Used by permission. See other forms under letter b. Isaiah Compare Pers. But this signification is in part expressed in the Indo-Germanic languages by peculiar forms; Lat. Hiphil, apoc. Sign out. Not a member? Color Scheme. Bible Tools Search. Interlinear Search. Lexicon Search Greek Hebrew Aramaic. Writings Search. Before Christ Edersheim Flavius Josephus more. Illustrations Search.
The Quotation Archive Add a Quotation. That version is the King James Version. However, many people choose not to use the King James Version because they do not understand many of the Old English words. One word in particular is the word firmament, which many people have seen in the first chapter of Genesis.
To better understand the word firmament as used in the King James Bible, we will seek to find what is the definition of firmament in the Bible? These original meanings reflected the ancient beliefs by many that the sky was a sort of fixed or solid dome that encased the earth. Some cultures understood it to be a solid dome with the lights of the stars and planets being fixed to it like the lighting in a theater.
Others thought that it was a vast black covering that had holes in it that let light shine through. In scripture, the word denotes an expanse, a wide extent; for such is the signification of the Hebrew word, coinciding with regio, region, and reach. The original therefore does not convey the sense of solidity, but of stretching, extension; the great arch or expanse over our heads, in which are placed the atmosphere and the clouds, and in which the stars appear to be placed, and are really seen.
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament. Genesis The use of the word firmament was highest in the early s with the publishing of the King James Bible 3. It was also popular in the early to mids with the rise of interest in end-times prophecies and the publishing of other lesser used Bible versions.
Today, it is used very little, but mostly by people who use the King James Bible. This technique was often used to create the items in the Tabernacle that were covered in gold. Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? The majority, on the other hand, impressed by the overwhelming preponderance of external evidence supporting the longer form, explained the origin of the shorter form as due to some scribal accident or misunderstanding. A minority of the Committee preferred the shortest reading, supported by D it a,b,d,e,ff2,l,r1 see the Note on Western non-interpolations following Although ver.
When the passage is compared with Jn A majority of the Committee, impressed by the presence of numerous points of contact between Luke and John in their Passion and Easter accounts, preferred to follow the preponderance of external attestation and to retain the words in the text.
See also the Note on Western non-interpolations, following Was ver. Or is it a gloss introduced by copyists in all other witnesses from Jn A minority of the Committee preferred to omit the verse as an interpolation see the Note following The Sinaitic Syriac condenses ver.
- HIS DECEMBER BLONDE: FLAVOR OF THE MONTH BOOK ONE.
- An Alexander Technique Approach to Soprano Saxophone Technique.
- Married By Christmas (Mills & Boon Vintage 90s Modern);
- H1 אב - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon Number!
A minority of the Committee preferred the shorter reading, regarding the longer as a Western non-interpolation see the Note following The majority of the Committee, however, favored the longer reading for the following reasons. Although a minority of the Committee preferred the shorter reading, regarding the others as interpolations see the Note following Thus we see that from to English versions prepared by committees of mainline scholars omitted words which in were deemed to be almost certainly authentic by a committee of mainline textual critics.
Lucian of Antioch. In his principal work, Lucian analyzed the Greek text of both the Old and New Testaments, creating a tradition of manuscripts known as the Lucianic Byzantine, or Syrian, text. Until the development of 19th-century biblical criticism, its clarity made it the common text. By comparative study of the Greek and Hebrew grammatical styles in their Semitic background, Lucian proposed to limit the symbolical interpretation characteristic of the Alexandrian Egyptian allegorical tradition by emphasizing the primacy of the literal sense, whether expressed directly or metaphorically.
But, for one thing, the criteria are unclear for determining how this recension could have been made by Lucian the relationship to the Hexapla is also unclear. The effort to find a Lucianic recension must be regarded as a failure. Simply stating that IF there is no proof of how someone did something, because you do not understand how they did it, is not evidence against the claim that it was done by that person. The point is, what is the most accurate translation, rather Josephus translated text correctly, or Clement, or any other writings; what should be of concern is the accuracy of that translation, not if others have come to the same conclusion prior to the work in question.
Like Like. It should be understood that James […]. I greet you by this means, thanking you for these important information that I have gathered to read carefully. Knowing that Dr James Strong was a liberal, I would like to, please, ask you the following question: in Dic Strong of the Greek, the term — used in Mt 5.
- Books by A. Frances Werner (Author of Bible Words Thesaurus);
- Once upon a Nightmare?
- Leben mit meiner dementen Mutter (German Edition)?
- Joseph Conrads Collected Works.
- Bad Sex.
- All The Pretty Little Horses?
It may be that the DIC is including in the a Meaning that should not? Thank you very much — Cristina, Portugal, Lisbon. In Matthew , G is translated four occasions as opposed to adultery, and G is translated into the English adultery, both terms in the plural. His work was to locate words and do so he created numbering system which we still use today in its very valid. Part of the reason for the confusion may be the fact that the grammatical breakdown is the same, a specially regarding the gender.
Yet in their specific meanings we have the diversity of sexual sense as fortification, which is any type of sexual send outside of marriage, and adultery, which is having sex with someone other than your legal husband and wife. There seems to be no variance between these two words as far as their severity. Throughout the new testament these two words seem to hold the same weight as far as how bad the sin as.
God never stated he hated fortification, he did state he needed to force which in essence indicates a greater severity for him concerning adultery. It does affect more people and a much more negative manner. Again it may take me a few days to get back to you but I will leave you in my inbox, which drives me crazy in affirms I will answer.
Therefore, it is difficult to define what the Lord Jesus wanted to say to us when affirmed Mt 5.
Well, this his a very difficult key to understand, for the church. I hope I have succeeded in making myself understood, and I thank you in advance for the kindness of an orientation based on your knowledge. This is the grammatical breakdown of certain words listed using a secondary numbering system brackets so that the grammar of the understood.
For those that have followed his conversation I will present the on formatted version below the formatting will not carry over from word document.
What Is The Definition Of Firmament In The Bible?
Christine this should answer your question. And remember on using voice recognition so please excuse any typos the program presents one this balance which I did not catch Your brother in Christ, BRENT. Christina, I apologize for taking so long to giving your inquiry be honest time it needs to explain why various diversity, especially when you cross reference would seem to be the same locations.
The number one rule when cross referencing his eat scripture stands alone and not at variance or reliance upon another scripture in another gospel. For years I miss thought there was one purging of the temple, but actually there are two. Each passage should be taken in the context which is immediate, yet also in Biblical context which is to cross reference. Yet if there seems to be any inconsistency in the terms each scripture must stand on its own because we do not know that the situations are truly talking about the same events.
Such as I believe there were two feeding of Remember what john said.
Joh And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. So the first issue is that of continuity of cross referencing the same events. Each scriptures should basically stand on its own within its own context, yet also be validated by other scripture if it appears to do so.
There is a principle within Biblical interpretation which understands that the more importantly subject is to god the more he speaks about, thus repetition is important, as seen in the following scripture. To write the same things to you, to me indeed is not grievous, but for you it is safe.
These things are good and profitable unto men. Now to the second issue which is much more important.
View how H1 אב is used in the Bible
When somebody says that the scripture, singular says; there actually incorrect. In fact there completely incorrect. We do not have a single scripture that everyone refers too, we have a multitude of Greek new testaments which were assembled from hundreds if not thousands of other Greek text. I find this very hypocritical that an author does not tell his audience up front what source manuscripts of the Greek new testament he uses. It was not so a few decades ago.
The main premise is that it does not believe that there is an inspired word of god that was given to man through the writings of the apostles in a Greek original text, they think of that is plural, but their thinking is that it is a manmade textual rather than originally divinely inspired.
I follow the old school that was taught for years of which refer to as lower textual criticism. This makes them divine in their ability to decide what god meant.
Higher criticism is evil even know what sound so logical away the present. Their first premise is that the oldest documents are correct as compared to newer ones. Which is not true if the older documents are corrupt and the newer ones are not. They also teach that Greek Textus Receptus is not accurate. This started in the s with two scholars by the name of Westcott and Hort.
Neither one of them believed in the divinity of Jesus Christ or his atoning death on the cross for our sins. They set the groundwork for what is now the standard of higher criticism which treats the bible like a man made book. All of our new translations are based upon this group of text that they put together that originate it from Alexandria Egypt, call the Alexandrian codex.
There are 17 to 40 of these documents that they use to combine to come up with their own individual Greek new testaments. I follow the Greek Textus Receptus only. This was used in the eventual translation into what we call the King James authorized version. Again everyone puts these documents downed though god had use them for the first years of the church age until the s when it ever it is now been vehemently attacked.
Let me give you a for instance concerning credibility. If you took 40, which is the maximum amount of Alexandrian codex is you would find there are over contradictions between each other, there are so many words that have one or two letters different than another text that inconsistency is the standard.
King James Version Strong’s abridged Complete Bible Concordance - PDF Drive
And no variance in any doctrine of the Bible or subject matter. And when they say that this is a younger text where did they think in originate from, it had to come from an original text written with a source document at the time of Christ or Paul or else it would be complete gibberish and nothing would be consistent at all. We know that Lucius the bishop of Antioch, put together the documents which were part of the originals written by the hands of the apostles if not the first generation copies and put together a new testament that has been used since the beginning, which we know to be the Greek Textus Receptus.
Yet the devil has tried to discredit this group of manuscripts which are almost exactly the same as the group as a whole. There are many missed translations which are very slight in some quite massive found in all of the newer translations that are not based upon the Greek Textus Receptus. The headquarters of Paul missionary outreach and were the church grew from was Antioch and not Jerusalem.
Alexandria Egypt is where Gnosticism and the polluting of the gospel was headquartered. It does not have the original words used in each individual passage, which would be analogous to not having the prefix or suffix, yet rarely in the Greek it combines words together and you can have a completely in different word because of one letter change, which is what you will see below when my examples.
What I have learned is that I do not take a scholars word for anything until ye first tells me which Greek new testament he uses. You see the one thing that creates doubt is inconsistency, even just a little. This is because again he is presenting the root diction area which is generic. But before you use any of a mute needed no other source new testament. I will also would catch a document which makes comments concerning research books in which new testament their written using.
Please check out my website so that you may grow in faith and not grow in confusion. I am not a King James only person. King James has translation errors that we all know about and I talk about. The English translation is not the inspired word of god it is a translation of re-copied new testaments that were re-copie by man, so there are slight errors. The inspired word of god is the original manuscripts that the authors wrote and were then copied in re-copied and send out across the world to preach the gospel. They used it successfully for years. If there are re-copie mistakes they are noted by now.
But the point is I am willing to stake my life on the Greek Textus Receptus, that not a mere the other translations. The biggest one I know of is a lack of teaching that Christ is our example of faith not purity. He was sinless and we can never be that some trying to be that is a waste of time. No one not saying descend because sin creates problems for the believer, and is so bad that the son of god had the shed his blood for.
We are saved not because of our own faith only but because he trusted god by being divine yet been changed to where he was all human in all divine in his essence yet vulnerable as a human. He and the father had this term and before the creation of the earth knowing that man would choose not to trust him, that they would have a plan to save man and that the son were put it all on the line.
Jesus believe that the father would resurrect him, even though we know that both Jesus, the holy spirit, and the father had scriptures indicating their involvement and the resurrection as well as the crucifixion of Jesus. But Jesus is our example of complete trust in god, yet how many times if you heard about. Faith these days is taught as a tool to get something from god.
In fact every relationship you will have must have one ingredient to be good and healthy, that is faith. I will answer questions but it is better if you will spend the time to go through when read article after article because a lot of things I talk about are NOT the so old, same old. I feel like the most fortunate of sinners. I am one messed up person, yet over the decades got his chosen to use me because I take ownership of by sin and proclaimed that I am not the way to follow, Jesus as. Your brother in Christ, Brent.
If you find clerk goals please let me know because this was put together quite fast and I did and uses much time as I should have. I find a little confusing but hopefully I can see idea across until the day comes that I could we do it in a more artful manner. Not just this but the whole web site. As a Christian we call these Bereans.
God bless you, Brent. Harrison, William. Uses only the Textus Receptus. Easton, Ellis Enterprises Inc. Uses Alexandrian Codex. Butler, PH. Woods, The Great Unpublished. MacArthur, Jr. Packer, Merrill C. Tenney, William White, Jr. Comfort, , Electronic Media. Robinson, for use with the Greek New Testaments containing parsing or declension codes.
E-Sword, Ver. IV, A. Robertson, Boardman Press Inc. Thayer, Parsons Technology Inc. Haldeman, Fleming H. Revell Co. Richards, Victor books, College Ave. Vine, Ellis Enterprises Inc. Willmington, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. Kenneth S. Wuest, Wm. Faussett, David Brown, William B.
Exell, William B. Delitzsch, trans. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Ringgren, 4 vols , William B. Friedrich, 10 vols , William B. Barackman, Fleming H. Uses Alexandrian Codex? Use discretion. Use great discretion!