Administrators Gail Posted October 24, 2012 Administrators Posted October 24, 2012 I haven't been following every page of this, but if Jesus had risen on the Sabbath, wouldn't all of mainstream Christianity still be keeping the Sabbath? After all, the reason they state that they honour Sunday is because of the resurrection. Quote Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever.
Lysimachus Posted October 24, 2012 Posted October 24, 2012 So at last, we discover that Gerhard is not even a Seventh-Day Adventist this whole time. Go figure. He is a TULIP Calvinist--the heresy that sprang from St. Augustine. Quote ~Lysimachus (Marcos S.) Author of article, Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation (see attachment for article) Currently writing a book, Vindicating the Historical School of Prophetic Interpretation Founder of the largest and fastest SDA Apologetics Group on Facebook, Seventh-Day Adventism - Defending the Pillars of the Faith Writer and apologetics contributor at Adventist Defense League Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation.pdf
Moderators John317 Posted October 24, 2012 Moderators Posted October 24, 2012 Originally Posted By: John317 How would you translate the following sentence--- alektora phonesai tris aparnesee me Some people might transliterate it this way: alektora phonhsai tris aparnhsh me Please translate the above, placing the punctuation marks where they belong. Why? Are you not satisfied with the KJV in Matthew 26:75? How do you expect me to translate the clause without the Adverbial Preposition prin, before? Stop the pedantry. It's off topic. Yes, I am satisfied with the KJV and every other translation of that verse. The question is on topic because it has to do with the subject we are discussing, which is translation and punctuation. I apologize for neglecting to include "prin" in the sentence: prin alektopa phonesai tris aparnese me If a person puts the comma in the wrong place, he could make Jesus say, "Before a c-o-c-k crows three times, you will deny me." Do you know of any translation that has it that way? I don't. And the reason I don't is that any other way of translating it would be wrong. The only way it can be translated correctly is: "Before a c-o-c-k crows, three times you will deny me." It is the same way with John 20: 1. The only way to translate it correctly is, "Mary the Magdaline comes early to the tomb while it was still dark...." NOT "Mary... comes to the tomb while it was still early-dark..." As someone who doesn't know Greek, you should notice that you can't find any translation that reads that way, and then reconsider your understanding of how it should be translated. Instead, you conclude that all the translators are either ignorant or are refusing to translate it correctly in order to deceive people. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 24, 2012 Moderators Posted October 24, 2012 John originally wrote in 19: 39, Greek from Nestle Interlinear, ehlthen de kai Nikodehmos ho elthohn pros auton [iohsehph] nuktos prohton pherohn migma smurnehs kai aloehs, Indeed came there also Nicodemus he having-come-bearing a mixture of myrrh and aloes to him [Joseph] by night THAT [NIGHT] THE FIRST ---English, literal; word order, logical and chronological. Absolutely awful, nonsensical translation. Try reading it aloud before the congregation and see if they understand it. "Indeed came there also Nicodemus he having-come-bearing a mixture of myrrh and aloes to him by night that [night] the first." There's no chance of its ever being published because it's nonsense. The writer of the Gospel was never inspired by the Holy Spirit to write such jibberish. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 24, 2012 Moderators Posted October 24, 2012 When I read translations it will be half a dozen or so which I have on my shelves. Which translations do you have on your shelves? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 24, 2012 Moderators Posted October 24, 2012 Originally Posted By: John317 Gerhard, can you find a single English translation of the NT that gives the reading "being early-of-dark still"? If so, please quote it and give the title of the translation. My field of study has been limited to certainsubjects of special interest to me. So I don't say I have much of a knowledge of Greek generally --- far from it. I'll also not claim I have a good or wide knowledge of the Bible. All of this is readily apparent, Gerhard. It brings up the question-- why don't you take a couple of semesters or quarters in NT Greek? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Lysimachus Posted October 25, 2012 Posted October 25, 2012 Excellent work John317. Was just curious, where did you take your Greek classes? And are there online courses? Quote ~Lysimachus (Marcos S.) Author of article, Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation (see attachment for article) Currently writing a book, Vindicating the Historical School of Prophetic Interpretation Founder of the largest and fastest SDA Apologetics Group on Facebook, Seventh-Day Adventism - Defending the Pillars of the Faith Writer and apologetics contributor at Adventist Defense League Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation.pdf
jasd Posted October 25, 2012 Posted October 25, 2012 >>Gerhard, there are a number of "death-knells" for a Sabbath resurrection, but one of the most powerful "death-knell" is the truth of Ellen White's statement in Desire of Ages, page 785, 786: Quote: Christ arose from the dead as the first fruits of those that slept. He was the antitype of the wave sheaf, and His resurrection took place on the very day when the wave sheaf was to be presented before the Lord. QUESTION: On which day was the wave sheaf presented before the Lord? Lev. 23: 9-15 contains the answer: Leviticus 23:15 "You shall count seven full weeks from the day after the Sabbath, from the day that you brought the sheaf of the wave offering."<< Ain not the above what might be termed ‘circular reasoning’?—I mean, proving the argument with recourse to the proffered numinous and extraBiblical… by first asserting, “is the truth”? The statement in the above red font flies against Holy Writ. Anyway, what then must one make of the fact that the wave sheaf was to be cut, gathered in, at the time that Matthew 28:1 declares Jesus Christ resurrected?—that is, the evening of the Sabbath day… Moreover, ain it not significant that the waving of the sheaf signified the beginning of the harvest?—wha’s with that, all yous soul-sleepers? >>Yes, Mary Magdalene did come to the tomb while it was still dark, but it was in the early morning shortly before sunrise, NOT at twilight.<< Re Matt 28:1 “Now late on the sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week (opse de sabbatwn, th epipwskoush ei mian sabbatwn). This careful chronological statement according to Jewish days clearly means that before the sabbath was over, that is before six P.M., this visit by the women was made "to see the sepulchre" (qeorhsai ton tapon). They had seen the place of burial on Friday afternoon ( Mark 15:47 ; Matthew 27:61 ; Luke 23:55 ). They had rested on the sabbath after preparing spices and ointments for the body of Jesus ( Luke 23:56 ), a sabbath of unutterable sorrow and woe. They will buy other spices after sundown when the new day has dawned and the sabbath is over (Mark 16:1 ). Both Matthew here and Luke ( Luke 23:54 ) use dawn (epipwskw) for the dawning of the twenty-four hour-day at sunset, not of the dawning of the twelve-hour day at sunrise. The Aramaic used the verb for dawn in both senses. The so-called Gospel of Peter has epipwskw in the same sense as Matthew and Luke as does a late papyrus. Apparently the Jewish sense of "dawn" is here expressed by this Greek verb. Allen thinks that Matthew misunderstands Mark at this point, but clearly Mark is speaking of sunrise and Matthew of sunset. Why allow only one visit for the anxious women?” [ed.jasd] --Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament Indeed, where are we told that the women could only visit the tomb but the once?—that is, on the following morning, Sunday. >>This is according to both the NT and the writings of Ellen G. White.<< Errr? Quote
Lysimachus Posted October 25, 2012 Posted October 25, 2012 Was so exciting to see that maybe JASD was defending us for once, then I realize he's just attacking Ellen White again. JASD, maybe one of these days you will surprise me for once, and actually defend us for a change. Quote ~Lysimachus (Marcos S.) Author of article, Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation (see attachment for article) Currently writing a book, Vindicating the Historical School of Prophetic Interpretation Founder of the largest and fastest SDA Apologetics Group on Facebook, Seventh-Day Adventism - Defending the Pillars of the Faith Writer and apologetics contributor at Adventist Defense League Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation.pdf
jasd Posted October 25, 2012 Posted October 25, 2012 Unless you also believe in "In the end of the Sabbaths..." of Matthew 28:1 - then I was not defending you - for my position is that Jesus Christ resurrected late afternoon to dusk on the Seventh-day Sabbath as was then practiced by the Jews. Thanks for the hoot and the holler, anywez. An', was not attacking Ellen White per se - just her position here which goes directly against Holy Writ. She deserves more respect than I could ever be worthy in multiple lifetimes. But, wrong is wrong, and she ain not no infallible missus. Quote
Lysimachus Posted October 25, 2012 Posted October 25, 2012 Unless you also believe in "In the end of the Sabbaths..." of Matthew 28:1 - then I was not defending you - for my position is that Jesus Christ resurrected late afternoon to dusk on the Seventh-day Sabbath as was then practiced by the Jews. Thanks for the hoot and the holler, anywez. An', was not attacking Ellen White per se - just her position here which goes directly against Holy Writ. She deserves more respect than I could ever be worthy in multiple lifetimes. But, wrong is wrong, and she ain not no infallible missus. Her position goes against...YOUR interpretation of the Greek, which many many people, and many many scholars, who do not even KNOW who Ellen White is, agree with Ellen White, whether they realize it or not. Thousands of scholars who know nothing of EGW agree with us. And they interpret the same Greek, and same texts very differently from you. It's your interpretation of Holy Writ that she goes directly against. Not Holy Writ itself. Sorry, that's just how it is. And no, Jesus resurrected on Sunday morning. Not late afternoon Dusk. Your interpretation goes against: 1. The sound interpretation of MOST scholars, who know a lot more than you...and... 2. The Inspired Testimonies of Ellen White---that happen to agree with most scholars. Thus, your case is far more hopeless condition than ours. Quote ~Lysimachus (Marcos S.) Author of article, Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation (see attachment for article) Currently writing a book, Vindicating the Historical School of Prophetic Interpretation Founder of the largest and fastest SDA Apologetics Group on Facebook, Seventh-Day Adventism - Defending the Pillars of the Faith Writer and apologetics contributor at Adventist Defense League Vindicating the Year-Day Principle of Prophetic Interpretation.pdf
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 Excellent work John317. Was just curious, where did you take your Greek classes? And are there online courses? I studied New Testament Greek at Loma Linda University, on what is now the La Sierra campus. I'm sure there are online courses, but it is best to study in a class-room because the professor asks questions and has you read the Greek texts aloud as well as parse and translate. You also hear the answers to the questions other students ask. So what goes on in the classroom is a very important part of learning the language. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 ....that Matthew 28:1 declares Jesus Christ resurrected? that is, the evening of the Sabbath day... Matt 28: 1 does not say Christ was resurrected on the evening of the Sabbath day. The verse says the women came to the tomb early in the morning as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week. ESV--Matthew 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. KJV--Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 QUESTION: On which day was the wave sheaf presented before the Lord? Originally Posted By: jasd Ain not the above what might be termed circular reasoning I mean, proving the argument with recourse to the proffered numinous and extraBiblical by first asserting, is the truth? On which day was the wave sheaf (the first fruits) presented before the Lord? See Lev 23: 5-11. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 Our Lord slept in the grave, resting after sacrificing a perfect life for our salvation, just as He rested on the first Sabbath after finishing His creation of a perfect world. Originally Posted By: Gerhard This familiar claim, John 317, I am SURE you must have read in Sundaydarians literature, not only a few times, >> He rested on the first Sabbath after finishing His creation of a perfect world.<<But whereas John317 meant the Seventh Day Sabbath, they the Sunday-worshippers would have meant Sunday. Sure, some Sunday-keeping Christians would think of Sunday, but what does the Bible teach? Does the Bible teach that God rested on the first Sabbath of creation week-- or does it say He rested on the first day of the week? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 If you don't like people to "misrepresent" your position or your motives, then don't do it to others, Gerhard. I only repeated what you told me-- that you believe the translators are dishonest and that they purposely mistranslate the Bible. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 What translations do you use in your study of the Scriptures? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 Now let me tell you, I do NOT consider the placing of comma's worthy to be reckoned even under the smallest of points of contention as far as the present issue is concerned. You miss the woods for the dead timber as you miss the smallest twig for the woods. The placing of the comma in some verses, such as John 13: 38, is important because it demonstrates some of the rules of translating Greek to English. You talk about reading the Greek and reading Marshall's Greek-English interlinear, yet your posts show that you don't even understand what you're reading. You would be better off taking classes in the language you want to understand, before claiming to translate the Bible more accurately than thousands of translators who have studied and taught Greek and NT theology for many, many years. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 Unless you also believe in "In the end of the Sabbaths..." of Matthew 28:1 - then I was not defending you - for my position is that Jesus Christ resurrected late afternoon to dusk on the Seventh-day Sabbath as was then practiced by the Jews. How do you understand "In the end of the Sabbaths..."? Do you believe it is saying the various sabbaths, including the weekly Sabbath, came to an end at that time? Matthew 28: 1 isn't correctly translated "in the end of the Sabbaths..." It is translated, "After [Gk opse] the Sabbath...." (NIV). It can also be translated as "in the end of," or "late on." It is saying the same thing as Mark 16: 1, where Mark uses the singular, sabbatou. "Sabbath" can be translated from either singular [sabbato/ sabbatou] or plural [sabbaton]. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 Originally Posted By: Gerhard You raised this issue before' date=' dear John317; but I have not had the time or the chance to address it. The first thing here, dear John 317, to mention, is your bravery for opposing the scholarship and authorities of your church. No, I am not being brave by pointing to Christ's resurrection on the first day of the week as a fulfillment of the offering of the first-fruits as described in Lev. 23: 5-11. Stephen N. Haskell teaches this in his book, The Cross and Its Shadow, a well-known classic of SDA literature included in the Heritage Library. It is also found in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary on the book of Levitcus, Vol. 1, page 804. Of course, as I showed earlier, it is also in the writings of God's modern-day prophet, Ellen G. White. Would you please provide documented evidence of what you claim to be the scholarship and authorities of the SDA Church opposing the above teaching? Originally Posted By: Gerhard I repeat, THIS, has always been what - as far as I know -, your church, has taught. I assume also at Loma Linda. Did they never oppose you, propagating your Saddusaic teaching in this regard?![/quote'] Please show references and quotes to support your statement here about the SDA church's position, and particularly in regard to Christ's fulfillment of the offering of the first fruits but also in regard to His fulfillment of the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread. I have never felt or experienced the slightest opposition from my church to what I believe and teach on this topic. In fact, I have read it in the church's Sabbath School lessons. My own opinion based on our exchanges is that you know the SDA Church about as well as you know the Greek language. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 You may deride me, John317. Do it! For me it is like receiving a nod of approval from Jesus. If you had not opposed me, I would have been disappointed and discontented with myself. You're the one who is getting personal, Gerhard. I have attempted to stay with arguments and evidence and away from personalities. I've learned after some years on the forum that it's best that way. I haven't derided you-- I have talked about the problems in your translation and in your understanding of the Greek language. Do you honestly feel that Christ approves of you because people point out to you the errors in your translation and understanding of certain Scriptures? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 The NIV is the work of the devil; it misrepresents the Written Word of God FOR TO IDOLATROUSLY WORSHIP SUNDAY. ONLY ITS ABUSE OF THE GREEK IS WORSE THAN ITS IDOLATRY. There's no perfect translation, Gerhard. They all have their problems, only some have more problems than others. I don't have to agree with everything in a translation in order to quote some of its verses as correctly translated. The NIV is not all bad, nor is the KJV all good. I don't believe the NIV is the work of the devil. If that is true, then the Devil is divided against himself, because millions of believers have been blessed by studying and reading the NIV and the RNIV and the TNIV. Speaking of misrepresenting the Word of God, you must realize that the Septuagint often misrepresents the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. The LXX is a paraphrase and often inaccurate translation of the OT, yet both the Hebrew OT and the LXX are the word of God. The Septuagint, notwithstanding its defects, has been used mightily by God over the last 2000+ years. . The NIV is much more accurate as a translation of the Hebrew OT texts and Greek NT texts than the LXX was of the OT. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 If you don't like people to "misrepresent" your position or your motives, then don't do it to others, Gerhard. I only repeated what you told me-- that you believe the translators are dishonest and that they purposely mistranslate the Bible. Originally Posted By: Gerhard You also said that I said that they are "ignorant", which I NEVER said or would say! On the contrary, I would allow the translators no excuse or mitigation 'ignorance' would have given them. Are you claiming, then, that all the errors that occur in translations are deliberate attempts to deceive their readers? I assumed that even you would think some of the errors are due to ignorance--- that is, ignorance of what you consider the truth about Christ's resurrection being on the Sabbath. Am I mistaken in this? Is it your belief that ALL translators know perfectly well that Christ was raised on the Sabbath and they are merely using trickery to fool everyone by such mistranslated verses (in your view) as John 19: 39; 20: 1 and Mark 16: 9? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 The NIV is the work of the devil; it misrepresents the Written Word of God FOR TO IDOLATROUSLY WORSHIP SUNDAY. ONLY ITS ABUSE OF THE GREEK IS WORSE THAN ITS IDOLATRY. OK, so which translations do you have in your bookcases? I believe you mentioned before that you have 10 different translations. Which translations do you use most often? Which ones do you place the most confidence in? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted October 25, 2012 Moderators Posted October 25, 2012 ...Again I shall call on God my only Help and Witness ... through HIS WORD THE SCRIPTURES. You mangle the Scriptures, Gerhard. You've given proof that you don't know the Greek language and in fact you've conceded that you know very little about the language or about the Bible generally-- so why do you think your "translations" are superior to those of the best translations of Scripture in English? Have you ever tried taking your "translations" and ideas of John 20: 1, etc., to a teacher of NT Greek, and asking him or her if your understanding is correct or incorrect? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.