Kjvo And Original Languages

[TheSword]

As said many times there is no Koine Greek Dictionaries those you use are classical Greek word meanings and pronunciations placed on Koine Greek words.  Strongs and Zoiates are to examples of scholarly works that really are not scholarly.

 

So a good reason for transliteration is that no one knew the translation if there was one because no Koine Greek Dictionary.

 

As I pointed out, that's factually incorrect. I agree that Strong's is not really a great academic resource, but it's not a lexicon/dictionary either.

 

 

You can't tell from reading scripture what kind of baptism it is?

 

What is the etymology of the English word?

 

Here, I'll help you:

 

baptize (v.)

c.1300, from Old French batisier (11c.), from Latin baptizare, from Greek baptizein "to immerse, to dip in water," also used figuratively, e.g. "to be over one's head" (in debt, etc.), "to be soaked (in wine);" in Greek Christian usage, "baptize;" from baptein "to dip, steep, dye, color," from PIE root *gwabh- "to dip, sink." Christian baptism originally consisted in full immersion. Related: Baptized; baptizin

 

My bible was given to me in English. I don't need to study accent languages. I'll leave that to those who are looking to correct it.

 

How do you know any of that is correct? How do you know my 1828 Websters that says "from Gk βαπτισμα  from Gk βαπτιζω, to baptize...the application of water to a person, as a sacrament or religious ceremony, by which he is initiated into the visible church of Christ. This is usually performed by sprinkling or immersion" is not correct? How do you know my Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek which gives "stricly to dip, immerse in water" is not correct? Wait...that's all eerily similar...it's as if all our dictionaries are pointing back to....the Greek definition.

 

According to AVBB there was no Koine Greek lexicon so we can't know what the translation was supposed to be. I suppose that's why secondary inspiration must be dogmatically clung to.

 

My Bible was given to me in English as well, but it was translated by men from Greek and Hebrew.

[ASongOfDegrees]

 

 

My Bible was given to me in English as well, but it was translated by men from Greek and Hebrew.

Then why waste time with the English? Read the "originals".

[DaveW]

ASOD - I don't know if you were trying to be ironic, but in using that etymology you go back to the Greek.

So in trying to prove you don't need greek, you use greek!.

Made me chuckle.

[AVBibleBeliever]

As I pointed out, that's factually incorrect. I agree that Strong's is not really a great academic resource, but it's not a lexicon/dictionary either.

 

 

 

How do you know any of that is correct? How do you know my 1828 Websters that says "from Gk βαπτισμα  from Gk βαπτιζω, to baptize...the application of water to a person, as a sacrament or religious ceremony, by which he is initiated into the visible church of Christ. This is usually performed by sprinkling or immersion" is not correct? How do you know my Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek which gives "stricly to dip, immerse in water" is not correct? Wait...that's all eerily similar...it's as if all our dictionaries are pointing back to....the Greek definition.

 

According to AVBB there was no Koine Greek lexicon so we can't know what the translation was supposed to be. I suppose that's why secondary inspiration must be dogmatically clung to.

 

My Bible was given to me in English as well, but it was translated by men from greek and Hebrew.

I have a Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Dictionary and the Dictionary is entitled"Dictionary of the Greek Testament. (did you know we don't have a complete Greek text to put together a whole and complete Koine Greek NT Bible but he has one.  and Zoiate's says his is a Greek Dicitonary too.

 

When Strong's talks about Greek Articulation he is giving you Classical Greek articulation.  No one today and as far back as 1000 years knew how to articulate Koine Greek.  it is a dead language and died off in use before the 305AD.

 

My point is just to know the English and not rely on the Greek or Hebrew. Know the English and you will know what god wanted you to know.

 

Webster is going from classical Greek.  When you see GK in an English Dictionary it is classical Greek.  You will never see Webster say it is Koine Greek just Greek and everyone knows it is classical Greek that is being mentioned.

[AVBibleBeliever]

As I pointed out, that's factually incorrect. I agree that Strong's is not really a great academic resource, but it's not a lexicon/dictionary either.

 

 

 

How do you know any of that is correct? How do you know my 1828 Websters that says "from Gk βαπτισμα  from Gk βαπτιζω, to baptize...the application of water to a person, as a sacrament or religious ceremony, by which he is initiated into the visible church of Christ. This is usually performed by sprinkling or immersion" is not correct? How do you know my Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek which gives "stricly to dip, immerse in water" is not correct? Wait...that's all eerily similar...it's as if all our dictionaries are pointing back to....the Greek definition.

 

According to AVBB there was no Koine Greek lexicon so we can't know what the translation was supposed to be. I suppose that's why secondary inspiration must be dogmatically clung to.

 

My Bible was given to me in English as well, but it was translated by men from Greek and Hebrew.

we have those words of baptize in the Koine and their context in English give us the meaning.  We are not sure if the classical Greek is correct but it could be.

 

However, one would walk down into the water and john would pour water on them could easily be interpreted from teh context as well as immerse.  one way to find out is to see how God gave men the Holy Ghost.   Ac 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
 Ac 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

 

 Ac 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
 

 

I like immerse and stay with it but I will let those who pour, pour.
 

[ASongOfDegrees]

ASOD - I don't know if you were trying to be ironic, but in using that etymology you go back to the Greek.

So in trying to prove you don't need greek, you use greek!.

Made me chuckle.

I'm glad I made you laugh but you intentionally misunderstood my post as usual.

 

Sword gave an example of a transliterated word ("baptize") and claimed we can't know the definition ("immerse") without knowing the root meaning of the word from a Greek lexicon. I just pointed out that you can find the root meaning in an English dictionary. 

 

Anyone who reads the bible can see that the mode of baptism was to be dunked under water.

 

In the Greek the word can mean more than just "submerge" so to rely on the Greek for the definition isn't a safe bet. Especially when you are dealing with a dead language.

[ASongOfDegrees]

we have those words of baptize in the Koine and their context in English give us the meaning.  We are not sure if the classical Greek is correct but it could be.

 

However, one would walk down into the water and john would pour water on them could easily be interpreted from teh context as well as immerse.  one way to find out is to see how God gave men the Holy Ghost.   Ac 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
 Ac 2:18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

 

 Ac 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
 

 

I like immerse and stay with it but I will let those who pour, pour.
 

You know, I'm a Baptist through and through but I agree with you. I'm not sure if the mode of baptism (immerse, pour, sprinkle, etc.) is so important as long as you are baptized.

[DaveW]

I'm glad I made you laugh but you intentionally misunderstood my post as usual.

Sword gave an example of a transliterated word ("baptize") and claimed we can't know the definition ("immerse") without knowing the root meaning of the word from a Greek lexicon. I just pointed out that you can find the root meaning in an English dictionary.

Anyone who reads the bible can see that the mode of baptism was to be dunked under water.

In the Greek the word can mean more than just "submerge" so to rely on the Greek for the definition isn't a safe bet. Especially when you are dealing with a dead language.

I didn't intentionally misunderstand.....

Regardless of English or other language dictionary, you posts uses other languages to show the meaning - including Greek - in an attempt to show you don't need Greek.

I was not disregarding your point or even arguing against it.

I found it ironic - I thought you meant it that way.

in that particular instance, I think it is important to find the proper definition, because society over the years has changed the meaning of the word. But a well sorted English dictionary should give you the original meaning, along with popular meaning. Then it is up to the reader to determine which fits the context.

[TheSword]

Then why waste time with the English? Read the "originals".

 

I read both. The KJV translators were much better Greek/Hebrew scholars (yes...they were Greek/Hebrew Scholars) than I am, though I'm still studying. I study Greek/Hebrew to better understand the nuances that often don't make it through translation and to better understand their word choices. I study both because I have a deep desire to have a thorough understanding of God's Word and what He intended to communicate to fallen man who has communication prOBlems thanks to Babel.

[TheSword]

I have a Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Dictionary and the Dictionary is entitled"Dictionary of the Greek Testament. (did you know we don't have a complete Greek text to put together a whole and complete Koine Greek NT Bible but he has one.  and Zoiate's says his is a Greek Dicitonary too.

 

When Strong's talks about Greek Articulation he is giving you Classical Greek articulation.  No one today and as far back as 1000 years knew how to articulate Koine Greek.  it is a dead language and died off in use before the 305AD.

 

My point is just to know the English and not rely on the Greek or Hebrew. Know the English and you will know what god wanted you to know.

 

Webster is going from classical Greek.  When you see GK in an English Dictionary it is classical Greek.  You will never see Webster say it is Koine Greek just Greek and everyone knows it is classical Greek that is being mentioned.

 

Perhaps you missed my earlier point that the differences between Classical and Koine Greek are being way overstated here, and if anything, Koine was much simpler. You're also incorrect that Koine Grek died out in 305 AD. It was very gradual transition from Koine to Medieval/Byzantine Greek and the best boundary between the two is more properly placed around 600 AD.

 

Futhermore, someone fluent in Modern Greek (Demotic dialect is the most common) can read Koine Greek with an acceptable level of understanding AND those who choose to learn their own language thoroughly and study the Katharevousa dialect (what would be considered the academic or literary form which is a combination of Demotic and Ancient/Classical) have very little trouble reading Koine OR Classic. Honestly, for a native Greek speaker, learning to Koine Greek is not any different from a native English speaker learning KJV/Elizabethan English.

[TheSword]

 

I like immerse and stay with it but I will let those who pour, pour.
 

 

Though I think you're 100% wrong in that position, I'm glad you're consistent.

[Musician4God1611]

I read both. The KJV translators were much better Greek/Hebrew scholars (yes...they were Greek/Hebrew Scholars) than I am, though I'm still studying. I study Greek/Hebrew to better understand the nuances that often don't make it through translation and to better understand their word choices. I study both because I have a deep desire to have a thorough understanding of God's Word and what He intended to communicate to fallen man who has communication prOBlems thanks to Babel.

So do you believe that we have the perfect Word of God in English?

[TheSword]

Anyone who reads the bible can see that the mode of baptism was to be dunked under water.

 

In the Greek the word can mean more than just "submerge" so to rely on the Greek for the definition isn't a safe bet. Especially when you are dealing with a dead language.

 

Then why are Baptists in the minority with their view on baptism? If it's so plain to see then why have so many well-learned and highly intelligent men throughout the centuries missed it? Even you have equivocated above that it doesn't have to be immersed but could be done in some other way.

 

Please show me (or point me to the source) a definition where βαπτιζω/βαπτισμος/βαπτισμα (baptizo/baptismos/baptisma) means anything other than dip, immerse, or submerge because I haven't seen one. You may find one that will suggest "wash" but that is really a description of the activity.

 

------------------

 

Also, I'm not sure why we're stuck on baptism specifically because it is a word that has been deeply investigated in order to glean the meaning from the original language. Perhas we should also examine another like "apostle" whose English defintions mean nothing anywhere close to what the actual Greek words meant.

 

-----------------

 

Another question, how is appealing to an etymology of a word in an English dictionary to support your understanding any different than appealing to language study?

[TheSword]

So do you believe that we have the perfect Word of God in English?

 

Yes. As I stated in an earlier post, I believe a Christian does not have to study Greek or Hebrew to get what they need. However, to imply that it is wrong, faithless, or even devious to do so in order to better understand and better teach that Word is absolutely ridiculous and, in my opinion, ignorant.

[Musician4God1611]

But if the Word of God is perfect (that is complete) in English, I don't understand how you can say that you can better understand it in another language that is not your native tongue. Is it an inadequacy on the part of the language or is it an inadequacy on your understanding of that language? In other words, should you spend all this time learning Greek or would it be better spent learning English?