Originally Posted by againstheresies

3. Today study does not mean diligent

Perhaps you have a selected memory - I have already shown you the meaning of the English word "study" - and it does include that meaning:

Webster's 1828 Dictionary gives these definitions for the verb:

1. To fix the mind closely upon a subject; to muse; to dwell upon in thought.

2. To apply the mind to books.

3. To endeavor diligently.

I am not trying to “correct your Bible” I am trying to challenge your understanding of the Bible.

It very much looks like you are - that is all you have done since you came to these boards - challenge and question and correct the KJV.

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by againstheresies

I am not trying to “correct your Bible” I am trying to challenge your understanding of the Bible.

Of course you are -- you are saying that the word is inadequate and needs to be changed.

Anyway, several of us have already explained that we know what study means. You have constructed something of a straw man here by insisting people can only follow one narrow definition of the word study, and therefore offer up a new word that follows one narrow aspect of study.

It is you and the translators of the NKJV who are missing truth for your dogma's sake. There is nothing wrong with the word study in the KJV.

Rather than try to make a case that the word has changed meaning, you might ask yourslef why the KJV translators translated the word "study" in 2Ti 2:15 but "diligence" in 2Ti 4:9,21. Could it be that they simply knew more about the Greek word than you do? That they understood a contextual significance that eludes you? No, of course not -- why am I asking...

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

[COLOR="Navy"]Hi Folks,

A bit more on "study to shew thyself approved..."

======================

From Will Kinney, an excellent study, in line with the verse .

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messia.../message/13259

So even if you thought that "study" should be "be diligent", what are you to be diligent in?? - the answer is in the verse - "rightly dividing the word of truth". That's why contextually it makes perfect sense to translate as "study".

Well if you agree that “spoudazo” should be diligent here in 2 Ti 2:15 and rendered the same way as the exact form is translated in 2 Ti 4:9 and 2 Ti 4:21, then to use “study” today would be more interpretive and less literal. The context is about being approved to God in contrast with those who are unapproved. One of the ways to be approved is to acquire knowledge (study) but it is my contention that is not all that is being communicated here. You are free to make that the only or primary emphasis, but by translating 2 Ti 2:15 with “be diligent” the exegete is free to make a case for the meaning. “Study” is more interpretive. Further my argument is that the KJV translators followed Tyndale and did not intend for this word to convey an idea other than diligence. The essence of my argument has not been addressed, and thus still stands intact.

1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.
2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent
3. Today study does not mean diligent.
4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

Originally Posted by Diligent

Of course you are -- you are saying that the word is inadequate and needs to be changed.

Anyway, several of us have already explained that we know what study means. You have constructed something of a straw man here by insisting people can only follow one narrow definition of the word study, and therefore offer up a new word that follows one narrow aspect of study.

It is you and the translators of the NKJV who are missing truth for your dogma's sake. There is nothing wrong with the word study in the KJV.

Rather than try to make a case that the word has changed meaning, you might ask yourslef why the KJV translators translated the word "study" in 2Ti 2:15 but "diligence" in 2Ti 4:9,21. Could it be that they simply knew more about the Greek word than you do? That they understood a contextual significance that eludes you? No, of course not -- why am I asking...

The KJV translators followed Tyndale in their reading of this passage. I still would like to hear a response to my argument.
1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.
2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent
3. Today study does not mean diligent.
4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

Originally Posted by jerry

Perhaps you have a selected memory - I have already shown you the meaning of the English word "study" - and it does include that meaning:

Try a modern dictionary. The normal meaning that is conveyed by study is an effort to acquire knowledge. When you see the word “study” used in this passage does it really convey the idea of being diligent to be approved of God? If does then I would suggest that your understanding is unique. Most people would not conclude that “study” here means “diligent.”

[Diligent]

Originally Posted by againstheresies

Try a modern dictionary.

My Random House Websters (1999) Includes "zealous endeavor or assiduous effort" among its definitions for the word -- definition 8 of 26. Is it your position that a Bible must use words which have a single meaning in every case to be found at the "top" of a definition in a modern dictionary? You assume much -- not the least of which is that you actually understand the word you are complaining about, and that you understand why Tyndale and the KJV translators used it. Ho hum...

Originally Posted by Diligent

My Random House Websters (1999) Includes "zealous endeavor or assiduous effort" among its definitions for the word -- definition 8 of 26. Is it your position that a Bible must use words which have a single meaning in every case to be found at the "top" of a definition in a modern dictionary? You assume much -- not the least of which is that you actually understand the word you are complaining about, and that you understand why Tyndale and the KJV translators used it. Ho hum...

No. My contention is that “be diligent” more accurately conveys the proper meaning in this passage for readers today.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

I really enjoyed reading about what it means to study to shew thyself approved !
Thank you Lord Jesus for your pure and perfect word.

Originally Posted by Diligent

ask .. why the KJV translators translated the word "study" in 2Ti 2:15 but "diligence" in 2Ti 4:9,21. Could it be that they simply knew more about the Greek word than you do? That they understood a contextual significance that eludes you? No, of course not -- why am I asking...

:-)
Amen. So lets look at a couple of comments, and try to continue the 'dialogue'. 'against' does not seem to be responsive to simple questions.

Originally Posted by againstheresies2

Further my argument is that the KJV translators followed Tyndale

And if the King James Bible translators simply "followed Tyndale" rather than deciding on the proper translation by their own approved study .. then why didn't they "follow Tyndale" in 1 Thessalonians 4:11 ?

Originally Posted by againstheresies2

and did not intend for this word to convey an idea other than diligence.

And do you make the same claim for the usage in Ecclesiastes ?

Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, by these, my son, be admonished:
of making many books there is no end;
and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
or, reading

And on what basis do you know so well what the 50 skilled world-class translators intended ? Do you always make such awkward and ill-supported and illogical conjectures about the intentions of scholars whose knowledge of the languages far, far surpasses yours ? And if you speak so loosely, why should anything you say be taken seriously ?

Oh, and why not tell us more about the two alternate words that you claim could have been in the Greek if Paul had intended to indicate study -- ie. study including the learning and student and 'hungry for truth' sense. You did not respond to my question to you about one word's usage in the New Testament nor about the clear inapplicability of the other.

The essence of my argument has not been addressed, and thus still stands intact.
1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.

Wrong. We showed that the word has a far wider range of meaning. You ignored that.

2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent

Wrong. The King James Bible itself in Ecclesiastes disproves this assertion, showing study used like we use it today.

3. Today study does not mean diligent.

One-dimensional. The dictionary range of meanings includes to diligently endeavor or pursue.

to apply oneself to the acquisition of knowledge, as by reading, investigation, or practice.
to apply oneself; endeavor.

4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

GIGO. (Garbage in, garbage out). All of your components were false or one-dimensional, yet there is such deep rebellion against God's pure word that you simply ignored every improper assertion and every error you made that was carefully pointed out to you.

Now, to try to help you out in your confusions, the most you could possible say is that 'diligent' is an alternate translation. Personally I see it as quite a bit inferior, subtracting from the sense of the word of God, however you could make a case for an alternate translation and have a sensible discussion. That however would not fulfill your self-proclaimed role as bible corrector.

So what you have done instead is look foolish and obstinate on each and every point.

against, I would like to know where you picked up this whole idea from ? A web-site ? Why not tell us.

Also I would like to know why you did not do even rudimentary NT study of the alternate words you said would have been written by Paul.

And you should answer the question from Diligent about your background.

Shalom,
Steven

[Easy E]

I've been studying all weekend all week for my last papers and exams of my college career.

I wish all I had to do was "be diligent."

See.

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

I really enjoyed reading about what it means to study to shew thyself approved !
Thank you Lord Jesus for your pure and perfect word.

:-)
Amen. So lets look at a couple of comments, and try to continue the 'dialogue'. 'against' does not seem to be responsive to simple questions.

And if the King James Bible translators simply "followed Tyndale" rather than deciding on the proper translation by their own approved study .. then why didn't they "follow Tyndale" in 1 Thessalonians 4:11 ?

And do you make the same claim for the usage in Ecclesiastes ?

Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, by these, my son, be admonished:
of making many books there is no end;
and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
or, reading

And on what basis do you know so well what the 50 skilled world-class translators intended ? Do you always make such awkward and ill-supported and illogical conjectures about the intentions of scholars whose knowledge of the languages far, far surpasses yours ? And if you speak so loosely, why should anything you say be taken seriously ?

Oh, and why not tell us more about the two alternate words that you claim could have been in the Greek if Paul had intended to indicate study -- ie. study including the learning and student and 'hungry for truth' sense. You did not respond to my question to you about one word's usage in the New Testament nor about the clear inapplicability of the other.

Wrong. We showed that the word has a far wider range of meaning. You ignored that.

Wrong. The King James Bible itself in Ecclesiastes disproves this assertion, showing study used like we use it today.

One-dimensional. The dictionary range of meanings includes to diligently endeavor or pursue.

to apply oneself to the acquisition of knowledge, as by reading, investigation, or practice.
to apply oneself; endeavor.

GIGO. (Garbage in, garbage out). All of your components were false or one-dimensional, yet there is such deep rebellion against God's pure word that you simply ignored every improper assertion and every error you made that was carefully pointed out to you.

Now, to try to help you out in your confusions, the most you could possible say is that 'diligent' is an alternate translation. Personally I see it as quite a bit inferior, subtracting from the sense of the word of God, however you could make a case for an alternate translation and have a sensible discussion. That however would not fulfill your self-proclaimed role as bible corrector.

So what you have done instead is look foolish and obstinate on each and every point.

against, I would like to know where you picked up this whole idea from ? A web-site ? Why not tell us.

Also I would like to know why you did not do even rudimentary NT study of the alternate words you said would have been written by Paul.

And you should answer the question from Diligent about your background.

Shalom,
Steven

Thanks for finally attempting to answer my thesis, but I still find your answers deficient.

Your response to my propositions summarized followed by my response:

1. Study is a possible meaning---Yes, but a more thorough word study would demonstrate that possibility is very unlikely here.

2. KJV in Ecclesiastes disproves---Ecclesiastes was written in Hebrew. The Hebrew word “Lahag” only occurs once in the Bible at this verse. The Septuagint translated “lahag” with “melete” not “spoudazo.” You should address the usage of the meaning of “study” in Middle English.

3. One-dimensional, dictionary includes diligently as a meaning for study---diligent is clearer, people today normally understand study as acquiring knowledge.

4. GIGO…rebellion against God’s Word—pejorative responses and imputation of motives do not enhance or advance the discussion.

As to the criticism of my expertise and the challenge of my scholarship, I will allow my argumentation to speak for itself. I am diligently committed to rightly dividing the Word of Truth and engage in sound exegesis in order to properly communicate God’s Word. I would argue that you are guided by a particular tradition. I am guided by the truth even if it causes me change my position. Honestly, I would change my position if you gave me a compelling argument. Thus far your arguments are unconvincing, but I am sure our evaluations will be polar opposites.