It either means a body of water or it is referring to a specific Sea. Either way, a body of water.

So Jesus walked on the sea.

As it has been pointed out, Peter walked on the water and sank in the water. Jesus was on the water. It was a miracle. One of the divine attributes that Jesus had. He made peter to be able walk on the water.

So..


Not even close. Nothing is mentioned of going "around" anything. Context in no way supports a definition of around.

I am not good in english but it dont mean walking.
Jesus walked upon the Sea; not across or over.

To do miracles is not a divine atribute.
Moses did miracles and was not God.
In the other thread I have proved that Jesus did not have any divine atribute. I did prove it to the point where you did close the thread.
You have not idea what a miracle is. You have the wrong and traditional idea that a miracle is a wonder, a overnatural fiture. Those are the miracles of the pagans that entered the christianism.
Jesus did many miracles non of them being a wonder or an amusement.

 

[Goinheix]

And just what scripture do you have to back up such a statement?

do open a threath to discuss that.
we can not change the topic.

 

[Goinheix]

A couple years ago there was a guy here who thought Noah's ark was a spaceship using very similar reasoning and greek "skills". They must be from the same church. Wonder what Nike's they all wear...

LOL. you are reported. better say somethig inteligent instead of making mokery

 

[Don]

If Jesus did walked aroud the Sea; then he was walking at the beach, in dry ground; and them try to reach the boat. If Jesus did walk over the water, obviously he did go stright across the Sea directly to boat.

The 3 Gospels prefer the first interpretation.

Actually, the 3 Gospels are all in agreement: All three use the same words for Jesus walking on the sea; and the same words for the disciples seeing Jesus walking on the sea.

If the gospels are in agreement on the wording, then interpreting them to mean "around" instead of "on" is another form of eisogesis.

Yes, that is putting meaning into scripture. My bad.
Any how Jesus was trying to overtake or pass by the boat. Jesus was trying to get infront of the boat. We dont know for sure why, but he was trying and were impossible for him to do his intentions.

Are you sure that it was impossible for Him to do His intentions?

In John 6, He boarded the boat and then they immediately found themselves at the shoreline point they were trying to reach. In Matthew 14, He rebuked Peter's lack of faith; and the ones on the boat recognized His divinity (verse 33). In Mark 6, they were sore amazed beyond measure, and wondered.

In your interpretation, He was simply trying to get to the other side, and saw the boat in trouble. Also in your interpretation, He would have boarded a boat that was basically already ashore; they would have had to cast off again to resume their on-sea journey to their destination. This casting off again is not identified in scripture.

The final thing we have to address is geography. First, we have to agree on the starting point of this story, so where did the boat cast off from?

 

[Don]

did Jesus told the servants in the weading to put sea into the jars? did Jesus ask the samaritanin woman to take out some sea for him to drink? where Jesus baptised in the sea?

Go, I hope you realize that I've been trying to have a reasonable discussion with you. So here's a serious question: What's the definition of "sea"?

 

[Goinheix]

Actually, the 3 Gospels are all in agreement: All three use the same words for Jesus walking on the sea; and the same words for the disciples seeing Jesus walking on the sea.

If the gospels are in agreement on the wording, then interpreting them to mean "around" instead of "on" is another form of eisogesis.


Are you sure that it was impossible for Him to do His intentions?

In John 6, He boarded the boat and then they immediately found themselves at the shoreline point they were trying to reach. In Matthew 14, He rebuked Peter's lack of faith; and the ones on the boat recognized His divinity (verse 33). In Mark 6, they were sore amazed beyond measure, and wondered.

In your interpretation, He was simply trying to get to the other side, and saw the boat in trouble. Also in your interpretation, He would have boarded a boat that was basically already ashore; they would have had to cast off again to resume their on-sea journey to their destination. This casting off again is not identified in scripture.

The final thing we have to address is geography. First, we have to agree on the starting point of this story, so where did the boat cast off from?

Jesus was trying to... That means in plain english that he was not susceeding on doing what he was trying. Whaterever Jesus was trying to do, he was not doing, he was failing to do. That is why he was trying.

Everything else is throwing perls to the porks. You have not intention to understand my point. I told you my interpretation and now is up to you to accept it or not. The fact is that all 3 Gospels coincide in that Jesus did not walk over the water; he did walk upon the Sea; that is by the coastline.

 

[Goinheix]

Go, I hope you realize that I've been trying to have a reasonable discussion with you. So here's a serious question: What's the definition of "sea"?

Yes, you have been trying...but you failed. Jesus was also trying and he failed.

 

[annsni]

While the OP says that he is Baptist, I seriously doubt it because he's bringing in doctrine that is quite contrary to Scripture. I could call myself whatever I want but the truth comes out quickly. The interpretation we see here is quite ... different and not at all based on the text at hand. What is sad to me is the thought that while Jesus was God, He was powerless and weak and was nothing while He walked on earth. He knew nothing, couldn't do anything - all ideas that are completely 100% different than what the Scriptures tell us. I think I'll stick with God's version of things rather than one man's. I wonder if this is what is taught in his church or if his pastor even knows of this stuff.

 

[mandym]

do open a threath to discuss that.
we can not change the topic.

You made the statement in this thread. Now back it up

 

[jbh28]

I am not good in english but it dont mean walking.
Jesus walked upon the Sea; not across or over.

You just contradicted yourself.

To do miracles is not a divine atribute.
Moses did miracles and was not God.
In the other thread I have proved that Jesus did not have any divine atribute.

I named at least 13 yeaterday which you ignored.

I did prove it to the point where you did close the thread.

I can't close threads

You have not idea what a miracle is.

Um...sure

You have the wrong and traditional idea that a miracle is a wonder, a overnatural fiture.

As you said, you are "not good in english[sic]."


Jesus walked(that's what the Greek term means) on the water. It showed that Jesus had divine power. Moses didn't have the power but was used by God. Jesus is God.

 

[Don]

peripateō is a verb and means to walk.

I am not good in english but it dont mean walking.
Jesus walked upon the Sea; not across or over.

Sir, I suggest you get a new Greek dictionary. Every one that I've consulted says the same thing:
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Word Origin[/FONT] περιπατέω [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]from (4012) and (3961)[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]peripateō[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]per-ee-pat-eh'-o[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Parts of Speech[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]TDNT[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Verb[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]5:940,804[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]

1. to walk
   1. to make one's way, progress; to make due use of opportunities
   2. Hebrew for, to live
      1. to regulate one's life
      2. to conduct one's self
      3. to pass one's life

[/FONT]
Also in the english language, there is no difference between "upon" and "across" or "over" when used in conjunction with an object; in other words, you can say "he walked across the bridge," "he walked over the bridge," and "he walked upon the bridge," and you'd have the same thing: He was on a bridge.

In the case of the english translation of the scripture, we have "He walked across the sea," "He walked over the sea," and "He walked upon the sea"; and they'd all mean He was above the sea.

 

[mandym]

That means in plain english[sic] that he was not susceeding[sic] on doing what he was trying.

You have yet to accomplish your attempt at "plain English" therefore I doubt you know what "plain English" is.

 

[jbh28]

Go, I hope you realize that I've been trying to have a reasonable discussion with you. So here's a serious question: What's the definition of "sea"?

He's a troll or sock. He's not here for serious discussion. That's why yesterday I quoted from Skandelon 13 divine attributes and he just claimed that nobody has named them.

While the OP says that he is Baptist, I seriously doubt it because he's bringing in doctrine that is quite contrary to Scripture.

That's why I've asked the mods why he's being allowed to post here in the baptist only section.

 

[mandym]

He's a troll of sock. He's not here for serious discussion.

I agree :thumbs: neither is he Baptist

 

[jbh28]

Sir, I suggest you get a new Greek dictionary. Every one that I've consulted says the same thing:
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Original Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Word Origin[/FONT] περιπατέω [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]from (4012) and (3961)[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Transliterated Word[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]peripateō[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]per-ee-pat-eh'-o[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Parts of Speech[/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]TDNT[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Verb[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]5:940,804[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]Definition[/FONT] [FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Geneva]

1. to walk
   1. to make one's way, progress; to make due use of opportunities
   2. Hebrew for, to live
      1. to regulate one's life
      2. to conduct one's self
      3. to pass one's life

[/FONT]
Also in the english language, there is no difference between "upon" and "across" or "over" when used in conjunction with an object; in other words, you can say "he walked across the bridge," "he walked over the bridge," and "he walked upon the bridge," and you'd have the same thing: He was on a bridge.

In the case of the english translation of the scripture, we have "He walked across the sea," "He walked over the sea," and "He walked upon the sea"; and they'd all mean He was above the sea.

:thumbsup:

 

[jbh28]

I agree :thumbs: neither is he Baptist

oops...that's supposed to be "troll or sock" not troll of sock.

 

[Don]

Jesus was trying to... That means in plain english that he was not susceeding on doing what he was trying. Whaterever Jesus was trying to do, he was not doing, he was failing to do. That is why he was trying.

Everything else is throwing perls to the porks. You have not intention to understand my point. I told you my interpretation and now is up to you to accept it or not. The fact is that all 3 Gospels coincide in that Jesus did not walk over the water; he did walk upon the Sea; that is by the coastline.

Sir, you do me an injustice. I think I'll report you for it. I do understand your point. You told me your interpretation. I subsequently researched scripture, several commentaries, language dictionaries, and other sources to determine the correctness of your interpretation.

It's not that I don't have any intention to understand your point; it's that I've prayerfully considered your point, and found it to be in error.

Now, I'm going to respond to you in the manner that you're responding to us: You're being misled in reading and understanding the scriptures. You need to listen to what I've told you, or you're going down a path that will lead you to hell.

And with that, i leave you to ponder the following verses: Proverbs 26:4-5.
-----
Okay, I gave it my best shot, and addressed each of his points. He refuses to entertain any thoughts other than his own. I shake the dust off my shoes, and go on to other, more productive conversations.

 

[annsni]

The fact is that all 3 Gospels coincide in that Jesus did not walk over the water; he did walk upon the Sea; that is by the coastline.

Well, when we go sailing on the sea on Sunday, I can assure you that part of the time that we will be out, we will be quite far from the coastline - by Monday afternoon or Tuesday, we will not be seeing any land for quite some time as we sail the ocean. Oh - and trust me, it's all covered in water. Sea, water - essentially the same thing. Not all water is sea but all sea is water.

 

[DHK]

In the case of Jesus walking around the Sea; if we follow the traditional interpretation, then we have to admit that God/Jesus did break the natural laws stablished by him.

He didn't "break laws." He lived above them. That is why they are "super" natural--above or beyond nature. In the OT the prophet made the iron axehead to float. That goes against nature. It is super-natural or above the laws of nature. Christ could do those things which were above the laws of nature which the laws of nature could not explain away. There is no law of nature which allows a person to walk on water. That is why it is a miracle and one that shows the divine attribute of God--omnipotence--the power to do those things which man cannot. He is all powerful. He has power over nature as he demonstrated.

When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone. (John 6:15)
--Jesus had just fed 5,000 (and that was just counting the men). I suppose if women and children were counted it would be more like 20,000. He perceived (was omniscient) that they were going to come and make him king by force. Jesus would offer the Jews the kingdom, but the time was not right. So he departed to be alone (despite the crowd). That also shows his omnipotence.

And when even was now come, his disciples went down unto the sea, (John 6:16)
--Now it is getting dark. The disciples for the most part are fishermen. It is natural for them to go to the sea. Many of them have their own boats.

And entered into a ship, and went over the sea toward Capernaum. And it was now dark, and Jesus was not come to them. (John 6:17)
--The disciples were at Tiberias and wanted to go to Capernaum. Both are ports on the Sea of Galilee. They are both on the western edge of the Sea, Tiberias to the South, and Capernaum to the North. Only the account in Matthew (14:25-31) speaks of Peter walking on water on this occasion.
--Again, John notes that Jesus had not yet come to them.

And the sea arose by reason of a great wind that blew. (John 6:18)
There was a great wind which caused large waves. It was a storm at Sea.

So when they had rowed about five and twenty or thirty furlongs, they see Jesus walking on the sea, and drawing nigh unto the ship: and they were afraid. (John 6:19).
--One furlong is one-eighth of a mile. Thirty furlongs is almost four miles. That is how far they had rowed out into the sea--four miles (6.4 km.).
Then they see Jesus walking on the sea (the water) . He was coming close to the ship, and since they were four miles out they weren't able to recognize him right away and were therefore afraid.

But he saith unto them, It is I; be not afraid. (John 6:20)
--Immediately they recognize his voice.

Then they willingly received him into the ship: and immediately the ship was at the land whither they went. (John 6:21)
--John adds this detail that the others don't. Not only was the sea calmed, but immediately the ship made it to land; to its destination. Jesus is master over his creation--over land, sea, time, space. He is omnipotent and proved it here, such as no other man would ever be able to do. He calmed the Sea. He walked on water. He transcended time by causing the ship to be at Capernaum the moment that he set foot in it. It was in the middle of the sea four miles outside of Tiberias. Look at a map. He exhibited his divine attributes here. They cannot be denied. Then go back to Matthew and read the account of Peter walking on water. His divine attributes cannot be denied him.

 

[annsni]

Let's not forget Jesus telling the storm to stop - and it did. I'd say that's pretty divine.