,TODAY, ???

[oldhermit]

Because of a recent discussion on an earlier post, I would like to engage in a little investigative research for those interested parties. There is much debate even among the most emanate Greek scholars regarding the placement of the comma in the phrase of Jesus in Luke 23:43 - καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμήν σοι λέγω σήμερον μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ Παραδείσῳ. I do not want this discussion to be a theological one but a grammatical one, no matter which side of the argument you may take. What grammatical arguments can you present from your own research to support your preference in the placement of the comma in Jesus' statement?

 

[john832]

I am not interested in grammar, I had that in the eight grade. Thank you Mrs. Schmidle.

Now when you want to examine this in a theological light, I am interested.

 

[Isdaniel]

Because of a recent discussion on an earlier post, I would like to engage in a little investigative research for those interested parties. There is much debate even among the most emanate Greek scholars regarding the placement of the comma in the phrase of Jesus in Luke 23:43 - καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ἀμήν σοι λέγω σήμερον μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ Παραδείσῳ. I do not want this discussion to be a theological one but a grammatical one, no matter which side of the argument you may take. What grammatical arguments can you present from your own research to support your preference in the placement of the comma in Jesus' statement?

Wheather the comma is there or not that does not change the meaning of the verse that the thief did not go to paradise that day.
There is a resurrection for eveyone no one has gotten eternal life as yet . Not even Elijah and Enoch .

 

[oldhermit]

Wheather the comma is there or not that does not change the meaning of the verse that the thief did not go to paradise that day

This is not the focus of this thread.

 

[Isdaniel]

This is not the focus of this thread.

It will turn out to be that anyhow wath and you shall see

Because again the grammer will not change the meaning of the verse no matter how you put a comma here or there .

Who will be right if the comma is there or there hmmmmmmmmmm

One will claim this scholar said this and the other said that

 

[Crazylove]

In th matter of a comma (","), the Greek used them a lot to make a meaning (in this case Jesus) clearer, because it makes th reader pause and ponder and what they had just read.

In mattr of apostrophe ( ' ), Greek used them to drop vowels (ex:can't), as well as use for accent, and also when there were too many constants in or around th word.

In this case it would make more sense for this definition of apostrophos: The direct address of a personified abstraction (Paradise), especially as a change in subject (from today on a cross dying to today in Paradise living) in the course of a speech.

I haven't study Greek too much so I can't say a whole lot... Especially sense th scholars don't even understand! Yet based on my knowledge of Greek it makes sense to me

 

[john832]

In th matter of a comma (","), the Greek used them a lot to make a meaning (in this case Jesus) clearer, because it makes th reader pause and ponder and what they had just read.

In mattr of apostrophe ( ' ), Greek used them to drop vowels (ex:can't), as well as use for accent, and also when there were too many constants in or around th word.

In this case it would make more sense for this definition of apostrophos: The direct address of a personified abstraction (Paradise), especially as a change in subject (from today on a cross dying to today in Paradise living) in the course of a speech.

I haven't study Greek too much so I can't say a whole lot... Especially sense th scholars don't even understand! Yet based on my knowledge of Greek it makes sense to me

Problem is, they were not in the original. They were added later. Makes the discussion rather pointless. Why not debate the commas in the NIV? They were not in the original Greek text either.

 

[Gjolll]

Wheather the comma is there or not that does not change the meaning of the verse that the thief did not go to paradise that day.
There is a resurrection for eveyone no one has gotten eternal life as yet . Not even Elijah and Enoch .

Your logic is in error as "Paradise" does not equate to resurrection. It signifies the place of repose of the soul after death. As for Elijah, Enoch, Abraham, etc it is God who takes care of them. God can make souls come alive at his good pleasure (Rev 14:3).

As for the comma, no comma is required. "Today" obviously refers to being with Christ in paradise.

 

[john832]

Your logic is in error as "Paradise" does not equate to resurrection. It signifies the place of repose of the soul after death. As for Elijah, Enoch, Abraham, etc it is God who takes care of them. God can make souls come alive at his good pleasure (Rev 14:3).

As for the comma, no comma is required. "Today" obviously refers to being with Christ in paradise.

Your comment is not Biblical...

2Co 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven.
2Co 12:3 And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—
2Co 12:4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

 

[oldhermit]

Everyone seems to be offering a theological opinion on the placement of the comma but, no one is providing any textual or scholastic research defending their position. All I am getting is unsubstantiated opinions.

 

[Woodartdon]

What was wrong with crazylove's repy?

Everyone seems to be offering a theological opinion on the placement of the comma but, no one is providing any textual or scholastic research defending their position. All I am getting is unsubstantiated opinions.

 

[Gjolll]

Everyone seems to be offering a theological opinion on the placement of the comma but, no one is providing any textual or scholastic research defending their position. All I am getting is unsubstantiated opinions.

What your beef? I just told you, no comma is required, as "today" can only relate to being with Christ in paradise. Otherwise the sentence is nonsense, as no one ever says "I tell you today" even if they might have said "I told you yesterday."

 

[Dan58]

The Youngs literal translation has it; "and Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, To-day with me thou shalt be in the paradise" (Luke 23:43 YLT). I think it should read "I say unto thee to day". 'To day' is connected to 'I say', not with "shalt thou be". Its a Hebraism meant to emphasize the solemnity of the occasion. Similar to; "I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that ye shall soon utterly perish from off the land whereunto ye go over Jordan to possess it" (Deuteronomy 4:26 KJV).

 

[Gjolll]

Your comment is not Biblical...

2Co 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven.
2Co 12:3 And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows—
2Co 12:4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

Non-sequitur. My statement is perfectly biblical. Paradise, third heaven - so what? Did not Paul say that when he died he would go to be with Christ? Phl 1:23

 

[Wanderers]

Hahaha....this thread is a Christmas wind up, right!?

 

[Isdaniel]

Non-sequitur. My statement is perfectly biblical. Paradise, third heaven - so what? Did not Paul say that when he died he would go to be with Christ? Phl 1:23

hmm did not Jesus say that all believers will desire His day to come to be with Him this is what paul means

 

[Isdaniel]

Everyone seems to be offering a theological opinion on the placement of the comma but, no one is providing any textual or scholastic research defending their position. All I am getting is unsubstantiated opinions.

hmm and I wonder why I said So their will be the good scholar and the evil scholar who would you chose the one that fit your facncy

 

[oldhermit]

The Youngs literal translation has it; "and Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, To-day with me thou shalt be in the paradise" (Luke 23:43 YLT). I think it should read "I say unto thee to day". 'To day' is connected to 'I say', not with "shalt thou be". Its a Hebraism meant to emphasize the solemnity of the occasion. Similar to; "I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that ye shall soon utterly perish from off the land whereunto ye go over Jordan to possess it" (Deuteronomy 4:26 KJV).

Yes, this is one argument that I have seen from the scholars. That this is a Hebraism found in OT passages is certain. The question I would have regarding this argument is that since this was written in Greek, does this Hebraism translate into the Greek idiom?

 

[oldhermit]

In th matter of a comma (","), the Greek used them a lot to make a meaning (in this case Jesus) clearer, because it makes th reader pause and ponder and what they had just read.

The P75 MSS written at the beginning of the third century is our oldest copy of Luke and it has no point either before or after σήμερον although some punctuation can be found here and there in the MSS.

 

[Gjolll]

hmm did not Jesus say that all believers will desire His day to come to be with Him this is what paul means

I agree it's a little ambiguous, especially as Paul explicitly states that the dead in Christ "are not risen" (1 Thess 4;16). Nonetheless, the statements of Paul and Jesus about souls going to Paradise are so unambiguous, that the only issue must be what the souls are actually doing there. I suggest, not a lot until Christ comes again. Residing "under the altar" according to Revelation.

Then there is also this passage: Zechariah 14-5, 1Th 3:13 that suggests that when Christ returns, he will bring with him all his saints, so these must be those who are already in paradise.

What I conclude, is that after death, everything is at Christ's direction and order.