The Gospel of Twelve Thrones
- Thread starter jeremiah1five
- Start date
TibiasDad
Active Member
I quoted Strong directly!
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
παραδίδωμι (paradidómi)
betray, bring forth
From para and didomi; to surrender, i.e yield up, intrust, transmit -- betray, bring forth, cast, commit, deliver (up), give (over, up), hazard, put in prison, recommend.
see GREEK para
see GREEK didomi
Doug
TibiasDad
Active Member
I use lexicons (that’s a Greek dictionary; perhaps you didn’t know that) to define how to translate a Greek word into English.
Doug
Last edited:
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Yes, what did he do?
jeremiah1five
Active Member
You’re using translation as definition. We don’t get doctrine from translation.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
We don’t get doctrine from translation.
TibiasDad
Active Member
Let’s see…you get a dictionary (that’s a lexicon for actual students of the word); then you go to the page where the word you are looking for is (it’s in alphabetical order for those unfamiliar); then you read the information written about the particular word in question.
Depending on the word, it might tell you about its frequency of use; the variant meanings in various syntactic combinations, such as the difference cases- Aorist, Dative, Genitive, etc, etc. (This is especially true of Greek lexicons, which considers both biblical usage as well as usage in secular writings of the same timeline. Cases, by the way will affect the interpretation of the word in question as to what it means specifically in those instances. Word to the wise…)
That’s how you use it correctly!
PS: It also is quite helpful if you are willing to accept that the defined meaning might not be what you want it to be, and adjust your thinking accordingly. I know, it’s hard to do, but I’ve had to do it many times myself, and it always works out to my benefit in the long run.
Doug
jeremiah1five
Active Member
We don’t get doctrine from translation. You’re confusing the definition.
TibiasDad
Active Member
Nope, the other way around: start with the original language’s definition and find the same word or words in English that match that original usage. Greek and Hebrew/Aramaic always first, then the English equivalent. Not hard to understand: You can do it!!! (I know it’s tough to do if you haven’t studied the language. It’s never too late to learn!)
Doug
TibiasDad
Active Member
You’re changing it to fit your conclusion. In logic we call that a circular argument.
Doug
TibiasDad
Active Member
Then from whence do we get doctrine of not from the words themselves? Like Paul said regarding speaking in tongues, it is meaningless unless someone interprets what the words spoken mean! Translating is the first step in understanding!
Doug
jeremiah1five
Active Member
We get our doctrine from the Scripture in the original languages: Greek and Hebrew (a little Chaldee and Aramaic.)
Understanding the language and the word meanings of the time.
That has to do with tongues but it's not the tongue being translated. It's the interpretation given by the Spirit. In this our understanding is disconnected. Those to whom the Spirit gives the interpretation is not understanding the tongue. It is submitting to the Spirit and being given the interpretation separately from our understanding the tongue.
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. 1 Corinthians 14:2.
14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 1 Corinthians 14:14.
The interpreter of the tongue does not interpret because he/she understands the tongue, he/she interprets as the Spirit gives the utterance. A complete disconnect from understanding the tongue.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
We get our doctrine from the words and the grammar. There are other literary devices involved, too. Adjective, verb, adverb, noun, etc. Then there are the senses. But this is Greek and Hebrew and because the Scripture is written to believers, the unbeliever cannot come to the knowledge of the truth because the Spirit is necessary and the unsaved do not have the Spirit and cannot consistently receive the revelation and the knowledge of the text. Oh, an unbeliever can interpret John 11:35 "Jesus wept." But it is the Spirit that brings the edification (building up) from glory to glory. It is the believer that loves God and His Word that are more readily able to understand the Word of God and build doctrine "a little here, a little there", precept by precept, etc.
Since you don't understand how you are confusing the language and the definition you posted I will tell you.
betray: Strong's [#3860]
Greek Word: παραδίδωμι
Transliteration: paradidōmi
Part of speech: verb
it's a compound word: from [#3844] (para) and [#1325] (didomi); to surrender, i.e. yield up, intrust, transmit:- betray, bring forth, cast, commit, deliver (up), give (over, up), hazard, put in prison, recommend.
This is how it is written in the concordance. Your error is that you are including the words past the colon/dash as the definition. It is not part of the definition. The words beyond the colon/dash are words used in the text that are part of the translation, not the definition.
English Words used in KJV:
deliver 53 times
betray 40
deliver up 10
give 4
give up 4
give over 2
commit 2
miscellaneous translations 6 times
[Total Count: 121]
Do you understand now your error?
Rockerduck
Active Member
If you read 2 Peter 2:5 it clarifies that 2 Peter 2:4 is talking about before the flood. Peter is saying God locked up the angels before the flood and will do it again later. 2 Peter 2:9 Peter talks about the day of Judgement, which further clarifies Peter is talking about a future date.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Verse 4 and verse 5 are two separate and different occasions and different times.
One event: (already past.)
4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
Another event: (already past.)
5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4–5.
A flood is not a future event. Let's look at 2 Peter 2:9.
Another event: (past, present, and future.)
9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: 2 Peter 2:9.
At the time 2 Peter was written the Lord had ALREADY (past) delivered the godly out of temptations and will continue to do so (present), and the unjust on the day of judgment (future.)
The angels that sinned and were locked up occurred BEFORE God created man. I know the prevailing Gentile theology is that angels (sons of God) married and mated with women (Gen. 6) but that interpretation has many holes in it. Spirit beings who have no genitals nor DNA to transfer out cannot mate with material women. Angels do not participate in HOLY matrimony with human women. God decreed that in this creation we and animals mate with like kind "after their kind" and produce offspring. It is impossible for spirit beings with no genitals to mate with material beings (women.) At any rate you're conflating 2 Peter verse 4 with verse 5.
Rockerduck
Active Member
You go over all details not related. Peter did refer to before the flood and God will do same at Judgement.
TibiasDad
Active Member
Then you are wrong in your assessment of what scripture says. I have shown you the grammar and the lexical definition and range of meanings. Nobody translates
These are the parts of speech, not literary devices. Literary devices are things like metaphor, simile, imagery, alliteration, foreshadowing, and symbolism.
I already posted this to you here. Have you ever taken Greek?
Yea, in large part, but it is not just about or for believers; it is for and about everyone in relation to God. When an unbeliever is told the truth by a believer, the Holy Spirit convicts us of the truth about ourselves. That is about the sinner not the believer.
The OT prophets were not sent to saints but sinners. The apostles were sent to preach the gospel to unbelievers, not believers. The gospel is meaningless without sinners being the object. It is given to believers for the sake of the nonbeliever.
Doug
jeremiah1five
Active Member
That's your error to make verse 4 and 5 speaking of the same thing. It does not.
Most likely you believe that the reason why the angels were locked up was for creating human flesh to adorn their spirit essence and then you make them enter into HOLY matrimony with women. You believe the nephalim was the offspring of these unions between angel and woman and such a belief has no Biblical support. God decreed that like animals' mate with like animals "after their kind." Angels and humans are two different species of beings that are not biologically compatible. One is spirit, the other is material/physical. It's incredible that you believe angels have genitals and DNA that matches human women. That belief is so very full of error. God is Sovereign over ALL His creation. Angels do not have free will and cannot do whatever they want. Man has no free will. And to believe that angels copulated with human women is so fantastical and impossible that many believe this about God I was never in doubt of this belief, even as a newborn baby Christian. I never believed this lie. Ever. It takes a special kind of ignorance to believe in that teaching. Next, angels will marry and sleep with men.
jeremiah1five
Active Member
Boy, are you so very wrong. You don't get to command the Holy Spirit that upon every unbeliever you share Jesus with is going to become convicted of sin and turn to Jesus. Such a man centered belief-system you have. But that's one of the greatest errors plaguing today's so-called Christian that they HAVE TO tell others about Jesus - even when they don't ask of the "hope in you." "We" are NOT all apostles, "we" are not all prophets of evangelists. Saul taught against that particular belief and said we are NOT ALL apostles. And yet from the pulpit and on radio and pod casts Christians instruct other Christians to go find an unbeliever and tell them about Jesus. Unbelievers/unsaved [people] do not understand the things of the Spirit of God because they are dead to God and His Spirit. Your belief flies in the face of what Saul said:
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned 1 Corinthians 2:14.
But still there are many speaking to living walls of ignorant death.
The Hebrew prophets were sent to Israel, and it was not all "gospel" they prophesied. Israel is a people of believers. They possess the Spirit as promised by Joel.
And the apostles were not sent to unbelievers; they were sent to fellow Jews with one message: God has kept His Promises. Messiah had come and gone and is coming again.
Every born-again believer is "commissioned" to function in some way to God, and it is not always to preach Jesus to unbelievers. The gifts of the Spirit are not given to believers to waste their gifts on unbelievers. The gifts of the Spirit are given by God to be used on believers ONLY.
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Ephesians 4:11–12.
As you can hopefully see these gift ministries are given to believers to perfect the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the BODY OF CHRIST.
The gifts are not given to believers for the perfecting of the world, for the work of the world, and it is NOT for the edification of the world. Saul says it clearly the gifts of the Spirit are for BELIEVERS.
ONLY.
Similar threads
