OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 8 minutes ago, goor_de said: jesus 10 And saith unto him, Everyone gives first the good wine, and, when they are drunk, the lesser wine; but you have withheld the good wine until now. Yes, because they didn't know there was water in the amphoras right before, and no good wine being withheld. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) . . . Edited September 28, 2018 by OnePassenger double post, sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) . . . Edited September 28, 2018 by OnePassenger double post because of the lame software, not because of the wine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 10 minutes ago, Vort said: He was asked why he saved the good wine until last, not the new wine. He didn't only transform water into wine, but he created even a better wine than the guests had drunk before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 1 minute ago, OnePassenger said: Yes, because they didn't know there was water in the amphoras right before, and no good wine being withheld. The master butler recognized the bridegroom in Jesus. He said you have withheld the good wine until now. but thou hast kept the good wine until now. maybe that's badly translated in English Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, goor_de said: The master butler recognized the bridegroom in Jesus. He said you have withheld the good wine until now. but thou hast kept the good wine until now. maybe that's badly translated in English No, Old English, KJV. Jesus helped there and maybe he was responsible for the wine. That's all. And the guests were drunk, which surely didn't make things easier. Edited September 28, 2018 by OnePassenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, OnePassenger said: Jesus helped there and maybe he was responsible for the wine. That's all. And the guests were drunk, which surely didn't make things easier. The theory is too thin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 1 minute ago, goor_de said: The theory is too thin Better a thin theory than a thin wine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/john/2.1-11?lang=eng#p1 Quote 9 When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, 10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 11 This abeginning of bmiracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him. If Jesus was the bridegroom, then fine, he asked Jesus, but otherwise, he asked someone else... NOTE: I'm not saying it was or wasn't. This whole thread seems pointless to me. Anddenex 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, OnePassenger said: Besser eine dünne Theorie als ein dünner Wein. ich sags mal auf deutsch wenn er nur eingeladen war dann war er sicherlich nicht für den Wein veranwortlich Edited September 28, 2018 by goor_de Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 4 minutes ago, zil said: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/john/2.1-11?lang=eng#p1 If Jesus was the bridegroom, then fine, he asked Jesus, but otherwise, he asked someone else... NOTE: I'm not saying it was or wasn't. This whole thread seems pointless to me. it's about, jesus was married Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, zil said: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/john/2.1-11?lang=eng#p1 If Jesus was the bridegroom, then fine, he asked Jesus, but otherwise, he asked someone else... NOTE: I'm not saying it was or wasn't. This whole thread seems pointless to me. We should point out Jesus wasn't the bridegroom. Yes, maybe one of the guests asked someone else. But I think Jesus was responsible for the drinks, because he was helping out there. And the only drink they knew was wine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, goor_de said: ich sags mal auf deutsch wenn er nur eingeladen war dann war er sicherlich nicht für den Wein veranwortlich You mean, if he only was invited he surely wasn't responsible for the wine. Why not? On a party or so you can delegate some things to one of your friends. In this case Jesus was it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, goor_de said: it's about, jesus was married My point of view: there is a certain probability he was. The big question mark would only be: who was he married to...? I'm sure the scenario doesn't describe his own marriage resp. wedding reception. Edited September 28, 2018 by OnePassenger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, OnePassenger said: You mean, if he only was invited he surely wasn't responsible for the wine. Why not? On a party or so you can delegate some things to one of your friends. In this case Jesus was it. the cellar master is responsible for the wine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 21 hours ago, OnePassenger said: 21 hours ago, goor_de said: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. maybe that's badly translated in English No, Old English, KJV. That is not Old English. This is Old English, from around King Alfred's time: Fæder ūre, þū þe eart on heofonum Several hundred years later, during the high middle ages, English had evolved to what we call Middle English: Oure fadir that art in heuenes By the end of the 1400s, people were speaking early forms of modern English. Jacobean English, a form of early modern English similar to Shakespeare's English, was spoken at the time the King James ("Authorized") version of the Bible was produced. Our Father which art in heaven One prominent feature of early modern English was the use of the second person singular pronoun thou and its related forms thee, thy, and thine. Sadly, we lost that usage two centuries ago and now have to struggle along with a bare you, sometimes supplemented with the bastardized plural form you all (or y'all, which is itself often used as a singular, necessitating the doubly bastardized all y'all). Just in case you were wondering. Edited September 29, 2018 by Vort JohnsonJones, OnePassenger and SilentOne 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, goor_de said: the cellar master is responsible for the wine I'm rather sure those houses in Galilee had no cellars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, OnePassenger said: My point of view: there is a certain probability he was. The big question mark would only be: who was he married to...? I'm sure the scenario doesn't describe his own marriage. with maria from magdalla. Jesus first showed herself to her. she recognized him as her husband John 20:16 Jesus says to her, Mary! Then she turned and spoke to him in Hebrew: Rabbuni !, Normally one speaks Armenian. I am sure that it is the Hebrew form of the husband's address Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentOne Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, goor_de said: Normally one speaks Armenian. I'm guessing this is supposed to mean they usually spoke Aramaic. Otherwise, . P.S. Does anybody here actually speak Armenian? Edited September 28, 2018 by SilentOne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goor_de Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 3 minutes ago, SilentOne said: I'm guessing this is supposed to mean they usually spoke Aramaic. Otherwise, . P.S. Does anybody here actually speak Armenian? sorry, Aramaic SilentOne 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnePassenger Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, Vort said: That is not Old English. This is Old English, from around King Alfred's time: Fæder ūre, þū þe eart on heofonum Several hundred years later, during the high middle ages, English had evolved to what we call Middle English: Oure fadir that art in heuenes By the end of the 1400s, people were speaking early forms of modern English. Jacobean English, a form of early modern English similar to Shakespeare's English, was spoken at the time the King James ("Authorized") version of the Bible was produced. Our Father which are in heaven One prominent feature of early modern English was the use of the second person singular pronoun thou and its related forms thee, thy, and thine. Sadly, we lost that usage two centuries ago and now have to struggle along with a bare you, sometimes supplemented with the bastardized plural form you all (or y'all, which is itself often used as a singular, necessitating the doubly bastardized all y'all). Just in case you were wondering. We still have it all in German. du, Ihr (habt Ihr...), euer, sein, ihr alle (y'all) usw. Funny to see that "y'all" is often used as a singular, necessitating the doubly bastardized plural "all y'all". Oure fadir that art in heuenes sounds a bit German: Unser Vater der ist in der Höhe... Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzie Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 1 hour ago, Traveler said: According to Jewish tradition it was the responsibility of the groom to provide the wine at the wedding fest. One may ask why Jesus was involved in the wine running out in the first place. The Traveler Because as Mary stated "THEY have no wine" and she knew he could do something about it? 1 hour ago, Traveler said: How come Jesus was asked why he saved the new wine for last? The Traveler Where does it say that? The verses separate the two words: Jesus and bridegroom. The verses are not using the two words interchangeable. Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 1 minute ago, Suzie said: Where does it say that? The verses separate the two words: Jesus and bridegroom. The verses are not using the two words interchangeable. Thank you. Good point. I responded that it was "good wine", not "new wine". But the more basic fact is that this was directed to the bridegroom, not to Jesus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 1 hour ago, Traveler said: I am interested in why you believe this to be so. The Traveler ??? Because it’s taught. Jesus is God. He is the God of the Old Testament. Gospel principles is pretty clear on the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zil Posted September 28, 2018 Report Share Posted September 28, 2018 18 minutes ago, SilentOne said: P.S. Does anybody here actually speak Armenian? I had an Armenian pen pal, eons ago. Does that count? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.