Tagged: greek Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Eugene Adkins 7:05 am on 2016-07-19 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: greek, , ,   

    Interesting Greek word in 2 Peter 1:19 

    And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts;” (2 Peter 1:19)

    The interesting Greek word (at least to me) that is translated as “morning star” in the NKJV, BBE, ESV and NET, and as “day-star” in the KJV and ASV is φωσφόρος, and in the New Testament it’s unique to 2 Peter 1:19.

    Now, in case you can’t read Greek, spell the word out in English and it would be something along the lines of, “phōsphoros.”

    And in case you don’t remember anything about phosphorus from your High School physical science classes, phosphorus does a couple of things very well; one of which is that it burns brightly! Such is the reason why the Greek word “phōsphoros” literally means, “light bearing or light bringing.”

    The Greek word in 2 Peter 1:19 can also refer to the planet Venus due to the planet’s orbiting characteristic in relation to the Earth which causes Venus to appear brighter in the morning than in the evening.

    Either way, the apostle Peter’s point is clear – Jesus (who is the topic of the context’s confirmed prophetic word) is the bright and morning star whose light will cause our hope to become a reality regardless of how dark it may be before the dawn. Perhaps this thought is why the song writer of “He’s the Lilly of the Valley” follows up that reference with the proclamation of Jesus being the fairest of 10,000 to our soul.

    I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.” (Revelation 22:16)

     
  • Richard Mansel 10:18 pm on 2013-05-08 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , greek,   

    Custom or Law? 

    bible4676

    One of our men was teaching Acts 15 on Wednesday night. I noticed something that I wanted to share with you, to get your feedback.

    “And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1, NKJV).

    “But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1, ESV).

    “And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1, KJV).

    “And certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1, ASV).

    “While Paul and Barnabas were at Antioch of Syria, some men from Judea arrived and began to teach the believers[a]: “Unless you are circumcised as required by the law of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1, NLT).

    The word for “custom” in Acts 15:1 means “habit or law.”  

    Circumcision was more than custom under the Old Covenant (Genesis 17:7-14; Leviticus 12:3; Joshua 5:2-8; Romans 4:11). And we know that law is much stronger than custom.

    To us, custom means something that became common over time like Sunday night worship or a family having pizza on Friday night. Law, however, is something commanded by God. In Acts 15:1, the Judaizing teachers were false teachers but they believed that circumcision was still law.

    • Why do you think custom is used in this context?
    • Do you see a difference between “law” and “custom.”
    • If the word means “habit” or “law,” what clue would translators use to make the determination?

     

     

     

     
    • Ron Thomas 3:33 am on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      I think you are correct with the word “custom,” but I have always understood it in relation to “law” in this context. Thus, I see “custom” as a “practice” (habit), even though it was part of the LM.

    • Eugene Adkins 6:12 am on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      The English word “custom” is probably used in the context because of its relation to governing actions (think of a government’s customs department). Some supporting definitions according to Webster’s is: “Law, such usage as by common consent and long-established, uniform practice has taken on the force of law” and “a social convention carried on by tradition and enforced by social disapproval of any violation” and “a usual practice or habitual way of behaving; habit“.

      In the context of Luke 1:9 (Zacharias and the “custom” of the priest’s office) and Luke 4:16 (Jesus’ custom of going to synagogue on the Sabbath) the word custom is in direct connection to the guidance of God’s Law. It was their personal custom (because we know others ignored it) and it was due to the rules and directions that they found in the Law.

      In connection to Luke 15 I’d say it has to do with the distinction that’s meant to be made for the readers. In other words, we have to remember why the Judaizers were teaching what they were teaching (the Law of Moses’ expectations), but at the same time the readers must remember the relationship between the Law of Moses and the Law of faith in Jesus.

      I guess like always it goes back to context, context, context and having a good grounding in the meaning of a word and not just what we’re used to thinking it means. Hope that helps.

    • Scott Wiley 7:47 am on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      OK, not thought on this before, but here’s a strange thought that jumps into my head, so it 90% likely to be a dead end… but just maaayyyyyybbeeeee….. Young’s and Darby’s translations both have the term ‘custom’ and both from the mid-late 1800’s. Barnes and Gill, both old timey commentaries, speak of ‘custom’. So the term ‘custom’ is not a recent translational choice. Looked up ‘custom’ in my 1828 Webster’s (available via E-Sword) and among the meanings of ‘custom’ is the idea of ‘duties imposed by law’ – more in the idea of taxes and tariffs though – but maybe when the term ‘custom’ was chosen by the 1800’s translators it carried in their minds more the weight of law than just habit, and moves into the ‘mores’ or, ‘expression of law’ kinda thing. When the ‘custom’ is associated with Moses, a Jew would likely see little difference between saying the ‘law of Moses’, the ‘manner of Moses’ or the ‘custom of Moses’. To many Jews of the time they might be likely to view the differences in the words (as many folk today say)… “Oh, that’s just semantics…. “Moses” would grant a virtual legal status to anything the Jews of Jesus time would associate it with.

      Now, here’s where my mind takes an odd turn… Even before the ascension, Jesus took the apostles through a 40 day seminar on the kingdom and had opened their minds to the scriptures… They’d know more after the Outpouring of the HS at Pentecost, but they were no longer as ignorant as they had been about the Kingdom. With the outpouring and their now miraculous ability to tap into the words of Christ via the Comforter, they gotta understand pretty well the Old Cov is gone and done. They wouldn’t have kept this a secret, too much of the doctrine of Christ depends on a change of covenant (Priest and King at the same time, and etc). The men of Acts 15 don’t seem to be ignorant, and they’d have likely had to work through some of the things that would have to change covenant-wise for Christianity to be valid.

      Soooo….. is it possible, that on some level they knew the Covenant of Moses was no longer in effect, but viewed the customs – duties imposed & carrying the weight of Moses’ name – into the semi-legal area of ‘mores’? Backed by a lifetime of practice, and nearly 2 millienia of enforcement, their heart / gut reactions have not caught up to their head knowledge, and to them, though no longer covenant law, it’d be ‘virtual law’ because it came from Moses.

      OK, wild conjecture and speculation on my part, so take it with a pound of salt. Likely after I let it percolate over night, I’ll see the flaws in it myself. But perhaps this will be helpful, much as Edison’s first few thousand tries at finding a proper filament for the light bulb were helpful. 😎

      Yours in the Great Hope
      Scott P. Wiley

    • Don Ruhl 10:03 am on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      A law becomes a custom by long term use. Circumcision was of the Law of Moses, and that became the custom of the Jews.

    • John Henson 11:04 am on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      According to Robertson, “The associative instrumental case (tōi ethei) is customary.” Of course, he’s not infallible.

    • Don Ruhl 5:01 pm on 2013-05-09 Permalink | Reply

      Also, notice that Luke 2.27 speaks of “the custom of the Law.” All the major translations have this wording, including NKJV, KJV, ASV, NIV, NASB, and the ESV.

  • Richard Mansel 1:21 pm on 2011-03-22 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , greek   

    Literal Reading 

    I am a novice at Greek. Yet, I enjoy using the tools that I have to do research on God’s Word. I enjoy the word studies that we can do as students of the inspired Scripture. In the process, I get my NKJV Greek  English New Testament Interlinear out and read what the passage says in a literal translation. Even though their word orders differ from ours, their usage does illuminate some interesting nuances that can be special to the student and teacher as they prepare to impart lessons to their listeners.

    For example, John 14:23 says in the NKJV,  “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.'”

    However, the literal reading in my Interlinear paints a more passionate and personal version of the same verse. It says, “answered – Jesus and said to him ‘If anyone loves  Me,  word My he will keep. And – Father My will love him, and to him We will come and Our abode with him We will make.”

    That is wonderful to me. “…loves Me, word My he will keep…” They are one and same! The Word and the Savior cannot be separated.  “father My” is also poignant and denotes a passionate bond between them. Finally, I love the statement: “to him We will come and Our abode with him We will make.” That is so much more expressive than the English in my mind.

    If we would look at the Word, the Savior and the Kingdom in such personal, familial terms, we would all have a deeper relationship with them.

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel