Our Lord's God
Well-known member
Peter wasn't talking about a set of letters from the alphabet.
If ό Θεός is the NT designate name for God the Father of Jesus....
- Thread starter cjab
- Start date
Peter wasn't talking about a set of letters from the alphabet.
Gryllus Maior
Well-known member
Later generations may have done this. We tend to do it now, but it wasn't so in the NT.
Gryllus Maior
Well-known member
Gryllus has other things to do besides haunt this forum. As it is, Χριστός works perfectly well as a title in Acts 26:23.
Do you think "Word" John 1:1 is used as a proper name? Is it a proper name?
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
Gryllus has nothing to do with my position.
I would say "Jesus the Messiah"
However 'Let etymology create a path"
christ | Etymology, origin and meaning of the name christ by etymonline
CHRIST Meaning: "the Anointed," synonymous with and translating to Greek Hebrew mashiah (see messiah), a title… See origin and meaning of christ.
www.etymonline.com
the Anointed," synonymous with and translating to Greek Hebrew mashiah (see messiah), a title given to Jesus of Nazareth; Old English crist (by 830, perhaps 675), from Latin Christus, from Greek khristos "the anointed," noun use of verbal adjective of khriein "to rub, anoint" (from PIE root *ghrei- "to rub").
In the primitive Church it was a title, and used with the definite article, but from an early period it was used without it and regarded as part of the proper name of Jesus. It was treated as a proper name in Old English, but not regularly capitalized until 17c. Pronunciation with long -i- is result of Irish missionary work in England, 7c.-8c. The ch- form, regular since c. 1500 in English, was rare before. Capitalization of the word begins 14c. but is not fixed until 17c. The Latin term drove out Old English Hæland "healer, savior," as the preferred descriptive term for Jesus.
Last edited:
The Real John Milton
Well-known member
Not "later generations," but later (post Gospel) NT documents like the Epistles did that.
The Real John Milton
Well-known member
What are you talking about ?
The Real John Milton
Well-known member
Not at all. In Acts 26:23 the apostle speaks of something which the Christ had already suffered in the past. He could not have been referring to anyone other than Jesus when he made this comment . Look at 1 Cor. 1:17 as another example. And there are many more.
If you won't accept reason from me, perhaps Wallace might help ? --
But I doubt reason will work with you. You are deceived and you unwittingly deceive others. Not a good place to be.
The Real John Milton
Well-known member
Yes, it is referring to something, to the Torah in Heaven (which was created before the foundation of the World). The Midrasim are instructive on this matter.
So the Torah became flesh and dwelt among us; and we saw His glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Real John Milton
Well-known member
Yep. That's what the text says. The Word (i.e. the Torah) became flesh (i.e. became a human being).
Douglasdeg
New Member
Modern culture rarely raises the important issues of faith, religion, and God that are important to society. But it is faith in God that makes us human and teaches us mercy and compassion. When I was young, I did not believe in God, and it was more important for me to hear the new Beatles single than to hear a priest preach. Now I am wiser and even though I can't go to church anymore I can go to online services edit per mod God sustains me and gives me the strength to keep going, no matter what. This is very important in our time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Our Lord's God
Well-known member
16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day 17 things which are a shadow of what is to come but the body is Christ.
Colossians 2:17