Jesus' last words

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by edna kawabata, Sep 1, 2019.

  1. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't think you're following the methodology critical to the discussion. In order to derive the meaning of an Aramaic word, you have to look at the various contexts in which it is being used. Five contexts is enough to get a pretty good feel for it.

    We know that "dismiss" fit all 5 contexts, but "forsake" didn't. Therefore, "forsake" should not be used as a translation for the Aramaic word in question, most specifically in Matthew 27:46.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2019
  2. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not necessarily - some words mean different things depending on the context - what was clear from your examples is that the word did indeed have different meanings in the examples you put up.

    " Because of this, a man shall dismiss his father and his mother, and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.
    "So they immediately dismissed their nets and went after him.

    I don't think dismiss fits that well in the above examples - and perhaps we should not expect the word to have the same meaning in all 5 examples as some words mean different things depending on the context.

    Regardless - "dismiss" and "forsaken" in Jesus last words are not that far off - and pretty much mean the same thing.
     
  3. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To me, forsake doesn't fit in either of the two verses you cite, whereas dismiss is at least tolerable. The words leave/left are likely the best choice for the two verses you cite.

    Mostly, I just look for consistency in a translation, and the more a single source word gets chopped up into multiple English words, the less reliable the translation becomes. I see no reason why "forsake" should have been used in Matthew 27:46.
     
  4. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't say that forsake fit .. I said that dismiss does not fit.

    Forsake does fit very well in Matthew 27:46 .. which is most likely the reason why that is the term translators use.
     
  5. delade

    delade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2017
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Always it seems as if the sentiment of... if He can't accept my 'pervy' sexuality, then i dont want to be near Him?.. But have you considered the same for other acts such as kidnapping, child prostitution, murder, rape, torture, etc...??? If He can't accept my kidnapping, child prostitution, murder, rape, torture ways/preferences, etc, then i dont want to be near Him anyways???


    So, yes. Sin is sin regardless of the severity or unseverity... Sin is sin that needs to be 'forgiven' and 'cleansed'away so as to NOT repeat over and over. It needs to be 'washed' away.


    Sex is as a drug.. And drugs tend to be addictive with side effects. Some enjoy the drug of sex with its side effects even known to them as a possibility.

    Alcohol Anonymous
    Narcotics Anonymous
    Sex 'addiction' Anonymous


    Can you name some other 'addictions'?

    'greed for'.....

    $$??
    Food??
    Sleep??
    Work??
    Play??
    Vacationing??

    etc...
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2019
  6. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While one can not deny that Sin is Sin .. Severity matters.
     
    trevorw2539 likes this.
  7. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it doesn't fit, and I gave you ample evidence to show you why it doesn't fit. No rational person would say that "forsake" fits in all the five contexts I provided, which is why forsake doesn't belong in any of the five contexts.

    Yet, you keep insisting it does, which only perpetuates the myth that "forsaken" is the proper translation for Matthew 27:46. It isn't.

    Most translators use the term because most of them are like sheep, who follow behind the sheep in front of them, never second guessing the vast array of errors they are following after.
     
  8. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would say your claim that the various translators of the Bible - all who use the term "forsake" are not rational people is dubious.

    You keep ignoring the fact that words can mean different things depending on the context - not sure whether this is intentional or you are just stubborn. In other words -- just because a word might mean "dismiss" in one context .. does not mean this word means "dismiss" in another context.

    Further - you have provided no academic scholarship that supports your claim.

    It is not that I am saying you are necessarily wrong but, you have not proven your point with any kind of academic rigor - nor non problematic argument.
     
  9. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I said no rational person would say that "forsake" fits in all the five contexts I provided. I stand by that claim.

    It was I who offered "leave", "relinquish", "remit", or "dismiss" as being viable options. So perhaps I am not as rigid in my thinking as you might think. However, that does not lead me to believe that "forsake" is appropriate for the Aramaic word in question.

    Better to be a student of a subject than an academic, it gives one a wider path to the truth; like not having to stubbornly submit to the word "forsaken".
     
  10. DavidMK

    DavidMK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2015
    Messages:
    2,685
    Likes Received:
    690
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You worship a zombie...
     
  11. Migrunt

    Migrunt Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2019
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL. Boo.
     
  12. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nor should we expect it to - it is in this expectation where we find your flawed logic.

    I am not a big fan of titles either - that does not change the fact that some of the people with titles know what they are talking about.
     
  13. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't comment upon the Greek text because I haven't studied the Greek text. But I have spent quite a bit of time with the Aramaic text, and I am quite familiar with it. Were it not for the fact that the thread is addressing an Aramaic word, I wouldn't have replied to it at all.

    Below is the actual word I use for the Aramaic root Sh:B:Q. Though it has little resonance with modern day English, it resonates well with the many contexts of the Aramaic root Sh:B:Q. And yes, dictionaries ARE useful for researching the general usage of words and how they are used, to see if they fit the contexts of the word you are attempting to translate.

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/remit

    Eli, Eli, to what this thou remit me?
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2019
  14. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Fercryingoutloud, am I the only one who sees this as gibberish?
     
  15. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Question: In what language was Mark/Matt originally written.

    Answer: Greek

    Why then are we talking about Aramaic ?
     
  16. Political Master

    Political Master Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2019
    Messages:
    514
    Likes Received:
    209
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Ouch! that hurts.
     
  17. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would expect quite a few people to see it as gibberish; those who have no understanding of the topic, and who therefore have no business commenting on it in the first place.
     
  18. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe because the words used by Jesus, as recorded in Matthew 27:46, are based upon Aramaic words, not Greek words.

    And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

    Congratulations on proving yourself to be as misinformed on the topic as the others; and here I was thinking you had some knowledge on the subject.
     
  19. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He who laughs last, laughs best.
     
  20. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No need to name call and demonize because I pointed out a simple truth - the simple fact that the NT was written in Greek.

    And apparently the two versions Matt/Mark differ with respect to language.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_of_Jesus#EliEli

    As I have been stating this whole time - some words can have different meanings depending on the context ... clearly this is one of those words - although dismiss and relinquish (two words you suggested) are not given as possibilities.

    What is given as a possibility is "forsake" - and clearly in context there are many interpreters that think forsaken is what was meant.
     
  21. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Certainly that's a theoretical possibility. If I may be so bold as to transition from the theoretical to the actual, another is that some of us might expect something presented as an English translation of what is presumably a sentence in another language to likewise qualify as a sentence in English - which "Eli, Eli, to what this thou remit me?" clearly doesn't.
     
  22. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most know the NT was written in Greek. What should also be known is that the words of Jesus written in Matthew 27:46 were written in Aramaic, likely because Jesus spoke the words in Aramaic. Would you not agree?
     
  23. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,709
    Likes Received:
    13,466
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the translation given for the Aramaic word in question is "forsaken"
     
  24. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why would the father forsake the son? It makes no sense. What he likely would do is relinquish him, remit him, dismiss him, leave him, or give him up in some way so as to be fulfilled the father's own purpose:

    For God (the father) so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life. - John 3:16
     
  25. pol meister

    pol meister Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    5,903
    Likes Received:
    2,273
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It looks like proper sentence structure to me.

    * Eli, Eli, is likely a reference to the earliest way in which the Hebrews referred to God, which was "El".
    * If "to what this thou remit me" doesn't resonate with you, think of it as "why do you remit me"
    * If "remit" doesn't work for you, substitute a word of your own choice, maybe something like "relinquish".

    * Eli, Eli, why do you relinquish me?

    It's a rhetorical question.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2019

Share This Page