Re: [TruthTalk] Eternal Sonship

Sun, 26 Jun 2005 12:29:19 -0700

judyt writes: BT gets this from Acts 13:32,33 and he must be using one of the newer translations because the KJV includes the word "again" ... The word "again" to me means that he was raised up once and then God did it again - otherwise it is meaningless and redundant and I don't believe that this is so.  Do you?
 
Hi, Judy.
 
The word "again" in the KJV does not appear in the GR text per se; that is, it is not represented there by its equivalent in the Greek: the word palin. The KJV gets this word "again" from the same word that is translated in the NKJV (and some other Translations) as "raised up." The word is anastasis. It is translated in numerous ways, even in the KJV: raise up, stand up, arise, appear, get up, rise, lift up -- to name a few. From this we can see that the word itself does not necessarily have to give us the impression that this raising up or being made to stand is happening "again." On the hand, it can be translated in a way that does emphasize this aspect, in that it is also translated as "raise up again" and "rise again," along with other "again" emphases. Here is why: If one examines the word etymologically, the stasis means "to stand" and the ana means "to repeat" or to do "again" -- e.g. the Anabaptists were the "re-baptizers." The KJV translators have picked up on this "ana" aspect of the word and, considering that it is spoken in the context of Jesus' resurrection, translated it as "raised up Jesus again" (in verses 33) and "raised again" (in verse 37). Obviously some translators would argue with the license the KJV translators used in doing this, considering how the word functions elsewhere, but it seems reasonable, at least to me, in this context to translate it the way they did with an emphasis on the "ana" aspect.
 
I hope this is helpful,
 
Bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Eternal Sonship

Just by way of aside: the below illustrates a problem with the phrase "biblical terminology". What exactly is its referent?
 
Debbie 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Eternal Sonship

 
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 08:40:25 -0400 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John wrote:
An eternal Son only CONTINUES  to be a son.
 
DM: Bill Taylor seems to see something more than this.  Did you read about how 
he thinks the phrase, "this day I have begotten you" applies to the ressurection?
 
judyt: BT gets this from Acts 13:32,33 and he must be using one of the newer translations because the KJV includes the word "again" ie:
 
"And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the 2nd psalm 'thou art my Son, this day have I begotten (fathered, sired, procreated; produced) thee. And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, now no more to return to curruption, he said on this wise (in this way), I will give you the sure mercies of David. Wherefore he said also in another psalm, 'thou shalt not suffer (permit, allow, tolerate) thy holy one to see corruption"
For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption; but he, whom God raised again saw no corruption.  (Acts 13:32-37)
 
The word "again" to me means that he was raised up once and then God did it again - otherwise it is meaningless and redundant and I don't believe that this is so.  Do you?
Blessings
Judyt

Reply via email to