Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bible Study The Gospel of John, Greek discussion

The discussion about JTB fails to take into account a very simple point, which illuminates the doctrines of v1.

There was a man sent from God.

The preposition used for from is para, which almost invariably means 'from alongside', or 'by the side of'.

wiki:
originating from the Greek preposition para that means: "beside, next to, near, from,"
<SNIP>.

You need to have a GREEK LEXICON to explain a Greek word, especially since that word means much more than what you have expressed..

Can you see the error you make?

  1. You take an English source, wiki, and type in a Greek transliterated word.
  2. You then take that single meaning and interject it into the text, not knowing either the context of the word, nor the range of possible usages.
  3. You then take that literally, and ask a question based upon your assumption.

The term that best explains that process is the logical error of "begging the question". It is true 100% of the time that an error of logic always results in an erroneous conclusion. IIf you do not understand what I am stating, and btw I am not being snarky in saying this, please look it up, OK?

BTW I an curious about your user name. With what are you out of sync?
 
You need to have a GREEK LEXICON to explain a Greek word, especially since that word means much more than what you have expressed..

Can you see the error you make?

  1. You take an English source, wiki, and type in a Greek transliterated word.
  2. You then take that single meaning and interject it into the text, not knowing either the context of the word, nor the range of possible usages.
  3. You then take that literally, and ask a question based upon your assumption.

The term that best explains that process is the logical error of "begging the question". It is true 100% of the time that an error of logic always results in an erroneous conclusion. IIf you do not understand what I am stating, and btw I am not being snarky in saying this, please look it up, OK?

BTW I an curious about your user name. With what are you out of sync?

Hi Grace

I own Grimm-Thayer's Greek Lexicon which agrees with the above comments I made.

I own Moulton and Milligan's Vocabulary of New Testament Greek.

I own Strong's concordance which gives those definitions.

I own Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon

I own Wilson's Diaglott, which as you may know, is an interlinear Greek English translation.

I own Eric Jay's Grammar of New Testament Greek.

And so on.

Asyncritus is a New Testament name, taken from Romans 16: 14. It means 'incomparable', and before you start leaping up and down on me, I chose it because I liked the sound, and only a lot later did I discover the meaning of the word.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Grace

I own Grimm-Thayer's Greek Lexicon which agrees with the above comments I made.

I own Moulton and Milligan's Vocabulary of New Testament Greek.

I own Strong's concordance which gives those definitions.

I own Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon

I own Wilson's Diaglott, which as you may know, is an interlinear Greek English translation.

I own Eric Jay's Grammar of New Testament Greek.

And so on.

Asyncritus is a New Testament name, taken from Romans 16: 14. It means 'incomparable', and before you start leaping up and down on me, I chose it because I liked the sound, and only a lot later did I discover the meaning of the word.

No one "jumps on another" here, Asyncritus.

What we do is discuss, show our supporting data, and think because unlike some sites, there is nothing to "win" here.

Here is a resource that you should have because it has all what you cited, plus other sources.

4123 παρά (para): prep.; ≡ Str 3844; TDNT 5.727—1. LN 83.25 at, by alongside; a position near a location (Mt 20:30; Lk 9:47; Jn 19:25; Ac 16:13); 2. LN 83.9 among, with; in a location (Mt 28:15); 3. LN 84.5 from extension from a source (Lk 2:1; 6:19; Jn 6:46; Mk 16:9 v.r.); 4. LN 90.14 from, by, of; marker of a source (Mk 12:2; Jn 4:9; Ac 3:2; 2Jn 3); 5. LN 90.3 for, by, with; a marker of a potential agent (Mt 19:26; Lk 1:37); 6. LN 90.20 in opinion of the view-point the participant (Ro 2:13); 7. LN 89.137 contrary to, in opposition to (Ro 1:26; Ro 16:17); 8. LN 89.132 instead of, a marker of contrast (Ro 1:25); 9. LN 89.111 with; a marker of association (Lk 11:37); 10. LN 89.25 because of; marker of cause or reason (1Co 12:15); 11. LN 78.29 beyond, to a greater degree than (Lk 13:2); 12. LN 59.76 less, minus (2Co 11:24), note: see LN index for a fuller treatment of the lexical units.​

Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament).

John 1:6
Ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος, ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ Θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἰωάνης·

pará [from, beside, before, etc.]


A. With the Genitive (Ablative).
1. Spatially the sense in such cases is “out of,” “from beside,” “from.”
2. The word then denotes authorship: “from.” In this sense it comes a. after verbs of asking, demanding, etc. (cf. Mt. 20:20), or verbs of taking, receiving, or buying (cf. Mt. 18:19; Mk. 12:2; Eph. 6:8). Another use b. is with verbs in the passive to denote the doer or logical subject (cf. Lk. 1:45; Jn. 1:6). We also find it c. in movements that stress the starting point or

B. With the Dative (Locative).
C. With the Accusative.​


Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

What I have done is copied just a part of a 500 word essay on that one word παρὰ . As you can see that the case of the noun is very important in the Greek grammar as it relates to the word παρὰ . It is good that you own all those resources, and it it is good that you attempt to learn what the Greek actually says, but in saying that, it is also vital to understand the grammar of the Koine Greek. Usually that is taught in Bible college, or in seminary.

No, I am not attempting to play "one up" with you, but I am attempting to let you know why and how you created that logical error called "begging the question" which leads to a false conclusion.

Also, I am NOT calling you a "cultist" but having logical errors, and basing a belief on a faulty meaning of a word is what the cultists do. Therefore I am only showing you how to avoid false doctrines, such as what you came up with.

What I am attempting to do is to demonstrate the source and conclusion of your logical error. The source of your error is that the references that you used are simply inadequate, and that is not a judgment against you, but a recognition of where you are now. Because you began with a faulty source, your conclusion was likewise false. As you can see from what I posted, wiki is inadequate to demonstrate that the case of the noun is determinative in the meaning of that "simple Greek word,παρὰ .

The discussion about JTB fails to take into account a very simple point, which illuminates the doctrines of v1.
There was a man sent from God.
The preposition used for from is para, which almost invariably means 'from alongside', or 'by the side of'.
wiki:
originating from the Greek preposition para that means: "beside, next to, near, from,"
Given that this is correct, and I think it is, then you are faced with the problem of JTB also being by the side of God - if, you insist on taking it literally.
<SNIP>.

THAT is why it is impossible for the world-class scholars who created those books which I cited to come up with the conclusion that you expressed. Besides, that is contrary to what the Bible says elsewhere. One true adage that I use regarding wiki is that due to its nature of having many contributors is "Any idiot can write something for wiki, and many idiots do just that."

That is why it is extremely important to be very careful when you cite anything from wiki.

When you respond, please understand that this is not a personal attack. I never insinuated that you are ugly, or that your mother dresses you funny or that she smokes cigars. OK?
 
4123 παρά (para): prep.; ≡ Str 3844; TDNT 5.727—1. LN 83.25 at, by alongside; a position near a location (Mt 20:30; Lk 9:47; Jn 19:25; Ac 16:13);

Just as I said. And not that this is the primary meaning of para, and is listed first.

Your world class trinitarian scholars couldn't possibly translate that exactly, because they all recognise the problem which the above creates for the doctrine.

I checked this with Dr Brash Bonsalll who was running the NT Greek Course I attended, and he couldn't explain it either. So don't despair. Just take the blinkers off and see clearly.
 
Just as I said. And not that this is the primary meaning of para, and is listed first..

Just some friendly reminders here:

This is a Bible STUDY section.
This is NOT a debating forum
Trinitarianism is not germane to this section; it is best discussed on the "Ye Old Theology" forum

Finally, if you wish to discuss your JW theology, please go to that section and do it there.
 
Just as I said. And not that this is the primary meaning of para, and is listed first.

Your world class trinitarian scholars couldn't possibly translate that exactly, because they all recognise the problem which the above creates for the doctrine.

I checked this with Dr Brash Bonsalll who was running the NT Greek Course I attended, and he couldn't explain it either. So don't despair. Just take the blinkers off and see clearly.

I want to see comments like "take the blinkers off" to cease. Remember, this is not a forum for debate or insults. Thank you.
 
John 1:9
Ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινὸν, ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον, ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. (ESV)
 
John 1:9
Ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινὸν, ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον, ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. (ESV)

What is your point here?
 
What is your point here?
I'm just posting the Gospel of John verse by verse, hoping to generate discussion.
I'm also hoping to generate interest in the original language of the New Testament.

What do you think of John 1:9?
I'm looking at the way the writer makes a clear distinction between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ.
He calls Jesus Christ the phos, the alethinon, (τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινὸν), the light, the true. But he calls John "a man sent from God".

I wanted to post the verses without a lot of my own commentary, because I think y'alls comments are better than mine. If I say what I think, I don't learn anything, but if I hear what you think, I can learn something. I guess that's a little selfish of me, but oh well...
 
John 1:10
ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν, καὶ ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω.
He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. (ESV)

This verse makes me sad every time I read it.
He came into the very world he created, but the world didn't recognize him. (NLT)
This is his own world, but the world rejected him. He created it, He sustains it, He died to save us, and what do we do? Reject him.
 
John 1:10
ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ἦν, καὶ ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω.
He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. (ESV)

This verse makes me sad every time I read it.
He came into the very world he created, but the world didn't recognize him. (NLT)
This is his own world, but the world rejected him. He created it, He sustains it, He died to save us, and what do we do? Reject him.

Oh boy, are you right. When I look at Philippians 2:5-9 I get the same sadness and an awe of His love for us....I have always wondered about verse 6 (ASV) "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." That verse has had so many different translations that it's hard for folk to grasp the meaning. I think it means that Jesus did not feel that He must stay with the Father, but would come down to us. I'm curious what the Greek says.
 
Thanks Chopper,
Here is Philippians 2:6
ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ,
who - in - form - God - being - not - what is grasped - considered - the - to be - equal - God
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, (ESV)
http://biblehub.com/text/philippians/2-6.htm

The awesome power and humility of Jesus Christ. Wow.
 
Thanks Chopper,
Here is Philippians 2:6
ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ,
who - in - form - God - being - not - what is grasped - considered - the - to be - equal - God
who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, (ESV)
http://biblehub.com/text/philippians/2-6.htm

The awesome power and humility of Jesus Christ. Wow.

Wow, thank you very much.
 
John 1:11
εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον.
He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. ESV

The words ἴδια and οἱ ἴδιοι (idia and hoi idioi) are interesting.
"One's own, belonging to one, private, personal; one's own people, one's own family, home, property."
http://biblehub.com/greek/2398.htm

He came to his own, those who belong to him, his private people, his personal people, his own people, his own family, his home, his property, and they didn't even receive him in.
 
John 1:11
εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθεν, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον.
He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. ESV

The words ἴδια and οἱ ἴδιοι (idia and hoi idioi) are interesting.
"One's own, belonging to one, private, personal; one's own people, one's own family, home, property."
http://biblehub.com/greek/2398.htm

He came to his own, those who belong to him, his private people, his personal people, his own people, his own family, his home, his property, and they didn't even receive him in.

Timothy I wonder, did the knowledge of this rejection, trouble Jesus? Or since He knew this would happen, He took it in stride. If it were me, even if I knew, it would still bother me quite a bit.
 
Timothy I wonder, did the knowledge of this rejection, trouble Jesus? Or since He knew this would happen, He took it in stride. If it were me, even if I knew, it would still bother me quite a bit.
I don't know, I agree, I think it would. He is full of Grace, though. He knows us and loves us anyway, how great is that?

John 1:12
ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα Θεοῦ γενέσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ,
But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, ESV

But those who did receive him, he gave them the right to become children of God, those who believe in his name.
(I rearranged the translation so the phrases line up with the Greek phrases.)
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: KJV (The word even, is italicized indicating that it isn't in the Greek.) The word τέκνα is translated "sons", I like the ESV better here, translating it "children". (I hesitate to criticize the great KJV of the Bible, but...that's my opinion.)
http://biblehub.com/greek/5043.htm
 
I don't know, I agree, I think it would. He is full of Grace, though. He knows us and loves us anyway, how great is that?

John 1:12
ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα Θεοῦ γενέσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ,
But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, ESV

But those who did receive him, he gave them the right to become children of God, those who believe in his name.
(I rearranged the translation so the phrases line up with the Greek phrases.)
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: KJV (The word even, is italicized indicating that it isn't in the Greek.) The word τέκνα is translated "sons", I like the ESV better here, translating it "children". (I hesitate to criticize the great KJV of the Bible, but...that's my opinion.)
http://biblehub.com/greek/5043.htm

I agree with your estimation of the ESV. I was a "KJV only" for quite a few years. When I purchased a paperback copy of the ESV and began to compare it with the KJV, I delighted in the fact that I thought the ESV was more accurate.

You know? the more I read your posts, the more I see a very deep love that you have for our Lord. Bravo my friend!
 
I agree with your estimation of the ESV. I was a "KJV only" for quite a few years. When I purchased a paperback copy of the ESV and began to compare it with the KJV, I delighted in the fact that I thought the ESV was more accurate.

You know? the more I read your posts, the more I see a very deep love that you have for our Lord. Bravo my friend!
Thank you Chopper.
I know we have our disagreements, (You and I) but I hope we have more in common in our love for Jesus Christ.

The KJV is a great translation, but I really like all of the translations. (With one exception, the JW Bible, the NWT)
 
Thank you Chopper.
I know we have our disagreements, (You and I) but I hope we have more in common in our love for Jesus Christ.

The KJV is a great translation, but I really like all of the translations. (With one exception, the JW Bible, the NWT)

lol, yea I don't favor the JW or the NWT. You know Ti.m we have had a few disagreements but your a good friend here in the forum.I certainly appreciate your posts thank you very much.
 
Back
Top