Featured Recently Published NT Translation

No quote will be forthcoming. More misrepresentation. One falsehood after another. More waste of time, more obfuscation. The CSB was shown to contain loose translations.

Apo does not mean "before."

 

A little history:

Let's consider "Katalambano G2638" which is a transliteration of the Greek and refers to several different forms of the word in Greek. Words in he word group (G2638) appears about 16 times in 14 verses in the CSB. The CSB has translated the various forms of the word into 13 different English words or phrases. This form of "loose translation" obliterates correspondence between the Greek word meanings and the corresponding English word or phrase used in the loose translation.

Here is part of a lexicon:
katalambanó: to lay hold of, seize
Original Word: καταλαμβάνω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: katalambanó
Phonetic Spelling: (kat-al-am-ban'-o)
Short Definition: I seize tight hold of, overtake, comprehend
Definition: (a) I seize tight hold of, arrest, catch, capture, appropriate, (b) I overtake, (c) mid. aor: I perceived, comprehended.

Now seize tight and take hold of reflect the same meaning. perceived or comprehend reflects the same meaning as understood. And overtake something is similar to catch up to something. The issue is not really what the word meanings are, but rather should translations consistently translate those meaning.

Lets consider rendering understood as grasp because that word is closer to the core meaning of the Greek word in the inspired text Also. take hold and catch are rendered seize. The result is Katalambano G2638 has been translated accurately into just two English words reflecting two of the historical word meanings.

Mar 9:18
“Whenever it seizes him, it throws him down, and he foams at the mouth, grinds his teeth, and becomes rigid. I asked your disciples to drive it out, but they couldn’t.”
Jhn 1:5
That light shines in the darkness, and yet the darkness did not grasp it.
Jhn 8:3
Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman seized in adultery, making her stand in the center.
Jhn 8:4
“Teacher,” they said to him, “this woman was seized in the act of committing adultery.
Jhn 12:35
Jesus answered, “The light will be with you only a little longer. Walk while you have the light so that darkness doesn’t seize you. The one who walks in darkness doesn’t know where he’s going.
Act 4:13
When they observed the boldness of Peter and John and grasped that they were uneducated and untrained men, they were amazed and recognized that they had been with Jesus.
Act 10:34
Peter began to speak: “Now I trulygrasp that God doesn’t show favoritism,
Act 25:25
“I grasped that he had not done anything deserving of death, but when he himself appealed to the Emperor, I decided to send him.
Rom 9:30
What should we say then? Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have seized righteousness — namely the righteousness that comes from faith.
1Co 9:24
Don’t you know that the runners in a stadium all race, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way to seize the prize.
Eph 3:18
may be able to grasp with all the saints what is the length and width, height and depth of God’s love,
Phl 3:12
Not that I have already reached the goal or am already perfect, but I make every effort to seize it because I also have been seized by Christ Jesus.
Phl 3:13
Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself to have seized it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and reaching forward to what is ahead,
1Th 5:4
But you, brothers and sisters, are not in the dark, for this day to suddenly seize you like a thief.

Note that if suddenly is added for clarity and italicized to indicate a translator addition, the meaning comes through using the historical word meaning.

 

You claim to be able to sue all of those resources, but how much of the Koine Greek have you studied and learned? Are you qualified to be one of the esv/Csb translators?

 

No, all that has been shown is that you are bringing to translations biases,just as youa re saying the Esv/Csb translators did, and all of them are much more learned in Greek and tools than you are, so why would we credit you over nay of them?

 

The problem is you are focusing on one word and not the context provided. You continue to ignore γέγραπται. This word strongly implies "before" since it is in the perfect tense. If απο indicates a speration of time here. As the BDAG indicates is a primary function of the word. Then one is not hard pressed to see the "written", the γέγραπται, as occurring in the past of the foundation of the world. The Greek tense forces us to look in the past for the time of which the names were "written". Απο is the only indicator for time and it governs the "foundation of the world". To limit απο to a gloss found in a lexicon is to ignore its actual definition, which is to indicate "a separation from something or someone. In space or time."



Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

See posts 15, 19, 23, 24, 26, 27. Those posts between us demonstate you where willing to only accpet the 3 words found in Strongs, when 3 other lexicons offered nore words in the gloss. But even a gloss is not a definition.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

he claims to use all of those other references, but still keeps coming back to Strongs, which is the most unreliable tool for what he is trying to do here!

 

We are to study God's word and share. Unless do not believe in the priesthood of believers?

 

Yet another example of ;non-comprehension. I gave specific examples for both versions, but somehow you did not address them. Obfuscation on display.

 

Yet another example of non-comprehension. If there was any actual support for before, why did the ESV use from at Revelation 17:8. You have no answer, your assertion is bogus.

 

My posts demonstrate you are misrepresenting my view. You are not a mind reader, you do not know the basis of my view.

Folks, note no effort is being made to address the topic.

 

Yet another misrepresentation of my view. Yet another claim of mind reading. Yet another post addressing me and not the topic.

 

On what grounds do you declare it bogus. What does perfect tense mean? Walk us through the Greek here Van. Explain why the perfect tense was used and not the aorist

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Your assertion that they couldn't change 17:8 because they had no support, but changed 13:8 without support makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Really? Because anyone can read the thread and see you refused to recognize anything but the 3 words found in Strongs.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Anyone can see you are repeated a falsehood, but providing no quote. You just make up stuff to smear others.

Now we get straight up nonsense. You, not me, claimed something in the tense made before a possibility in Rev 13:8. My observation is if that were true, then Rev. 17:8 would also read "before." The fact is the ESV blundered in its translation of Rev. 13:8.

 

"Something in the tense". What is the tense? Explain how the tense effects the passage. They certainly could have done "before" in 17:8 as well. Απο indicates a separation of time here as well.
γέγραπται is once again in the perfect tense. It happened in the past, is completed and still has a present effect. How are you going to explain away the perfect tense? Your theology does not get priority over the Greek.

You claim it is "bogus". Explain it. What us the relationship in time between the writing of the names and the foundation of the world?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

More nonsense. More you, you and you rule violations. Obfuscation on display.
Still waiting for anyone to post actual excerpts from the title version.

 

You called it bogus. Walk us through it. You made the claim. Back it up. Address the word γέγραπται in relation to ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. You brought up in this thread, not me. If you see the question as unclear....as "obfuscation" suggests, that isn't my fault. I did not write γέγραπται, John did. Why did he choose this form of the word?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Yet another off topic, you, you and you post. Obfuscation on display. I am waiting for you to address why the same construction in Revelation 17:8 was not translated the same way. But no answer will be forthcoming. My dispute is not with John, apo means from, after or since, not before.