3DJay

BULLSHIT! "de" is used as "and" consistently. Show me one bible translated your way. I can show you 10+ translated the other way.


Peace

Sauron

Aren't you supposed to be the messiah?

Why would you have to memorize the details of your own death? Weren't you present to experience it?

Larsguy47

It's not about the MISTRANSLATION.

The only comparison you need in this case is whether John 19:14, which per the context should be the noontime before it gets dark, and thus the noon of the previous day, has any textual differences in syntax when compared to any other references to "preparation" that is clearly the day Jesus died.

I listed the scriptures for your to compare with the actual Greek words. Only at John 19:14 is "de" used in front of preparation. Therefore, it would be considered as a reference to "before." "De" also becomes NOT just as "but" does in our own language, such as:

"Everything, BUT the kitchen sink" is really: "Everything, NOT the kitchen sink."

In reference to time, the koine Greek simply adopts "de" and it's negative reference to apply to "just before." It's a term of EXCEPTION:

All BUT one. BUT thus means NEARLY, close to. That is, "not" in absolute sense, but in usage, a degree of "not"; close, near, almost.

That general concept for "but"/de, then used with the time of day was just a convenient way of indicating "nearly preparation" at John 19:14.

Another example is how in English we use "after noon" to define a distinct period of the day we call "afternoon" which is the entire period from noon to sundown, basically. It defines that quarter of the day.

Well because the next day for the Jews actually occurs at sundown (sabbath days only) or at nightfall for the average day, instead of calling this segment of the day "afternoon" they called it "before the next day" in the form of "de morrow." This can be demonstrated by comparison texts as well.

So the "de[but] morrow" (just before the next day) usage, is just adapted when "morrow" (next day) is more specific with regard to "preparation"; thus "but preparation" is just a more specific form of "but morrow."

So the "but" in front of preparation in John 19:14 is not simply a casual use of "de" which is quite casually used in Greek, but it's selective.

If you find an online GREEK lexicon, I'll post the comparisons for you. How's that?

But if you want to check yourself, just search for every reference in the gospels for "preparation" and see if "de" is used with it or not. John 19:14 is the only instance. Therefore, since the context suggests his trial at noon was actually a different day and more pertinently the day before it gets dark at noon with Christ already impaled, "but preparation" being unique at John 19:14 allows it to mean "before the next day" in syntax, that next day being "preparation". Even though, more specifically it is actually an adaptation of their concept of the quarter of the day we call "afternoon".

So there you have it. Translators have completely missed this for some reason, like so many other things. So all I have are the comparison texts for you to look up and compare. I don't know of an online Greek lexicon though that makes this easy so you can just compare the actual Greek with the English and highlight the differences, etc.

Thanks.

LG47

Larsguy47

Good question.

LG47

3DJay

de: also, and, but, even, for, misc, moreover, nevertheless, not tr, now, so, then, yea, yet, after, another, even though, former, however, or, other, other hand, others, partly, rather, suppose, therefore, though, what, when, whereas, yes


Now (de), I'm supposed to believe that you know how to better translate Greek, then onyone in the past 1500 years, or so?

Don't count on it. Can you cite a translation that agrees with you, or not?


Peace

3DJay

And, you're full of shit, regarding only needing to compare the one verse to other preparation day verses. The comparison needed is verses that start with "and", "now". Where δε generally appears as the second word, in the Greek translation.

δε conjunction
de deh: but, and, etc. -- also, and, but, moreover, now (often unexpressed in English).

John 19:14 ην δε παρασκευη του πασχα ωρα δε ωσει εκτη και λεγει τοις ιουδαιοις ιδε ο βασιλευς υμων

Consistently translated as "and", or "now", or simply dropped. Drop the δε, and you're still left with "It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week". "But, it was the day of Preparation of Passover Week" wouldn't make me think it was some different day, before preparation day, even if it was translated as "but".

15 οι δε εκραυγασαν αρον αρον σταυρωσον αυτον λεγει αυτοις ο πιλατος τον βασιλεα υμων σταυρωσω απεκριθησαν οι αρχιερεις ουκ εχομεν βασιλεα ει μη καισαρα
"but", "then", "and", or dropped. None signify "before".

19 εγραψεν δε και τιτλον ο πιλατος και εθηκεν επι του σταυρου ην δε γεγραμμενον ιησους ο ναζωραιος ο βασιλευς των ιουδαιων

"and", or dropped.

25 ειστηκεισαν δε παρα τω σταυρω του ιησου η μητηρ αυτου και η αδελφη της μητρος αυτου μαρια η του κλωπα και μαρια η μαγδαληνη
"and", "now", "but", or dropped...BUT...the "but", IN NO WAY, implies "before".

33 επι δε τον ιησουν ελθοντες ως ειδον αυτον ηδη τεθνηκοτα ου κατεαξαν αυτου τα σκελη

Lots of "but" translations...BUT...they, IN NO WAY, signify "before", as the context is "when they came to Jesus", not "before they came to Jesus".

38 μετα δε ταυτα ηρωτησεν τον πιλατον ο ιωσηφ ο απο αριμαθαιας ων μαθητης του ιησου κεκρυμμενος δε δια τον φοβον των ιουδαιων ινα αρη το σωμα του ιησου και επετρεψεν ο πιλατος ηλθεν ουν και ηρεν το σωμα του ιησου

"and", or dropped.

39 ηλθεν δε και νικοδημος ο ελθων προς τον ιησουν νυκτος το πρωτον φερων μιγμα σμυρνης και αλοης ωσει λιτρας εκατον

"and", or dropped.

41 ην δε εν τω τοπω οπου εσταυρωθη κηπος και εν τω κηπω μνημειον καινον εν ω ουδεπω ουδεις ετεθη

"now", "and", "but", or dropped. The "but", IN NO WAY, signifies "before".


A similar word to "δε"...

ουν conjunction
oun oon: (adverbially) certainly, or (conjunctionally) accordingly -- and (so, truly), but, now (then), so (likewise then), then, therefore, verily, wherefore.

John 19:31
οι ουν ιουδαιοι ινα μη μεινη επι του σταυρου τα σωματα εν τω σαββατω επει παρασκευη ην ην γαρ μεγαλη η ημερα εκεινου του σαββατου ηρωτησαν τον πιλατον ινα κατεαγωσιν αυτων τα σκελη και αρθωσιν

"Now it was the day of getting ready for the Passover", "Now it was the day of Preparation"...a couple translations that are exactly the same as John 19:14. And, the other "therefore"..."because it was the Preparation Day" translations, amount to the same thing. Translated in the same context as the other passages that use "δε".

John 19:42
εκει ουν δια την παρασκευην των ιουδαιων οτι εγγυς ην το μνημειον εθηκαν τον ιησουν

"then", "therefore", or dropped. Translated in the same context as the other passages that use "δε".


Young's Literal Translation: "THE WORK, in its present form, is not to be considered as intended to come into competition with the ordinary use of the commonly received English Version of the Holy Scriptures, but simply as a strictly literal and idiomatic rendering of the Original Hebrew and Greek Texts."

3 whole chapters, and "δε", as the second Greek word in a passage, is translated to "and" every single time.


Peace

Larsguy47

No, I don't necessarily know "better" than they do, but only that "de" is used at John 19:14 in connection with "preparation" but not at any of the other references in the gospel using this term which are:

Matt 27:62, Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31,42.

The context and syntax issue here is SPECIFICALLY THIS. Now stop speed reading for a moment and pay attention:

1) Jesus' final trial before Pilate at John 19:14 is occurring around the sixth hour, noontime.

2) Elsewhere at noon Jesus is already impaled, being specifically impaled at "the third hour" (9:00 a.m. or p.m.), which is before the sixth hour.

Based on the above, we presume this is in reference to two different days, and since the trial logically occurs before the impalement, the presumption is that the sixth-hour trial is the day before it gets dark. That is, the noontime trial must occur before the "third hour" impalement, which is either 9:00 p.m. that night (my preference) or 9:00 a.m. the following moring, following which at noon it becomes dark for three hours.

Now. We know that Jesus did die on the day of preparation, the day before a "high sabbath." When John 19:14 is translated, however, it appears his trial is also on the day of preparation.

NWT: " Now it was preparation of the passover; it was about the sixth hour."

"Preparation for Passover" The actual Seder passover meal was long over, so here "passover" is a general reference to a passover-related preparation day. There were two passover special "high sabbath" days. These were the 1st and 7th days of unfermented cakes. Originally, the actual calendar DATE did not change until midnight, though the observed sabbath day began at sundown. Thus when the entire sabbath day is in reference in the Bible, and not simply some event during the sabbath day, it is expressed in terms of two calendar dates, since the first six hours belongs to one calendar date and the remaining hours during another. Not understanding this is the foundation of much confusion. But having noted that, the SABBATH DAY of the first day of unfermented cakes begins in the evening of Nisan 14th and ends on Nisan 15th. The 7th day of unfermented cakes begins in the evening of Nisan 20th and ends on Nisan 21st.

Prior to each of these special "high sabbath" days of passover are the usual preparation days, in this case, the specific "preparation for passover [sabbath]" days would be either Nisan 13/14 or Nisan 19/20. In 33 CE this fell on a Friday/Saturday and a Thursday/Friday.

Now having noted that, since we know since Jesus ate the traditional passover meal and it was already Nisan 15th by the time he was arrested, Nisan 14th as a reference in John 19:14's "preparation for passover" is excluded. That only leaves us with Nisan 19/20 as the "preparation for passover" in reference.

Now getting back to the translation, what John 19:14 should be indicating is that it is the day before preparation for passover, not the same day as preparation for passover. Otherwise, there is a conflict for what happens at noon and obviously with his impalement at 9:00 whether p.m. or a.m.

SO...we invesitage for a possible mistranslation, looking for something that might indicate that John 19:14 actually is indeed a reference to "before preparation" as understood by someone back then reading this. What we are thus looking for and expecting is a different syntax in connection with "preparation" at John 19:14 that is different than with other references concerning "preparation" in the gospels. That is, John 19:14 should be unique in that comparison.

When we look, it IS! Only John 19:14 uses "de" with preparation. That is, since de is translated as "but", only "but preparation" is used at John 19:14 and not with any other of five other references to preparation, specifically and clearly a reference for during preparation.

John 19:14

GREEK: [14] ên de paraskeuê tou pascha, hôra ên hôs hektê.

ENGLISH: 14 Now it was preparation of the passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews: “See! YOUR king!”

COMPARISON TEXTS:

Matthew 27:62 The next day, which was after the Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together before Pilate

GREEK: Têi de epaurion, hêtis estin meta tên paraskeuên, sunêchthêsan hoi archiereis kai hoi Pharisaioi pros Peilaton legontes Kurie,

Mark 15:42 Now as it was already late in the afternoon, and since it was Preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath..

GREEK: [42]Kai êdê opsias genomenês, epei ên paraskeuê, ho estin prosabbaton...


Luke 23:54 Now it was the day of Preparation, and the evening light of the sabbath was approaching.

GREEK: Kai hêmera ên paraskeuês, kai sabbaton epephôsken



John 19:31 Then the Jews, since it was Preparation, in order that the bodies might not remain upon the torture stakes on the Sabbath, (for the day of that Sabbath was a great one,) requested Pilate to have their legs broken and the [bodies] taken away.

GREEK: Hoi oun Ioudaioi, epei paraskeuê ên..

John 19: 42 There, then, on account of the preparation of the Jews, they laid Jesus, because the memorial tomb was nearby.

GREEK: hôi oudepô oudeis ên tetheimenos: ekei oun dia tên paraskeuên tôn Ioudaiôn, hoti engus ên to mnêmeion, ethêkan ton Iêsoun.

Out of all the above texts, none insert de before "preparation." But the closest syntax comparisons where "it was preparation" is used is with Mark 15:42 and Luke 23:54. The precise use of en (it was) with "preparation" immediately following are as follows:


Mark 15:42: ên paraskeuê
Luke 23:54: ên paraskeuês

Both make a reference to the specific day, that is, that "it was preparation" or "it was the day of preparation". But John 19:14 is different:

John 19:14 ên de paraskeuê


So, John is the exception here, the only verse using "de" with preparation, and the context indicates the trial was the day before preparation. Therefore, does the use of de mean that it was understood in this specific usage that "de preparation" means "yet preparation" or "before preparation"?

The generic meaning of "but" is a negative word of exception giving the concept of "nearly", "almost", "yet", etc. All those when applied here at John 19:14 would mean that it was "nearly prepearation," "almost preparation" or "yet preparation."

If so, then John 19:14 is a mistranslation to simply way "it was preparation" and it would better be translated as "It was yet preparation" or "It was nearly preparation."

NOW, before we take this to the Greek "scholars" on this, since these are the only references in the gospel to "preparation" whether the unique use of de at John 19:14 is considered a significant modification of "preparation" is entirely and copletely dependent upon the context being different from the other references. Of course, the context is different since the John 19:14 is about the trial and the other references to preparation are about when Jesus was being placed into the tomb just before the sabbath; two different days!

Now what we were looking for here, was whether or not the use of de used in a syntax just before "preparation" ever occurs besides John 19:14 and if it does, did it refer to the same day of preparation or the day before. Since there is no other example of this except John 19:14 it can never be disproven that de is an incidental inclusion here and should remain untranslated as has been done by the "scholars" so far.

SO PLEASE NOTE, that the Biblicalists are now leaving the room, before we event humor ourselves to take this to any Greek "scholars", clearly the reason any Biblicalists are still in the room is because they must be single and trying to get a date, because there is certainly nothing any scholar can contribute to what is already proven or cannot be disproven at this point.


But what I was able to do in comparison with similar references is to show how de does imply "almost" or "before" with a similar reference time of the day as preparation. And we have already a perfect example with Matthew 27:62 where it mentions "the next day" but it uses de in front of it.

Now PLEASE NOTE. The normal weekly Jewish day began at NIGHTFALL. Only the sabbath days began at sunset, but it still ended at nightfall. The 12th hour of the day was at 6 p.m., which is sunset. Thus the beginning of the hours of the day would begin at 7 p.m. at the time of nightfall. These times were all adjusted and generalized, so I'm not being specific here. So again, if we were just to even out the hours and make the "sixth hour" noon, then the 12th hour would be 6 p.m. the time of sunset. 7 p.m. would be the first hour of the day. WATCH

Noon=6th
1 p.m. = 7th
2 p.m. = 8th
3 p.m. = 9th (the hour Jesus died)
4 p.m. = 10th
5 p.m. = 11th
6 p.m. = 12th (around sunset)
7 p.m. = 1st
8 p.m. = 2nd
9 p.m. = 3rd (the hour Jesus was impaled)

The above hours were applied to both night night and day.

And why did I bring this up? Just to show that the regular WEEKDAY began at NIGHTFALL not at sunset. Again, the sabbath day was the exception which we all know began at sundown.

This means the Sabbath day is an hour longer than the regular weekday, having borrowed the last hour of the day of "preparation" to do this. This means that preparation is shorter than the usual week day.

Thus the common reference to "next day", epaurion, is a reference to the weekday that begins at nightfall, the same time of the day that the day of preparation would begin. So we are considering that "preparation" was simply substituted for "next day" simply because it was more specific, but the syntax of using de with "next day" should be the same sense of "yet" or "before" if we are to be consistent.

This becomes a key reference, therefore, because indeed, Matthew does use de:

GREEK: [I]Têi de epaurion...

Thus if we were to be consistent, this would be a mistranslation to mean "The next day" since it should be "Before the next day..."

But here, we find the latter is precisely the better translation because of the context. What does the context tell us?

Basically, when the pharisees saw the women around the tomb they panicked and ran to Pilate to get the tomb sealed so that nobody could claim that Jesus rose when in fact, they just stole the body. Pilate gave them permission to seal the tomb.

But the question is, did they run to Pilate that next morning? Or if the "next day" is presumed to have begun at midnight, sometime after midnight? Or did they run to him that very evening after Jesus had been laid in the tomb? The context is that they would have had the tomb sealed immediately that very evening.

But how can this be? Since Matthew would now have to read:

"Before the next day, which was after the Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together before Pilate.."

PERFECT! And this explains why there seems to otherwise be a redundancy. That is, if it is "after preparation" one would presume it was the "next day", why make a redundant remark? The answer is because these are two different times! You see, preparation ends at sunset, but the next day does not begin until nightfall. So what Matthew is saying, is quite specific, about the time, noting that preparation had ended, that is, it was after sunset, but it was not yet nightfall. So this was that short hour or so after sunset but before nightfall. Sunset ended the day of preparation, but it was not technically the "next day" yet.

See?

Again, checking our CONTEXT. It makes a lot more sense that the priests and Pharisees ran to Pilate immediately after they noticed this situation developing right after sunset, than for them not to have sealed the tomb until the next morning.

Agan again, there is a redundancy to say this was the "next day" and also state, as well it was after Preparation, since simply saying the next day would have been the day after preparation. That's apparent since Jesus was just placed in the tomb. But it is not a redundancy when Matthew is simply making it more specific as to exactly when the priests and others ran to Pilate, that short period after preparation but before the next day (epaurion) that begins at nightfall.

Thus de epaurion... and de paraskeuê are variations of the same syntax and the use of de to reference this part of the day.

It could be further surmised that as we label a certain part of the day as "afternoon" that the Jews likewise had this same period in mind, say from Noon to nightfall as their afternoon segment of the day, only they called it "before epaurion" rather than "afternoon". Preparation day, being an equivalent of the "next day" at John 19:14 was simply specified, but using the same context, so that "but preparation" meant before the next day that began with preparation.

NOW, you see why it's risky going to Bible Greek scholars? Already we have two mistranslations that they never picked on. Not because the words are not there, but because it takes more than just words, you have to understand the CONTEXT and that means understanding the cultural setting and the common references, in this case, for the times of the day and the use of "de" to mean just before that time of the day, but when left off to mean during that time of day.

Now guess what? I researched Greek texts to see if this context was used outside the Jewish community, etc. And other comparisons of "epaurion" with and without de. So I've done all that. But I'm not doing it again here. You have enough information to make your own comparisons and you need the practice anyway. The above is more than enough to prove my point, with or without Greek scholars.

But at this point, John 19:14 is a normal reference to the day before preparation and is mistranslated and that means the gospels are not in conflict with each other, but only that our current level of translation is indequate and that specific was, like many other verses, unfortunately, "lost in translation." Just remember, the CONTEXT supersedes everything, not the meaning of the word in some other context or even the basic meaning of the word. It's how it is USED that determines the translation.

I hope the above wasn't too jumbled.

Cheerio!

LG47

3DJay

So what? There are tons of conflicts, in the bible.

"Should be"?...according to you. I don't care if δε is connected to the other references to "preparation day", or not. "δε", as the second word in Greek passages, is consistently translated as "and"...especially in the literal translation. Cite a knowledgable source, that supports your assertions. Put up, or shut up.


Peace

Larsguy47

Yeah, there are TONS of "conflicts" when amateurs and people too lazy to try to resolve apparent "conflicts" think they are looking at a conflict when they are not. This is the perfect example of that.

It's like the "Mary Magdalene" references in the gospels that show three different scenes of Mary Magdalene coming to the tomb. The gospels make sure you know the specific times and circumstances of each event. They are all different. That tells someone who is actually "awake" that there must have been three of them! Mary (Marion) was quite a common name and these women seemed to be part of the households of others, so "Mary Magdalene" might have been a position of housekeeper, etc.

But try to tell that to someone who is LOOKING for mistakes in the Bible.

I don't mind dealing with those unprovable and truly hard to accept things such as the Flood or Creation and all that. I don't expect someone to believe that if they don't believe the Bible. But creating errors where there are none because they don't understand the culture is no excuse.

So I haven't found any "errors" yet or any conflicts. This is a popular one claiming John is different than the gospels, but that's just not the case. John's reference is distinctly different than the other gospels in relation to to "preparation". John's reference is to the day before.

BUT....by all means if this works out to be an "error" you can't get past, then enjoy it. God purposely makes things difficult for the nonbelievers. Some people think it's an even playing field, but it's not. To the believers (those who have "much") he gives more. He gives miracles and all kinds of assurances, even today. But for those who doubt, he just doesn't leave it at that, he gives them everything they are looking for in the way of "errors" or anything else so they are soooo convinced the Bible is not true they will not heed it's warning. What God and Christ do is thus move people away from the fence, away from the center line. They push people all the way to the right or to the left, so that there is a clear distinction.

Sometimes there's a little manipulation (hardening of the heart) involved, but God does things like that.

Where some people see "conflicts" in the Bible, others find secret hidden truths.... It's one way or the other.


LG47

3DJay

Cite ONE example of a Biblical translation supporting your ASSERTION. ONE.

http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/index.htm
14 Now it was preparation of the passover; it was about the sixth hour. And he said to the Jews: “See! YOUR king!”

Yeah, I noticed. He hardened Pharaoh's heart so he could slaughter innocent Egyptians, non-Hebrew slaves, and animals. Sweet guy.


Peace