Family History

It does??? I don't remember anything about that. Y'have a reference?

EDIT: I'm trying to find something on Bible Gateway…

John 1:42 And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

Yes- John 1:24

Okay, I also found Matthew 16:17; "Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven."

I have no idea…let me think.

This came up in our Bible Study last night and I really questioned it… so I thought I would ask one of my other BB friends. :)

ESV in John 1:42 says "Simon the son of John". Probably just a mistranslation, or maybe it was another Jonas/Jona/Jonah.

Okay. :) Well, I'm honored that you would ask my uneducated opinion! :P

TEV says "Simon son of John". The Amplified Bible says "Simon son of John". The Living Bible says "Simon, John's son". KJV says "Simon son of Jona".

Okay. :) Well, I'm honored that you would ask my uneducated opinion! :P

You won't be 'uneducated' in this matter for long. ;P

Haha, you're right. :P :D

So is 'John' and 'Jonah' the same name?

I suppose it can be. :) Hmm, let's see. In the OT uses of "Jonah", the Strong's number is 3124. The Hebrew word is yona, or at least that's what is says in the concordance. In the NT use of "Jona" in John 1:42, the Strong's number is 2495. The Greek word is Ionas. Both say in the definition, "Jonah, 'dove'". When the word "John" is used in the NT, the number is 2491, so it's a pretty similar word. Greek: Ioannes: "John, 'Yahweh is gracious'". So apparently it's not the same Greek word when the KJV says "John" and when it says "Jona". Make sense?

Just a wild thought, what if Jonah learned his lesson later and renamed himself "John", meaning "Yahweh is gracious", after what he learned in his experience with Nineveh? O_o

I got to borrow some old pictures from my granny yesterday. She has one of my great great great grandparents, Roy and Josie Foster…when they got married!!!

Is it the duty of family historians to recount without personal discernment the lives of those who went before? Or do you just not mention certain things that would give that person a bad reputation in the eyes of those who go after? The Bible says to speak no evil of any man. But my personal perspective is that I like to think about heritage names. I want to name my children after godly people. How can I do that if the historian hides certain things about a person, thinking they don't need to be mentioned? I like people to be honest with me, and I need to be so with them. Where do you draw the line?

I'd think you can write that, but write it in a respectful way (does that make sense?).

That does make sense.