Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is Jesus the 'Eternal Father'? | Is 9:6 | Ray | 6286 | ||
Hi Nolan, I have to reopen this topic because I don't think you answered my question. I asked, and pay attention to the capitalization please, "Why do people need a son of man?" You answered, "Translators need a 'Son of Man'..." Do you see why I believe you did not answer the question? You gave references to the Son of Man and they were all capitalized. Why do we need to bring Jesus down to our level and make Him a man? You say that He did not sin. Then make Him God and capitalize Him as a Man. You don't call Him the son of God. You don't think that He is Joseph's illegitimate son. Why must translators make Him a man? It just now dawned on me. If we make Him a Son of Man then we make the Man the Father of the Son and that is what you are denying. I would lead you to Matthew 21:33-46. |
||||||
2 | Capitals? What was your question Ray? | Is 9:6 | Makarios | 6306 | ||
Ray, I don't understand what you are asking or saying here.. Please clarify for me so that I can give you an informative response. As for translating Jesus as 'son of man' (lower capitals) this is done usually to focus on Jesus' humanity. Is this what you are referring to? As for the translators and why they chose to or not to capitalize certain things, that is probably best answered by the translators themselves. | ||||||
3 | Capitals? What was your question Ray? | Is 9:6 | Searcher56 | 6309 | ||
Capitalization is not in the orginial text. Transaltions vary on if the captialize a name/ attribute of God. Christ was both fully human and fully God. |
||||||
4 | Capitals? What was your question Ray? | Is 9:6 | Makarios | 6313 | ||
Yes, this is where we can find agreement: That Christ was both fully human and fully God. Praise the Lord that we have a High Priest that is able to relate to and understand all of our sufferings! I'm willing to look at specific passages with you in the New Testament to see if the Greek specifically 'capitalizes' each noun that refers to the person of Christ. I don't know what end that this would serve, except to help understand why certain translators decided to capitalize here or there and some didn't. I do not have a complete copy of the Hebrew here with me, so I would be ill-suited to help you with Hebrew. But I would be willing to look at the Greek. | ||||||
5 | Capitals? What was your question Ray? | Is 9:6 | Ray | 6367 | ||
Hi Nolan, I think I can agree on fully human, also. I expect some help on a new question under Hebrews 7:26. | ||||||
6 | Capitals? What was your question Ray? | Is 9:6 | Makarios | 6812 | ||
Hello Ray! Hebrews 7:26 is describing Jesus as our "high priest". The word usage in the Greek for 'high priest' in this verse does not refer to God directly (as far as specific word usage) and therefore does not denote capitalization for the noun 'high priest'. Therefore, 'high priest' in the context of this verse is indeed describing Jesus as our perfect and exalted high priest, but is using a human term ('high priest' as pertaining to the Law vv. 28) to describe Jesus, and is therefore not capitalized. We can contrast the word usage here with vv. 25 and 27-28, where Diety is directly referred to (and rendering capitalization), while the human term as pertaining to the law, 'high priest', remains uncapitalized. | ||||||