Christmas is not pagan

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

I know this was directed to Votivesoul, yet I would like to comment on this, because I believe it is a worthy concern.

There's a JW contractor in my town, and he doesn't celebrate anything as far as holidays are concerned, 4th of July, Thanksgiving, especially Christmas, not even Birthdays! He'll schedule new home projects for around Thanksgiving/Christmas time, and work right through it. A customer will hand him a check as a bonus during Christmas time, and he will not accept it.

Would anyone that accepts a bonus, or gift during the holidays be guilty of paganism?

At least he's consistent, I suppose.

I'll take anybody's money so long as it's free of strings (and I have turned it down for that reason) and put to to good use. I guess I'm not principled enough But then again, I celebrated Christ-mass yesterday so take that for what it's worth

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I draw your attention, and any other reader's as well, to the fact that the Greek text does not have a past tense verb equaling the word "was" in English. In fact, the verb in question is found in the present indicative active tense.

See here: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/3-24.htm

The sentence in Greek is:

ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ πίστεως δικαιωθῶμεν

Transliterated:

hōste ho nomos paidagōgos hēmōn gegonen eis Christon hina ek pisteōs dikaiōthōmen

The verb in question is γέγονεν - gegonen.

The above is the conjugated form of γίνομαι - ginomai, meaning "to emerge, to become, or to come into being".

See: https://biblehub.com/greek/1096.htm

From the first link above, you can see that the present indicative action (3rd person singular) of γίνομαι - ginomai, that is, γέγονεν - gegonen, is best translated as "has become', which at first may seem to be "past tense", but in reality, and in context, is not.

Here's why:

The verse in question can (and I think should be) translated as follows:



You can see in this context, the verb in question really has a present tense meaning, hence why it is present active indicative, which means it is present tense, continuously active in every sense of "the present" from each and every moment to the next, in order to stress the fact of the reality of, in this case, what the Law/Torah is to us, that is, the tutor that leads us to the Anointed One.

What this means is, you cannot come to the Christ without the Law/Torah constantly, presently, actively from moment to moment, leading you to Him, bringing you back to Him, returning you to Him, as a matter of spiritual fact, so that you can be made righteous/justified.

To be antinomian is to be unrighteous, to forsake the Christ, and to abandon the tutor that leads you to your salvation.

I understand that there is many complexities in translating languages, but I am very Leary people completely retranslating verse to fit their preconceived views.

If you you read verse Galations 3:23

Galatians 3:23
But beforefaith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

Note the word “before”, it creates the context for the useage of the past tense in vs 24.

Also I have looked at about a half a dozen popular translation and they all have the same past tense usage. I am content in the tense that is used in the KJV

[good samaritan]

What is an antinomian?

I can google it, but I just want be sure I am understanding what is meant when people are using it on AFF.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I draw your attention, and any other reader's as well, to the fact that the Greek text does not have a past tense verb equaling the word "was" in English. In fact, the verb in question is found in the present indicative active tense.

See here: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/3-24.htm

The sentence in Greek is:

ὥστε ὁ νόμος παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν γέγονεν εἰς Χριστόν ἵνα ἐκ πίστεως δικαιωθῶμεν

Transliterated:

hōste ho nomos paidagōgos hēmōn gegonen eis Christon hina ek pisteōs dikaiōthōmen

The verb in question is γέγονεν - gegonen.

The above is the conjugated form of γίνομαι - ginomai, meaning "to emerge, to become, or to come into being".

See: https://biblehub.com/greek/1096.htm

From the first link above, you can see that the present indicative action (3rd person singular) of γίνομαι - ginomai, that is, γέγονεν - gegonen, is best translated as "has become', which at first may seem to be "past tense", but in reality, and in context, is not.

Here's why:

The verse in question can (and I think should be) translated as follows:



You can see in this context, the verb in question really has a present tense meaning, hence why it is present active indicative, which means it is present tense, continuously active in every sense of "the present" from each and every moment to the next, in order to stress the fact of the reality of, in this case, what the Law/Torah is to us, that is, the tutor that leads us to the Anointed One.

What this means is, you cannot come to the Christ without the Law/Torah constantly, presently, actively from moment to moment, leading you to Him, bringing you back to Him, returning you to Him, as a matter of spiritual fact, so that you can be made righteous/justified.

To be antinomian is to be unrighteous, to forsake the Christ, and to abandon the tutor that leads you to your salvation.

Greek has three tenses that describe the past: aorist, imperfect, and perfect. This allows a Greek writer to be specific about the three different types of action that can come into play: simple, continued, and completed.

I am sure Bible translaters where familiar with the Greek grammar when they used the verb tenses they used in the English bibles. Also when you read many translations in parallel and they all use the same tense, I would be comfortable to say that they probably got it right.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I understand that there is many complexities in translating languages, but I am very Leary people completely retranslating verse to fit their preconceived views.

If you you read verse Galations 3:23

Galatians 3:23
But beforefaith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

Note the word “before”, it creates the context for the useage of the past tense in vs 24.

Also I have looked at about a half a dozen popular translation and they all have the same past tense usage. I am content in the tense that is used in the KJV

There is unequivocal translator bias in all translations of the Bible, or any text for that matter. All translation is interpretation first. And all English translations after the Reformation are biased toward the Protestant doctrine of grace, even if it means taking an unwarranted translational tack.

Originally Posted by good samaritan

What is an antinomian?

I can google it, but I just want be sure I am understanding what is meant when people are using it on AFF.

An antinomian is a person is thinks or believes no part of the Law is binding on the New Covenant believer in Christ, on account of the coming of the grace that saves.

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Greek has three tenses that describe the past: aorist, imperfect, and perfect. This allows a Greek writer to be specific about the three different types of action that can come into play: simple, continued, and completed.

I am sure Bible translaters where familiar with the Greek grammar when they used the verb tenses they used in the English bibles. Also when you read many translations in parallel and they all use the same tense, I would be comfortable to say that they probably got it right.

Thank you for the information. But, if you will go to the think I shared, you will see the verb in question, translated as "was" in the verse you originally shared from Galatians, is neither aorist, imperfect, or perfect, but is present active indicative.

So, why would any translator translate against the clear tense and mood of a verb to something equivalent to a different tense and mood, if not for translator bias?

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

There is unequivocal translator bias in all translations of the Bible, or any text for that matter. All translation is interpretation first. And all English translations after the Reformation are biased toward the Protestant doctrine of grace, even if it means taking an unwarranted translational tack.



An antinomian is a person is thinks or believes no part of the Law is binding on the New Covenant believer in Christ, on account of the coming of the grace that saves.



Thank you for the information. But, if you will go to the think I shared, you will see the verb in question, translated as "was" in the verse you originally shared from Galatians, is neither aorist, imperfect, or perfect, but is present active indicative.

So, why would any translator translate against the clear tense and mood of a verb to something equivalent to a different tense and mood, if not for translator bias?

The word is used 709 times in the NT and the tense is used differently, no doubt based upon the the translators choice in relation to each specific text.

Transliteration:
ginomai

Pronunciation:
ghin'-om-ahee

Part of Speech:
Verb

It does not have a tense here. It no doubt depends on the text. As far a translator bias, it appears that you also have bias as to why you feel the word is mistranslated.

[good samaritan]

A antinomian is a person is thinks or believes no part of the Law is binding on the New Covenant believer in Christ, on account of the coming of the grace that saves.

In that case I am antinomian. I am not under the old covenant law. Although, much of moral laws under the old covenant are definitely identical to the new covenant. The law of love is definitely a part of the new covenant. We still don’t kill, steal, lie, etc. when we are walking in the Spirit. I don’t see sabbath observance as a moral law, except for the fact of abusing laborers by never allowing proper rest. BTW, that is still something that would be wrong.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

In that case I am antinomian. I am not under the old covenant law. Although, much of moral laws under the old covenant are definitely identical to the new covenant. The law of love is definitely a part of the new covenant. We still don’t kill, steal, lie, etc. when we are walking in the Spirit. I don’t see sabbath observance as a moral law, except for the fact of abusing laborers by never allowing proper rest. BTW, that is still something that would be wrong.

Great post. You hit the nail on the head. But you are not
antinomian.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

So if Jesus doesn’t align with your logic concerning the law, he is a deceiver and false prophet? Christ fulfilled the law to bring us into a new and better covenant.





Romans 14:5-6
5......One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
6......He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

Romans 14:10
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

This doesn’t go along with your reasoning.

These "Apostolics" don't seem to have a good grasp regarding many subjects that Paul and the other Apostles taught.

[Originalist]

I'm still baffled that anyone would doubt that Jesus did not at least give token acknowledgment to the celebration of Dedication, as any normal Jew would.