Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Will Wagers <hyle AT gte.net>]

>>Rolf Furuli writes:
>>
>>> The problem, however, is not lexical but rather theological. The word
>>> prototokws taken in is plain meaning of "the one who is born first"
>>> strongly suggests a partitive genitive i Colossians 1:15, and this again
>>> places Jesus among the creatures - something  which is disgusting for 
>>> those
>>> believing in the trinity. Therefore, systematic searches have been done to
>>> find another meaning of bekor/prototokws, and the meagre result (shown
>>> inthe lexicons) is Psalm 89:27 which adds nothing to the lexical meaning 
>>> of
>>> the word.

> Have you ever tried to look at the 120 examples of bekor and the 132
>examples of prwtotokos in the OT and and the 8 examples of prwtotokos in
>the NT? If you do, you will find that more than 95% of the examples
>definitely have the *literal* meaning "the one who is born first".

I agree with Rolf (I think), but how does one distinguish between this core,
literal meaning and the (supposedly) etymologically fallacious meaning?


Will Wagers     hyle AT gte.net    "Reality is the best metaphor."