Results 221 - 240 of 568
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137682 | ||
Absolutly NONE! Thank God for that, heh? | ||||||
222 | Sources? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137708 | ||
I am hunting down the sources for the idiom (can't locate them when you need them...) In the mean time, you can read, "Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus" by David Bivin and Roy Blizzard. Also, "Our Father Abraham: Jewish roots of the Christian Faith", by Marvin Wilson. Both books show how modern scholars agree that the first century Jews spoke Hebrew as their main language and not Arabic or Greek (or Latin). The ISBNs are: 1-56043-550-X and 0-8028-0423-3 respectively. I apologize for not having the source for the Idiom readily available, but both these authors make the same argument for this verse as I have. I will get that source a.s.a.p. |
||||||
223 | Hebrew culture;a help or not? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137728 | ||
You can understand the Bible on its face in any language. Obviously the Holy Spirit has been able to guide many in the Church for centuries. Your argument suggests that I (and apparently others) are saying you cannot understand God’s revelation in His revealed Word unless you have a complete and total grasp of Jewish History, culture and language. Nothing could be further from the truth. HOWEVER; learning such things and knowing such things adds greatly to ones understanding, grasp and ability to live out the truths found in the Bible. I have been amazed and blown away by many clearer understandings of both testaments simply by understanding the culture. Imagine with me if you will: How could we view Jesus and His teachings more fully if we knew what His contemporaries were teaching? What other Pharisees were saying? The fact that there are more than one type of Pharisee? Maybe if one understood the Maccabean revolt , they would better understand what Jesus said and did at the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. I actually heard a pastor say that the only reason Jews picked up Palm branches was because that was what was available. He totally botched the sermon because he did not know what the Palm branch meant to the Jew in the 1st Century! Or why did Jesus say certain things during the festival of Hanukah (festival of lights in the NIV). Then there is the little know fact that the disciples were (almost undoubtedly) teenagers, not middle aged men. And why did they drop their nets and follow Jesus as if in a trance? (If you understand Rabbi’s and their disciples and how they typically came together, you’d realize that they probably ran to follow Jesus with great excitement. The fact that they were even fishing tells the reader something about them and their schooling, but you need to know the culture to know this.) Or what about the 10 virgins? Why are these women waiting for “the groom” and who is this guy (I mean in the Parable, not who he represented)? Did the original readers know something about this parable that we don’t? Yes, and it’s quite fun to know. Or how about the lady who bleed for 12 years and touched Jesus’ cloak? Any meaning in that? Actually this one you do not need to know Hebrew culture for, but you do need to know the Hebrew language (This one, should you learn it, is awesome….) Or what about Zacchaeus? Did you ever wonder why he didn’t just go to the front of the crowd instead of climbing a tree? Does knowing Hebrew culture get you more saved? Is it required? Of course not! BUT WHY, and I really need to know this, why do people resist so much the desire to know the culture, history, and language of Jesus? Why don’t people eagerly seek out to know what Jesus’ contemporaries thought? I hear this argument that God wouldn’t require people to know this and how does this help a Chinese man who has no hope of such in depth study? “You don’t need to know all this stuff!”, the say. Well you don’t need to know Greek either. And you don’t even need to know how to read (ever met a downs syndrome person who loves God and lives for him better than you could ever wish to? I have.) But just because you don’t need to do in depth hard study to have a richer understanding and better grasp of Jesus and His teachings, does NOT mean that you shouldn’t do it. In fact, and I will end here, if you DID know the schooling that Jesus went through to get to where He was, you would be ashamed of the “girlie men” students of the Bible we all are. And it wasn’t just Jesus; it was every Pharisee that He chastised as well. Want a hint? Have you memorized the first 5 books of the Bible? How about before you were 12? Or the whole Old Testament? Then there is the really hard learning – the Oral law. You can understand Matt 5:17 without agreeing with my interpretation and be a great Christian. In fact, there is a chance I am even wrong. But why not look into Jesus’ world some and see what you find before labeling someone else who has done it. |
||||||
224 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137729 | ||
See my reply to kalos below in the thread. He responded to you and I responded to both in that post titled: "Hebrew culture; a help of not". I also look forward to answering you on Mark 7, but one thread at a time. This one has surprised me as is evident in my post stated above. Thanks, Marvin |
||||||
225 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137732 | ||
Your comments on Jesus speaking Greek were fascinating and I am thankful for the chance to read them. They educated me. I often said that in Jerusalem, Jesus would have had to speak another language other than Hebrew because of the vast numbers of people from outside the region. Greek was my third guess, but with your posts, maybe it will become my first. This does not explain how he spoke to His disciples and those in Galilee. I still firmly believe that He spoke Hebrew (you even make that point to some degree.) I am not the best source for this argument and making it would plagiarize, so see the book, “Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebraic Perspective.” by Bivin and Blizzard. I even have an extra copy I could send you. Since you are interested in languages, then this is a MUST READ. Believe the book or not, it still provides a treasure of information and would be useful. On other notes: I was taught that Jesus built in Sepphoris, a city being built when he was a child and closer to Nazareth (building with stone.) Caesarea was a long way off, but of course we really can only speculate. You mentioned Pilot and not knowing much about him. Check out Paul Meier’s book about the man. Very fascinating and explains why he might have acted the way he did when Jesus was condemned (something that “The Passion” got right – or close). On your explanation of Jesus quoting Deut. 6:5 and adding “mind”; you are of course right in knowing that the Greek had to add “mind” to get the full meaning, but couldn’t the Gospel writers have made the change, and Jesus still teach it in Hebrew? Thanks for the lively discussion, and for not calling me names because I study Hebrew culture, language and 1st century rabbinic teachings to more fully grasp who Jesus is. (I’m sorry, did that sound sarcastic?) |
||||||
226 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137733 | ||
I like your answer and agree (My other comments on this not withstanding.) On our other thread I think I just got sarcastic and a bit upset with your comments, so in this thread I will appologize and I have noted that you certainly understand more of what I am saying than your posts to me have led on. (I read your Bio.) God bless, Marvin |
||||||
227 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137745 | ||
John chapter 21 the word Love is used in its various Greek forms. YES! I like that. Hebrew, amazingly, also has 3 words for love. Ahava, Ryah, and Dod (possibly more) but these match the Greek and are all in the Song of Solomon. Jesus would have used Ahava, and Peter use Ryah. Again, when John told this part of the story he could translate the subtleties into Greek from Hebrew. -It's neat to see how John was following Peter and Jesus. I picture Jesus taking Peter off alone to have this discussion, and then John tails behind just close enough to hear. Read it with this in mind and see if you get that feeling. - I also agree that God most definitely arranged the languages that way. I see that over and over again in studying Hebrew, and I imagine the same with Greek. God after all does plan well. :) In Him, Marvin |
||||||
228 | Hebrew culture;a help or not? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137791 | ||
Steve and John (and others?), Once I re-track down the apparently elusive source for this interpretation, I will get back to this thread and see if anything makes more sense. I think the fear is that if my interpretation is correct, that it therefore diminishes a Christian teaching or possibly a Doctrine. But I would not fear this (in case anyone has been) because the common interpretations for Matt 5:17—that Messiah Jesus was the "end of" the Law [Torah], meaning the purpose of and what the Prophets were pointing to—is made in many other places within the New Testament, not just here. But, like I said, we should get back to this once I find the source and shed some more light on the topic. Marvin |
||||||
229 | Sources? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137898 | ||
I’ve spent several hours digging this up, and have yet to complete my task, but I hope that this will be adequate at least for right now. The Sources are at the end of this post. The reason I’m digging into this source and taking time to follow this thread is so that some can appreciate the value of knowing the language, culture, and contemporary teachings of Jesus time. When Jesus is placed back in His Jewish roots, the scriptures come alive in ways they do not when Jesus is taken out of His original Jewish culture. Case in point: A denominational Sunday school curriculum had a picture of a young boy walking up stairs into a building and the words with the picture said, “Jesus was a good Christian boy who went to church every Sunday.” Three things are wrong with this: 1) Jesus was not Christian but Jewish; 2) Jesus went to Synagogue, not Church; and 3) Jesus went on the Sabbath, not on Sunday. I suppose when children are taught such things, it is no wonder that there is such an uphill battle to help adults place Jesus back into His true setting. Why do I harp on this stuff? Several of you asked what this has to do with Salvation. First and foremost, when I began to study along these lines my life changed dramatically. It is not uncommon for a newly saved person to try and convert all his friends because of the Joy they have found. I too, feel this way in a sense and want everyone to experience the exhilaration of meeting Jesus in a fresh and real way, as He was and is. My goal is to know God and Jesus more and more to enjoy Him and live in the fullness of His Kingdom. Second; I do not believe that God’s only purpose in the story of the Bible was to simply get people saved and out of hell. We too often have the attitude that our job is to “get people in” when Jesus’ life and ministry was far more than just that. He practiced a first century discipleship that was not only common to His day, but ended up changing the Roman world in ways the Zealots of His time couldn’t have imagined. Jesus did this by studying immense amounts of information from the Old Testament to Oral Law and many other extra-Biblical teachings. Jesus debated with other respected Rabbis (not just those “white washed tombs” he chastised.) There were eight great debates in Jesus time and Jesus addresses all eight of them. (7 times he sides with Hillel and 1 time with Shammi, the leading Rabbinic schools of the day.) Jesus discussed the most minute law of the day as well as the greatest. I feel that when we ask, “What does this have to do with Salvation.” we devalue much of what God wants for us and from us. We cheapen the scriptures and what they can do in our lives. We forget that God is more interested IN us than in what we can do for Him. That being said, I am not one to participate in polemic divinity. I feel I side with Benjamin Franklin on this account. SOURCES: First the English ones: “Jesus the Jewish Theologian”, by Brad H. Young page 264-265 of ISBN 1565630602 “Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus”, by David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, Jr. page 111-115 of ISBN 156043550X “Our Father Abraham”, by Marvin R Wilson, page 117 of ISBN 0802804233 En-Gedi web site: http://www.en-gedi.org/articles/rtb/rtb2002apr.html “Heavenly Torah”, by Abraham J. Heschel page unknown (I do not have this book yet) ISBN 0826408028 Non English Sources: W. Bacher, Die exegetische Terminologie der judischer Traditionsliteratur (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1905; Hebrew translation by A Rabinovitz; Erche Midrash, Jerusalem: Carmiel, 1970) Rabbis of today! This is a current common saying in the schools of Jewish theology found throughout the world, particularly in Israel. Also, I do have notes from an article by Bivin that come from the earliest sources (Mishnah written in the 200’s AD and is the Oral Traditions that were common during Jesus time.) These notes are all but meaningless if you do not know Hebrew and since the article they are attached to is copy protected, I can only post the notes. I am not posting the notes because they are long, but should you want them, I can post them in a separate response. And finally, the following was emailed to me by a wonderful man who helped me track some of this down: “David Bivin and the other Jerusalem School Scholars are experts in Koine Greek (even conversing in that ancient language on occasion), Mishnaic Hebrew, Aramaic, Biblical and Modern Hebrew, Syriac, and other languages used in Biblical scholarship like German, Latin, and French. I have not found the equal of their scholarship and linguistic capabilities among other Biblical scholars.” I hope that this helps in our walk with God, not just in some stupid disagreement about interpretation. Anyway, the most common interpretation of this text, even though wrong when used in Matt. 5:17, is a correct belief and teaching of the Bible, but that point is made elsewhere in the New Testament. |
||||||
230 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137899 | ||
Hank, please see my post in this thread under the heading "sources?" My post begins, "I've spent several hours...." and was posted on 11/20/04 at 11:53pm | ||||||
231 | Hebrew culture;a help or not? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137900 | ||
Steve, please see my post in this thread under the heading "sources?" My post begins, "I've spent several hours...." and was posted on 11/20/04 at 11:53pm The meaning may be changed, but it fits the context perfectly and the traditional meaning is made in other places in scripture, just not here. |
||||||
232 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | MJH | 137901 | ||
Doc, please see my post in this thread under the heading "sources?" My post begins, "I've spent several hours...." and was posted on 11/20/04 at 11:53pm I mention this to you because you seemed interested in the discussion and I didn't want you to miss what will hopefully be my final post on the matter regardless of whether my point is accepted. Hope all is well with you and your illness. God Bless, Marvin |
||||||
233 | Sabbath Saturday change to Sunday | Matt 5:18 | MJH | 231798 | ||
God did not nor could not change the Law. It's a binding covenant for all time, both in this life and the life to come; however, given the changes in our status before God, certain elements of the Law would be applied differently, or all together irrelevant. (Where there is no unclean, there is no need for cleansing rituals.) Some time between 70 AD and 114 AD this change occurred. More likely after 90 AD. The why? is far too long of an answer for here, but historically it was inevitable. The New Testament doesn't answer the question for us because the writing of the New Testament, with the exception of possibly John's Revelation, was written before anyone even thought such a thing could occur. While some point to obscure Texts to show it was an Apostolic change, this is impossible when one understands first century Judaism. One of the primary reasons the Jews are said to be exiled in Babylon was for ignoring the Sabbath. They knew this, and because of this they turned the Sabbath into a heavy burden of rules to guard against it's desecration. Had the Apostles "changed" this day from Saturday to Sunday, it would have been as big of a fight and discussion as Gentile inclusion was. But nothing is said in the New Testament! Nothing. This fact alone aught to be proof enough that it never changed during the writing of the New Testament. That all being said, should you worship on Sunday or Saturday is your call. God has OBVIOUSLY blessed the church and many many devout Christians who have not only believed, but taught passionately that Sunday was the day of worship. To fail to take this into account is a massive error. So I am not telling you, nor anyone, what is right in this matter; only what is to me obvious knowing now what I know. MJH |
||||||
234 | The meaning of being Elect? | Matt 5:44 | MJH | 163613 | ||
Doc (any anyone else), I check in on this forum about once a month or so now, and it just so happenes that this discussion is very much in line with some reconsiderations I have been having about heaven/hell and election, etc... Have you heard of the idea that just as Israel was elected by God, not because of their own works, but by the grace of God (called out of Egypt) to be a light to the world of the One True God and to be a blessing to the nations. That similarly, God has elected some to be a blessing to the world by bringing His Good News and bringing his redemption and his Kingdom to the lives of those in the world. In this light, those who are elect, are not elect only to salvation from hell (or to Heaven), but elect for an ordained purpose. And likewise, those who are NOT elect are not necessarily sent to hell (I mean on a whole). After all, many joined Israel who were not Israel in the Old Testament. They were not elect, but they received all the benefits of God's mercy just the same. (Ruth the Moabite, Rehab of the destroyed Jericho, etc...) I have not really explored this idea, but I heard it in passing and it has been running through my mind during those times in the day that allow for thinking. Any thoughts from anyone? MJH |
||||||
235 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | MJH | 163615 | ||
Sonlite. You are in a good place. I joined in on this forum some time ago and it has been very fruitful for me in exploring new ideas and questions about the scripture. Many people hear are wroth listening to. I too have been raised in the church and held pretty much to the same doctrinal views for the first 29 years of my life. After joining a new church and meeting some new people, my views have been challenged a lot. After 4-5 years of this, I now actually have many more questions than before, but my views of God, Jesus, and His Word have become so much more great. The awe and worship of such a great God has changed not just my thinking, but my life and actions. There are MANY benefits for growing up in and staying within the same community of believers (there is plenty of Biblical evidence that this is the ideal.) However, doing so can make one think that "we have it figured out." All questions have an answer that is correct and that's that. But is that possible. Can a finite being understand fully an infinite God? Systematic theology, for all its good points, often removes the "mystery" of God that is so wonderful. I cherish my up bringing and love the church that brought me into the world of God very much. Without their dedication, the roots of my faith would not have been so deep, and the trails I have followed may have uprooted some of my faith, rather that cause it to bloom. I have seen people loose much of their faith because they were knew to Christianity and followed many of the same paths I followed, but did not have that deep root into a faith that has been tested by time, trials, as well as joys. All questions are worth asking, even the "scary" ones, because ultimately, on the other end, your faith will be stronger and you will probably be asking more questions and more questions... MJH |
||||||
236 | Praying for the 'World'. | Matt 5:44 | MJH | 163626 | ||
Doc, I would whole heartedly agree with your every word. I greatly appreciate systematic theology and all its good points of which many you mention. What I don't like is approaching God and the study of God in that manner ALONE. Taking him and his revelation apart and looking at it like a scientist can lose sight of the whole of the story or picture. After all, God does not describe Himself as Omni..., but as a Father, a Shepherd, a Rock, a fortress, etc... An example might be: A local junior high school goes to the swamp and gets frogs, cuts them up, and studies their bodies. Another approach would be to go to the swamp and watch and learn about the frogs behavior, his girl friend, his favorite lily pad, etc… It’s the same frog and neither method of study will give the whole picture, but both together will really help us understand “frogness.” So I do love and study the systematic theologies and they are much of what gave my faith roots that last. But recently, I have loved studying who God is using other approaches. (Biblical theology as one example, but others as well.) Like I said, I do agree with your every word in your post. I only want to add more too it. You are right, some like the word "wonder" rather than "mystery" for many reasons. "Wonder" is probably a better word to use given the semantics associated with a word such as "mystery." God bless, MJH |
||||||
237 | Who then is on this broad way? | Matt 7:13 | MJH | 217086 | ||
Rakpak, Welcome to the forum. You are not alone. MJH |
||||||
238 | Violent men take it by force | Matt 11:12 | MJH | 140400 | ||
The key to understanding this verse turns out to be an old rabbinic interpretation (midrash) of Micah 2:12-13 which reads: 12 I will gather all of you, Jacob; I will collect the remnant of Israel. I will put them all together like sheep in a fold, like a flock inside its pen. It will be noisy and crowded with people. 13 The breach-maker (poretz) goes through before them Then they break out. Passing through the gate, they leave by it. Their king passes through before them, their Lord at their head. Rich imagery! A picture of a shepherd penning up his sheep at night. He quickly builds a fold by throwing up a makeshift rock fence against the side of a hill. The next morning, to let the sheep out, he makes a hole or a breach in the fence. The sheep being penned up all night can hardly wait to “break” out. The ancient rabbinic interpretation said the “breach-maker” was Elijah, and “their king” was the Messiah. “The Kingdom of Heaven,” Jesus says, “is ‘breaking forth’ [not ‘suffering violence’], and every person in it is ‘breaking out’ in it.” Two things are happening. The Kingdom is bursting forth into the world, and individuals within the Kingdom are finding freedom and liberty. In Micah it is the Lord and his sheep that are breaking out. Jesus alters that figure slightly so that it is the Kingdom and its sheep that are breaking out. Though Jesus does not refer directly to his own role as the shepherd leading the sheep out, no listener could possibly misunderstand Jesus’ stunning assertion – I am the Lord. Elijah had come and opened the way, and the Lord himself was leading the noisy multitude out to freedom. Adapted from “Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus” Bivin, Blizzard MJH |
||||||
239 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215868 | ||
John the Baptist did not drink wine because he was a Nazarite for life and no grape product (wine or juice or simply a grape) could be eaten. Jesus did drink wine and it was the real thing...with alcohol in it fully fermented. He also changed water into wine, and again, it was the real thing. The master of the household declared it the best, and wine that isn't fermented isn't close to the best. (This miracle was performed in a town that worshiped Dionysius, the god of wine.) Some have tried to convince themselves that Jesus only drank what they refer to as “new wine” that did not contain alcohol. But historically and religiously this simply is not true. In fact, it is so obviously shown to be untrue that only one thing can cause a person to hold firmly to such a belief. Pure dogmatism. A strict belief in something because their “teachings” say so. No proof needed and all evidence to the contrary is dismissed outright. The fact of the matter is that God actually created grapes to be used as wine. It's use in the worship at the Temple was prescribed by God Himself. The Passover celebration (in the first century) required four glasses of wine to be drunk by the participants (probably small glasses or all from a common cup.) Drinking red wine with a meal is in no way bad in-and-of-itself. Only when it causes offense to another, or temps a person with a drinking problem. Most churches now use grape juice for the Lord's Supper (Eucharist, Communion, et. al.) to protect those who are alcoholics. I hope this helps. Biblical references are so numerous it would be cumbersome to include, but if you do not have a good concordance or e-sword.org, or can't access “blue letter Bible” on the Internet, I could gather them for you. MJH |
||||||
240 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215886 | ||
You said, "The wine at the time Jesus lived was diluted from a concentrate about 4 parts of water to one part of wine." Do you have a source for this information? Thanks, MJH |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [29] >> |