Alternatively, in hexadecimal or binary, 10 x 3 is unable to be calculated. Different frames of reference may lead to different results.

Oy! me scratches head.

...waaayyyy, beyond my ken. :-o

HEY JASD

WELL SINCE 08-08-08- is over
and we are still here and the world
has not come to an end-----
should be wait for 09-09-09

before the end comes

hahaha heheheh hohohoho


:) :-D


dgrimm60

Hey! yourself, dgrimm60 - glad to see your presumption upon the will of Gd has not ill-affected your health. By the way,

(I am vaguely recalling that you previously posted under the netnym – Buzzard ... disabuse me, should I err)

So, the proverbial penny..., aren’t you posting quite a few boards removed from Townhall? Anyway,

rather than trying to compose a thoughtful response, allow me to simply refresh a previous response – you may have missed – following:

_____________











Let me simply remind of the many chapters remaining to the Book of Revelation - and caution against – running ahead of oneself.

There is really no need to attempt manufacture of a 'dogmatic purse' by applying to a sow’s ear. It behooves us that we not only read – but that we cogitate, as well

I’ve drawn upon a cut from post #177654 - 07/22/08 06:16 AM, this thread, to wit,



that I might segue. Let me ask, “Is this passage re the ‘Thief on the cross’ simply an anomaly, or...?”

Jesus Christ’s own words: Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: v26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? (Jn 11:25, 26)


shall never die is, in the Greek, a double negative, ie, ‘shall never never die’, ‘will not never die’, etc. The negative particles define the text herein – emphatic; as in E-M-P-H-A-T-I-C [/extemporaneously]

Well, then, speaking of the emphatic double negative..., it seems that the foundational stratum was laid aforehand – affirming that the ‘comma placement’ (Lu 23:43) in our Authorized Version Bible is, well, correctly placed – and that, indeed, the thief was in Paradise that day.

Moreover, the passage re the thief on the cross and the texts of John 11:25, 26 argue for a doctrinal position that

the deceased believer is neither insensate nor ‘soul-sleeping’ – having never never died, but rather, is an aware and involved being – dancing in fields of glory – as it were. And, one assumes, together with Jesus Christ.

The need to search the meaning of both the OT and the NT term ‘die’ may obtain; as, it is used variously.

The subject is twn sabbatwn, which is, in this post, drawn from

Acts 16:13; that is, from the clause “And on the sabbath (twn sabbatwn) we went out of the city by a river side”.

I am addressing twn sabbatwn together with its [seeming] modifier hemera, singular feminine noun. The entire phrase is hemera twn sabbatwn, or, as most commonly translated, “the Sabbath day”.

hemera, feminine singular noun is thought to qualify and/or define the noun substantive following it; that is, twn sabbatwn, rendering the entire phrase ”the Sabbath day”.

I believe the crux of the expositor’s dialogic position rests upon the grammatical rule/theory that case and number must agree.

I am confident that I am correct to read twn sabbatwn in its plural form. The plural use, in this instance, would be buttressed by the length of time St Paul spent in Philippi – spending the Sabbaths by a riverside.

Saying the above, I proceed...

The expositor’s argument: "The sabbaths" is an impossible translation, because the word "day" is singular. Thus the only correct translation is, "the Sabbath day". The singular word, day, proves that the word sabbatwn is to be translated "sabbath," singular. [/end]

It is for the reason that I disagree with the assertions that ”the only correct translation is” and ”singular word, day, proves” – that I am adding this post to the ‘Loose Ends’ thread.

Umm, we speak of twn sabbatwn as St Luke uses it in Acts 16:14. When St Luke desired to impart a singular meaning to Sabbath he, in Luke 13:14; 13:16; and in 14:5, utilized the phrase hemera tou sabbatou with its singular sabbatou/Sabbath day – thereby, apprising us, his readers, that when he desired to advance the idea of a ‘singular Sabbath day’, he was aware of the manner by which to do so properly.

Our problem lies with the phrase, which includes both the singular feminine hemera (day) together with the plural twn sabbatwn. It occurs only the three times in the NT and is unique to St Luke. Why does he utilize the phrase hemera twn sabbatwn – if it was that he wished to convey the meaning of a singular Sabbath day? He, instead, constructed a phrase incorporating – hemera, a singular feminine noun together with sabbatwn, a plural genitive substantive neuter.

(It can probably be stipulated that St Luke wrote with more sophistication than, perhaps, any other NT author – with, perhaps, the exception of St Paul and the author of Hebrews)

The answer may lie in the fact that sabbatwn is in the genitive/possessive and therefore, the phrase hemera twn sabbatwn should more properly read ‘day of the Sabbaths’ with ‘of’ being latent and inferred by the genitive/possessive character of sabbatwn. Should that be the case, thoughts come to mind of a succession of Sabbaths, that is, those of the Spring Feasts and/or the Fall Feasts – with the latter, seemingly, numinously coincident the Jubilee Sabbath and manifesting in Jesus Christ’s reading of Isaiah 61, and recorded in Luke 4:16.

Jesus Christ used the language of Jubilee in Luke 4:16 – and it may have been that He stood up and spoke in the Synagogue during the 'day of the Sabbaths’ – that is, during the Fall Feasts and possibly, more specifically, The Atonement.

Let’s also bear in mind that hemera, in cognate form, carries with it the sense of time; as, in the ‘day or time of the End’ – or, equivalently, ‘day or time of the Sabbaths’.

Lu 4:16
And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

kai hlyen eiv thn Nazaret ou hn teyrammenov kai eishlyen kata to eiwyov autw en th hmera twn sabbatwn eiv thn sunagwghn kai Anesth anagnwnai

The other two incidences of St Luke’s use of the phrase hemera twn sabbatwn follows:

Acts 13:14 (St Paul’s first journey)
But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

autoi de dielyontev apo thv Perghv paregenonto eiv Antioxeian thv pisidiav kai eiselyontev eiv thn sunagwghn th hmera twn sabbatwn ekayisan

Acts 16:13 (St Paul’s second journey)
And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted [thither].

th te hmera twn sabbatwn exhlyomen exw thv polewv para potamon ou enomizeto proseuxh einai kai kayisantev elaloumen taiv sunelyousaiv gunaixin

It may be that, as sabbatwn is genitive/possessive in case, it may more bear upon hemera than would hemera bear upon it. I would think that a substantive, bearing the quality of genitive/possessive, qualifies what ordinarily functions as a modifier; moreso, than might that modifier (in this instance – hemera) defines the genitive substantive plural – sabbatwn; that is, the Sabbaths.

I do not doubt that every/any professor of Koine Greek would disagree with me; after all, it is supposed that they’ve been to Seminary and learned – generationally – that is, didactically. I emphasize – that I have a sufficiently difficult time with English – without mention of Greek or any other language...

Perhaps, that is why I prefer to simply snort and grunt :-o

If I am mistaken in what I proffer – disabuse me.

Re sabbatou, sabbaton, sabbatwn, sabbatsin, sabbata, sabbatw, – all cognates and/or inflections: I sometimes think even those who professionally teach ‘Sabbath’ make no distinction. I suspect much of that taught re ‘Sabbath’ is done so by reliance upon the simplistic.

I tend to explore and check things on my own – sometimes finding that I am incredulous as to the ‘things and reasons’ people accept. For instance: where on earth can one find in secular writings sabbatwn as indicating week!? So, upon what foundation or grammatical atlas has that leap been made?

The fact is that the exegetical foundation from which to advance the doctrine that sabbatwn translates to week in the English language – is, at best, questionable – such as the Didache notwithstanding.