Results 241 - 260 of 568
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215891 | ||
THanks, I will check them out. MJH |
||||||
242 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215899 | ||
I check out the two links. They both hold very different views. The second is a perfect example of my earlier post on this thread. Apparently anyone who doesn't agree with their view of wine is "apostate." In either case, the first did not mention the mixing of wine with water and the second mentions the four parts to one mixture without any reference. It's not that I don't think this has a high probability to be true. But the quote is a specific 4-1 mixture rather than the more generic "they mixed water in with their wine" This leads me to believe that they MUST have a source. Something dating from near the first century such as Philo or Josephus or the Mishna or a Greek writer from the era speaking about the Jews. I've read many of so-called historical "facts" from the first century that turned out to be not true, but since they've been passed on so much and so many pastors reference them in sermons, they become assumed. MJH |
||||||
243 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215900 | ||
see new note to searcher56 | ||||||
244 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215971 | ||
Tim, Thanks. That was exactly what I was looking for. I love it when a specific historical statement can be backed up. Seems to me that the anceints might have used Wine more as a common beverage than as a beverage to accompany a good steak. Either way, your link was a good one. MJH |
||||||
245 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215985 | ||
Val, Yes I did catch that too. I was more interested in historical evidence than attitude. Also, I simply do not have a "dog in this fight" so-to-speak. I just don't care much about it to get into the fray. My personal impression is that if a church desires to be alcohol free, I am perfectly fine with this. I also think if you join that church you are obligated to follow what you signed up for. But they would be much better served if they didn't attempt to prove it from the Bible as being a hard and fast "law" all Christians should follow. Doing so puts them in a theological corner they can't get out of. While there is a part of me that would love to draw them into a discussion and then back them into a corner and watch them squirm, I don't think it would be profitable. As far as anyone on this forum whom I have spoken with about the issue, I have seen only grace. Maybe others I haven't spoken to (and the links provided) use terms such as "so-called Christians" or apostates, but that doesn't reflect the discourse I’ve seen from this forum. MJH |
||||||
246 | Did Jesus ever drink wine? | Matt 11:19 | MJH | 215986 | ||
Val, Forgot to mention. The link puts "so-called" in square brakets. This usually means the origianal word was replaced with a similar word. OR it wasn't in the original text but added by the editor later. MJH just trying to give the benefit of the doubt. |
||||||
247 | Origins of Synagogues and Rabbis? | Matt 12:9 | MJH | 207301 | ||
For the origins of the Synagogues see: The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years by Lee I. Levine It's a heavy book (700 pages I think?) In short, the Synagogue became popularized (if not began) with the Babylonian exile. The exile of Judah allowed them some religious freedoms and absent the Temple, the synagogue developed. The Rabbi's can be traced back to Ezra at the very least. Judaism will go back to Moses and the 70 Elders, but Ezra clearly sets up an instructional system that included Sages and disciples who trained to become like them. Of course, Ezra's system evolved over time. It wasn't until after 70AD that we see the period of the Talmadim (disciples) really take off in force. The Synagogue was very effective at keeping Israel as a nation and a people group throughout the past 2000 years. MJH |
||||||
248 | Why did jesus speak in parables? | Matt 13:10 | MJH | 143847 | ||
Jesus spoke in parables because it was one of the most common methods of teaching by the rabbis of His time. The other answer given to your question is also correct. MJH |
||||||
249 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139539 | ||
Can anyone still believe that Jesus spoke Aramaic? The most advanced research says He spoke Hebrew. Using one verse to show He spoke Aramaic, when most of the Gospel and Acts say Hebrew, Archeology says Hebrew, Josephus says Hebrew, the early church fathers say Hebrew, Rabbinic literature says Hebrew, the Dead Sea Scrolls say Hebrew, and coins minted in the first century BC say Hebrew. You said, “We know Jesus spoke Aramaic because he spoke it from the cross when he said: "Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani" which is the Aramaic, not Hebrew, version of Psalm 22:1 "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me." Matthew records this in Hebrew (same words). The people in Mark's version are thinking that Jesus is calling Elijah which is only possible if He spoke the words as Matthew records in Hebrew since in Hebrew the term "Eli" can be either "My God" or a shortened from of Eliyahu, Hebrew for Elijah. "Eloi" in Aramaic can only mean, "My God". For Matthew; "lama" (why) is the same word in both languages, and sabak is a verb which is found in Mishnaic Hebrew as well as in Aramaic. Other Hebrew words in the Greek text; levonah, mammom, Wai, rabbi, Beelzebub, corban, Satan, cammom, raca, moreh, bath, kor, zuneem, Boarnerges, Mor, Sheekmah, amen. All archeological finds are 9 to 1 in favor of Hebrew over Aramaic including for those things used by the common man of the day. The Dead Sea Scrolls were in Hebrew 9 to 1 over Aramaic (the common man’s rules for the community were in Hebrew.) … and on and on and on it goes. . . Oh, and a fun one to explain: Jerome says he translated the Latin Vulgate directly from Matthew’s original Hebrew text. Jerome was the most competent Hebrew scholar of all the early church fathers, living in the Land for many years, learning Hebrew from the people who spoke it every day. Then there is the linguistic research which is beyond the scope of this forum I think. MJH |
||||||
250 | What was Caesarea Philippi like? | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139541 | ||
Where was Jesus when He said, "On this Rock"? Caesarea Philippi. Are you aware of what is in Caesarea Philippi? Do you know what happened in that city during the time Jesus walked around? Have you seen the "gates of Hades" which is physically located in Caesarea Philippi? Some geography and history will both enlighten what Jesus said AND blow you away that He had the chutzpah to go there with His disciples. This being said, your explanation is not incorrect, but lacking some powerful pictures that could help make your point stronger. A side note: understanding how Rabbis in the time of Jesus understood the terms “binding” and “loosing,” would very much support some of your points. MJH |
||||||
251 | What was Caesarea Philippi like? | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139551 | ||
I don't think I am making the place too important. I know that can be done, but knowing the place can add to ones understanding. The Gospel writers mentioned Caesarea Philippi for a reason. And it was no mistake that Jesus says, "Gates of Hades" while there. After learning some of the history behind this city and what was going on in front of the "gates of Hades" (or underworld), it gave me a fuller picture of what Jesus was doing. It didn't change the meaning, but helped me see Jesus and His dicsiples better. Just ask, would your pastor still be a pastor if he took the youth of the church to a place like this? For many pastors, this act would have ended their ministry. And then Jesus says, "Who am I?" "On this rock I'll build by church." "The Gates of Hades (you see before you, and all that is associated with it) will not prevail." The contrasts and images are powerful and ADD to the readers understanding. They don't change it, or detract from it. MJH |
||||||
252 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139552 | ||
I've had this discussion too many times on this forum to bother with it much more, but should you interested in correting your thinking :-) I'd be happy to suggest a resource by the leading scholors (not some slub like me and many of us). God Bless, MJH |
||||||
253 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139555 | ||
Oh, one more point. You quote David H. Stern a lot. He believes in a Hebrew speaking Jesus and Hebrew as the common language in the first century Israel too. MJH |
||||||
254 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139560 | ||
I am so very sorry. I should have said, "Shlub." My bad. Please please forgive. :-) You mentioned Norman Willis. I am not familure with his argument. Since you are familure with David Stern and Hebrew roots (judging from your posts) I really think you would like the book "Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus" by David Bivin and Roy Blizzard. If you should read it (short book) let me know. It isn't the only book that makes my point, but it is the book that lays out the argument clearly with all the effidence on all three sides (some say Jesus spoke Greek the majority of the time). Shlubs in the Lord, MJH |
||||||
255 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139568 | ||
If you are willing to read the book "Understanding the Difficult Word of Jesus" by David Bivin and Roy Blizzard then we can continue this portion of the discussion. Every point you make is discussed in the book. Many of your points are true, but do not support your conclusion. Bivin and Blizzard are not a couple of uneducated authors. They have great authority to write on this topic. Once someone on the Forum will be willing to read current scholarship on this topic, I see no point in continuing to debate among ourselves. After all, we are mostly going to quote commentaries, books, and articles we agree with and none of us have the background to speak with authority. If this is the case, then we aught to look to true experts in language, archeology, history and Biblical study. Most people quoted in this forum on this issue are experts in Biblical study, but not in the other areas of study. I would rather actually STUDY the issue and how it impacts our understanding of Jesus and His teachings. I believe that once the true conclusion is reached, it does impact our understanding of Jesus teachings. Others disagree with me, which is fine, but they also never ventured to find out either. In might be noted that some of the major Aramaic proponents have altered their views in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. M. Wilcox writes: “…the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . The non-Biblical texts show us a free, living language, and attest to the fact that in NT times, . . . Hebrew was not confined to Rabbinical circles by any means, but appeared as a normal vehicle of expression.” Note he used the word “fact” and he preciously argued for an Aramaic source and was a student of Matthew Black who himself in his third edition to “An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts” remarks on this issue. Again, current study has overturned the Aramaic idea, but unfortunately it may take a generation of scholars to filter the new understanding down to the common lay scholar. Should you or anyone on the forum be willing to read a short book I’ll gladly continue the discussion and gladly read any book suggested as well. (I LOVE BOOKS) MJH |
||||||
256 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139572 | ||
I am familiar with all but one of these books, although I do not have them all yet. The Chumash is very interesting and it’s great to get a new perspective on the Torah. Friends in my Bible study group have it, but not me. I have the complete Jewish Bible and Jewish New Testament Commentary. I have not heard of Kingdom Relationships. I loved reading the Historical Fiction books, "First Light" and "Second Touch" by the Thoene's. They are very knowledgeable about the times and the characters in these books meet Jesus. They provide insights that are fascinating. They make the Text come alive in many ways. I would recommend them highly. Marvin Wilison’s “Our Father Abraham” is also very good. It is some what like a text book, but I thought it was an easy read. “The Bible as it Was” by James L Kugel is also very interesting showing many ancient interpretations. Similar, I think, to the Chumash, but not in commentary form. Is Kingdom Relationships a good read? I like to add books to my wish list. It’s quite long. MJH |
||||||
257 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139595 | ||
Let me know where on the site you find this disturbing information. And I agree, it sounds disturbing. The site is not totally represetative of Bivin's beliefs which is stated at the end of every article that may appear in the magazine (of which many articles are online). To say I agree 100 percent with any author would not be accurate, but I believe that Bivin and his co-author in the book mentioned earlier make a strong case for the evidance for the Hebrew spoken language. MJH |
||||||
258 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139819 | ||
Tim, I checked out Jerusalem Perspective again, and I can not find what you found. "For instance, the site advocates the view that Judas did not in fact betray Jesus. In response to the many challenges that this statement generated, the remark was made that 'Matthew CHANGED Mark's account' of the story." Help me out here. I'd like to know. I have read many articles, and where I don't subscribe to all of them, I haven't found anything outrages like you have. God bless, MJH |
||||||
259 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139821 | ||
Ahh I found it. You were looking in the Forum. But what is written there is no more a reflection of Bivin than what others on this Forum say is a reflection of you. Are we not all glad of that. The forum is "watched" but not controlled. And, even though I am not discussing Hebrew being spoken by Jesus in the Galalie for reasons earlier stated, don't forget we are talking about an historical issue. An athiet could just as well make the point. But no more on that . . . Thanks for checking the JP site. I appreciate your care. MJH |
||||||
260 | "upon this rock I will build my church" | Matt 16:18 | MJH | 139822 | ||
So you're up late too. I think I am addicted. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [29] >> |