Results 1 - 15 of 15
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30127 | ||
I was comparing John 1:2 and Matthew 9:3. The word that I was looking at was "outos" in Greek. It is translated "This One" or "He" in the NASB and NKJ for John 1:2. It is translated "The same" in the King James referring back to the Word in verse one. In Matthew 9:3 "outos" is translated "This (fellow) blasphemes." in the NASB. "This Man blasphemes." in the NKJ. And "This (man) blasphemeth." in the King James. Does anyone wish to discuss this comparison? |
||||||
2 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Jesusman | 30137 | ||
OK? As for John 1:2, remember what the verse says. "This was in the beginning with God." Now, there are two possible meanings here. Before I get into that, it is pertanent to clarify a few things. First, "outos" is a pronoun meaning "this". It is often used descriptively with another noun, for example "this chair", "this house", and etc. However, when it stands byitself, with a definite article, as in John 1:2, it functions as a noun on it's own. Thus giving the meaning of "this one", as in John 1:2. Now, the question then becomes, "what is 'this' referring to?" Now, in the context of John 1:2, you have two possibilities. "This" is referring to "the Word" or to the preexistance of "the Word" that is described in verse 1, as if to say "and vise versa". Both possibilities fit here in John 1:2. "outos" could be referring to the "Word", and summing up what was said in verse 1. Also, it could be trying to describe "God" in the same manner of pre-existance as it did for "the Word". Thus saying something like "in the beginning was God, and God was with the Word, and God was the Word." This is what I personally believe. While the first possibility does fit, it the second that I believe because it makes better sense in my mind. As for Matthew 9:3, here you also have "outos" by itself with a definite article. Through the context, we find that "this fellow" is in reference to Jesus. As in John 1:2, "outos" is being used in a similar manner than as a noun would've been used. Jesusman |
||||||
3 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30148 | ||
Greetings Jesusman! Excellent explanation of the demonstrative pronoun! May I make one small correction though? The pronoun 'houtos' does not have a definite article in the Greek text in either John 1:2 or Mt. 9:3. But, everything else you said was right on! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30174 | ||
Hi Morant61, Tim, does the word need a definite article to allow the capitalization of "One"? If the word "He" in John 1:2 was not the beginning of the sentence would it be capitalized? Later, Ray |
||||||
5 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30178 | ||
Greetings Ray! As we have discussed before, Greek didn't follow the same rules of capitalization as English. So, when we discuss capitalization, we are really discussing the application of our rules to the text. In that case, I would capitalize the word in John 1:2 since it is a personal pronoun naming Deity. I wouldn't capitalize Mt. 9:3, simply because the Jews didn't recognize Him as Deity. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30197 | ||
Hi Tim, Can you explain to me now why in Matthew 9:3 "fellow" or "man" is in italics or parenthesis when the same word in John had no problem with being "this ONE"? [emphasis mine]. I agree with the Amplified Version where they capitalized when the belief in Deity of the people in the passage was not known. For after all we know that He is God in the flesh. And, after all, this is God's word; how would He print it? Would He quote unbelievers and write, "This blankety-blank fellow blasphemes?" I think not. And this "Fellow" is Jesus who knows their thoughts, and will in the next verses forgive sins. I think that verse 8 could very well read, "But when the multitudes saw this, they were filled with awe, and glorified God, who had given such authority to such a Fellow." This authority to forgive sins was not given to all men but it was given to this Man; even the expected Son of Man. Just some thoughts. Later, Ray |
||||||
7 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30230 | ||
Greetings Ray! I'm not sure why they put "fellow" in italics. If I had to guess, I would say that strickly speaking, the pronoun means "this" or "this one". "Fellow" is stretching the meaning just a bit. I guess that's why they use the italics. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
8 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30319 | ||
Hi Morant61, Would you discuss with me the ending for anthropos and whether this verse in Matthew is talking about such a Man or whether it is plural. Also, the Interlinear copies talk about "the One having given [sic] such authority to men." Can you speak to the absence of that "One" in Matthew 9:8. Later, Ray |
||||||
9 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30324 | ||
Greetings Ray! Please just call me Tim! :-) In response to your question, let me first translate the verse: Mt. 9:8 - "And after seeing, the crowds were filled with fear and glorifed God, who had given authority such as this to men." If I understand your question correctly, you are basically interested in two parts. 1) The phrase "to men", and 2) The word "such". 1) The word "men" is the Dative, Masculine, Plural of 'antropos'. So, it should be translated as "to men". 2) The word "such" is the Greek word 'toioutos'. It is a pronoun, but in this verse it's antecedent is "authority", not "men". This is definitely the case because a pronoun always has to agree with it's antecedent in case, gender, and number. "Such" is Accusative, Feminine, Singular. The noun "Authority" is also Accusative, Feminine, Singular. Concerning the Interlinear reading, I'm not sure where they possibly got that from. The phrase is literally, "...the God who gave such authority to men." There is no "One" in the passage at all and "such" refers to "authority" not "men". I double checked the other Greek texts just to make sure that there wasn't a variant reading in the TR or the Majority Text, but both have the exact same reading as the UBS text. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
10 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30647 | ||
Hi Tim, I know that we are talking about Matthew here in this thread for John but we are still considering this Man who was God in the flesh. In Matthew I see the people glorifying God, but they are glorifying this Man who gives Himself the authority to forgive sins. You say that the phrase is literally, "...the God who gave such authority to men." The Interlinear says, "the One having given [sic] such authority to men." This is an example of bad English to put forth a perfectly good truth that Jesus was giving Himself this authority. I think that you would translate this verse as,"And after seeing, the crowds were filled with fear and glorified God, the God who gave such authority to men." The Greek has the definite article before and after the word God, and I believe that is the reason for "the One who gave such authority to men." They glorified God there and if they did, they glorified the Man, Jesus also for they are one God. Later, Ray |
||||||
11 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30658 | ||
Greeting Ray! Your translation isn't bad! I would avoid adding the words "the God" and simply go with "who". The reason is that I try to avoid adding words unless they are absolutely required by the text. However, "who" definitely refers to God! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
12 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 30929 | ||
Hi Tim, Would you give me your thoughts if you compare John 18:5,6,8 with John 9:9. Later, Ray | ||||||
13 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 30932 | ||
Greetings Ray! Both Jesus (in John 18:5-8) and the beggar (John 9:9) respond to a question about their identify with the statement "I am (he)". This would be exactly like you asking me if I were Tim Moran, and I replied "I am". Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
14 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Ray | 31585 | ||
Hi Tim, I believe that the (he, He,) is necessary for a clear reading. This is the conversation in John 18:4-8. Jesus: "Whom do you seek? Chief priests: "Jesus the Nazarene." Jesus: "I am (He)." l)The flow of the conversation would require a "That's Me." or "I am Jesus" or "I am the One". 2) Similarly, concerning the beggar, John 9:8, "The neighbors therefore, and those who previously saw him as a beggar, were saying, "Is not this the one who used to sit and beg?" "This is he" still others, "No, but he is like him." Beggar kept saying: "I am (the one)." ***I think that both passages speak to Jesus being the Expected One, the Prophet that was being sought. And for the beggar, He was a Prophet who was for him the Light of the world for Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. ***I think that it is important that people know that He is the One so that we can take to heart the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:23. "Then if anyone says to you, 'Behold, here is the Christ,' or 'There He is,' do not believe him. For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told you in advance." I am reminded of the "What's My Line?" show that was a favorite of my father's when I was growing up. All of the people claiming to be a certain person had to answer questions about themselves and the celebrity panel had to decide who was telling the truth. For they all had from the start of the show said, "I am ..." and only one was telling the truth. Matthew 24:5 is an example of the other side, the converse side of our discussion. Later, Ray |
||||||
15 | Same old question: man or Man? | John 1:1 | Morant61 | 31588 | ||
Greetings Ray! I've actually seen that show! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||