Featured Abbreviated Word Study G2749, “keimai”

In political jargon, that is what is called walking something back. You have got to love them, folks. They do not "fit" together, but "work" together hand in glove.

 

Rippon continues to post absurdity. Things do not fit together but work together hand in glove.

Fidelity and concordance are not mutually exclusive, but are inclusive. If you translate the same word meaning, as discerned by context, concordantly you have translated both with fidelity and concordance.

 

1) Rippon refers to "lexical concordance." Google it folks

2) Fidelity and concordance are not mutually exclusive, but are inclusive. If you translate the same word meaning, as discerned by context, concordantly you have translated both with fidelity and concordance.

 

Does this have anything to do with a lexical concordance, which refers to the index of words in a lexicon. So it is a made up definition, a strawman if you will, and not useful.

Lets take a rational run at it, how about trying to translate consistently by use of the same or similar English words or phrases for each word meaning of the original source word. Since words have a range of meanings, to use the same word for more than one meaning would obliterate the message.

Fidelity and concordance are not mutually exclusive, but are inclusive. If you translate the same word meaning, as discerned by context, concordantly you have translated both with fidelity and concordance.

 

Folks, unless Rippon refers to the post by number where I supposedly said something, pay no attention. For example I have never "disdained" using context to discern which shade of meaning the author most probably intended.

 

Folks, unless Rippon refers to the post by number where I supposedly said something, pay no attention. For example I have never "disdained" using context to discern which shade of meaning the author most probably intended.

Words have inherent shades of meanings, i.e. a range of meanings. We use context to discern which shade of meaning the author most probably intended.

 

Folks, unless Rippon refers to the post by number where I supposedly said something, pay no attention. For example I have never "disdained" using context to discern which shade of meaning the author most probably intended.

Words have inherent shades of meanings, i.e. a range of meanings. We use context to discern which shade of meaning the author most probably intended.

 

Words have an inherent meaning, or range of meanings. We use context to discern which one of the possible meanings is more probable.

Pretty simple concept

 

Here we have a word (G2749, keimai) that literally means to lie down, or to lay something down, to set down something or to put something somewhere. However, metaphorically, it refers to God placing someone or something somewhere for His purpose, and so can be properly translated as something being destined or put there to be the cause of something according to God’s purpose.

Lets look at a few of its usages in scripture, ones that seem to use the word metaphorically.

Luke 2:34, And Simeon blessed them and said to Mary His mother, “Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed—

Here the literal meaning “put here” to be the cause of many… captures what is literally and metaphorically being said.

Philippians 1:16, the latter do it out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel;

Other versions say “put here” and that more literal rendering best captures the idea.

1 Thessalonians 3:3, so that no one would be disturbed by these afflictions; for you yourselves know that we have been destined for this.

Again, the rendering “put here” seems spot on.

1 Timothy 1:9, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the )ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and )profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers

Here, I see no need to pull off the literal meaning, i.e. law is not “put here” for a ….

Revelation 4:2, Immediately I was in the Spirit; and behold, a throne was standing in heaven, and One sitting on the throne.

The word does not mean “standing” but does include being set somewhere, so a throne put there in heaven seems to hit the mark. For example a throne laid down in heaven might suggest erroneously it was tipped over.

Bottom line, of the 5 metaphorical usages, “put here” or “put there” better presents the literal and metaphoric meaning of the word.

 

Here we get the repeat of the argument against fidelity and correspondence that says pick the most chosen option over the most faithful and accurate meaning.