One In The Greek

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

Overall, I am unimpressed.

I could purchase a stack of Hebrew dictionaries and lexicons, and then add a pile of scholarly commentaries.

But in the end, I would not be able to read or translate Hebrew. I would simply be a person with an impressive library.

Greek grammar, especially the details, are best left to those who have college level Greek under their belt. As a rule, I do not discuss the finer points of grammar with those who have not studied Koine Greek in a college setting.

This is frustrating for some, but it is my policy.

As a reminder, I am no apologist. I occasionally post as a courtesy for those who have kindly assisted me in my book project.

I hope my contributions have been of value to the original post.

*Umm, Scott, for about the 5th time now, I DO have university Greek and Hebrew “under my belt.” That’s the whole point I’ve been making to the moon-man ()!

*I have provided quotation after quotation and biblical example after example clearly demonstrating that the masculine singular “heis” speaks of “one person”—despite how many times you & the Gail Riplinger wanna’ be might parrot otherwise. The quotes are for all to see.

*Speaking of being unimpressed, trust me, that’s a two way street . If God’s Word cannot convince you then I am certainly wasting my time—as virtually every single time I log on here .

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What on earth?

Scott, are you drinking that water again?

*Exactly! More pure nonsense.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Μάρκος 10:8

καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν. ὥστε οὐκέτι εἰσὶ δύο, ἀλλὰ μία σάρξ.

Still in Mark 10:8 Jesus is still saying that the two are literally one. Yet, we walk away with believing it is a unified one. Which the body still has only one head. In John 10:30 we still have a literal one, while the high church has a take away believing it is a unified one. But still, this body also only has one head. The God is the head of the Body of Jesus, Jesus is the head of man, the man is the head of the woman. Hence the church never has female leadership over men. Because in the church the head is one, which is male.

William D. Mounce explains ἓν in John 10:30 to mean one and the same.

So, Mike, you know English, you speak English. As you see in this thread you aren't going to win a debate in Greek over εἷς, μία, ἕν. Anyone who brings it up to you to prove that God is three separate persons know as much Greek as you do. So, pick up your KJV, believe that Jesus is going to speak through you, and speak English to those who you desire to win for Christ.

[Steven Avery]

Galatians 3:28 (AV)
There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither bond nor free,
there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Yes, Thayer and the NEB actually had the weak "one person" text for ONE verse, Galatians 3:28. Thanks for the Thayer correction.

NEB - New English Bible:
There Is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female,
for you are all one person in Christ Jesus.
http://www.katapi.org.uk/katapiNSBun....php?B=309&C=3

Thayer: 28 (ye that adhere to Christ make one person, just as the Lord himself);
https://books.google.com/books?id=7wVNDAjFkRoC&pg=PA186

Esaias properly asked
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...er#post1571376

Originally Posted by Esaias

So, we are all one person in Christ? I"m trying to wrap my head around that, what it would actually mean. I can see "one body" as a metaphor for a corporate unity composed of many persons. We are one is equivalent to we are united or joined together as a (composite) whole. But saying we are one person, I don't understand what that would mean. We are many persons.

You tried to ignore his point, that this is a very poor English text.

Originally Posted by rdp

*I quoted, for examples, Thayer & JFB earlier (see also NEB, ERV) where they pointed out that because the masculine and not the neuter was employed in Galatians 3.28 the passage should technically be rendered as “one person”—this is simply the normative force of the masculine singular when a personal being is being described. In fact, the passage is a saying that in Christ Jesus there is no distinctions, but we are all considered “one person” in Christ Jesus (of course, Paul is using hyperbole to make a point).

No, the passage does not say that. Two sources out of hundreds have that text. It is a weak and confusing wording.

Your ERV and JFB references are simply lies that you continue to make even after correction.

JFB talks of "one new man" in an interpretative sense, yet you lie outright and claim that the JFB says that:

"the passage should technically be rendered as “one person”.

And your lie about the ERV is simple to see:

ERV - “You are all the same in Christ Jesus”

You are such a charlatan that on your page you quoted Dalcour on the ERV, never responded, and still bring that lie over to this forum again and again.

Exegetical Surrejoinder πρὸς Edward Dalcour (III)
Roger Perkins - July 19, 2017
https://apostolicacademics.com/2017/...d-dalcour-iii/

(Dalcour): First, Perkins misleads he readers here. For both the ASV (“for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus”) and the ERV (“You are all the same in Christ Jesus”), none say “one person.” As said, Perkins has a reputation for misquoting and botching sources. He selects translations that he can put a spin on, as he did with the older ed. of the AMP of Gal. 3:20.

You gave a response on the AMP but you did not touch the ERV.

Thus, you graduated to lying outright in including that reference. The same accusation applies to your botching the JFB text.

Apparently you did remove the ASV reference.

The AMP reference was from their earlier edition of Galatians 3:20, discussed here:
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=101

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Galatians 3:28 (AV)
There is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither bond nor free,
there is neither male nor female:
for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Yes, Thayer and the NEB actually had the weak "one person" text for ONE verse, Galatians 3:28.

NEB:
There Is neither Jew nor Greek,
there is neither slave nor free,
there is neither male nor female,
for you are all one person in Christ Jesus.
http://www.katapi.org.uk/katapiNSBun....php?B=309&C=3

Thayer: 28 (ye that adhere to Christ make one person, just as the Lord himself);
https://books.google.com/books?id=7wVNDAjFkRoC&pg=PA186

Esaias properly asked
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...er#post1571376



You ignored his point, that this is a very poor English text.



Your ERV and JFB references are simply lies that you continue to make even after correction. JFB talks of "one new man" in an interpretative sense.

ERV - “You are all the same in Christ Jesus”

Your interpretation is absurdly weak.

You are such a charlatan that on your page you quoted Dalcour on the ERV.

You gave a response on the AMP but you did not touch the ERV.

Thus, you graduated to lying outright in including that reference.

*LOL! Avery, does Mommy know you’re up past bed time? You’re either mentally insane, or, more than likely, just another blind, ignorant Oneness pseudo “scholar.” Here, let’s recap for little Ned in the 1st Reader once again:

*D.A. Carson, JFB, A.T. Robertson, White, Dalcour, Zacharias, Wuest, Thayer, LXX, GNT, UBS Handbooks for Translators, Vincent, Wallace, etc., etc. allll plainly state that the masculine singular denotes “one person.” But, you, being the whacko that you are readily known to be repeatedly double down on your rife stupidity of original language research.

*Worse, you actually claim that you have “corrected” something in these texts—when all you’ve done is continue to place your gross ignorance on full display for all the world to see. Do you just make things up as bumble along? Remember, you claimed above that Thayer did not support the translation of “one person” in Galatians 3.28—when explicitly TRANSLATED the passage as “one person” as copied above. Hard to believe you’re really being serious (but, you’ve been this way ever since I’ve been interacting w. you, as is well noted).

*I specifically answered Esaias above. Once again, you just make things up in your fertile imagination as you fumble along. You remind me of the Apostolic Apple Dumpling Gang .

*Oh, and lest I forget, here’s Galatians 3.28 so everyone can see where the ERV renders the text as: “There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female: for ye all are ONE MAN in Christ Jesus.” Hey Avery, how many “persons” would you suppose “one man” is:___________? LOL. Hear that background music playing? Did you just make up that ERV translation above? The “lie” is that JFB & ERV do NOT openly affirm “one person/man”—and all anyone has to do scroll back up & read the actual sources. How very weird. (Link: https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-28.htm)

*Still even worse, your quote from Dalcour above is soundly refuted in my rejoinders - that you somehow couldn’t manage to locate online . I declare, you seem to reach new levels of ignorance every time you try to save face. Quick, offer more diversionary tactics before you look too bad in front of everyone!

*Tell ya’ what, perhaps when the NA29 & UBS-6 come out—and when NASA goes to stage another moon landing—we’ll send them to you so they can get it all right . You’re a glutton for punishment Avery—but, then again, most conspiracy theorists are .

[Steven Avery]

Note: I pointed out above that you are lying outright about JFB and ERV.
And I use the word lying deliberately, because they were specifically corrected.

Why not handle those first.

You have not even had the integrity to accept the simple and clear Edward Dalcour correction on the ERV. Your rant response to Dalcour simply omitted that factual correction and you have tried to deceive this forum by continuing to use the phony ERV claim.

============================

Then we can go into your false claim about others that you say:

plainly state that the masculine singular denotes “one person.”

Take one by one.

AFTER you accept the two corrections above.
.
============================

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Note: I pointed out above that you are lying outright about JFB and ERV.
And I use the word lying deliberately, because they were specifically corrected.

Why not handle those first.

You have not even had the integrity to accept the simple and clear Edward Dalcour correction on the ERV. Your rant response to Dalcour simply omitted that factual correction and you have tried to deceive this forum by continuing to use the phony ERV claim.

============================

Then we can go into your false claim about others that you say:



Take one by one.

AFTER you accept the two corrections above.
.
============================

*Umm, there’s absolutely not one single thing to “correct” other than your continued stupidity and lies. All anyone has to do is merely click on the links I have provided to see your gross errors, as well as how Dalcour’s assertions backfired on him in the worst way (which is why he has refused to meet me in one-on-one debate at every turn).

*Simply, it is YOU who is the liar. If you’re a biblical “Christian”—I’m Elvis Presley....and you ain’t nothing but a hound dog !

*Again, can lil’ Stevie tell us all how many “persons” “one man” would be in the ERV:__________? Waiting......

*The only thing to “correct” is your astounding (but sooo typical) gross ignorance. Goodness, all anyone has to do is read the volumes of quotes (that you merely dismiss and ignore, and then somehow reason that you’ve offered “correction” ) all posted in this thread. Need more quotes Steven? I found many more tonight in my library. Quick, hurry and post to save face...LOL.

[Steven Avery]

There are two different ERVs.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

What is the text of the ERV.

Why do you use that to claim "one person".

*Can you not read English Stevie? I specifically quoted above the ERV straight from the source itself, which renders the relevant clause as “he are all ONE MAN in Christ Jesus.” How many “persons” is “one man” Avery:________?

*You and your cohort erroneously claimed that “no translation” renders this text as one person—which is flatly false, as all anyone has to do is click the link and read the tons of quotations I have provided on here. And, again, I located three more tonight in the UBS Handbooks (ready?)...FOR TRANSLATORS. Guess what they say Stevie? You can render the adjective “one” in these verses (Galatians 3.20 & 28) as “one person.” Maybe they should consult w. your grammatical “expertise” before they write their next grammar? LOL. You just never learn.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

What is the text of the ERV.

Why do you use that to claim "one person".

=====================================

In this quote you are lying outright about the ASV and the ESV.



Dalcour is right about your botch methodology. However, what makes it worse is your ability to use phony references even after they have been shown to be false.

*Ummm, I didn’t say the “ESV”—I said the ERV. Learn to read English before calling someone a liar Avery. You are the liar.

*Worse, not 1 SINGLE reference has been “shown to be false.” In fact, the polar opposite it true, as my rejoinders well demonstrate, as does this thread. Next?