Comments
1 - 16 of 16 Comments Last updated Feb 3, 2012

“Only Biblical methods will”

Since: Apr 10

bring others to Christ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 11, 2010
 

Judged:

1

Punctuation is very important to the meaning of a sentence. For example:

I tell you, today you are getting your hair cut.

Or

I tell you today, you are getting your hair cut.

Same words, different meanings (this is just an example despite its similarities to Luke 23:43, as I am not really tempting debate on the different meanings of Luke 23:43 or any one specific verse.)

I am just beggining my studies on this subject, so please bear with my ignorance on this matter (and this is why I am posting this thread in on attempt at minimizing my ignorance.)

At the time the Bible was written, there was no punctuation in use (along with no chapter/verse of course). Does anyone have any insights they care to share about how the Bible is currently punctuated, the variations between translations and denominational doctrine, how the scholars/translators came to their decisions, or any other relevant links/info. I am googling this as well, but I know some on here have this kind of information at their fingertips.

Thanks to all who care to share :)
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 11, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

well over time many of the mistkaes in grammar have been corrected...when a great deal of the hand copying was being done the sentences all tended to run into another...thats why so many errors were initially made...and so many add-ins resulted...the next guy was always trying to fix the last guys mistakes. or what he thought were mistakes.

but at this time the grammar is pretty accurate

this is great primer on the history of the bible - dont get scared by the price listed. get a cataloge sent to you and buy at the sale prices...

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.a...

this company offers some great courses on religion and many other topics...

“Only Biblical methods will”

Since: Apr 10

bring others to Christ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 11, 2010
 
Punisher wrote:
well over time many of the mistkaes in grammar have been corrected...when a great deal of the hand copying was being done the sentences all tended to run into another...thats why so many errors were initially made...and so many add-ins resulted...the next guy was always trying to fix the last guys mistakes. or what he thought were mistakes.
but at this time the grammar is pretty accurate
this is great primer on the history of the bible - dont get scared by the price listed. get a cataloge sent to you and buy at the sale prices...
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.a...
this company offers some great courses on religion and many other topics...
Thanks for the reply and the information. I will also have to check out that link and see if they have any courses I can take. Gotta love online courses :).

Since: Dec 09

Ontario, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 11, 2010
 

Judged:

1

In addition to texts on paper, the books that make up the Bible are part of a living culture. These stories were well known prior to being written. For the well known cases, the cultural memory shows how the punctuation should be added. There are, however, some cases in which punctuation choices are not clear and are based upon some guess work.

“Jesus forgives..... ”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jun 11, 2010
 

Judged:

1

Seriously__ wrote:
Punctuation is very important to the meaning of a sentence. For example:
I tell you, today you are getting your hair cut.
Or
I tell you today, you are getting your hair cut.
Same words, different meanings (this is just an example despite its similarities to Luke 23:43, as I am not really tempting debate on the different meanings of Luke 23:43 or any one specific verse.)
I am just beggining my studies on this subject, so please bear with my ignorance on this matter (and this is why I am posting this thread in on attempt at minimizing my ignorance.)
At the time the Bible was written, there was no punctuation in use (along with no chapter/verse of course). Does anyone have any insights they care to share about how the Bible is currently punctuated, the variations between translations and denominational doctrine, how the scholars/translators came to their decisions, or any other relevant links/info. I am googling this as well, but I know some on here have this kind of information at their fingertips.
Thanks to all who care to share :)
That's the beautiful thing about English language. One can twist the meaning by a simple comma.
Punisher

Massapequa, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 12, 2010
 

Judged:

1

Seriously__ wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the reply and the information. I will also have to check out that link and see if they have any courses I can take. Gotta love online courses :).
they are not actual courses, but university level lectures on various subjects. like books on tape/cd.
david

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 21, 2011
 
Consider this:

"Do all come in"
"Do all take a seat"
"Do all help yourseves"

Are the above a question, or a statement.

I would expect you all to recognise them as a statement, especially if they were all spoken within the context of a welcome, spoken to others within the context of a meeting. The context of a meeting, resulting in a welcome, helping us to identify whether they were spoken as statements, or questions, apart from the addition of punctuation.

Know look at this:

"Do all work miracles, do all have gifts of healing, do all speak in tongues, do all interpret.(I would prefer to see ; ) BUT (it makes no grammatical sense what so ever to use the word BUT, except in terms of "YES DO ALL - BUT")eagerly desire the greater gifts."

Was Paul really undermining Jesus' words spoken in Mark 16? Or was Paul trying to bring order, to the disorder of the Corinthian church, with its divisions, and boasting, men and women using the gift of tongues to compete with each other?

Read around the verses, understand the context of all that Paul was saying, and why he was saying it, and you will see, that Paul was making a statement, not asking a question, calling for order, not undermining God's Word, or God's Son, not bringing into question the gift of tongues.

YES "do all.....BUT....."
Norma Austin

Tulsa, OK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 21, 2011
 
In the book: These Were God's People A Bible History by William C. Martin, published by Southwestern Company on page 311 in the footnote it reads:
*Notice that this passage was later applied to John the Baptist (Matthew 3:3) Notice also that the familiar "a voice crying in the wilderness,'prepare the way of the Lord' " should actually be read "a voice crying,'In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord.' "
I would like to read more of these punctuation differences, I don't want to call them errors because I think the words of the Bible are true. Some things don't matter, and some things do. Jesus is Christ.
david

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 21, 2011
 
I should have added - the addition of a question mark in 1 Corinthians 12 v 29 -31 "Do all.....?" introduced doubt (God is not the author of confusion remember). Modern translations replaced the words "do all" with "not all," and so now we have a completely different statement, something Paul never did, and never would have said, is now used as an excuse by many many people. It really is enough to make you cry and cry.

The gift of tongues is still the attesting sign to a wonderful event (1 Corinthians 13 v 5 -6), a vital event - Luke 12 v 50. But the gift of tongues is NEVER to be taken as a continued love for, and obedience to God, only doctrine and behaviour, beliefs and opinions reveal that - test the spirits - test the doctrine, the behaviour, the beliefs and opinions - which spirit/Spirit is the person following, giving their attention, and allegiance to?
Gray

Richmond, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 2, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

In the verse that you mentioned in at the beginning of this post, does it make sense in the punctuation that it popularly used when you read this verse.
John 20:17

New International Version (NIV)

17 Jesus said,“Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them,‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 16, 2012
 
In the Ancient Hebrew writings; there was "NO" punctuation.

Does anyone know who upgrades biblical writings with current punctuation?

“God bless you (o: welcome (o:”

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 17, 2012
 
Hi, Seriously ... there are places in the Bible where what two sides are arguing against each other can both be true, or each can be part of the whole.

So ... for one example > Jesus said "this day" > it was that day when He said that, plus I accept that somehow on that day He and the man were in Paradise ... what Jesus meant, "maybe" not what people can now understand, though they are arguing.

Often enough, those arguing to prove themselves right can all be wrong or not totally correct.

But in that case, I consider that Jesus did not need to tell people that it was on that day that He was telling the man something. People would know that, without saying (c: But when he would be with Jesus is something that would not go without saying.

So, the context can help.

“God bless you (o: welcome (o:”

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 17, 2012
 
Seriously, have you ever heard or read that story about the blind men who were feeling an elephant and each one was arguing what an elephant is? One, holding the trunk, was insisting the elephant is a snake hanging from a tree and not feeding from its branches. Another was saying, no way ... the elephant was the tree > he was exploring one of the elephant's legs (c: Another was feeling the flapping ears and sure the elephant was a sting ray that could fly out of the water, as hard as it might be for science to believe this.

(c: lololololol

Well, that is not exactly what the story is.

But each one arguing can be limited to one's own whatever.

Like this, with God, we can not get all there is about God, just by parts of the Bible and pieces of our own experience. But each part can help to understand other parts.
bibleonly

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Feb 2, 2012
 
But in that case, I consider that Jesus did not need to tell people that it was on that day that He was telling the man something. People would know that, without saying (c: But when he would be with Jesus is something that would not go without saying.

There where 2 schools of thought in the Jewish faith at the time of the crucifixion, a) belief in a final resurrection b) no life after death. The criminal identified his belief in a resurrection by stating. KJ v. 40 Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation (sentenced to death)? And again saying, v. 42 Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. When he would be with Jesus then would go without saying, it being the resurrection. On your first point that "Jesus did not need to tell people that it was on that day that He was telling the man something". The man was asking Jesus to, on some future date, consider his case to see if he can come into the kingdom. Jesus answered, "I can tell you right now, you will be with me in paradise"(my paraphrase).

“theholychristian church.com”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Feb 3, 2012
 
You mean the greeks did not use punctuation in their writing back then? If they did not then the punctuation was still implied by their use of the chosen words - like with chinese and arabian???

And do not forget: everything we need to understand to be able to do what we must to find salvation, is very clear, without contradiction.

----------

The Gospel is not the way you like to see it: it is the way it is.
Jesus taught those who follow him only to Preach what he taught them - for they can never Teach you.

Calling The Unbeliever, Confronting The Lukewarm, Exposing The Hypocrite
Do Not Follow Men, Nor Churches! Come to Christ, says God!
http://www.theholychristianchurch.com/christi...
http://www.theholychristianchurch.com/repenta...

Murder: the unauthorized (by God) killing of a creature
Killing: the authorized (by God) putting to death of a creature
Judging: In Christianity, the prohibited 'judging' is to execute a penalty upon another as retribution for their sins.
comment

Marshfield, MO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Feb 3, 2012
 
bibleonly wrote:
But in that case, I consider that Jesus did not need to tell people that it was on that day that He was telling the man something. People would know that, without saying (c: But when he would be with Jesus is something that would not go without saying.
There where 2 schools of thought in the Jewish faith at the time of the crucifixion, a) belief in a final resurrection b) no life after death. The criminal identified his belief in a resurrection by stating. KJ v. 40 Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation (sentenced to death)? And again saying, v. 42 Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. When he would be with Jesus then would go without saying, it being the resurrection. On your first point that "Jesus did not need to tell people that it was on that day that He was telling the man something". The man was asking Jesus to, on some future date, consider his case to see if he can come into the kingdom. Jesus answered, "I can tell you right now, you will be with me in paradise"(my paraphrase).
The interlinear greek text most definitely uses punctuation. And the above quote is not accurate. The phrase, in the Greek is as follows: "Truly I say to you, Today with me you will be in paradise.(the comma is placed as indicated) I'd post the Greek, but that is not possible within the font capabilities of the website.

My opinion of Jesus' mention of the word "today" is that Jesus knew that upon his death he would, that day, decend to hades to rescue the prisoners 1Peter 3:19, and that he would take the criminal with him. It also might be interpreted that Jesus claim that he would "preach freedom to the prisoners" Luke 4:18, is indicative of that event.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••