Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | kalos | 137629 | ||
NT given in GREEK, not Hebrew 'Some of the errors in the HRM [Hebrew Roots Movement], or ANY, for that matter, who classify themselves Messianic Jews today are: '1. They call for Christians to recognize extra-biblical Jewish books, which are supposed to give fuller understanding of the Greek New Testament. In fact some go so far as to proclaim the Hebrew Scriptures are the authentic scriptures, not the Greek text of the KJV Bible. 'The New Testament was given in its original, inspired from the Hand of God, in GREEK, not Hebrew. Most of the extra-biblical Hebrew "scriptures" that the HRM is seeking to foist onto the Christian Church are ancient writings, often with occult and mystical sources, traditional material which are NOT Scripture at all. They are extra-biblical sources of knowledge. 'The Bible was written in 3 languages: '1. Hebrew was the Language of the Old Testament. '2. Aramaic was the language of the far east until the time of Alexander the Great. '3. Greek was the New Testament language and the International language at the time of Christ. 'But yet the Hebrew Roots Movement claims falsely that the original Gospels were written in Hebrew, or possibly Aramaic, and that the Greek New Testament is a mere translation and in some cases a mis-translation of the Hebrew or Aramaic originals. They have even gone so far (some of them) to conclude that Paul's writings where he addressed the heresy they teach, were re-written by Rome and are not authentic. Of course they cannot prove this, but it is enough to cast doubt in their adherents and justify themselves in their error.' ____________________ http://www.angelfire.com/la/jlush/dangersHRM.html |
||||||
2 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137664 | ||
Mathew wrote in Hebrew – Let’s get this back into context. The text is Matt. 5:17 and my original interpretation was as follows: This is a common Jewish statement. It is even used today, and was used a lot in Jesus time. "to abolish the [Torah]" meant to "misinterpret it." "to fulfill" meant to "interpret it correctly." An argument came that Matthew wrote in Greek and therefore my interpretation was not valid. In response to this I made 2 points: 1) The common Jewish people of Jesus day spoke Hebrew and therefore regardless of what language Matthew wrote in, the interpretation still stands. This idiom (Matt 5:17) was used often in the 1st century, and those living then would have understood it as such. I used extra Biblical sources to make my point because they paint a good picture of history and culture during that time. I also used archeology. 2) Matthew was writing to Jews and would have used their language; Every church father for 400 years after Jesus said Matthew wrote it in Hebrew; Jerome said the Hebrew version was still extant at the library of Caesarea (which is a bold thing to say if it isn’t true since his reader(s) would have been able to easily check.). Your comment does not address my comments at all. The fact remains that Jesus spoke in Hebrew. I attest that all of our manuscripts are in Greek. But to assume that one should neglect to study the Hebrew culture of the 1st century is dangerous to accurate scriptural interpretation. Most Evangelicals (and others) agree that you must first attempt to know what the original hearers understood in order to grasp the texts full meaning. Getting back to the verse--when one understands the Hebrew culture of the first century and their idioms, this text is much easier to understand. One more point about Hebrew culture and extra Biblical writings. Jesus often is addressing these very things when he speaks. There were 8 great debates in his time and he addresses every one of them. We can know what many of Jesus contemporaries thought because of extra Biblical evidence. Who are the Sadducees, Pharisees (more than one type), Essences, and Zealots? The Bible is largely quiet on this, but for centuries we knew the answer because Bible commentators used extra Biblical information to paint a better picture of the historical/cultural times. |
||||||
3 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | kalos | 137669 | ||
Jesus spoke in Aramaic "The people of first century Palestine, including Jesus, spoke the Aramaic language. However, early Christian writings were written entirely in Greek, the universal language of the Roman Empire." (http://www.twopaths.com/faq_kjv.htm) 'It is almost universally accepted that Jesus and His disciples spoke in Aramaic. The theory that the New Testament was written in Hebrew is without basis, though I believe that I have heard some suggest that some of the sources may have been in Aramaic. The simple fact is that the Jews lost their facility in Hebrew. That is why the Old Testament had to be translated into the Greek language (this translation is known as the Septuagint). 'You will remember that when Jesus cried out from the cross, "Eli, Eli, LAMA, SABACHTHANI"(Matthew 27:46-47), He was citing the Hebrew text of Psalm 22:1, and no one there seemed to understand it. They thought Jesus was calling for Elijah. How could this fellow’s (Norman Willis') theory* hold up if no one at the cross could understand the Hebrew words Jesus spoke? (Hebrew and Aramaic are related languages, but not the same.)' ____________________ *Norman Willis' theory. Norman Willis claims that the NT may have been written in Hebrew instead of Greek. (http://www.bible.org/docs/qa/) |
||||||
4 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | kalos | 137674 | ||
Quotable Quote "In the great scheme of things what effect on one’s salvation could finding out what language the New Testament was written [in] make?" --EdB |
||||||
5 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137682 | ||
Absolutly NONE! Thank God for that, heh? | ||||||