1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Word Study G2525 kathistemi

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Van, Aug 14, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Although no translation uses "put in charge" in those verses.
    "We" do not have 17 out of 22 usages where "put in charge" is the preferred rendering. Translations already clearly convey the intended message without your help.
    It does not qualify as frequently --just sometimes. Frequently would mean it occurs more than half the time at the least. You fail. I know you like lexicons, but a dictionary would assist you in determining the meaning of words like frequently.
     
  2. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    1) Other translations translate G2525 as "put in charge" in various verses.

    2) We have 17 out of 22 usages where put in charge clearly conveys the intended message.

    3) Rippon has redefined "frequently" to mesh with his agenda, just like Calvinism. Go figure.
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Only in a handful of places such as Matt. 24:45,47;Mark 13:23;Luke 12:42,44. Only two that I have seen use "put in charge" in Acts 6:3 --the NASB and NET. I'll give you half a point for that.
    Only in your estimation.
    No, I have not not. Your pet phrase is used only 5.5 times out of the 17 instances you think merits the rendering. That's less than one third of the time. That, my friend, does not qualify as frequently. Frequently means very often or habitually. You fail.
     
  4. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So in 22 occurrences, eleven would be half. And more than half of 11 would be six. Thus if the NASB uses "put in charge" eight times to translate "Kathistemi" that would fit a dictionary definition of often or its synonym, frequently. Then if you stick with put in charge, rather than appoint in accordance with the goals of fidelity and concordance, you have 14 usages where "put in charge" seems best. Now if we add it the three more examples where "put in charge" seems better than "make" you have 17 out of 22 usages where "put in charge" provides a translation choice that comes closer to the goals of fidelity and concordance.
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Most versions use your phrase five times. But since the NASB uses it 8 times --8 out of 22 occurrences is roughly 37% of the time. That qualifies as infrequently. If it occurred 17 or more times it could be classified as frequently. It's amazing that I have to school you in basic English and math.
     
  6. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    More than 25% of the time is frequently, is often, and is spot on. :)
    As Jesus said, who put you in charge?
     
  7. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You're not familiar with adverbs of frequency. Let me show you.
    Always :100%
    Frequently : 90%
    Usually : 80%
    Sometimes 50% or less
    Occasionally : 40%
    Seldom : 20%
    Never : 0%

    So your usage of the term "put in charge" occurs around the occasional mark.

    Jesus never asked that question.
     
  8. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Your percentages are arbitrary and absurd. Put in charge is frequently used to translate 2525 in the NASB.
     
  9. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Van loves to say my posts are absurd. It's no different when it comes to the above. So is the chart above absurd or perfectly reasonable?

    Van, I will give a range this time. Of course it is approximate. It can't be exact. Always and never are absolutes with no range of course.

    Frequently : 90% -95%
    Usually : 80% --85%
    Sometimes : 45%-50%
    Occasionally : 37%-44%
    Seldom : 20%-25%
    Rare : 5%-10%

    How's that? I think these percentages are within a decent margin. No rational person could claim that 26% qualifies as a minimum for frequent.
     
  10. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yet another off topic post, from a person is quibbles over the meaning of words.

    Your percentages are arbitrary and absurd. Put in charge is frequently used to translate 2525 in the NASB.
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Isn't that your speciality Van?
    No, on the contrary --quite sound and reasonable.
    Have you forgotten so quickly what I just taught you Van? Eight times out of 22 times is "occasionally" or almost 37% of the time. Frequently would mean that your phrase was used in the NASB about 19 times at the minimum, or roughly 90%.
     
  12. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    More quibbling over the meaning of "frequently" but no discussion of the topic.
     
  13. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The Greek compound word ( G2525 kathistemi) literally means to set someone or something down over something else. Frequently it is translated as to “put in charge.” The word appears 22 times in scripture. Lets look at some of those cases where it is not translated “put in charge.”

    In six of these alternate translation choices, our word is translated as “appointed” and thus could also be translated as “put in charge.” Therefore, in 14 verses, the idea is clearly someone or some group puts someone in charge of something. I see no need to pull off the most frequent and literal translation choice.

    However, lets look at the eight remaining cases, where our word is translated as “made” or “set” or “render” or “escorted.”

    In three of the verses where our word is translated “made” the idea again is being “put in charge.” (Acts 7:10, 7:27 and 7:35). So now we have 17 out of 22 usages where put in charge clearly conveys the intended message.

    Now to the verses where it seems another shade of meaning is intended. To be “put in charge” is to change a person’s status, and thus a shade of meaning is to change a person’s status. For example, if you are friends with the world, you render yourself an enemy of God. Or, as in Romans 5:19 by one man’s disobedience, many were rendered sinners, but by One man’s obedience, many will be rendered righteous.

    And so our word has the intended meaning of altering, i.e. rendering a person as such and such, and this is the meaning found in Romans 5:19, James 4:4 and 2 Peter 1:8.

    One pesky problem when suggesting better translation choices to improve transparency and concordance, is that often when reducing overlap by avoiding words that translate other Greek words, the alternate may also be used to translate other Greek words. The old out of the frying pan, into the fire dilemma. The NASB translates other words as “render.” But, happily in this case, only in four verses (Matthew 22:21, Romans 2:6, Romans 13:7 and Revelation 22:12) with other versions translating those verses with repay or give repayment and the like.) And so, if we change Romans 5:19, James 4:4 and 2 Peter 1:8 to render, and then change Matthew 22:21, Romans 2:6, Romans 13:7 and Revelation 22:12 to repay or give repayment, then the overlap is eliminated.

    Which brings us to our last two verses, Acts 17:15 and James 3:6.

    Acts 17:15, Now those who escorted Paul brought him as far as Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as soon as possible, they left.

    Most translations I looked at either go with escorted or conducted. Apparently, our Greek word is used elsewhere to indicate bringing someone or something through something, thus escorted or conducted is a lexicon meaning. However, it occurs to me, and to no other published source that I have found, that “put in charge” was the intended meaning. Those who had put Paul in charge brought him as far as Athens; and after receiving a command [from Paul who is in charge] for Silas and Timothy to come to him [Paul] as soon as possible, they left. It is probably best to stick with “escorted” but the other possibility is intriguing. Word Study can bring questions to mind, for which more study, prayer and meditation is required.

    James 3:6, And the tongue is a fire, the very world of iniquity; the tongue is set among our members as that which defiles the entire body, and sets on fire the course of our life, and is set on fire by hell.

    Here our word is translated as set. Other verses have placed. So our tongue is set or placed or put in an adversarial position with our other body parts or members. Every once in a while I come across a wing-ding of a verse that cries out for serious and deep study. This is such a verse. Lets just leave it that the tongue, or the tongue’s fire which spreads injustice, can alter the course of our life, taking us into the lake of fire in Gehenna.
     
  14. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Your last post is a verbatim of posts 1 and 52. Perhaps you think your message isn't getting through.
     
  15. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Word study is not difficult, but it takes a few tools, such as a study bible, like the NASB95, an exhaustive concordance, comparison bible versions like the NET, HCSB, NKJV, and WEB, prayer and thoughtful consideration of the range of possible meanings in light of context.
     
  16. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But you are deceiving yourself to think that with those tools you can be a translator and correct what you think are messy translations.

    But I am glad to see that there are glimmerings of light in that you have finally acknowledged that contextual meaning is important. This time you haven't gone on your usual route of fidelity and concordance ...etc. meaning lexical concordance. A few days ago you would have called someone like yourself a liberal.
     
  17. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Rippon thinks of himself as judge over what others should do. I have addressed discerning the shade of meaning using context from the get go, but it seems the concept was not grasped by Rippon until recently.

    Liberals say words have no inherent meanings, and thus feel free to redefine words and translate "since or after" as "before."
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, as a matter of fact. You have not. You have been into merely word replacement armed with your lexicon and lots of swagger. You follow a lexicon and think that unveils a key which unlocks the fully God-intended meaning.


    "I used the meanings found in the lexicons for each and every word studied." (Van 9/19/2014)

    No reference for concern for contextual concordance is found.
     
  19. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,995
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Folks, note I said "meanings" thus referring to the fact one must chose from among the range of meanings based on context.
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ah, no you did no such thing. There could be as many as 20 or more English words used in a particular translation and you would narrow-the words down to eight at most because of what you call overlap. Contextual meaning has not been on your radar at all. How can you have concern for context if you force-feed eight words into widely different contexts for a certain Greek word or phrase? You make no sense.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...