Pasa ktisis in the new testament

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 11 2010,10:29)

Mikeboll said: Quote Where is the word yalad in this verse? You need to go to your nearest trinitarian bookstore and acquire the Strong's Concordance. The words “brought forth” in Is. 23:4 is the Hebrew “yalad” (Strong's# 3205). the Roo

I've got Strong's online. I beat you over the head with it all the time, don't you remember? Which scripture do you quote about Jonah that contains “yalad”?

mike

[KangarooJack]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2010,10:59)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 11 2010,10:23) So the sea literally gave birth to children. First they literally came from the wombs of women and then again they literally came from the womb of the sea and were also taught by the sea? You're sinking into the sea Mike! So the land actually “vomitted out” people?  Does the fact that God used a word that actually DOES mean “vomit” in a figurative way mean that vomit no longer literally means vomit? I'm sinking in the sea and you're sinking in vomit Jack!         Answer my question Jack.  Does vomit no longer mean vomit? mike

So you believe then that the sea LITERALLY gave birth (yalad) to people?

the Roo

[KangarooJack]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2010,11:02)

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 11 2010,10:29) Mikeboll said: Quote Where is the word yalad in this verse? You need to go to your nearest trinitarian bookstore and acquire the Strong's Concordance. The words “brought forth” in Is. 23:4 is the Hebrew “yalad” (Strong's# 3205). the Roo I've got Strong's online.  I beat you over the head with it all the time, don't you remember?    Which scripture do you quote about Jonah that contains “yalad”? mike

Mike,

The word “yalad” is not in Jonah 2:2 but the idea is clearly present. Jonah's presence in the fish was likened by him to being in the WOMB of sheol. So the fish's vomiting Jonah out would be likened to sheol giving birth to him.

Jesus went down to sheol and came up out of it when He was raised. “Today I have given birth (yalad) to you.”

Jack

[JustAskin]

Roo,

Birds have Eggs, Kangaroo's have Pouches, but the Son of God has no womb to be birthed from.

The illustration of Jonah in the belly of the whale is analogous with Jesus in the Grave (A distasteful place). Nothing more. Not a WOMB.

The illustration stops before the VOMITTING out of Jonah. It only says “As Jonah was in the Belly of the great beast three days and three night, so too …”.
It does not lead onto the vomitting him out because Jesus was not “Vomitted out of the burial Chamber”

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 12 2010,00:27)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2010,11:02) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 11 2010,10:29) Mikeboll said: Quote Where is the word yalad in this verse? You need to go to your nearest trinitarian bookstore and acquire the Strong's Concordance. The words “brought forth” in Is. 23:4 is the Hebrew “yalad” (Strong's# 3205). the Roo I've got Strong's online.  I beat you over the head with it all the time, don't you remember?    Which scripture do you quote about Jonah that contains “yalad”? mike Mike, The word “yalad” is not in Jonah 2:2 but the idea is clearly present. Jonah's presence in the fish was likened by him to being in the WOMB of sheol. So the fish's vomiting Jonah out would be likened to sheol giving birth to him. Jesus went down to sheol and came up out of it when He was raised. “Today I have given birth (yalad) to you.” Jack

Why Roo, WHY?

Why would you go on and on about Jonah and yalad when that word isn't even in the Jonah account?  This is deceitful and dishonest and unfortunately it is your method of operation on HN.  Just like your “Jesus SPOKE all things into being” crap.  Please stick to saying ONLY what the scriptures actually say, not your “conjecture paraphrases” of what you WANT them to say.

To the point at hand…..No, I don't think the sea “gave birth”.  But I also thought your were smart enough to know that just because a literal word is used in a parable doesn't mean the word is forevermore “figurative”.  For example:  

Lev 18:28
So do not make the land vomit you out because you defile it  just as it has vomited out the nations that were before you.

Just because land doesn't LITERALLY vomit up people doesn't mean the Hebrew word for “vomit” no longer LITERALLY means “vomit”, does it?

Here's the clincher Jack:

Isaiah 7:14 KJV says,
Therefore the Lord
himself shall give
(8799)you a sign
_;Behold, a virgin
shall conceive
_,and bear
(8802)a son
_,and shall call
(8804)his name
Immanuel
 

This is from NETBible.  I don't know why it pastes verticle instead of horizontal but these are the Strong #'s along with the English words.  You can see that “bear” referring to Jesus' REAL, not FIGURATIVE birth is yalad (03205).  You can further see that it is the qal form of the verb(8802).  So much for qal only meaning “figurative”, right?  Unless you think Mary gave birth to Jesus in only a “figurative” sense.    

Here is some other useful info from Strong:

Qal
Qal is the most frequently used verb pattern. It expresses the “simple” or “casual” action of the root in the active voice. Examples: he sat, he ate, he went, he said, he rose, he bought This form accounts for 66.7% of the verbs parsed.

Are all of these examples of people “figuratively” sitting, eating, talking, rising and buying?  And qal is the verb pattern used 66.7% of the time in the OT.  Does that mean only 33.3% of the things said and done in the OT were actually LITERALLY said and done?

So, that brings us to these SCRIPTURAL FACTS: (JA and WJ, you guys pay attention too  )

1.  yalad DOES mean a LITERAL begetting

2.  yalad DOES NOT EVER mean any of these alternate definitons of the Greek equivalent “gennao”:
 a.  in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life, to convert someone
 b.  of God making Christ his son
 c.  of God making men his sons through faith in Christ's work

3.  yalad is the exact word that Paul was quoting in Heb 1 and other places and we can assume that as a Hebrew, he knew that yalad had the exact meaning of a LITERAL begetting

So it stands to reason that Paul talked of a LITERAL begetting, not some “position” that Jesus had been raised to.

Enough said?

peace and love,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Which goes along with what I've told you all before:

Acts says that Paul's top priority after being blinded by Jesus was to preach in the synagogues that this Jesus you killed WAS IN FACT THE REAL SON OF GOD, not just “a” son of God like the rest of us.

And that is the reason he quotes Psalm 2:7.  Not to say “this is when God begat His Son”, but to show that Jesus WAS this “begotten Son of God” spoken of in that Psalm all those years ago.

mike

[mikeboll64]

bump for KJ, JA and WJ

[mikeboll64]

bump

[mikeboll64]

bump for KJ, JA and WJ

[Author]

Posts