Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

John 1, and Philippians 2:5-7.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
    Your translation would imply that before he was born he was in the form of God.
    Yes. That is precisely what the passage is saying, in the Greek.

    But "And the word became flesh" was written by John.
    And I similarly believe that the author of the fourth gospel would have held a Hellenistic view.

    There you have it, you say it yourself , that "Jesus is God".
    No. I said that Jesus was in the form of God. Equivalent translations for ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ would be "in divine form" or "in the form of deity." Being in the form of God is not the same as being God.

    The word has different "layers" -- an outside meaning and an inside, inner meaning, which is called "mystery", a word more often used by Paul.
    The fact that Paul refers to "mysteries" does not at all imply that the mysteries he's referencing include gematria. In fact, not a single one of Paul's uses of that word shows any implication of gematria being either understood or utilized-- even if you include the disputed Pauline epistles and the Pastoral Epistles.

    -- he might be the same one as the author of John, who has the nuber 153 (and also 38).
    It is extremely unlikely that John of Patmos was the same person who authored the fourth gospel. The two documents are extremely distinct linguistically, rhetorically, and theologically.
    "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
    --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      Yes. That is precisely what the passage is saying, in the Greek.
      Except for that it has "genomenos", the translation of which was in dispute.

      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      And I similarly believe that the author of the fourth gospel would have held a Hellenistic view.
      What discerns the Hellesnistic view from the Jewish?

      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      No. I said that Jesus was in the form of God.
      , yes but "before he was born". Were you also in that form before you was born?

      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      The fact that Paul refers to "mysteries" does not at all imply that the mysteries he's referencing include gematria.
      Paul knows about "the indivisible moment", which is a statement about time not being something that just runs away, and also about eternity, that it is not endless running time.
      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      In fact, not a single one of Paul's uses of that word shows any implication of gematria being either understood or utilized--
      His name "Paulus" was. How do you think Paul came to his conviction that Jesus is the Christ?


      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
      It is extremely unlikely that John of Patmos was the same person who authored the fourth gospel. The two documents are extremely distinct linguistically, rhetorically, and theologically.
      Yet the one has the number 666 and the other the number 153, two numbers that are related to each other, 666 to be found in Genesis 1:31, when the letter "hey"of "hashishi" would have been left out; 153 in Genesis 1:12, "tov" , good, being the 153rd word from the beginning (which would not have been the case wehn the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri", i.e. a tree that was already fruit (= edible = flesh, Herew "basar").
      "hashishi" being 434th word from the begining, 434 being gematria of "delet"= door. You need a key to open, "key of knowledge".

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
        Except for that it has "genomenos", the translation of which was in dispute.
        That's fairly irrelevant. Regardless, the passage still says that Christ Jesus was in the form of God before he was γενόμενος in the likeness of man.

        What discerns the Hellesnistic view from the Jewish?
        Honestly, I'm not very familiar with Hebrew. It's fully possible that the Hebrew language contains a similar idiom for birth with which I am unfamiliar. However, we're talking about a Greek idiom, which means that we need to consider Hellenistic understanding of language.

        , yes but "before he was born". Were you also in that form before you was born?
        That's irrelevant. The question isn't "how can I twist Paul's words to conform to a preconceived theology?" The question is "what do the words which Paul wrote actually mean?" The words Paul wrote very clearly state that Christ Jesus was in the form of God before he came to be in human likeness and before he took the form of a slave.

        Paul knows about "the indivisible moment", which is a statement about time not being something that just runs away, and also about eternity, that it is not endless running time.
        ...which, even if I grant, still has nothing to do with gematria.

        His name "Paulus" was. How do you think Paul came to his conviction that Jesus is the Christ?
        There is no indication in Paul's writing that he ascribed any importance to gematria associated with his name, nor does his conversion experience as related in Acts bear any indication that gematria is being considered.

        Yet the one has the number 666 and the other the number 153, two numbers that are related to each other, 666 to be found in Genesis 1:31, when the letter "hey"of "hashishi" would have been left out; 153 in Genesis 1:12, "tov" , good, being the 153rd word from the beginning (which would not have been the case wehn the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri", i.e. a tree that was already fruit (= edible = flesh, Herew "basar").
        "hashishi" being 434th word from the begining, 434 being gematria of "delet"= door. You need a key to open, "key of knowledge".
        Like I said: pareidolia. I can pick out any random word from any New Testament book, find its numeric value, and draw completely speculative and untenable conclusions from it. For example, I could point out that the name Ιουνιαν, from Romans 16:7, has a value of 591, and the phrase כל ישראל also has a value of 591, and therefore claim that Paul was saying that he had been in prison with the entire nation of Israel. This is, of course, preposterous.
        "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
        --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
          That's fairly irrelevant. Regardless, the passage still says that Christ Jesus was in the form of God before he was γενόμενος in the likeness of man.
          the word "before" doens't occur either.

          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
          Honestly, I'm not very familiar with Hebrew. It's fully possible that the Hebrew language contains a similar idiom for birth with which I am unfamiliar. However, we're talking about a Greek idiom, which means that we need to consider Hellenistic understanding of language.
          Yet it is also not clear that in Hellenistic understanding "genomenos" should mean "born".

          "Born" in NT:

          Matthew 1:16, Ἰακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἄνδρα Μαρίας, ἐξ ἧς ἐγεννήθη Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός. [I][I]Jacob fathered Jospeh teh husband of Mary out of whom was born Jesus who was called Christ.

          Verb used γεννάω

          Same in Matthew 2:1.2.4; 11:11; 19:12; 26:24; Luke 1:35; 2:11; John 1:13; 3:3; 3:4.5.6.7.8; 8:41; 9:2; 9:19.20.34; 16:21; 18:37; Acts 2:8; 22:28; Romans 9:11; Galatians 4:23.29 Hebrews 11:12; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1.4.18.

          γίνομαι
          never occurs in the sense of "be born", except in those cases where certain kind of Christians want to read such, viz. John 1:14; John 8:58; Philippians 2:7.



          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
          That's irrelevant. The question isn't "how can I twist Paul's words to conform to a preconceived theology?" The question is "what do the words which Paul wrote actually mean?" The words Paul wrote very clearly state that Christ Jesus was in the form of God before he came to be in human likeness and before he took the form of a slave.
          That's also what those certain kind of Chriatians say: Jesus = God.



          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
          There is no indication in Paul's writing that he ascribed any importance to gematria associated with his name, nor does his conversion experience as related in Acts bear any indication that gematria is being considered.
          But how could he come to the notion that Jesus is Messiah? ("Damascus" might be well symbolic name; it occurs also in Genesis 14:15 (which is about "the mother of all wars" ) and 15:2 , which says that Eliezer is from Damascus, Eliezer of which gematria 318 coincides the number of trained servants -- with whom Abraham gained victory over the four kings in favor of the five (Genesis 14:14). Damascus seen as acrostic. Rashi:
          And in our Talmud (Yoma 28b), it (the word דַּמֶּשֶׂק) is interpreted as a notarikon [acrostic for דּוֹלֶה וּמַשְׁקֶה]: he drew and gave to drink from his master’s teachings to others.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
            the word "before" doens't occur either.
            The chronology is extremely clear from the phrasing. He was in the form of God, he emptied himself, and then he took on the form of a slave γένομενος in human likeness.

            Yet it is also not clear that in Hellenistic understanding "genomenos" should mean "born".

            "Born" in NT:

            Matthew 1:16, Ἰακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἄνδρα Μαρίας, ἐξ ἧς ἐγεννήθη Ἰησοῦς ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός. [I][I]Jacob fathered Jospeh teh husband of Mary out of whom was born Jesus who was called Christ.

            Verb used γεννάω

            Same in Matthew 2:1.2.4; 11:11; 19:12; 26:24; Luke 1:35; 2:11; John 1:13; 3:3; 3:4.5.6.7.8; 8:41; 9:2; 9:19.20.34; 16:21; 18:37; Acts 2:8; 22:28; Romans 9:11; Galatians 4:23.29 Hebrews 11:12; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1.4.18.

            γίνομαι
            never occurs in the sense of "be born", except in those cases where certain kind of Christians want to read such, viz. John 1:14; John 8:58; Philippians 2:7.
            Of course, you have managed to exclude every single one of the extra-Biblical Greek sources which I listed earlier, which very clearly gloss γίνομαι with "to be born." So, here are a number of them, again:

            νέον γεγαώς, Od.19.400
            ὑπὸ Τμώλῳ γεγαῶτας, Il.2.866
            “ἢ πρόσθε θανεῖν ἢ ἔπειτα γίγνομαι” Hes.Op.175
            γιγνομέναισι λάχη τάδ᾽ . . ἐκράνθη, A.Eu.347
            “γίγνομαι ἔκ τινος” Il.5.548, Hdt.7.11
            γεγονέναι κακῶς, καλῶς, Ar.Eq.218, Isoc.7.37

            That's also what those certain kind of Chriatians say: Jesus = God.
            Not only did I explicitly denote that "Jesus was in the form of God" doesn't equate Jesus to God, but Paul explicitly denotes this, as well, in the very next clause of the sentence: [Jesus] did not regard being equal with God as something to be grasped after.

            But how could he come to the notion that Jesus is Messiah?
            That is entirely irrelevant to the word γίνομαι.

            ("Damascus" might be well symbolic name; it occurs also in Genesis 14:15 (which is about "the mother of all wars" ) and 15:2 , which says that Eliezer is from Damascus, Eliezer of which gematria 318 coincides the number of trained servants -- with whom Abraham gained victory over the four kings in favor of the five (Genesis 14:14). Damascus seen as acrostic. Rashi:
            More pareidolic claptrap.
            Last edited by Boxing Pythagoras; 11-14-2014, 10:20 AM.
            "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
            --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
              The chronology is extremely clear from the phrasing. He was in the form of God, he emptied himself, and then he took on the form of a slave γένομενος in human likeness.
              It happens (becomes) in Paul's "indivisible moment", 1Corinthians 15:52, ἐν ἀτόμῳ, ἐν ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ

              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
              Of course, you have managed to exclude every single one of the extra-Biblical Greek sources which I listed earlier, which very clearly gloss γίνομαι with "to be born." So, here are a number of them, again:

              νέον γεγαώς, Od.19.400
              ὑπὸ Τμώλῳ γεγαῶτας, Il.2.866
              “ἢ πρόσθε θανεῖν ἢ ἔπειτα γίγνομαι” Hes.Op.175
              γιγνομέναισι λάχη τάδ᾽ . . ἐκράνθη, A.Eu.347
              “γίγνομαι ἔκ τινος” Il.5.548, Hdt.7.11
              γεγονέναι κακῶς, καλῶς, Ar.Eq.218, Isoc.7.37
              -- they don't say a thing being ripped out of context from extra-biblical sources.

              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
              Not only did I explicitly denote that "Jesus was in the form of God" doesn't equate Jesus to God, but Paul explicitly denotes this, as well, in the very next clause of the sentence: [Jesus] did not regard being equal with God as something to be grasped after.
              but you cling to your translation "born".

              Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
              That is entirely irrelevant to the word γίνομαι.

              More pareidolic claptrap.
              Paul mentions the 430 years of Exodus 12:40 in Galatians 3:17, This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.

              The exodus occurring 400 years after the birth of Isaac, i.e. 500 years after the birth of Abraham. So the "promise" must have been made when Abraham was 70 years old. But Abraham was 75 years when leaving Charan (Genesis 12:4), while between Genesis 12 and Genesis 15 (about the "covenant between the pieces") many things did happen, that you might think "the covenant ratified by God" must have taken place when Abraham was at least 80.

              Paul must have known this, if not then he is not a very reliable source.

              I seems to be a play with numbers , ie. gematrial. The number of missing five years coinciding the value of the letter "hey" that was added to the name Abram? I would think so.

              430 is gematria of "nefesh" = soul, the soul Jesus was ready to give away as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45), i.e. the wine of which he said: "this is my blood of the covenant"

              In Egypt the soul was trapped like a bird in a cage.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                It happens (becomes) in Paul's "indivisible moment", 1Corinthians 15:52, ἐν ἀτόμῳ, ἐν ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ
                This phrase in 1 Cor 15:52 is not describing the Incarnation, at all. Paul is talking about the general resurrection, in that passage. It's completely eisegetical to attempt to shoehorn Philippians 2:5-7 into Paul's ἄτομος.

                -- they don't say a thing being ripped out of context from extra-biblical sources.
                The first time I provided them, they came straight from the LSJ Lexicon. Both times, I included the references, so that you could check the context for yourself, if you doubted the gloss. However, here's yet another one which comes from a Biblical source:

                Source: Leviticus 25:45

                You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.

                © Copyright Original Source

                The Hebrew word, here, is ילד which most certainly means "to be born." The translators of the Septuagint obviously thought that γίνομαι means "to be born" because that is the word which they used to translate ילד.

                καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν τῶν παροίκων τῶν ὄντων ἐν ὑμῖν ἀπὸ τούτων κτήσεσθε καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν συγγενῶν αὐτῶν ὅσοι ἂν γένωνται ἐν τῇ γῇ ὑμῶν ἔστωσαν ὑμῖν εἰς κατάσχεσιν

                but you cling to your translation "born".
                Yes, because that is clearly Paul's intention.

                Paul mentions the 430 years of Exodus 12:40 in Galatians 3:17, This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.

                The exodus occurring 400 years after the birth of Isaac, i.e. 500 years after the birth of Abraham. So the "promise" must have been made when Abraham was 70 years old. But Abraham was 75 years when leaving Charan (Genesis 12:4), while between Genesis 12 and Genesis 15 (about the "covenant between the pieces") many things did happen, that you might think "the covenant ratified by God" must have taken place when Abraham was at least 80.

                Paul must have known this, if not then he is not a very reliable source.

                I seems to be a play with numbers , ie. gematrial. The number of missing five years coinciding the value of the letter "hey" that was added to the name Abram? I would think so.

                430 is gematria of "nefesh" = soul, the soul Jesus was ready to give away as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45), i.e. the wine of which he said: "this is my blood of the covenant"

                In Egypt the soul was trapped like a bird in a cage.
                You're still just grasping at straws, here. The fact that Paul mentions a number is not evidence that Paul subscribed to numerological views.
                "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                  This phrase in 1 Cor 15:52 is not describing the Incarnation, at all. Paul is talking about the general resurrection, in that passage. It's completely eisegetical to attempt to shoehorn Philippians 2:5-7 into Paul's ἄτομος.
                  it describes Paul's notion of time and eternity, things happening "immediately" with no "before" or "after"

                  Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                  The first time I provided them, they came straight from the LSJ Lexicon. Both times, I included the references, so that you could check the context for yourself, if you doubted the gloss. However, here's yet another one which comes from a Biblical source:

                  Source: Leviticus 25:45

                  You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.

                  © Copyright Original Source

                  The Hebrew word, here, is ילד which most certainly means "to be born." The translators of the Septuagint obviously thought that γίνομαι means "to be born" because that is the word which they used to translate ילד.
                  Just that Hebrew has "holid" = to beget; give birth.



                  Paul's ἄτομος.[/quote] it describes Paul's notion of time and eternity, things happening "immediately" with no "before" or "after"

                  Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                  Yes, because that is clearly Paul's intention.
                  why and how is that clear?


                  Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                  You're still just grasping at straws, here. The fact that Paul mentions a number is not evidence that Paul subscribed to numerological views.
                  Paul tries to explain here how Jesus is Abraham's promised seed.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                    it describes Paul's notion of time and eternity, things happening "immediately" with no "before" or "after"
                    This is quite obviously false. The ἄτομος which Paul mentions in 1 Cor 15:52 quite explicitly does have time before it, since it occurs "at the last trumpet" (ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ σάλπιγγι) and since Paul is talking about the future, in this passage ("we will not all die, but we will all be changed;" πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα).

                    Just that Hebrew has "holid" = to beget; give birth.
                    Apologies. As I mentioned, my Hebrew is quite poor. The form ילד is the stem, while the word in Lev 25:45 is הוֹלִ֖ידוּ, which is the word in Hiphil form, perfect tense, 3rd person plural. So, while ילד is "to beget" or "to bear [children]," the word הוֹלִ֖ידוּ translates to something like "have been born/begotten." So, again, the translators of the Septuagint obviously associated γίνομαι with birth.

                    why and how is that clear?
                    Because that is what γίνομαι means when applied to humans.

                    Paul tries to explain here how Jesus is Abraham's promised seed.
                    Yes, in Galatians 3, Paul is claiming that Jesus is Abraham's seed. That says nothing at all about whether Paul utilized gematria in forming or practicing his theology.
                    "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                    --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                      This is quite obviously false. The ἄτομος which Paul mentions in 1 Cor 15:52 quite explicitly does have time before it, since it occurs "at the last trumpet" (ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ σάλπιγγι) and since Paul is talking about the future, in this passage ("we will not all die, but we will all be changed;" πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα).
                      "the last trumpet" occurs within "the indivisible moment" -- like everything else too, since "the indivisible moment" is eternal. Hebrew "rega" occurs in Exodus 33:5, if I go up into your midst for one moment, I will destroy you i.e. when out of the chain of "(indivisible) moments of time" one moment is taken away, all is away.

                      "Second" being a rather meaningful word. That after this moment comes a second moment in fact is a miracle, the miracle of time.

                      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                      Apologies. As I mentioned, my Hebrew is quite poor. The form ילד is the stem, while the word in Lev 25:45 is הוֹלִ֖ידוּ, which is the word in Hiphil form, perfect tense, 3rd person plural. So, while ילד is "to beget" or "to bear [children]," the word הוֹלִ֖ידוּ translates to something like "have been born/begotten." So, again, the translators of the Septuagint obviously associated γίνομαι with birth.
                      Job 3:3 LXX . ἀπόλοιτο ἡ ἡμέρα ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθην καὶ ἡ νύξ ἐν ᾗ εἶπαν ἰδοὺ ἄρσεν

                      There is also another word for "born"- τίκτω, Luke 2:11, ὅτι ἐτέχθη ὑμῖν σήμερον σωτὴρ ὅς ἐστιν Χριστὸς κύριος ἐν πόλει Δαυίδ -

                      It seeming to be more or less after Psalms 2:7 (because of σήμερον)
                      κύριος εἶπεν πρός με υἱός μου εἶ σύ ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε.

                      I saw τίκτω is also used in LXX;
                      so they apparently knew difference in meaning between "gi(g)nomai", "tikto" and "gennao".




                      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                      Because that is what γίνομαι means when applied to humans.
                      Not true.

                      Mark 1:4, ἐγένετο Ἰωάννης [ὁ] βαπτίζων ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ καὶ κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν.

                      Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                      Yes, in Galatians 3, Paul is claiming that Jesus is Abraham's seed. That says nothing at all about whether Paul utilized gematria in forming or practicing his theology.
                      He came up with the 430 years;

                      That this number is used in Exodus 12 also already was an hint of the numerical world behind the written Torah (like also the number of 318 trained servants in Gnesis 14:14).

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                        "the last trumpet" occurs within "the indivisible moment" -- like everything else too, since "the indivisible moment" is eternal. Hebrew "rega" occurs in Exodus 33:5, if I go up into your midst for one moment, I will destroy you i.e. when out of the chain of "(indivisible) moments of time" one moment is taken away, all is away.

                        "Second" being a rather meaningful word. That after this moment comes a second moment in fact is a miracle, the miracle of time.
                        I'm not seeing how you can possibly justify the idea that ἄτομος implies that there was neither time before nor after. "Indivisible" does not mean "sole" or "only."

                        Job 3:3 LXX . ἀπόλοιτο ἡ ἡμέρα ἐν ᾗ ἐγεννήθην καὶ ἡ νύξ ἐν ᾗ εἶπαν ἰδοὺ ἄρσεν

                        There is also another word for "born"- τίκτω, Luke 2:11, ὅτι ἐτέχθη ὑμῖν σήμερον σωτὴρ ὅς ἐστιν Χριστὸς κύριος ἐν πόλει Δαυίδ -

                        It seeming to be more or less after Psalms 2:7 (because of σήμερον)
                        κύριος εἶπεν πρός με υἱός μου εἶ σύ ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε.

                        I saw τίκτω is also used in LXX;
                        so they apparently knew difference in meaning between "gi(g)nomai", "tikto" and "gennao".
                        The fact that there were other words which also meant "born" doesn't alter the fact that γίνομαι meant "to be born." All three words are used to refer to birth.

                        Not true.

                        Mark 1:4, ἐγένετο Ἰωάννης [ὁ] βαπτίζων ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ καὶ κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν.
                        Yes, the word could also be used in other contexts. That doesn't change the fact that it also refers to birth. And when something "becomes in human likeness," as in Philippians 2, that's a fairly obvious case where it refers to birth.

                        He came up with the 430 years;

                        That this number is used in Exodus 12 also already was an hint of the numerical world behind the written Torah (like also the number of 318 trained servants in Gnesis 14:14).
                        Once again, numbers do not imply numerology. The vast majority of documents throughout history which contain numbers have nothing to do with numerology. If you want to assert that Paul was influenced by numerology, you're going to need stronger evidence than the fact that he sometimes writes numbers in his texts.
                        "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                        --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                          I'm not seeing how you can possibly justify the idea that ἄτομος implies that there was neither time before nor after. "Indivisible" does not mean "sole" or "only."
                          "indivisible" means that time cannot be endlessly split up in ever more fractions of a second; that there is a hard core in time that is eternal, even like a kernel or a seed.
                          And Paul says it is "mystery" -- i.e. not subject to scientific research; not a statement that can be proved or disproved.

                          You can compare it to the two trees mentioned in Genesis 1:11-12, God asked for "ets pri oseh pri" ( a tree that is a fruit [in which is seed] and makes a fruit [in which is seed ]) and the earth brought forth "ets oseh pri" (a tree that itself is not a fruit but makes a fruit [in which is seed])

                          Above I stated already tht this is about "to be" and "to become", i.e. Greek "einai" versus "ginomai".

                          God asked for something that both is and becomes, while the earth brought forth something that still has to become (fruit in which is seed).

                          It is the mystery of the bible.



                          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                          The fact that there were other words which also meant "born" doesn't alter the fact that γίνομαι meant "to be born." All three words are used to refer to birth.
                          It was about
                          ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος: καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος

                          But he emptied himself taking the form of a servant, in likeness of men "having become"; and in outward form (he was) found as a man.

                          It being about a certain state of mind (like already said above), a certain attitude.

                          People use to overrule you. It being not so with you. Like Jesus you should be πάντων δοῦλος, servant of all (Mark 10:44)



                          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                          Once again, numbers do not imply numerology.
                          The number of 430 years is a weird number and draws attention.

                          Rashi on Exodus 12:40,
                          was four hundred and thirty years: Altogether, from the time that Isaac was born, until now, were 400 years. From the time that Abraham had seed [i.e., had a child, the prophecy] “that your seed will be strangers” (Gen. 15:13) was fulfilled; and there were another 30 years from the decree “between the parts” (Gen 15:10) until Isaac was born. It is impossible, however, to say that [they spent 400 years] in Egypt alone, because Kehath [the grandfather of Moses] was [one] of those who came with Jacob. Go and figure all his years, all the years of his son Amram, and Moses’ 80 years; you will not find them [to be] that many, and perforce, Kehath lived many of his years before he descended to Egypt, and many of Amram’s years are included in the years of Kehath, and many of Moses’ years are included in Amram’s years. Hence, you will not find 400 years counting from their arrival in Egypt. You are compelled, perforce, to say that the other dwellings [which the Patriarchs settled] were also called being “sojournings” and even in Hebron, as it is said: “where Abraham and Isaac sojourned (גָּרוּ) ” (Gen. 35:27), and [Scripture] states also “the land of their sojournings in which they sojourned” (Exod. 6:4). Therefore, you must say that [the prophecy] “your seed will be strangers” [commences] when he [Abraham] had offspring. And only when you count 400 years from the time that Isaac was born, you will find 210 years from their entry into Egypt. This is one of the things that [the Sages] changed for King Ptolemy. — [from Mechilta, Meg. 9a]

                          Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                          The vast majority of documents throughout history which contain numbers have nothing to do with numerology. If you want to assert that Paul was influenced by numerology, you're going to need stronger evidence than the fact that he sometimes writes numbers in his texts.
                          Growth is a matter of time.

                          Genesis 2:5 says: "nothing had yet grown" -- i.e. there was no time yet.
                          Next v. 6 "a mist went up from the earth, etc." -- This "mist" being the source of time (even as living water) LXX has πηγὴ δὲ ἀνέβαινεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς;
                          same πηγὴ found in both John and Revelation (indication that they are from the same author).

                          John 4:14, ὃς δ' ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, οὐ μὴ διψήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω αὐτῷ γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴ ὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον

                          Before John had written, John 1:4, ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων: in it (the word) was life and the life was the light of men.

                          So this is about the word "mist", i.e. Hebrew "ed", which has gematrial clue.

                          Rabbi Ginsburgh: http://www.inner.org/string/string.htm
                          Four Forces from One

                          The ratio 1:4 (“one to four” or “one becoming four”) is one of the pillars of creation as revealed in the beginning of the Torah. We will here observe four phenomena from Genesis based upon the ratio 1:4.

                          The two letters alef (= 1) and dalet (= 4) form together the word for “vapor.” In the beginning of creation, the “vapor” rose from the earth to moisten the earth for the sake of the creation of man.

                          One river flows from Eden to the garden, which thereafter, leaving the garden, divides into the four great rivers of the earth.

                          “The Tree of Life” (etz ha’chaim) = 233. “The Tree of Knowledge of good and evil” (etz hada’at tov v’rah) = 932. 932 = 4 times 233. Thus the ratio of the two trees is “one to four” (the “one” being the Tree of Life and the resulting “four” being the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil).

                          The word “good” (tov, the positive force of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil) = 17. The word “life” (chaim, of the Tree of Life) = 68. 17:68 = 1:4. The word for “life” possesses four letters. The average value of each of its letters is “good.” Thus we see that the fundamental force of “life” (of the Tree of Life) is in fact the positive force of “good” (inherent in the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil). The two trees thus create an infinite cycle of Divine energy.

                          To conclude, the most obvious phenomenon in the Torah related to the four forces of nature deriving from one, is that God’s essential Name Havayah is composed of four letters. “God is One.” In the future it will become revealed that “God is One and His Name is One.” “His Name” refers to the four letters of Havayah. This is the ultimate revelation of the Divine “unified field theory.”
                          "One river flows from Eden to the garden, which thereafter, leaving the garden, divides into the four great rivers of the earth."

                          "which thereafter, leaving the garden " -- That's not in the bibletext -- IMO it shows that Rabbi Ginsburgh didn't "get it", viz. that it is about "the indivisible moment", i.e. eternity in time.

                          And it is hard to get. I just do try my best.
                          Last edited by Geert van den Bos; 11-15-2014, 03:20 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Hey that's great, all the 26 occurrences of γενόμενος in NT:

                            http://biblehub.com/greek/genomenos_1096.htm

                            I no case: "was born".

                            It occurs 3 times in Philippians:

                            Philippians 2:7 V-APM-NMS
                            GRK: ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος
                            NAS: of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness
                            KJV: of a servant, and was made in
                            INT: [the] likeness of men having become

                            Philippians 2:8 V-APM-NMS
                            GRK: ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι
                            NAS: Himself by becoming obedient
                            KJV: himself, and became obedient
                            INT: he humbled himself having become obedient unto

                            Philippians 3:6 V-APM-NMS
                            GRK: ἐν νόμῳ γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος
                            NAS: which is in the Law, found blameless.
                            KJV: is in the law, blameless.
                            INT: in [the] law having become blameless
                            So it is also in the next verse Philippians 2:8 -- and we didn't that into account

                            7ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος: καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος 8ἐταπείνωσεν ἑαυτὸν γενόμενος ὑπήκοος μέχρι θανάτου, θανάτου δὲ σταυροῦ.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Geert van den Bos View Post
                              "indivisible" means that time cannot be endlessly split up in ever more fractions of a second; that there is a hard core in time that is eternal, even like a kernel or a seed.
                              Actually, no, that's not what "indivisible" means, and it's not what ἄτομος meant in the ancient world. An indivisible is, itself, a unit which cannot be divided. But the ancients would not have thought that it was eternal, nor that there weren't other ἄτομοι before and after that particular one. Those who believed in the existence of indivisibles thought that they composed the continuum, despite the fact that the continuum itself can be infinitely divided.

                              And Paul says it is "mystery" -- i.e. not subject to scientific research; not a statement that can be proved or disproved.
                              This is completely anachronistic. Paul had no conception of "scientific research."

                              You can compare it to the two trees mentioned in Genesis 1:11-12, God asked for "ets pri oseh pri" ( a tree that is a fruit [in which is seed] and makes a fruit [in which is seed ]) and the earth brought forth "ets oseh pri" (a tree that itself is not a fruit but makes a fruit [in which is seed])

                              Above I stated already tht this is about "to be" and "to become", i.e. Greek "einai" versus "ginomai".

                              God asked for something that both is and becomes, while the earth brought forth something that still has to become (fruit in which is seed).

                              It is the mystery of the bible.
                              Pareidolic eisegesis.

                              It was about
                              ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος: καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος

                              But he emptied himself taking the form of a servant, in likeness of men "having become"; and in outward form (he was) found as a man.

                              It being about a certain state of mind (like already said above), a certain attitude.
                              Absolutely nothing in this passage indicates that it was about attitude or a state of mind. The words μορφή and ὀμοιματι are references to appearance and physical form.

                              The number of 430 years is a weird number and draws attention.
                              Even if that is true, it doesn't grant you license to apply speculative numerology without any good basis for believing the author utilized such numerology.

                              Growth is a matter of time.

                              Genesis 2:5 says: "nothing had yet grown" -- i.e. there was no time yet.
                              Next v. 6 "a mist went up from the earth, etc." -- This "mist" being the source of time (even as living water) LXX has πηγὴ δὲ ἀνέβαινεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς;
                              same πηγὴ found in both John and Revelation (indication that they are from the same author).

                              John 4:14, ὃς δ' ἂν πίῃ ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, οὐ μὴ διψήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω αὐτῷ γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴ ὕδατος ἁλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον

                              Before John had written, John 1:4, ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων: in it (the word) was life and the life was the light of men.

                              So this is about the word "mist", i.e. Hebrew "ed", which has gematrial clue.

                              Rabbi Ginsburgh: http://www.inner.org/string/string.htm


                              "One river flows from Eden to the garden, which thereafter, leaving the garden, divides into the four great rivers of the earth."

                              "which thereafter, leaving the garden " -- That's not in the bibletext -- IMO it shows that Rabbi Ginsburgh didn't "get it", viz. that it is about "the indivisible moment", i.e. eternity in time.

                              And it is hard to get. I just do try my best.
                              I ask for evidence that Paul utilized gematria, and instead you simply analyze random gematria from non-Pauline sources. What evidence is there that Paul understood or utilized gematria? I am not asking what numerological significance you can manufacture out of random passages, or which others before you have manufactured. I am asking for evidence from Paul's work that shows Paul believed that the numeric value of words had theological importance.
                              "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
                              --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                Actually, no, that's not what "indivisible" means, and it's not what ἄτομος meant in the ancient world. An indivisible is, itself, a unit which cannot be divided. But the ancients would not have thought that it was eternal, nor that there weren't other ἄτομοι before and after that particular one. Those who believed in the existence of indivisibles thought that they composed the continuum, despite the fact that the continuum itself can be infinitely divided.
                                it is about time -- the indivisible moment is the smallest unit of time.

                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                This is completely anachronistic. Paul had no conception of "scientific research."
                                I didn't say that.



                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                Absolutely nothing in this passage indicates that it was about attitude or a state of mind.
                                the beforegoing verses said so. See above.


                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                Even if that is true, it doesn't grant you license to apply speculative numerology without any good basis for believing the author utilized such numerology.
                                There are five missing years, since Abraham left Charan when 75 years old.

                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                I ask for evidence that Paul utilized gematria, and instead you simply analyze random gematria from non-Pauline sources.
                                which were about time and eternity.

                                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                                What evidence is there that Paul understood or utilized gematria?
                                even his mentioning of the indivisible moment.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X