Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Dr. B. What does aggelos mean? | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171714 | ||
Dear Mark, Thanks for the point regarding the active voice of the verb "Anabaino" - to ascend. I can see where you're coming from, but I don't think that you are necessarily correct. In Matthew 17:27 Peter is told to use a line and hook to catch a fish. When he does so the fish "cometh up" [anabaino in the active voice] Now did the fish decide to come up of its own power and choice, or did it only come up because Peter caused it to come up? The fact that when Jesus ascended he did it in the active voice, merely means that he was the one doing the action of ascending. Similarly, taking a look at the active voice of "Katabaino" - to descend - does not indicate that Jesus descended under his own power. In Luke 9:54 the disciples James and John asked Jesus, "wilt thou that we command fire to come down [katabaino] from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?" Katabaino is again in the active voice, yet it is hardly possible that the fire descended of its own power and volition - it would clearly be sent from God. Likewise with Acts 10:11 and Acts 11:5. The vessel Peter saw in a vision was sent by God - it didn't travel of its own power. And likewise James 1:17 "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down [katabaino - active] from the Father of lights" Again, this very clearly shows that something or someone that God causes to ascend or descend can be spoken of in the active voice. I hope that this helps. Yrs, Dr. B. |
||||||
2 | Dr. B. What does aggelos mean? | Eph 4:9 | mark d seyler | 171741 | ||
Hi Dr. B, You give me some interesting food for thought. The thing about me is that I simply read the word and believe what I read. If the Bible says that the fish ascended after Peter hooked it, ok. That does not offend my sensibilities. A fish can do that. So now I realize a little more of God's grace. Peter only had to obey Jesus and put his line in the water. He didn't even have to reel the fish in. It just swam up to him. Regarding Jesus descending - why could He Not descend "under His own power" - in the active voice? Again, I see no problems there. The disciple ask "do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven?" I find it interesting that they are talking about "commanding" fire to do something, that if they commanded, fire would obey them, and come down from heaven. In this verse, "fire" is the accusitive noun following the verb "command", and so they are clearly talking about telling "fire" what to do, with the presumption that "fire" would obey their command, and "come down", as an active voice verb. The fire would be obeying their command, but it would be the fire that was comming down of its own accord. So I see no difficulty there. Could not a sheet in a vision "move of its own accord"? Just because it was sent, does not require that invisible hands carried it. Where it was taken up again, that is in the passive voice. But of its coming down, that is the active voice. But this is a vision, and God can have the visions He sends do whatever He wants them to do. Likewise for James 1:17, God can send, and what He sends goes. God can call, and what He calls comes. But as I read the accounts of Elijah and Enoch, the LORD "took" Elijah, and Enoch was "taken" by God. When I check the Septuagint on the story of Elijah, where the LITV says Elijah "went up" in a whirlwind, the Septuagint says "anelemphthe", which is (if I'm understanding correctly) the passive voice of analambano, to recieve up. All of these passages are literally interpreted, without bias, and my ideas of what they describe formed soley and entirely on the text. I find that all are in harmony with the rest of Scripture (to the best of my knowledge). So this is what I believe. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||