Your venom is not persuasive.
Did God become flesh?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
- Status
Apple7
New member
John 1.18
θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο
Theon oudeis heōraken pōpote monogenēs Theos ho ōn eis ton kolpon tou Patros ekeinos exēgēsato
No one has seen God at any time; but the unique One, Himself God, who is in the bosom of the Father, that One declares Him.
Do you know why the Greek you quoted is flawed?
You also fail to give verse references in post #918
I mean I read the English, and there was a missing word.
You wrote,
The word where there is a hyphen or dash instead of a word.
Interesting. Well I do not know what to do with your comment here. Accurate and controversial run different ways.
Okay then.
You are polite, thanks.
From the Word was God to God was the Word or from God was the Word to the Word was God?
Okay, but this last one might be two people if you didn't know someone intended to show a difference between the two.
I wonder who created the rule. And for what reason. And upon what basis it was established.
What is the difference between KAI and HO? What are these words about?
You still cannot refute these fact, big bad wolf.
"my Father is greater than I"
that his Father is "the ONLY true God".
That Jehovah is his Father, and our Father, his GOD, and our God.
That Jesus does NOT know the day, nor the hour of his return, but the Father does.
That Jesus is NOT the source of the words he spoke, his God is.
The Granville-Sharps-Rule is not a rule at all. It the use of English article grammar with Greek articles.
Apple7
New member
Show us...
You claimed to be an expert on Greek...except for the fact that you can't even read it...:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
Apple7
New member
Define it for us.....using duckduckgo, of course...:rotfl:
μονογενης θεος should be μονογενης υιος
It is supposed to mean uniquely begotten son, not uniquely begotten god.
Apple7
New member
The other search engines are censored, and Granville-Sharp didn't know what he was doing with Greek.
Apple7
New member
You are retard if you think only begotten god is good Greek variant. And ye recommending the critical text over Pickerings work with the majority text, I find astonishing.
Apple7
New member
Take it up with the world renowned NA28.
No it isn't. You take one word with the article and two words of description to the right and divide them with a kai. Thus two words describe the first word using kai. Words are also sometimes more than 1 wordage too.
It isn't renowned.
Apple7
New member
“Our restatement of Sharp’s rule is believed to be true to the nature of the language, and able to address all classes of exceptions that were raised.
The “Sharper” rule is as follows:
In native Greek constructions (i.e., not translation Greek), when a single article modifies two substantives connected via και (thus, article-substantive-και-substantive), when both substantives are (1) singular (both grammatically and semantically), (2) personal, (3) and common nouns (not proper names or ordinals), they have the same referent.”
Ref:
Granville Sharp’s Canon and its Kin; Semantics and Significance
2009 Daniel B. Wallace
p. 281
Apple7
New member
You're making a box of rocks look pretty intelligent right about now...
It isn't true because the Greek article has to match case in wordages, and there are mass substantives in Greek, because Koine doesn't have a second article. I find that as talented as Wallace is, he still often wrong or confused about Koine grammar in parts.
Apple7
New member
His refined rule came out a decade ago, and has not been refuted.
Perhaps you, who has SUB-ZERO Greek experience can now refute his rule?
:cigar:
- Status