Give us your absolute bottom-line Christian essentials

[CherubRam]

Neither the Hebrew to english from psalms 45:6 nor the greek to english from hebrews 1:8 states "O god of the living one" that I read.

Psalm 45:6 Hebrew Text Analysis

Hebrews 1:8 Greek Text Analysis

Nor any translation from Hebrews 1:8 that I read

Hebrews 1:8 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

In addition to about the Son
He also says,

“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end.

That is because they did not bother to translate it.

 

[Randy]

That is because they did not bother to translate it.

"text Analysis" links provided states otherwise.

 

[jeremiah1five]

That is because they did not bother to translate it.

Actually, they did bother to translate Psalms 45:6 into English and here is the text:

6Your throne, O God, [endures] forever and ever, [and] justice [is] the scepter of Your kingdom.

6כִּסְאֲךָ֣ אֱ֭לֹהִים עוֹלָ֣ם וָעֶ֑ד שֵׁ֥בֶט מִ֝ישֹׁ֗ר שֵׁ֣בֶט מַלְכוּתֶֽךָ׃​

 

[TMal3]

That is because they did not bother to translate it.

Still ignoring the correct translation of John 1.1. Can't just dismiss it because you don't like it.

 

[CherubRam]

If you guys are going to play stupid, there won't be no reason to talk to you.

 

[TMal3]

If you guys are going to play stupid, there won't be no reason to talk to you.

Uncalled for, poor grammar, and not a rebuttal to the consensus of "stupid" scholars around the world who all translate John 1.1 as

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"

I was honest enough to acknowledge the Johnannine Comma interpolation in 1 John 5. It's time for you to be honest, and at least acknowledge the scholarly consensus disagrees with your "translation" of John 1.1.

 

[CherubRam]

Uncalled for, poor grammar, and not a rebuttal to the consensus of "stupid" scholars around the world who all translate John 1.1 as

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God"

I was honest enough to acknowledge the Johnannine Comma interpolation in 1 John 5. It's time for you to be honest, and at least acknowledge the scholarly consensus disagrees with your "translation" of John 1.1.

They are being less than honest.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

John 1:1
Greek:
en arche eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ton theon kai theos eimi ho logos

Interlinear:
en (in) arche (beginning) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word) kai (and) ho (the) logos (word) eimi (was) pos (toward or with) ton (TON is a special definite article "the" meaning the one or only, it appears as TON instead of O in the Greek) theon (Divine Eternal) kai (and) theos (divine) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word)

In English we have:
In beginning was the word, and the word was with the only Divine Eternal, and divine was the word.

Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the only) before Divine Eternal?

 

[TMal3]

en (in) arche (beginning) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word) kai (and) ho (the) logos (word) eimi (was) pos (toward or with) ton (TON is a special definite article "the" meaning the one or only, it appears as TON instead of O in the Greek)

Thank you for your reply. We've been over this part before. Ton does not mean "one" or "only" (mono = one, and monon = only). Ton simply = "the." 'O is the nominative case ending used with the subject. Ton is the accusative case ending used with the direct object. Both mean the same thing: "the." The endings simply identify grammar/parts of speech.

theon (Divine Eternal)

Theon = God. Theon ending is simply the accusative case, which tells us this is the direct object receiving the action of the verb ("was with"). The definite article of a noun must agree in case, gender, and number. Theon is the accusative case, masculine singular. The article has to agree with the noun by the rules of grammar, which is why the article is ton, because ton is also the accusative case, masculine, singular.

Theios* = divine
Aionios* = eternal

*Neither word appears in John 1.1

kai (and) theos (divine) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word)

Theos = God; not divine. The-os is the nominative case, masculine, singular; indicating that this word is the subject of the clause.

There is no mono ("one"), monon ("only"), theios ("divine"), or aionios ("eternal") in John 1.1.

Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the only) before Divine Eternal?

Well again, t-on is not "the only," but simply "the" (accusative case, masculine, singular; the article must agree with the noun The-on which is also accusative, masculine, singular indicating it's the direct object in the clause). It is also very common to drop the article, so that it flows well in English (and not just here, in lots of places in the NT). But even if we translate ton it still doesn’t say "the only," but reads as follows:

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word

It certainly doesn't say "The only divine eternal."

Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?

 

[CherubRam]

Thank you for your reply. We've been over this part before. Ton does not mean "one" or "only" (mono = one, and monon = only). Ton simply = "the." 'O is the nominative case ending used with the subject. Ton is the accusative case ending used with the direct object. Both mean the same thing: "the." The endings simply identify grammar/parts of speech.

Theon = God. Theon ending is simply the accusative case, which tells us this is the direct object receiving the action of the verb ("was with"). The definite article of a noun must agree in case, gender, and number. Theon is the accusative case, masculine singular. The article has to agree with the noun by the rules of grammar, which is why the article is ton, because ton is also the accusative case, masculine, singular.

Theios* = divine
Aionios* = eternal

*Neither word appears in John 1.1

Theos = God; not divine. The-os is the nominative case, masculine, singular; indicating that this word is the subject of the clause.

There is no mono ("one"), monon ("only"), theios ("divine"), or aionios ("eternal") in John 1.1.

Well again, t-on is not "the only," but simply "the" (accusative case, masculine, singular; the article must agree with the noun The-on which is also accusative, masculine, singular indicating it's the direct object in the clause). It is also very common to drop the article, so that it flows well in English (and not just here, in lots of places in the NT). But even if we translate ton it still doesn’t say "the only," but reads as follows:

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word

It certainly doesn't say "The only divine eternal."

Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?

The search engines are going off to la la land, so I can not give an answer at this time.

 

[Randy]

The search engines are going off to la la land, so I can not give an answer at this time.

So you don't know yourself? You need to search for someone who states what you like to hear and all other scholars who do have the expertise of themselves are dishonest when they conclude that the most "honest" reading is the "word" has the same nature as "God" as in the Father? This doesn't offend me as I read the how. Col 1:19 -Gifted, not formed, from the will of another. The Son is the mirror image of the invisible God. God has placed all things in His hands and in Him all things are held together and sustained by His powerful word. When the last enemy has been destroyed, death, then He will hand the reigns back over to His God.

 

[CherubRam]

So you don't know yourself? You need to search for someone who states what you like to hear and all other scholars who do have the expertise of themselves are dishonest when they conclude that the most "honest" reading is the "word" has the same nature as "God" as in the Father? This doesn't offend me as I read the how. Col 1:19 -Gifted, not formed, from the will of another. The Son is the mirror image of the invisible God. God has placed all things in His hands and in Him all things are held together and sustained by His powerful word. When the last enemy has been destroyed, death, then He will hand the reigns back over to His God.

Good bye.

Genesis 1:2
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Romans 8:11
And if the (Spirit / Yahwah) of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he (Yahwah) who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

 

[Randy]

Good bye.

Genesis 1:2
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Romans 8:11
And if the (Spirit / Yahwah) of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he (Yahwah) who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

So? That doesn't take away from the fullness of God dwelling in the Son. Jesus is all that the Father is. "God" Nor that all things are held together in Him.

Its clear to me, the Spirit of God acts on the will of the mind of the Son so both He raised Himself and God raised Him are both truth.

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”


Have you not also read - the Spirit conveys the presence of Christ in the believer.

And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.


Anyway we all eagerly await your google searched answers to Tmal3's questions. Please don't let me sidetrack you.

 

[Free]

They are being less than honest.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

John 1:1
Greek:
en arche eimi ho logos kai ho logos eimi pros ton theon kai theos eimi ho logos

Interlinear:
en (in) arche (beginning) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word) kai (and) ho (the) logos (word) eimi (was) pos (toward or with) ton (TON is a special definite article "the" meaning the one or only, it appears as TON instead of O in the Greek) theon (Divine Eternal) kai (and) theos (divine) eimi (was) ho (the) logos (word)

In English we have:
In beginning was the word, and the word was with the only Divine Eternal, and divine was the word.

Why do translators drop off the definite article TON (the only) before Divine Eternal?

John 1:1

1 En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos
1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος , καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν , καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος .
1 In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with - God and God was the Word

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

Matthew 4:21

21 Kai probas ekeithen eiden allous dyo adelphous Iakōbon ton tou Zebedaiou kai Iōannēn
21 Καὶ προβὰς ἐκεῖθεν , εἶδεν ἄλλους , δύο ἀδελφούς , Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου , καὶ Ἰωάννην
21 And having gone on from there He saw others two brothers James the [son] - of Zebedee and John

ton adelphon autou en tō ploiō meta Zebedaiou tou patros autōn katartizontas ta diktya autōn kai
τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ , ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ μετὰ Ζεβεδαίου τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῶν , καταρτίζοντας τὰ δίκτυα αὐτῶν ; καὶ
the brother of him in the boat with Zebedee the father of them mending the nets of them and

ekalesen autous
ἐκάλεσεν αὐτούς .
He called them

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/4.htm

I just came across Matt 4:21 this morning while looking up something else, so I though I would just to add to what TMal3 said. If ton really means "the only," how is it that James is "the only" son of Zebedee, but has a brother John who is also the son of Zebedee?

Here is a link about the definite article in koine GreeK (note the masculine accusative): https://ugg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/determiner_article.html

 

[CherubRam]

John 1:1

1 En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos
1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος , καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν , καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος .
1 In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with - God and God was the Word

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

Matthew 4:21

21 Kai probas ekeithen eiden allous dyo adelphous Iakōbon ton tou Zebedaiou kai Iōannēn
21 Καὶ προβὰς ἐκεῖθεν , εἶδεν ἄλλους , δύο ἀδελφούς , Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου , καὶ Ἰωάννην
21 And having gone on from there He saw others two brothers James the [son] - of Zebedee and John

ton adelphon autou en tō ploiō meta Zebedaiou tou patros autōn katartizontas ta diktya autōn kai
τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ , ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ μετὰ Ζεβεδαίου τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῶν , καταρτίζοντας τὰ δίκτυα αὐτῶν ; καὶ
the brother of him in the boat with Zebedee the father of them mending the nets of them and

ekalesen autous
ἐκάλεσεν αὐτούς .
He called them

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/4.htm

I just came across Matt 4:21 this morning while looking up something else, so I though I would just to add to what TMal3 said. If ton really means "the only," how is it that James is "the only" son of Zebedee, but has a brother John who is also the son of Zebedee?

Here is a link about the definite article in koine GreeK (note the masculine accusative): https://ugg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/determiner_article.html

The - dash mark under TON means that it is not translated. The scholars are not always honest about translation.

 

[Free]

The - dash mark under TON means that it is not translated. The scholars are not always honest about translation.

Which is not at all relevant. I've addressed this before. First, we typically don't speak like that in English. Second, the definite article is often not translated, but is when it grammatically makes sense in English. Third, we know there is only one God, so saying "the God" when it is not grammatically needed is unnecessary.

 

[TMal3]

John 1:1

1 En archē ēn ho Logos kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon kai Theos ēn ho Logos
1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος , καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν , καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος .
1 In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with - God and God was the Word

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

Matthew 4:21

21 Kai probas ekeithen eiden allous dyo adelphous Iakōbon ton tou Zebedaiou kai Iōannēn
21 Καὶ προβὰς ἐκεῖθεν , εἶδεν ἄλλους , δύο ἀδελφούς , Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου , καὶ Ἰωάννην
21 And having gone on from there He saw others two brothers James the [son] - of Zebedee and John

ton adelphon autou en tō ploiō meta Zebedaiou tou patros autōn katartizontas ta diktya autōn kai
τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ , ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ μετὰ Ζεβεδαίου τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῶν , καταρτίζοντας τὰ δίκτυα αὐτῶν ; καὶ
the brother of him in the boat with Zebedee the father of them mending the nets of them and

ekalesen autous
ἐκάλεσεν αὐτούς .
He called them

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/4.htm

I just came across Matt 4:21 this morning while looking up something else, so I though I would just to add to what TMal3 said. If ton really means "the only," how is it that James is "the only" son of Zebedee, but has a brother John who is also the son of Zebedee?

Here is a link about the definite article in koine GreeK (note the masculine accusative): https://ugg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/determiner_article.html

Yes, and this is really basic stuff. The type of thing you learn in first year biblical Greek in the second or third chapter (!).

Whereas in English we have one word for the definite article ("the"), Greek has a couple dozen different words, but they ALL mean the same thing: "The." Everything highlighted aqua, violet, or yellow in the chart below means "the." Greek simply uses different endings to identify the part of speech. 'O (ho) is "the" used with the nominative case (subject); tou is "the" used with a genitive case (possessive); tw (tow) is "the" used with the dative case (indirect object); and our 'infamous' tov (ton) is "the" used with the accusative case (direct object).

Nouns have their own inflected endings to indicate part of speech as well:

Nominative (main subject): Theos = God
Genitive (possessive): Theou = of God
Dative (indirect object): Thew = [to/for] God
Accusative (direct object): Theov = [verb+] God

*When the definite article accompanies a noun, the two must agree in case, gender, and number:

Nominative: 'o (ho) Theos = the God (used when God is the main subject)

Genitive: tou Theou = [the] of God (used to indicate possessive; like huios (son) Theou (of God) = son of God

Dative: tw Thew = [to/for] the God (used when God is the indirect object)

Accusative: tov (ton) Theov (Theon) = [verb+] the God (used when God is the direct object receiving the action of the verb. Like in John 1.1 "the Word was with God." The Word is the main subject so is in the nominative case (Logos; notice how that's similar to Theos, which is the nominative for God when God is the main subject). Who was with the Word? Answer: God, so God is the direct object. In Greek this is indicated by using the accusative case: nv pros ["was with"] tov Theov ["the God"]

*That is literally all tov Theov (ton Theon) means. It simply means "the God" and tells us God is the direct object receiving the action of the verb ("was with").

 

[TMal3]

The - dash mark under TON means that it is not translated. The scholars are not always honest about translation.

No, it simply means you don't understand Greek.

Tov Theov (ton Theon) simply means "the God" and tells us God is the direct object receiving the action of the verb ("was with").

It is very common to leave the definite article untranslated so it flows better in English.

But let's be "honest" and go ahead and translate it:

"In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with the God. And God was the Word."

Even when translated (tov = the) it still doesn't mean "the only" nor does Theov (Theon) "God" mean the "divine eternal."

You still have yet to answer this question:

Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?

 

[CherubRam]

No, it simply means you don't understand Greek.

Tov Theov (ton Theon) simply means "the God" and tells us God is the direct object receiving the action of the verb ("was with").

It is very common to leave the definite article untranslated so it flows better in English.

But let's be "honest" and go ahead and translate it:

"In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with the God. And God was the Word."

Even when translated (tov = the) it still doesn't mean "the only" nor does Theov (Theon) "God" mean the "divine eternal."

You still have yet to answer this question:

Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?

The Greek word TON is before most names of people and goes untranslated. Does Greek have two different words that mean "the?" I think not! The translators are often less than honest.

 

[TMal3]

The Greek word TON is before most names of people and goes untranslated. Does Greek have two different words that mean "the?" I think not! The translators are often less than honest.

No, you don't understand Greek, as I said. There are approximately TWENTY-FOUR DIFFERENT WORDS for "THE" in Greek:

Whereas in English we have one word for the definite article ("the"), Greek has a couple dozen different words, but they ALL mean the same thing: "The." Everything highlighted aqua, violet, or yellow in the chart below means "the." Greek uses different endings to identify the part of speech, that's all. 'O (ho) is "the" used with the nominative case (and identifies the main subject); tou is "the" used with a genitive case (and identifies possessiveness); tw (tow) is "the" used with the dative case (and identifies the indirect object); and our tov (ton) is "the" used with the accusative case (and identifies the direct object that receives the action of the verb in a sentence or clause).

You still have yet to answer this question:

Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?

 

[dcdurel]

To go to heaven, all we need to do is repent of our sins and choose to love God and our neighbor.
To be a Christian, is the same thing, and then become a follower of Jesus as best we know how.