http://searchwarp.com/swa413703.htm
QuoteFirst we have to look at a couple of facts. One fact is that we have a transcript of the Book of Matthew in Hebrew, which predates any manuscripts we have in Koinia Greek.
QuoteWe also have to look at New Testament passages themselves. We see that when Yeshua stopped Shaul (Saul) He didn't speak to him in Greek but rather Hebrew
QuoteDr Robert Lindsey, who was my pastor when I was growing up in Israel, translated the book of Mark from Greek into Hebrew. He discovered something rather interesting. He found that when he read the translation in Hebrew rather then from Greek, it made more sense. It wasn't as disjointed as it was in Greek, rather it began to flow and many of the things that were written even had more meaning to the Hebrew ear.
QuoteEven the Church Fathers attest to this over and over again:
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
QuoteHaving said that, there is overwhelming evidence, both historical and linguistic that shows that the texts were originally written in Hebrew, and also that Hebrew was not a "dead language" (as was thought of for quite some time). A good source of information on the latter is "Biblical Archaeology Review" (BAR) magazine. BAR has had articles in the past few years on digs that have unearthed documents from around the first century written in Hebrew, including legal documents and one woman's personal diary.
http://www.search-the-scriptures.org/hebrew_new_testament.htm
QuoteEven E. W. Bullinger, in his Companion Bible, Appendix 94, makes the statement that "while the language is Greek, the thoughts and idioms are Hebrew." Apostle Paul stated that the New Testament Believers "....are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Yahshua the Messiah Himself being the chief cornerstone;" (Eph. 2:20 KJV).
QuoteSo let's look into the New Testament and ask some pointed questions:
First, what about all the Hellenized (Greek) names found in the New Testament? Examples, Hezekiah is "Ezekias" in Mat. 1:9, and Judah (more correctly Yahudah, as "Judas," Mat. 1:2. Isaiah is "Esias," Elijah is "Elias" in Matthew 11:14; Yahchanan is "John," Jacob is "James," and so on.
Second, why are there untranslated Hebrew/Aramaic words in the New Testament? That seems to be a dead give away all by itself. Here are a few. Most are Hebrew, some are Aramaic. Abba (Father), Rabbi (teacher), hosanna (Oh Save! An exclamation of adoration), Amen (Surely, or so be it), Talitha Cumi (Maid arise), ephphatha (be opened), corban (a dedicated gift), Sabbath, Satan, Mammon, raca, cumin, maranatha, Emmanuel, Eli lama sabachthani, and many others.
Third, even more convincing evidence for a Hebrew New Testament is the plain, clear Hebrew word order found throughout the New Testament. Many sentences have the verb-noun reversal that is common in the Hebrew and other Semitic languages, but not in Greek or English. Scholars have long understood that the grammar of the New Testament is not good Greek, but is excellent Hebrew grammar.
Fourth, in addition to all these, and the main focus of this article, are the many, many Hebrew expressions and idioms we find scattered throughout the New Testament. If the originals had been Greek, then they would have been written with Greek form and expression. But they were not, and translated word for word into Greek, they make no sense at all.
We understand hundreds of American idioms, but when translated into other tongues, they make no sense at all, and would be unintelligible to them.
Let's take a few examples of Hebrew idioms that the Savior used, that are impossible to understand when translated from Hebrew to Greek, then to English, but make perfect sense when translated back to Hebrew, then directly to English:
These are from a very good book on this subject, called, "Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective," by David Bivin and Roy Blissard, Jr.
1). Mat. 5:3, Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven . They say that "theirs" is a classic mistranslation from the Greek, and is retained din all modern English versions. It should be translated "of these" or "of such as these." We cannot possess the Kingdom. It does not belong to us. Rather, Yahshua is describing the kind of people who make up that Kingdom. It is the "poor in Spirit," those who have no righteousness of their own, the meek, those who have overcome their pride and vanity.
2). Luke 23:31, For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry? Makes no sense whatever in Greek or English, but makes perfect sense when retranslated into Hebrew.
Yahshua is referring to the "green tree" and the "dry tree" from Ezekiel's prophecy against Jerusalem and the Temple (Eze. 20:45 to 21:7). The green tree is the righteous and the dry tree is the wicked. All will be burned up because of the intensity of the fire He will kindle.
So Yahshua is saying, If you knew what is coming, you would not mourn for me, you would mourn for yourselves. If they do this to Me (the righteous), what will they do to you (the wicked)? The "in" should be "do to." This was a reference to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem , and the suffering and killing of many people, which took place in 69-70 CE.
3). Mat. 11:12, From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force." Have you ever wondered about this seeming contradiction? Why would the meek, the passive, the "poor in spirit," resort to violence to take the Kingdom, and why would YHWH allow it? This Scripture as written, as we have it, does not agree with the rest of Yahshua's teachings, does it?
So what is the key to understand this puzzle? Yahshua is making a reference to a well-known rabbinic interpretation of Micah 2:12-13, that reads like this:
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 ("breaker" in the KJV, poretz in Hebrew) goes through before them. Then they break out, passing through the gate, they leave by it. Their king passes through before them, YHWH at their head.
This is a picture of a shepherd out in the field, penning his sheep up for the night. He makes a sheepfold for them by throwing up a makeshift rock fence against the side of a hill. The next morning, he lets the sheep out by making a "breach" in the fence, and the sheep are eager and impatient to get out after being penned up all night. So they shove and push a bit to get out into the green pasture.
So now we see what Yahshua is saying – the Kingdom of Heaven is breaking forth, NOT suffering violence, and every person in it is breaking forth or breaking out INTO it, NOT "the violent take it by force."
Let's compare Luke 16:16, the parallel verse (Luke 16:16 KJV) "The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of YHWH is preached, and every man presseth into it."
The authors say: "Two tremendous things are happening at the same time: the Kingdom is bursting forth into the world like water from a broken dam, and individuals within the Kingdom are finding liberty and freedom."
4). Luke 12:49-50, "I am come to send fire on the earth, and what will I, if it be already kindled? But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how I am straitened till it be accomplished!"
Many Christians think this refers to the baptism of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. John the Baptist prophesied that the One to come would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mat. 3:11, "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and with fire":).
They think this happened on Pentecost, that the "tongues like as of fire" fulfilled this prophecy. But John clarified what he meant in the very next verse (Mat 3:12, "Whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.") Malachi 4:1-3 will fulfill this prophecy when it comes to pass, at the end of the age.
And what did Yahshua mean by "...how I am straitened till it be accomplished!"? These verses in Luke are an example of Hebrew poetry, and He meant, "how distressed I am till it is over," referring to the destruction of the "chaff" by fire. The chaff are those who refuse to repent.
5). Matthew 16:19, Whatsoever thou shalt bind (or loose) on earth shall be bound (or loosed) in heaven. In rabbinic literature, these two words in Hebrew, by Yahshua's time, had come to mean "forbid" and "permit." The rabbis were called upon often to interpret Scriptural commands. For example, the Law forbids work on Sabbaths, but does not define "work." So they were called upon to define what they could or could not do. They "bound" or prohibited certain activities, and "loosed" or allowed other activities. Yahshua was transferring this authority to Peter and His other disciples, to make decisions or judgments about how to keep the law more perfectly, NOT to make laws, or change laws. We find a good example of this being done in Acts 15, where the disciples bound (forbade) certain things, and loosed (permitted) others.
6). Matthew 5:20, "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."
The Hebrew word for "righteousness" is "tsedakah" and by Yahshua's time had come to have a secondary meaning, "almsgiving," or charity. Help to the poor. So Yahshua was saying that if your concern for the poor is not greater than that of the Pharisees, you will not be a disciple of His. Many think this verse belongs just before Mat. 6:1, where Yahshua is talking about giving alms, helping the poor.
7). Matthew 5:17-18, Destroy and fulfill are rabbinic argumentation methods. When one rabbi interpreted a Scripture and another disagreed, he would say, "You are destroying the Law!" Fulfilling the Law was simply interpreting it correctly. Someone had apparently accused Yahshua of misinterpreting a certain Scripture, and He was responding as a rabbi would. No one thought He had come to actually destroy the Law!
8). Luke 6:22, "Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast your name out as evil, for the Son of Man's sake." This is a Hebrew idiom that means "defame you" or malign you, or slander you. It is translated in the NRSV as "defame you."
9). Luke 9:44, "Lay these sayings in your ears" is a Hebrew idiom that means "Listen carefully and remember well, for this is very important."
10). Luke 9:51, "He set his face to go," is a Hebrew idiom found in scores of idioms using "face," such as "Hagar fled from the face of Sarai," Jacob from the face of Esau, Moses from the face of Pharaoh, Moses hid his face in fear, Yahweh sometimes hides His face in anger, Yahweh sets His face against idolators, and He can make His face to shine upon us. It simply means to turn in the direction of, or turn away from, take notice of, etc. In the verse cited above, it means "He prepared to leave."
11). Mat. 6:22-23, Good eye, bad eye – "The light of the body is the eye: therefore if thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!"
This is a Hebrew idiom that has confused all the translators. It simply means that if you have a "single" or good eye, you are generous; whereas if you have an evil eye, or bad eye, you are stingy.
Notice that several of these idioms that Yahshua used in His teaching, involves giving: alms, charity, helping the less blessed among us. Many say, "Well, with government aid, we don't need to help – we pay our taxes and that is our charity, our alms." We had better get over that. YHWH hates stingy people, who have the ability to help others and won't.
So, to sum up, when all factors are considered, the evidence seems overwhelming in favor of the New Testament having been first written in Hebrew/Aramaic, and later translated into Greek, in a word-for-word format. This method of translation would make it extremely difficult to ascertain the correct meaning intended by the speaker or writer. Obviously, later on, the originals were lost, as were the original Greek translations. So all that is left are copies of copies. However, there are at least two Hebrew versions of Matthew's Gospel, the Shem Tob and the Du Tillet.
This subject is in the process of on-going discovery, and more confirmation may be forthcoming in the future. In the meantime, be very skeptical of claims for an "inspired Greek New Testament." (By Frank Brown) ~
http://www.myspace.com/sandiegocutie/blog/470012095
QuoteThe first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37-c.100 C.E.) testifies to the fact that Hebrew was the language of first century Jews. Moreover, he testifies that Hebrew, and not Greek, was the language of his place and time. Josephus gives us the only first hand account of the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. According to Josephus, the Romans had to have him translate the call to the Jews to surrender into "their own language" (Wars 5:9:2) .
QuoteThus, Josephus makes it clear that first century Jews could not even speak or understand Greek, but spoke "their own language."
QuoteThe Dead Sea Scrolls consist of over 40,000 fragments of more than 500 scrolls dating from 250 B.C.E . to 70 C.E.. Theses Scrolls are primarily in Hebrew and Aramaic. A large number of the "secular scrolls" (those which are not Bible manuscripts) are in Hebrew.
http://www.modestapparelchristianclothinglydiaofpurpledressescustomsewing.com/new_testament_written_in_Hebrew.htm
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/topics/new-testament-was-orginally?commentId=1451550%3AComment%3A1344965&xg_source=activity
http://www.remnantofyhwh.com/Hebrew%20The%20Purel%20Language.htm
Etc.
Personally I would find it logical. Hebrew also has much more depth to hide little gems.
If true, then aionios as a translated word from hebrew meaning everlasting or eternal in the absolute sense is even less likely than it is now.
Very true Paul.
Then the foundation of ET gets even weaker as it is right now. Same for ED I think.
It would also explain the (little) problem I have with Hades.
Strictly speaking Hades is not the grave. Hades is the god of the underworld
So what's that pagan concept doing in the Bible?
a] Jesus was ridiculing Greek mythology.
b] Jesus agrees the god Hades exists but that Father will defeat the god named Hades.
c] Jesus never spoke the word Hades. He only used the Hebrew sheol.
I fear there are almost no original Hebrew manuscripts left to translate from. I really would like to see a NT translated from that source.
That is a wonderful topic to explore WW, thank you for bringing it up!
Quote3). Mat. 11:12, From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force." Have you ever wondered about this seeming contradiction? Why would the meek, the passive, the "poor in spirit," resort to violence to take the Kingdom, and why would YHWH allow it? This Scripture as written, as we have it, does not agree with the rest of Yahshua's teachings, does it?
So what is the key to understand this puzzle? Yahshua is making a reference to a well-known rabbinic interpretation of Micah 2:12-13, that reads like this:
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 ("breaker" in the KJV, poretz in Hebrew) goes through before them. Then they break out, passing through the gate, they leave by it. Their king passes through before them, YHWH at their head.
This is a picture of a shepherd out in the field, penning his sheep up for the night. He makes a sheepfold for them by throwing up a makeshift rock fence against the side of a hill. The next morning, he lets the sheep out by making a "breach" in the fence, and the sheep are eager and impatient to get out after being penned up all night. So they shove and push a bit to get out into the green pasture.
So now we see what Yahshua is saying – the Kingdom of Heaven is breaking forth, NOT suffering violence, and every person in it is breaking forth or breaking out INTO it, NOT "the violent take it by force."
That saying by Jesus was something I always struggled with..makes so much sense now!
Interesting counter-argument...there's always one.
QuoteStanley,
You placed an article out in the public domain- making very wild claims about a Hebrew NT; while there is absolutely no evidence of anything remotely similar to such a manuscript. The closest you can get is the Pe$%&*@$%&ta, which is an aramaic translation done in the late 2nd to 3rd century. There are over 5000 Greek manuscripts recovered- the earliest so far is a fragment called P52 (Papyrii 52) which is dated conservatively to the year 125 AD. Moreover, there is a disputed fragment of Mark 6 called 7Q5 which is dated between 30 and 50 AD!
Your position is not only archeologically bankrupt, but is scripturally destitute. Your conclusion rests upon the scriptural writers being jewish, and that the language they use is influenced by their hebrew culture. You then conclude that they must have written in hebrew. (!)
What amazes me, is how you degrade and insult the early church fathers- and then you go grovelling back at their feet to try and prove that they were right in positing that Matthew wrote a Hewbrew gospel before the Greek. Whats more, once you think youve proven that Matthew was written in Hebrew; you conclude that therefore the entire NT was originally written in Hebrew! Unfortunately, these days any old quack with an axe to grind and a goat-herd to shepherd can broadcast his false and baseless doctrine to the world. Your scholarship is reprobate, and your scripture twisting is an abomination.
My point is that you made a public decleration; but when your ideas were weighed and found wanting- you slinked off into the shadows from where you came... This is nothing new from the Messianic Movements. Ive spoken to atleast 3 people who behaved similarly- ungodly behaviour, lots of anti-christian bias; but no arguments with any substance to prove their theories. Im sure there are many sincere believers in the Messianic realm- too bad their 'rabbis' are all gainsayers. I pray earnestly that the One True God will remove their messianic tumours so that they may grow in His life-giving Spirit.
Perhaps you should stick to your website, Stanley- there you can have a monologue and your fantasies will never be challenged. Avoid the embarrassment of having your legs cut out from under you.
Once again:
Luke-Acts is a single account, written to a gentile Theophilus (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1-2). Therefore, Luke and Acts were written in Greek, not Hebrew. Ive read your other circular arguments where you try to suggest that Luke was a jew- your most coherent reason was because the NT was written by Jews- in the jewish tongue! The circularity in your system is cancerous.
I told you in my first post how John adopted a Greek method of time-keeping rather than the jewish one... This proves his audience was primarily gentile (Compare John 19:14 to Matt 27:45).
Mark was a companion with Paul and Barnabas on their gentile church-planting missions. His gospel was for the gentile converts. Want proof? Chapter 5:41. Here Mark tells how Jesus spoke in Hebrew; but then he goes on to translate what that hebrew phrase meant in Greek. Why would Mark translate a Hebrew phrase if his audience were hebrews? This proves that the text was written in Greek, to greek speaking people (including the jews- since they spoke Greek as well).
If you could theoretically respond to these alone- I would bury you in Scriptural proof that the epistles were likewise written in Greek (even though its theoretically possible that Hebrews and perhaps James were TRANSLATED into Hebrew later) Your thesis is dead.
Could the Jews speak Greek? Lets see... You respect Alfred Edersheim, dont you Stanley? Well, he says:
Pg. 17. "When we turn from the Jewish 'dispersion' in the East to that in the West, we seem to breathe quite a different atmosphere. ... These Jews of the West are known by the term "Hellenists" from ellhniqein, to conform to the language and manners of the Greeks."
Pg. 22 "Why, this sway extended even into Palistine itself, and was felt in the innermost circle of the most exclusive Rabbinism. We are not here referring to the fact that the very language spoken in Palestine came to be very largely charged with Greek, and even Latin, words Hebraised, since this is easily accounted for by the new circumstances, and the necessities of intercourse with the dominant or resident foreigners." --The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah
How about some scriptural proof?
See Acts 2:5-11;
Here, the dispersed jews are astounded when they all hear the men speaking in their own languages. In verse 9 they list all the areas of jews whose languages are being spoken- but in this verse "Judea" is mentioned as ANOTHER language- one thats part of the list, and is NOT the language with which these guys were talking about the miracle. Greek was not on the list- but the Judean tongue WAS. This means that the dispersed Jews were NOT speaking Hebrew or aramaic to oneanother when discussing the miracle- but instead they were speaking Greek; since they distinguished the Judean tongue from themselves. The Diasporic jews communicated with eachother in Greek. It was the language of commerce; and the language of the authorities. Alexander practically spread it across the entire known world.
Moreover, if Hebrew was a "holy language" (?!); how come it evolves over time? (ex. Joshua becomes Jeshua- Ex33:11-Neh8:17).
There so much more, but I dont want to flood the post. You said the burden of proof was on me; well- Ive answered your call, and demolished your "arguments". Now the burden of proof is on YOU to descredit my attack. But Im not sure you are able to stand at this point- you would atleast have to get over your hatred of christians (which I have probably now made worse), and deal with my arguments- but thats not your style.
Theres nothing left for you, Stanley. Your enemies have sacked your city, and taken captive your women- because you dont give God the glory; and His truth- by submitting to His Words. Instead you sell your own false ideas, cause division, and accuse all challengers of the same foul behaviour that you yourself exibit. Your God has used your enemy to point you in the right direction.
In conclusion, many christians study and teach Hebrew and Greek to thousands of christians across the world; Because we believe we can enrich our understanding of the scriptures by mastering the original languages they were written in. There is no scriptural reason to suggest that we should become 'outward jews' as a means to better understand the Word; or to improve ourselves in ANY way. In fact, its just the opposite- usually people who suggest this are called 'judaizers'.
You dont believe the NT was written in Hebrew because of evidence- as Ive shown you. You believe it because you cannot accept it any way otherwise- you would rather look like a jew, because you blindly assume that God is a respector of language, culture, and people group- even with all the scriptural evidence to the contrary. The New Testament as it stands, condemns all of your practises; thats why you are forced to believe the bible is a pagan corruption- your blinding hatred of greek and gentiles prevents you from seen that the TRUE scriptures were written in Greek. Ps12:6-7: God says that He preserves His Word- but YOU say He is powerless to do so, powerless to preserve the real Hebrew texts. They dont exist Stanley, you're chasing castles in the sky.
Your doctrines lead to lawlessness (Torah-lessness)- because you conveniently choose those sections of Torah you wish to keep; and the rest throw in the "fulfilled in Christ" trashcan. You dont wish to submit to all of His commandments, instead you call them hellenistic corruption.
Your doctrines also lead to TRUE anti-semitism. You redefine the word "anti-semetic" so that you can call all Christians who submit to the scriptures Anti-Semites. But it is you who is anti-semitic, because you put on the skin of an ethnic jew, and then parade around in their folds as if you were one of them- and you try to draw them away after a different God, named Yeshua- who does not fit in their rebellious system. The JewsForJudaism site is an example of the REAL "ethnic jews" of today- and they absolutely dispise you, Stanley. They call you Messianic guys Christians! Your movement should escape from its perpetual identity-crisis.
You know this, and step by step you are driven to be more consistent with your beliefs. And that train will consistently take you straight into the anti-christ apostate judaism- where you seem to feel comfortable.
Quote from: Quaesitor on December 12, 2010, 06:22:12 PMInteresting counter-argument...there's always one.
I would be suprised if there wasn't one....
About the timekeeping I agree. But stricktly speaking that doesn't mean it wasn't written Hebrew.
There are very early Hebrew manuscripts found too. LXX is also a Greek translation of the Hebrew. So our NT could be another LXX.
Christians were hunted down by the Romans in the early days. I think that minimized the number of copies (in any language)
Then Constantine made it the state religion. Roman and Greek religion was very similar. Different names but more or less the same story.
I wouldn't be suprised that the Hebrew copies where destroyed.
I can't verify this but it's very interesting. An argument I put a lot of weight in:
QuoteDr Robert Lindsey, who was my pastor when I was growing up in Israel, translated the book of Mark from Greek into Hebrew. He discovered something rather interesting. He found that when he read the translation in Hebrew rather then from Greek, it made more sense. It wasn't as disjointed as it was in Greek, rather it began to flow and many of the things that were written even had more meaning to the Hebrew ear.
Papias (150-170 C.E.) Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (quoted by Eusebius Eccl. Hist. 3:39)
==> So Matthew wrote the original in Hebrew and then later translated it (into Greek)
Ireneus (170 C.E.) Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Irenaeus; Against Heresies 3:1)
==> What was the dialect of the Hebrews?
Origen (c. 210 C.E.) The first [Gospel] is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (quoted by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 6:25)
==> This sounds like they knew the originals where in Hebrew but they no longer use/have them....?
Eusebius (c. 315 C.E.) Matthew also, having
first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:24)
Epiphanius (370 C.E.) They [the Nazarenes] have the Gospel according to Matthew
quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is certainly still preserved among them as it was first written, in Hebrew letters. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29:9:4)
==> The Nazrenes only had a large part of Matthew. That sounds a bit like only Matthew was ever in Hebrew but I'm sure they likely would have given their life to get the whole NT in Hebrew if they felt is was superior. But it's also unlikely if Matthew was the only Hebrew book they accidently lost part of it. There is a gap in history around that time. Lot's of material (also secular) was lost when libraries where burned down in wars.
Jerome (382 C.E.) "Matthew, who is also Levi, and from a tax collector came to be an emissary first of all evangelists
composed a Gospel of Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters, for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who translated it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Furthermore, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the
library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected. I also was allowed by the Nazarenes who use this volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In which is to be remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the testimonies
==> Strange quote. First is sounds like Matthew was written (composed) in Hebrew but a bit later it sounds like it was translated after the Greek was finished because Hebrew people could not read Greek.
==> Again only Matthew is mentioned. Why always Matthew and not the others?
http://www.remnantofyhwh.com/Was%20the%20New%20Testament%20Originally%20Greek.htm
QuoteEvery book written in the New Testament was written by Israelites whose native language was Hebrew (with the possible exception of Luke). This raises the question, were any of the 27 New Testament books first penned in Greek? Some critics declare that in spite of the preponderance of Israelite authors, the entirety of the New Testament was written in the Greek language.
A number of competent scholars, however, contend that the New Testament was first written in Hebrew (or Aramaic, a sister language), basing their assertion on valid grounds.
"The writers were Hebrews; and thus, while the language is Greek, the thoughts and idioms are Hebrew
QuoteAt the time of the Messiah, Koine Greek language was the international language. The Hebrew Old Testament had already been translated into Greek, known as the "Septuagint," from the Latin Septuaginta meaning "70" and often represented by the Roman numerals LXX. It is said that 72 Jewish translators sent from Jerusalem produced the version for Ptolemy II for his library in Alexandria, Egypt, in the third century BCE.
John (Yahchanan) 19:19-20 reveals that Hebrew, Latin, and Greek were the languages spoken in Palestine at the time the Savior was impaled. Not all understood Greek, Latin, or Hebrew. When the Messiah was teaching His disciples on this earth, the Koine Greek continued as the international language, but was relatively unknown or not understood in the rural towns nor by the Apostles, according to French archaeologist Ernest Renan.
QuoteCenturies of Christianity According to a New Source.
"The break between "Gentile Catholicsim" and "Jewish Christianity" came when the "al-Rum" [Roman or Byzantine Christians] complained to the Roman governors about the Jews. They were told by the Roman rulers that if they would separate themselves, praying as the Romans do (while facing east), eating things Romans eat, regarding as permissible such as Romans do, then the Romans would extend special favor to the Gentile Christian body, according to Pines.
When the Gentile Catholics reported this offer to their fellow companions [Hebrew Christians], they were rebuffed. The Romans should have no part in determining the religion of the Messiah, contended the Hebrew Christians. They refused to surrender their New Testaments, but gathered them and fled. The Gentile Catholics reported this to the Romans, who accordingly made a search for them, capturing some who were burned or killed, page 15.
QuoteAuthor Pines discusses how the Gentile Catholics took counsel to replace the New Testament Evangel, seeing that the true and original was lost to them. They constructed their own. A great part of what was contained in the original was missing in their version. Acquaintances among the Gentile Christians were those who remembered much of the true Evangel, but because they were attempting to establish a following, the Gentile Catholics refrained from communicating with them. Quoting from author Pines concerning the Gentile Christians:
"Then there is not among these a Gospel written in the language of [Messiah], which was spoken by Him and His companions, namely the Hebrew language, which is that of Abraham, the Friend of [YHWH] and of the other prophets, the language which was spoken by them and in which the Books of [YHWH] were revealed to them and to the other Children of Israel, and which [YHWH] addressed them. They have abandoned this language.
"Thus there is no Christian among them who in observing a religious obligation recites these Gospels in the Hebrew language: he does not do so out of ruse using a stratagem, in order to avoid public shame," pp. 16-17.
Pines goes on to show the reason they declined to use the Hebrew language was that "the people of the Book" who spoke Hebrew quickly recognized the error and deception of the Gentiles Catholic's gospel, such as quotations from counterfeit authorities. Thus, they employed a language other than Hebrew so the men of knowledge would not grasp their teaching.
Pines notes the Gentile Catholics, "Accordingly, they gave up Hebrew and took up numerous other languages which had not been spoken by [Messiah] and His companions," page 17, ibid.
Quote"...Jewish Christian authors...also deplored the fact that the Christians...no longer read the Gospels in Hebrew, the language of [Yahsha], and all the prophets. Quite clearly, these Jewish Christians believed that they preserved and continued (perhaps clandestinely) the traditions of the first not yet corrupted Christian community of Jerusalem founded by the immediate disciples of [Yahsha] who professed His religion, i.e....observed the Mosaic Commandments," page 65.
Pines goes on to recount how those denouncing the Hebrew Evangel were triumphant in their use of foreign languages to convert many nations. This gave them the opportunity to bypass the Hebrew Scriptures who were numerous among the Jews. Thus, the Hebrew language and the Old Testament were set aside and Israelite laws ignored as more and more pagans took up New Testament "Christianity."
When Catholicsim became the state religion of Rome, the position of the Hebrew Christians worsened. They were the minority, and their beliefs became the heresy of the Romanized Christian world. The Hebrew Christians found it easier to gather with the Jews at the synagogue (as did Paul), for both groups observed the Old Testament laws. However, paganism was baptized by the church and had become the state religion.
If we can rely upon Pines' work, it is quite understandable that when Titus and his Roman legions destroyed Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E., and Hadrian put down the revolt of Bar Kochba in 135 C.E., that the Jews became fair game because of their insurrection. Along with the Jews, however, were the converts to the Messiah who continued to worship in the synagogue and Temple rather than take up the pagan celebrations of Gentile Catholicsim.
QuoteAngry, Hadrian was determined to destroy Jerusalem, vowing there would never be a city there. The Hebrew Scriptures had been misinterpreted by the Jews, assuming Ezekiel was referring to Rome as the enemy that would be overcome. Hebrew Scriptures were blamed for the Jewish insurrection. The Romans took vengeance upon the Jews, not recognizing converts to the Messiah. Unaware of a Hebrew New Testament, the Romans destroyed all Hebrew texts, including Hebrew scrolls of the Hebrew-Christian New Testament as well. Rome did not differentiate between Old and New Testament Hebrew writings nor between Jews and Hebrew Christians.
Later came a division between the religion of the Jews and the New Testament believers in the Messiah. Not only were the Romans responsible for eradicating many Hebrew New Testaments, but the Jews themselves took part in such activity.
Please read the whole article. To summarize: There where many Hebrew copies but the Romans destroyed most of them.
http://www.hebrewnewtestament.com/samples.htm
ARAMAIC ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT
Check out the few sample pages...
$64 from this site
$47 from Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Aramaic-English-Testament-Hebrew-Lettering/dp/1934916269/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1292180062&sr=8-1)
Reviews (http://www.amazon.com/Aramaic-English-Testament-Hebrew-Lettering/product-reviews/1934916269/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1)
http://aramaicnt.com/
Matthew 25:46 sound very much like KJV
http://www.archive.org/details/newtestamentorb00murdgoog
Free and downloadable in many formats: http://ia600307.us.archive.org/26/items/newtestamentorb00murdgoog/
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on December 12, 2010, 04:23:17 PM
If true, then aionios as a translated word from hebrew meaning everlasting or eternal in the absolute sense is even less likely than it is now.
Exactly true- its all about "olam", a word that was used with great variety of meaning, because it was modified by the subject it was combined with.
So, to look to Plato or Aristotle for meaning regarding aion/aionios is futile, since their thoughts to not follow in the chain of language and thought our scriptures originate from, thousands of years before them.
What do ya kno! Looks like we have to interpret the scriptures from the scriptures. Well, Hallelujah! What a surprise!
I stumbled on this on the net and it presents some conclusions I agree with (which don't make em tru of course)
"The Hebrew word olam means in the far distance. When looking off in the far distance it is difficult to make out any details and what is beyond that horizon cannot be seen. This concept is the olam. The word olam is also used for time for the distant past or the distant future as a time that is difficult to know or perceive. This word is frequently translated as eternity or forever but in the English language it is misunderstood to mean a continual span of time that never ends. In the Hebrew mind it is simply what is at or beyond the horizon, a very distant time. A common phrase in the Hebrew is "l'olam va'ed" and is usually translated as "forever and ever" but in the Hebrew it means "to the distant horizon and again" meaning "a very distant time and even further" and is used to express the idea of a very ancient or future time"(Jeff A. Benner).
I have also seen that "olam" is used in relation to time(aion) and world(kosmos), so that it sometimes refers to an unkown or variable time, and sometimes refers to a world beyond the horizon, or the "other world", and is often in the OT used simply as "world". Hence, the reason we have "aion" sometimes rendered "age" and sometimes rendered "world" in the KJV and others- is that "olam" was the original Hebrew word in both usages and was able to fit both contexts in Hebrew.
:cloud9: The Lord told me about 18 years ago, that the church (which bases it's doctrines on the book) had become Helenized. If the church is Helenized, it's because the book has been Helenized. I didn't even know what the word meant, at the time; I had to look it up. Then I understood why He had had me from the beginning, "find" the words of the NT in the Hebrew meanings. And my eyes began to be opened to the OT in the NT and the NT in the OT. Let's look at something in the Hebrew bible......
Nehemiah 8:6 'Ezra blessed ADONAI, the great God; and all the people answered, "Amen! Amen!" as they lifted up their hands, bowed their heads and fell prostrate before ADONAI with their faces to the ground. 7 The L'vi'im Yeshua, Bani, Sherevyah, Yamin, 'Akuv, Shabtai, Hodiyah, Ma'aseiyah, K'lita, 'Azaryah, Yozavad, Hanan and P'layah explained the Torah to the people, while the people remained in their places. 8 They read clearly from the scroll, in the Torah of God, translated it, and enabled them to understand the sense of what was being read.
What was being read above, was out of Deuteronomy pertaining to the feast of Tabernacles. The root word of Torah, comes from a word meaning "to teach", and so it means, "teaching," "doctrine," or "instruction, ie. what Christendom is calling the "Word" from the Greek "logos", which to them for the most part, is considered the whole book, or if they contemplate Torah at all, it's only understood to be the first LITERAL NATURAL, 5 books of the OT, given to Moses at Mt. Sinai.
Now if you understand that the Torah, which is perfect/complete as the modern day Bible codes have proven, and that the language itself is "mystical" in that it is a "house or vehicle" to "carry" the Spirit, and a writing from which all others emanate from like rays from the sun, and is also what Christendom is calling the "Word", then let's take that thought further but "in reverse".......
In the beginning was the TORAH, and the TORAH was with God, and the TORAH was God......
The Torah is God's wisdom, will, and innermost desires, and in the case of the man Jesus Christ or Yahshua HaMachiach, "the Anointed One that saves", is the Torah (invisible) made flesh (visible). It is His SOUL. And Jesus was the Torah made flesh.....
That the Torah pre-existed in/as the heart of God, and was unveiled to His creation in the beginning, is shown by Adam's sons knowing to present sacrifices, which Adam, the first priest of God, would have shown them. Noah was told to take clean and unclean animals into the ark, WAY before Moses received the commandment to write the revelation of the full Torah, down. Abraham knew to give tithes to Melchisedek, again, before the Torah was commanded to be written down by Moses on Sinai.
Again, the Torah is not mere words on a page, but the blueprint of the TRUE, a vehicle or house, for that which is Spiritual and invisible. Jesus and the disciples quoted from 24 books of the OT = building upon revelations from the beginning, like rays of the sun coming from the one source of light. My :2c: Blessings.....
Fantastic Card.
I'm fascinated by what I'm hearing today!
Very cool.... That part about Torah as the soul of Christ....beautiful.
Lo it is written in the volume of the book of me.... I COME TO DO THY WILL O GOD!
Zeal for Thine house CONSUMES ME!
You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity,therefore God, even your God with the oil of gladness above all your fellows
O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.
(Psa 119:97-100)
:cloud9: @ Eaglesway.....technically both are true, but what I was pointing out is that Christ (means anointing or anointed one) which is Spirit, is the soul of God, the invisible Torah. A son and his father are not one in the flesh, as a mother and her son are in the womb, EXCEPT as the SEED is in the father's loins before it ever enters the mother's womb.
This is why our mother is as wisdom and she has been hidden in the Father's heart, lest she be put to an open shame by those that despise wisdom. Those that despise wisdom are breaking the first commandment with promise, ie. that our days might be long upon the earth. This is also why it was said that a man shall leave FATHER AND MOTHER and cleave unto His wife. Who was Adam's mother that he had to leave? And who was Christ's (speaking of the heavenly Christ, not the man Jesus), that He had to leave to cleave unto the church?
This is why Joseph, Mary's husband, was righteous by thinking to put Mary away, lest she be put to an open shame. God's Seed, Christ, was both in His loins, AND in the womb of the morning (wisdom, New Jerusalem which is above), ie. already in existance before He manifested Him as Jesus, the son of man.
This is how He was the Torah made flesh or natural, and why it says, Thy Word (TORAH) is Truth, and why it says when the Spirit of Truth (TORAH) shall come unto you.......the Spirit of Truth is God's Spirit, which is Christ,/anointing or anointed one (Seed), which is the Torah "UN-scrolled".
When the Word (TORAH) made flesh, was transfiigured on the mount, the "scroll" was opened and "it" was "read" ie. HEARD by the disciples who heard GOD'S VOICE, witnessing that this is the true TORAH. In the same principle, that "scroll" is opened and "read", when the "heavens" (our carnal minds) are rent (ROLLED BACK like a curtain/veil), and we "HEAR".
It's the returning to the garden when Adam walked with God in the cool (runs into meaning of His breath) of the day. Man shall not live (or have Christ/anointed life) by bread (scroll/letter) alone but every word (spirit-breathed Torah) that proceeds from the mouth of the Father. The Father is a Spirit, and the word that came from His mouth, is Spirit. Blessings......
QuoteThis is why our mother is as wisdom and she has been hidden in the Father's heart, lest she be put to an open shame by those that despise wisdom. Those that despise wisdom are breaking the first commandment with promise, ie. that our days might be long upon the earth. This is also why it was said that a man shall leave FATHER AND MOTHER and cling unto His wife. Who was Adam's mother that he had to leave? And who was Christ's (speaking of the heavenly Christ, not the man Jesus), that He had to leave to cling unto the church?
Awesome!
I'm seeing deeper that I ever saw before!
:cloud9: I'm glad.......sorry though, I know that word there is "cleave" not "cling"...... :mblush: LOL
the Day is definitely cool, and it is His breath that makes it so, and I catch your drift :thumbsup:
The authors make a very convincing case that the Synoptic Gospels (Mathew, Mark and Luke) were based on a lost Hebrew text. The translation into Greek was not idiomatic but literal and that is why many of the words of Jesus do not seem to make sense. These Gospels are full of Hebrew idioms and expressions that were taken literally into the Greek and subsequent translations of other languages. Most of the idioms that Jesus used can be understood only in a Hebrew context. The assumption that the entire New Testament was originally communicated in Aramaic has led to significant misunderstandings on the part of both scholars and laypersons.
Firstly, the authors examine the Aramaic and Greek theories. Contrary to the consensus, it now appears that Hebrew was very much alive as a spoken language at the time of Jesus. The Dead Sea Scrolls also point in this direction. As proof, the authors cite scholars like M H Segal, Matthew Black and Max Wilcox. Many words in the Greek versions are not just poor Greek but actually meaningless Greek, because of the literal translation. The undertext reveals a Hebrew original.
Recent linguistic research confirms that Hebrew was the spoken language of Israel at the time of Christ. This knowledge is enabling scholars to correct the numerous mistranslations in the English text, which was translated from the Greek. Some of the scholars quoted are Jehoshua M Grintz, David Flusser, Moshe Bar-Asher, Pinhas Lapide, Harris Birkeland, William Sanford LaSor, Frank Cross and Abbe J T Milik.
Chapter 4 explores the extra-biblical evidence for Hebrew in the writings of Josephus and the Anti-Nicene Fathers, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, on coins and inscriptions and in Rabbinic literature. The case for Hebrew is overwhelming.
But the most convincing indication of the Hebrew origin of these three Gospels can be found in the text itself. The Hebrew undertext is revealed in the sentence structure and the many literalisms and idioms that are peculiar to Hebrew. The authors provide many examples in which confusing passages immediately become clear when translated back into Hebrew.
Chapter 6 considers the theological error due to mistranslation. Unfortunately there are passages of which the mistranslation has caused significant error and unnecessary theological controversies. Thus, the expression Kingdom of Heaven primarily means the community of believers, not the future kingdom. It also becomes clear that Jesus did indeed claim to be the Saviour, by inter alia referring to himself as the "Green Tree", a messianic title. The book also dispels other myths like the ones about pacifism, martyrdom and giving without discernment.
In the Appendix, David Bivin deals with many particular texts in detail, including Matt 5:3, Luke 23:31, Matt 11:12, Luke 12:49 - 50, Matt 16:19, Matt 5:20, Matt 5:17 & 18 (about the iota and tittle). It is quite disturbing to think that for almost two millennia, believers did not read the true meaning that Jesus intended. How strange that this should only have come to light in the last century, and that most modern translations of the Bible still contain the incorrect and confusing translations!
Black and white photographs and illustrations enhance the text throughout. The book concludes with a bibliography and biographical information on the authors. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus is a compelling read, but too short. What it reveals has enormous implications for Christianity. Another book that sheds light on this matter is Yeshua: A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church, by Dr Ron Moseley.
A large portion of the texts we have today from around the time of the first century were discovered during my lifetime. The authors make a strong, well-supported case, based on many of these writings of the era, that the common spoken language in Israel at the time (at the very least, for religions discussions and teachings) was Hebrew, not Aramaic, and especially not Greek. They make the further case that the language of the synoptic gospels, especially the sayings attributed to Jesus, have a linguistic structure, vocabulary, and idiomatic expression that make them much more likely to be a (perhaps hasty) translation of Hebrew into Greek, rather than something originally written in Greek. They cite several specific examples where this understanding lets some otherwise puzzling passages make sense. Other scholars have carried this idea further by comparing these passages with other rabbinic writings and teachings of the day.
/EDIT #1 The above review was from this (http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Difficult-Words-Jesus-Perspective/dp/156043550X/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top) book.
EDIT #2 I wonder if there are already translations that take advantage of this recent research. (Recent is before May 2005)
:cloud9: :thumbsup:
:cloud9: This is only SLIGHTLY :hijacked: off topic WW, so don't stone me, but since we're discussing things Jewish on this thread......I was reading an article this morning about why the Jews (for one) don't believe God did anything to disannul Torah which Christendom basically teaches (I don't believe He did either, He just internalized it into spiritually apprehended concepts). Found it interesting that they consider Christianity a "breakaway sect" from Judaism, same as the Sadducees. Anyway, they site as the main reason, they don't believe it is because God spoke to 3 million Jews at Mt. Sinai.
They didn't go up to see Him face to face as Moses did, but they heard Him speak, and they said He gave Moses Torah, not just the 10 words (commandments), which makes perfect sense. Moses was the only one allowed to retain all of it so He could write it, which also makes perfect sense spiritually. So they reasoned that if He changed anything He would not have told one or two men as with other religions, but that He would have spoken to many.
We know He did at the day of Pentecost, the 3000. I knew the 3000 lined up with the 3000 He slew in one day in the OT, but something about that number struck me, in relation to the 3 million. Then it hit me: 3000 X 10 = 30,000 X 10 = 300,000 X 10 = 3,000,000!
What is astonishing about that, is that 10 X 10 X 10 = 1000, the dimensions of the Holy of Holies, which is as a perfect cube, and represents, among other things: the 7th day, the Day of the Lord, the day of our rest, our Sabbath, Christ perfected, the Kingdom of God, the 3rd 1000-year-day from Christ.
Additionally, a tithe of 3000 is 300. If you multiply that tithe 300 X 1000 it equals the 3,000,000 again. Just a little "sacred mathematics" :winkgrin: I saw.......Blessings.....
Quote from: Cardinal on December 13, 2010, 09:07:04 PM
:cloud9: This is only SLIGHTLY :hijacked: off topic WW,
That already happend several replies ago...
Quoteso don't stone me, but since we're discussing things Jewish on this thread......I was reading an article this morning about why the Jews (for one) don't believe God did anything to disannul Torah which Christendom basically teaches (I don't believe He did either, He just internalized it into spiritually apprehended concepts).
What verse is supposed to teach God did that?
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 13, 2010, 09:26:49 PM
Quote from: Cardinal on December 13, 2010, 09:07:04 PM
so don't stone me, but since we're discussing things Jewish on this thread......I was reading an article this morning about why the Jews (for one) don't believe God did anything to disannul Torah which Christendom basically teaches (I don't believe He did either, He just internalized it into spiritually apprehended concepts).
What verse is supposed to teach God did that?
:cloud9: Did what? Internalized it, or that Christendom teaches he disannulled it? :dontknow:
disannulled
:cloud9: You don't see any Christians sacrificing their sheep and cattle do you (except maybe at a steakhouse)? :laughing7: I was told when I came to the Lord, not to bother to read the OT because "it's just history, and we have a new covenant now". They use all kinds of scriptures to do away with it, and the law.
When He said He would write His LAW on our hearts, that didn't mean the "old" one was disannulled, it meant He would make it LIFE to us and not death. That's what revelation IS, an unveiling of Christ which was hidden in the letter, including the law and the prophets, just like He told the 2 on the road to Emmaus (sp.). Blessings....
Been looking at some of the Aramaic translation. Tony and I have chatted about this, I think it's of note. The translator, Rev. Bauscher, especially in Matthew translated as the lost go to eternal torment, while the righteous go into eternal life.
He reportedly used to be a Baptist minister (usually believe in ET), but is cited on one forum as being a universalist. Even though he translates as eternal torment, in his notes he states that a literal hell fire should not be taken literally, that would make God "worse than Hitler"; that hell should be seen symbolically as a state of being, not a place of being.
There are also arguments that say he is wrong in stating that the originals were in Aramaic/Hebrew rather than Greek, and that it's actually the other way around; that the Aramaic was later translated from the Greek.
Anyone else confused? Any further info/insight into this?
In my studies I have found too many arguments from all sides of the question to accept any of them as authoritative. I finally asked myself, "What makes sense"? Did the Father maintain a continuous thread through all the centuries from Moses to Malachi just to fumble the ball at the one yard line? In the hundred years after Christ, did all the good Hebrew converts just forget the discipline of over 2,000 years of scribes and holy handling of the scrolls/written word? Was there no sense of the need of continuity among the believers, even among the apostles and their immediate disciples?
I answered myself- NO WAY.
I have no doubt that the fundamental thoughts in the New Testament were Hebrew. Paul, Peter, John and James were certainly Hebrew thinkers. Whatever took place in the translation process, IMO the way to work through the issues involved in back tracking from current misunderstanding is to apprehend the Hebrew thought in the Old Testament and then to transfer that into our examination of questionable words when there is doubt. To me, this is because even if they spoke Aramaic in some cases or Greek in some- we know Paul was a Pharisee of Pharisees. He was taught by Gamaliel. Jesus was cetainly in no way bound by any language barrier at all and the testimony of Jesus Christ is the Spirit of Prophecy. By this I know we are always reading Hebrew thought, not because the gospel is Hebrew, but because the Hebrews were the Lampstand of God. By starting from a baseline of - "What was the Hebrew thought"?, in my opinion, everything gets easier. Why would anyone want to know what Aristotle or Plato thought about much of anything? They were distinctly anti what has come to us through the revelation of God, the Lampstand that can be traced through Abel to Noah to Abraham, then through Moses and then the prophets and finally to Jesus, whose words ALL reflected the things spoken by the prophets, because they prophesied by the Spirit of Christ. The apostles certainly continued in this vein. So IMO the need for understanding the contemporary Greek usage of words that were translated AT SOME POINT from Hebrew is less authoritative, especially when we now have in so many instances the knowledge of what the word was in Hebrew, and what the original Hebrew speakers were thinking when they spoke it. So I say, using context and history, interpreting the scriptures by the scriptures is the only way to go. :winkgrin: :2c:
:cloud9: AMEN...... :thumbsup:
Also found out in my studies today that there is a strong possibility Jesus was born of the Pharisee sect, because only they were called "rabbi", and it is likely He wore a white robe (probably with a blue band on it) and maybe even Tzitzit's, ie. the healing in His WINGS (as a corner fringe), which He would have also worn as a Jewish male, and especially a rabbi. It just gets better and better..... :laughing7:
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 01:16:26 AMI have no doubt that the fundamental thoughts in the New Testament were Hebrew. Paul, Peter, John and James were certainly Hebrew thinkers.
I'm amazed the 12 could even write in their own language. Many were simple people. Fishermen. I'm sure they picked up one or two foreign words but enough to understand Jesus' teachings? (It was long thought no Hebrew was spoken at that time) Or even write the teachings down.
Maybe the wrote in pens instead of speaking in tongues :winkgrin:
Jesus' didn't give lectures at a Greek university. Nope, He thaught simple people lile farmers and shepherds who often couldn't even read or write in their own language.
Jesus often quoted OT verses; or did He quote translated verses? (many quoted verses are translated wrong)
Not only Paul, Peter, John and Jabcat were Hebrew thinkers the whole NT has a Hebrew mindset. A mindset that (partly) got lost in translation.
For example what does "Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." really mean?
When Jewish priests had a religious discussion they didn't say "You are wrong and I'm right"; they said "You destroy the law and I'm fulfilling it."
Hebrew people being taught in Greek with Hebrew concepts? I don't think so.
Greek the HS inspired language but church fathers refering to Hebrew as important and original while their libraries are filled with inspired Greek? I don't think so.
:cloud9: Just found this snipet of information in an article, but it didn't list what section of Josephus's works it was in.......
......what Josephus (a jewish 1st century historian) wrote about the relation between 1st century Israelites and Greek;
"The Jews would rather let their children eat pork than teach them greek."
Since the founding of the church was of Jewish believers to start with, it's highly unlikely they wrote they received from the HS in Greek, until they had to make copies of the writings MUCH LATER for Greek readers. The non-Aramaic/Hebrew speakers would have to had listened to the Jewish speakers translate verbally. After all, initially a lot of them taught in the synagogues.
Your pork quote is in this interesting article I found. Excerpts;
Another contibuting factor to misinterpretation is that the books of the "New Testament" are "Greek documents." The fact that the "New Testament" texts we have are in Greek, makes them no more "Greek documents" than the Septuagint (Greek) version of the Old Testament, which the rabbis wrote into Greek 200 years before Yeshua. The rabbis did this (as did someone at some point with the "New Testament" letters), for the benefit of the non-Jewish world so that they could also learn of the God and faith of Israel.
Thus, the "New Testament" documents remain Hebrew texts written in a Hebrew mindset, and must be studied that way, if we are to determine what the authors' meanings are. And until we learn the true original meaning, discussing "what the verse means to us" (as is done in many so called "studies") is a an exercise in futility and leads to error.
Having said that, there is overwhelming evidence, both historical and linguistic that shows that the texts were originally written in Hebrew, and also that Hebrew was not a "dead language" (as was thought of for quite some time).
A study of the writings of the Christian "Church Fathers" shows that much of the "New Testament" was written in Hebrew. This includes direct statements made by; Papias, Ireneus, Origin, Eusubius, Epiphaneus, Jerome and Clement of Alexandria.
----------
4. The prominent first century historian Josephus wrote in both his books, Antiquities and Wars, that Hebrew was the language of first century Jews and that they did not know Greek. (In fact there is a Jewish tradition saying it is better to eat swine than learn Greek.)
-----------
Other books, such as The Jewish New Testament, by David Stern are also helpful in showing the Hebrew thought that gets lost in the Greek/English. (The latter can be ordered through Amazon.com.)
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
(comment found re: this translation - "I am all for learning about Jewish roots to better understand scripture, but it needs to be understood that Jesus "came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him" (John 1:11). Many gentile Christians falsely think that Messianic Jews have a better grasp of the scriptures simply b/c of their Jewishness. The truth is that some Jewish Christians still try to find there identity in their Jewishness instead of Christ. This is a huge mistake that leads to major theological errors. The author of this book sadly falls under this category. One such blatant error taught by this book is that Jewish Christians 'should' keep the dietary Laws or "Kashrut". The author does not submit to scripture (Jesus in Mark 7:19, Peter's Vision in Acts 10, Paul writing to the Galatians, and many more places). He tries to explain these passages away by appealing to a "Jewish understanding", but Jesus continually showed most Jewish understanding to be flawed. It is the spirit that leads into all truth (John 16:13), not Jewish roots or any other.")
:cloud9: Another interesting article and site......
The Holy Peshi tta
of the
Assembly of Jerusalem
Introduction
This version of the Scriptures is a faithful rendering of the original Hebrew and Aramaic languages based on the Assembly of Jerusalem's targums. Various English translations were consulted for comparison and references. The purpose behind this translation is to present a pure, understandable and modern translation of the Holy Scriptures in English for those who are unable to read the Original.
This version of the Peshi tta substitutes traditional Hebrew names and phrases for most equivalent Aramaic/Greek/English names and phrases. The meaning of the Holy Scriptures remains the same as that of the Peshi tta - the most accurate edition of the Word of God unchanged since the time of the Apostles.
Similar instances are given for other individuals' names and geographic locations as well. Most references to "the Jews" is translated as "the Yisraelites" or "the Judeans" and similar variations where appropriate. The Divine Name has been rendered directly from Aramaic in the form of "Mar-Yah" (meaning "Lord Yah") equivalent to the familiar form of "Yahweh".
This translation is based on the historically proven authentic text of the sacred book called the "Peshi tta" along with various Targums and other historical documents of the Assembly of Jerusalem.
The name "Peshi tta" is Aramaic and means "straight", (the original and pure interpretation of the Scriptures). The Peshi tta is the oldest dated Biblical manuscript in existence. Because it is the Word of God preserved throughout the generations since the Apostles' time, it is a reliable and pure text, which contains the books in the "Old" and "New Testaments" that were written in Aramaic and Aramaic dialects, the language spoken by the Messiah and His Disciples in the First Century.
http://www.essenescrolls.com/pecrapta/p-aesv-book-acts.php
haha, i've got a story about the "pecrapta". but for now, what happens is, the language filter on TM turns the real word into pecrapta, thinking you're writing a vulgar word. you have to do something to the word like spelling it with a space like this; 'peshi tta', so the filter doesn't pick up on it. I'll change it for you Card. However, I don't think we can get the link to work.
The story is, before I knew anything about the peshi tta, I saw the word pecrapta on tm where it had been changed and I didn't know it. I googled and googled trying to find out what that was - until I finally realized what had happened. :pointlaugh:
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 01:31:03 AM
:cloud9: AMEN...... :thumbsup:
Also found out in my studies today that there is a strong possibility Jesus was born of the Pharisee sect, because only they were called "rabbi", and it is likely He wore a white robe (probably with a blue band on it) and maybe even Tzitzit's, ie. the healing in His WINGS (as a corner fringe), which He would have also worn as a Jewish male, and especially a rabbi. It just gets better and better..... :laughing7:
No comment :winkgrin:
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 09:56:33 AM
:cloud9: Just found this snipet of information in an article, but it didn't list what section of Josephus's works it was in.......
......what Josephus (a jewish 1st century historian) wrote about the relation between 1st century Israelites and Greek;
"The Jews would rather let their children eat pork than teach them greek."
Since the founding of the church was of Jewish believers to start with, it's highly unlikely they wrote they received from the HS in Greek, until they had to make copies of the writings MUCH LATER for Greek readers. The non-Aramaic/Hebrew speakers would have to had listened to the Jewish speakers translate verbally. After all, initially a lot of them taught in the synagogues.
The first Christian church followed the Temple pattern/layout.
The first Christians were still Jews. A bit like the NT are new books that belong in the OT. Or better said there is just one Testament.
Quote from: jabcat on December 14, 2010, 10:30:07 AM
haha, i've got a story about the "pecrapta". but for now, what happens is, the language filter on TM turns the real word into pecrapta, thinking you're writing a vulgar word. you have to do something to the word like spelling it with a space like this; 'peshi tta', so the filter doesn't pick up on it. I'll change it for you Card. However, I don't think we can get the link to work.
The story is, before I knew anything about the peshi tta, I saw the word pecrapta on tm where it had been changed and I didn't know it. I googled and googled trying to find out what that was - until I finally realized what had happened. :pointlaugh:
:cloud9: Whoops! Never even thought about it......thanks for cleaning up my mess, roflol
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 10:45:55 AM
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 09:56:33 AM
:cloud9: Just found this snipet of information in an article, but it didn't list what section of Josephus's works it was in.......
......what Josephus (a jewish 1st century historian) wrote about the relation between 1st century Israelites and Greek;
"The Jews would rather let their children eat pork than teach them greek."
Since the founding of the church was of Jewish believers to start with, it's highly unlikely they wrote they received from the HS in Greek, until they had to make copies of the writings MUCH LATER for Greek readers. The non-Aramaic/Hebrew speakers would have to had listened to the Jewish speakers translate verbally. After all, initially a lot of them taught in the synagogues.
The first Christian church followed the Temple pattern/layout.
The first Christians were still Jews. A bit like the NT are new books that belong in the OT. Or better said there is just one Testament.
:cloud9: EXACTLY.... :2thumbs:
Quote from: jabcat on December 14, 2010, 10:01:37 AMMany gentile Christians falsely think that Messianic Jews have a better grasp of the scriptures simply b/c of their Jewishness. The truth is that some Jewish Christians still try to find there identity in their Jewishness instead of Christ. This is a huge mistake that leads to major theological errors.
I don't agree.
Indeed there is a danger becoming Jew instead of Christain. But without a certain amount of Jewishness the NT simply can't be understood to it's deepest level. And that even more likely leads to theological errors.
QuoteThe author of this book sadly falls under this category. One such blatant error taught by this book is that Jewish Christians 'should' keep the dietary Laws or "Kashrut". The author does not submit to scripture (Jesus in Mark 7:19, Peter's Vision in Acts 10, Paul writing to the Galatians, and many more places). He tries to explain these passages away by appealing to a "Jewish understanding", but Jesus continually showed most Jewish understanding to be flawed. It is the spirit that leads into all truth (John 16:13), not Jewish roots or any other.")
I partly agree with that. Basicly Jewishness is made up of 2 parts.
Commands directly from God (by using prophets etc) AND manmade additions to "improve" God laws. It was that second part Jesus rebuked. Not the first part. I think that's common sense because it's highly unlikely Jesus came to teach Father laws are wrong....
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
(Mat 13:10-17)
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 10:50:33 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 10:45:55 AM
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 09:56:33 AM
:cloud9: Just found this snipet of information in an article, but it didn't list what section of Josephus's works it was in.......
......what Josephus (a jewish 1st century historian) wrote about the relation between 1st century Israelites and Greek;
"The Jews would rather let their children eat pork than teach them greek."
Since the founding of the church was of Jewish believers to start with, it's highly unlikely they wrote they received from the HS in Greek, until they had to make copies of the writings MUCH LATER for Greek readers. The non-Aramaic/Hebrew speakers would have to had listened to the Jewish speakers translate verbally. After all, initially a lot of them taught in the synagogues.
The first Christian church followed the Temple pattern/layout.
The first Christians were still Jews. A bit like the NT are new books that belong in the OT. Or better said there is just one Testament.
:cloud9: EXACTLY.... :2thumbs:
I may seem trival but I think it's not. Many view the NT as a reboot/restart of things. But in reality Jesus was just (higher of course) a teacher like Daniel and Isaiah. Daniel was
added to the Scriptures. It wasn't seen a fresh start and a reason to throw out everything before. I think Jesus brougt us
extra knowledge instead of replacement knowledge :2c:
This may get into another topic that needs split off. I think the scripture John posted stands on its own merit. It shows that the majority of the Jews were blind to what salvation really is, including who the Messiah is. Paul said even to this day when they read the Law and prophets a veil remains over their eyes. Most of them won't "see" until the time of the Gentiles has been made complete - then all Israel shall be saved.
I believe it's important to remember Jesus' earthly ministry was pre-cross and to the Jews AT THE END OF THAT AGE.
With all that said, I do believe it is important to understand all we can about the originals. But I also agree with a lot of what this guy says here;
http://morechristlike.com/the-old-covenant-and-new-covenant-law-compared/ (he agrees he could have worded the first two lines of the 2nd paragraph better)
The writer of the above, Bob Mutch says this;
5. Here are some scriptures that show that the Mosaic law is passed, was until John, Christians are not under and are dead to, Christ was the end, was done away, added only until Christ came, no longer under, we are to cast it out, has been changed, was faulty, old, decaying, was ready to vanish when Hebrews was written, and God has taken it away.
Mat 5:17-18 not pass until fulfilled, came to fulfill
Luk 16:16 law until John
Luk 24:44 all things must be fulfilled
Acts 13:29 fulfilled all that was written of him
Rom 6:14 not under the law
Rom 7:4 dead to the law
Rom 10:4 Christ is the end of the law
2Cor 3:6-12 was to be, which is done away
Gal 3:19 was added till Christ
Gal 3:24-25 no longer under schoolmaster
Gal 4:22-31 cast out the bondwoman
Gal 5:18 not under the law
Heb 7:11-12 change of the law
Heb 8:6-13 not faultless, old, decaying, ready to vanish away
Heb 10:9 take away the first covenant
Truly it is mystery that in the face of these clear scriptures people still claim the Mosaic law is in effect.
(my thought; Jesus, through the working of the Holy Spirit in believers, has written His law on our hearts of flesh, and does the works through us - not because we're attempting to follow a law/rules, but because we have a desire placed within us to please our Father. :2c:)
On topic though; so it seems very possible that the originals were in Hebrew and/or Aramaic; and if so, I would think that would make some difference in our understanding. Let's keep digging :)
Then the question is: What exactly is the Mosaic law?
a] Manmade laws + laws directly from God
b] Manmade laws only.
I've read Jesus was a Pharisee and only had problems with the stuff they added. Not with the original/true laws.
That aligns quite well with Mat 5:17 where Jesus states He came to teach/(re)explain the law.
The first 69 pages of "Hebrew Christians V Jesus of Rome" (http://books.google.nl/books?id=j-DIMgZ9QXgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Hebrew+Christians+V+Jesus+of+Rome&source=bl&ots=LbAVxz1mD4&sig=qL8dZAFeI1hetXvxs_aU7FbqSks&hl=nl&ei=UmkHTcGtHM-hOu7JoMsJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Summary the Romans wiped out Jewish Christianity to protect Roman Christianity which was/is basically rebranded Roman paganism approved by the Jewish God (in their eyes)
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 11:00:39 AM
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
(Mat 13:10-17)
Amen :bigGrin:
For me, it doesnt seem to make a difference if the NT was originally written in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Russian, yet Im sure it is a good study, and something important for religious history. Eaglesway with the preceeding post of Matt. 13:10-17 expressed it well,
"... because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith,
By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them..."
Joh 4:24 God is Spirit; and those who worship Him must bring Him true spiritual worship."
Joh 6:63 the spirit it is that is giving life; the flesh doth not profit anything; the sayings that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life;
1Co 2:14 and the natural man doth not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for to him they are foolishness, and he is not able to know them , because spiritually they are discerned;
1Co 2:15 and he who is spiritual, doth discern indeed all things, and he himself is by no one discerned;
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 04:42:56 PM
For me, it doesnt seem to make a difference if the NT was originally written in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Russian,
It is of zero importance in what language Jesus chose to teach.
But it is of significant importance to know in what language He thaught because a language has a lot of cultural bagage (sp?)
Example when a parent corrects a child in some cultures the child must look the parent in the eyes as proof it listens (let's assume thats how it's done in Greece).
In other cultures (let's assume Jewish) culture the child must look down to show shame (looking is rejecting the autorithy).
So when Jesus says the man was reprimanded and looked down it's important to know we should read that with a Greek or Hebrew mindset.
Some translation errors are based one wrongly assumed mindset.
Summary: The language is of zero importance. The culture attached to that language is of great importance for your understanding of scripture.....
:2c:
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 05:01:31 PM
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 04:42:56 PM
For me, it doesnt seem to make a difference if the NT was originally written in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Russian,
It is of zero importance in what language Jesus chose to teach.
But it is of significant importance to know in what language He thaught because a language has a lot of cultural bagage (sp?)
Example when a parent corrects a child in some cultures the child must look the parent in the eyes as proof it listens (let's assume thats how it's done in Greece).
In other cultures (let's assume Jewish) culture the child must look down to show shame (looking is rejecting the autorithy).
So when Jesus says the man was reprimanded and looked down it's important to know we should read that with a Greek or Hebrew mindset.
Some translation errors are based one wrongly assumed mindset.
Summary: The language is of zero importance. The culture attached to that language is of great importance for your understanding of scripture.....
:2c:
because spiritually they are discerned;
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 05:08:01 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 05:01:31 PM
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 04:42:56 PM
For me, it doesnt seem to make a difference if the NT was originally written in Greek or Hebrew or Aramaic or Russian,
It is of zero importance in what language Jesus chose to teach.
But it is of significant importance to know in what language He thaught because a language has a lot of cultural bagage (sp?)
Example when a parent corrects a child in some cultures the child must look the parent in the eyes as proof it listens (let's assume thats how it's done in Greece).
In other cultures (let's assume Jewish) culture the child must look down to show shame (looking is rejecting the autorithy).
So when Jesus says the man was reprimanded and looked down it's important to know we should read that with a Greek or Hebrew mindset.
Some translation errors are based one wrongly assumed mindset.
Summary: The language is of zero importance. The culture attached to that language is of great importance for your understanding of scripture.....
:2c:
because spiritually they are discerned;
It snows.
Interesting.
Cultural understanding:
When Jesus turned the other cheek it was not in submission to the accuser but in defiance.
QuoteQuote from: Beloved Servant on December 14, 2010, 05:53:24 PM
Interesting.
Cultural understanding:
When Jesus turned the other cheek it was not in submission to the accuser but in defiance.
Good point David. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turning_the_other_cheek
Straightforward interpretation
.....
The most straightforward reading of the passages in Matthew and Luke, however, suggests that the phrase has a more radical meaning: a command to respond to aggression by willingly exposing oneself to a further act of aggression rather than retaliating, retreating, or ignoring it.
A literal interpretation of the passages,
.......
At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed.[3] The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.
===> That the opposite how many peopel understand that verse.
Another good example of cultural understanding. Was Jesus kind by saying to give both the cloak and tunic? Or was He making a different statement?
By handing over one's cloak in addition to one's tunic, the debtor has essentially given the shirt off their back, a situation directly forbidden by Hebrew Law as stated in Deuteronomy 24: 10-13:
===> Surely Jesus didn't suggest to break a Biblical law so it sounds like it was not about giving away everything you have.
When you make your neighbor a loan of any sort, you shall not enter his house to take his pledge. You shall remain outside, and the man to whom you make the loan shall bring the pledge out to you. If he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his pledge. When the sun goes down you shall surely return the pledge to him, that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you; and it will be righteousness for you before the LORD your God.
By giving the lender the cloak as well the debtor was reduced to nakedness. Public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on the viewer, not the naked, as evidenced in Genesis 9: 20-27:
Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard; and he drank of the wine, and became drunk, and lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it upon both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father's nakedness.
The succeeding verse from the Sermon on the Mount can similarly be seen as a method for making the oppressor break the law. The commonly invoked Roman law of Angaria allowed the Roman authorities to demand that inhabitants of occupied territories carry messages and equipment the distance of one mile post, but prohibited forcing an individual to go further than a single mile, at the risk of suffering disciplinary actions.[4] In this example, the nonviolent interpretation sees Jesus as placing criticism on an unjust and hated Roman law as well as clarifying the teaching to extend beyond Jewish law.[5] As a side effect this may also have afforded the early followers a longer time to minister to the soldier and or cause the soldier not to seek followers of Jesus to carry his equipment in the future so as not to be bothered with their proselytizing.
Perhaps it's just me but the more I read on the matter the more I feel it's more than just trival chit chat.... :2c:
/EDIT See also: http://donaldmsensing.blogspot.com/2003/12/turning-other-cheek-part-2.html
Perhaps He turned the other cheek in the overcoming power of love. Love overcomes fear and defiance and reveals the heart of God.
Also, concerning language, the Holy Spirit taught me from the corrupted words of the KJV that the words were corrupted before I had the benefit of any insight into Greek or Hebrew. The simple language of Ephesians 1;9-11 and Colossians 1:16-21 was sufficient to convince me to embark on a journey of discovery that has led me through history and language and culture and philosophy for the purpose of clarifying for anyone who may be on the trail behind me and so, perhaps, reduce the struggle for some of them, who- were not convinced by man, but led by the Holy Spirit themselves, to seek and follow the golden thread that winds through the seeming paradoxes and contradictions into the wide open space of the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, where God is all in all. ;o)
Because the letter kills while the Spirit gives life, it is in discerning the Spirit of the Word that the mysteries begin to unravel and the rain begins to fall. All the rest is just details. It is the Spirit who teaches the Word, and the Spirit comes from the heart of God to rescue the heart of man from the mind of man. Peace, John
:cloud9: Sorry for the length; I tried to make it into two columns, but my attempt just messed it up. :mblush:
The Lord God said that His words would never pass away; He also said that the 3 main feasts were to be celebrated FOREVER. Now either God is lying, or man is. OR; (and this is my stand on it) the scriptures also are "structures" that house the divine INTENT of the Spirit, which we now have, to teach us His will, and purpose behind the literal.
The Torah is as the waters below the firmament, anything that came via the Spirit understanding being revealed, IS the firmament. Jesus walked on the waters below the firmament, ie. He walked on the Word (Torah) that was from the beginning and is the foundation.
I want to make it clear that this topic for me is not about being brought back under the letter, but understanding that not one jot or tittle of the law shall pass away till all be fulfilled (in us, by the inworking of the Spirit and the scriptures). What He did, we appropriate. If not, then why do we observe Passover and Pentecost (and Tabernacles, but that's another thread for sure), JEWISH FEASTS, spiritually?
The New Testament quotes from all Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. This does not mean they are not inspired.
And Jesus quoted from 24 different Old Testament books. Old Testament texts quoted in the New Testament:
Gen 1:27
Matt 19:4
Gen 5:2
Mark 10:6
Gen 2:2
Heb 4:4
Gen 2:7
1 Cor 15:45
Gen 2:24
Matt 19:5, Mark 10:7-8,1 Cor 6:17, Eph 5:31
Gen 5:24
Heb 11:5
Gen 12:1
Acts 7:3
Gen 12:3
Gal 3:8
Gen 12:7
Acts 7:5
Gen 13:15
Gal 3:16
Gen 14:17-20
Heb 7:1-2
Gen 15:5
Rom 4:18
Gen 15:6
Rom 4:3,9,22, Gal 3:6, Jas 2:23
Gen 15:13-14
Acts 7:6-7
Gen 17:5
Rom 4:17
Gen 17:7
Gal 3:16
Gen 17:8
Acts 7:5
Gen 18:10
Rom 9:9
Gen 18:14
Rom 9:9
Gen 21:10
Gal 4:30
Gen 21:22
Rom 9:7, Heb 11:18
Gen 22:16-17
Heb 6:13-14
Gen 22:18
Acts 3:15
Gen 25:23
Rom 9:12
Gen 25:23
Rom 9:12
Gen 38:8
Luke 20:28
Gen 47:31
Heb 11:21
Ex 1:8
Acts 7:18
Ex 2:14
Acts 7:27-28,38
Ex 5:2
Acts 7:30
Ex 3:5-10
Acts 7:33-34
Ex 3:6
Matt 22:32
Ex 3:15
Mark 12:26, Acts 3:13
Ex 4:16
Rom 9:17
Ex 5:18
Jam 2:11
Ex 12:46
John 19:36
Ex 13:2
Luke 2:23
Ex 16:18
2 Cor 8:15
Ex 19:6
1 Pet 2:9
Ex 19:12-13
Heb 12:20
Ex 20:12-16
Matt 19:18-19
Ex 20:13
Matt 5:21
Ex 20:13-17
Rom 13:2 9
Ex 20:12
Matt 15:4
Ex 20:14
Matt 5:27
Ex 20:17
Rom 7:7
Ex 21:17
Matt 15:4, Mark 7:10
Ex 21:24
Matt 5:38
Ex 22:27
Acts 23:5
Ex 24:8
Heb 9:20
Ex 25:40
Heb 8:5
Ex 32:1
Acts 7:40
Ex 32:6
1 Co 10:17
Ex 33:19
Rom 9:15
Lev 10:9
Luke 1:15
Lev 12:8
Luke 2:24
Lev 18:5
Rom 10:5, Gal 3:12
Lev 19:2
1 Pet 1:16
Lev 19:12, 30:2
Matt 5:33
Lev 19:18
Mark 12:33
Lev 19:18
Matt 5:43,19:19,22:39
Lev 19:18
Mark 12:31, Gal 5:14,Jam 2:
Lev 23:29
Acts 3:23
Lev 24:20
Matt 5:38
Lev 26:12
2 Co 6:16
Num 16:
2 Tim 2:19
Num 27:17
Matt 9:36
Deut 5:16-20
Mark 10:1, Luke 18:20
Deut 24:14
Mark 10:19
Deut 5:16
Mark 7:10, Eph 6:2-3
Deut 5:17
Jas 2:11
Deut 4:24
Heb 12:29
Deut 4:3
Mark 12:32
Deut 6:5
Luke 10:27
Deut 6:4-5
Mark 12:29-30
Deut 6:5
Matt 22:37
Deut 6:13
Matt 4:10, Luke 4:8
Deut 6:16
Matt 4:7, Luke 4:12
Deut 8:3
Matt 4:4, Luke 4:4
Deut 9:4
Rom 10:6
Deut 30:12-14
Rom 10:6-8
Deut 9:19
Heb 12:21
Deut 17:7
1 Co 5:13
Deut 18:15-16
Acts 7:37, 3:12
Deut 19:15
Matt 18:16,2 Co 13:1
Deut 21:23
Gal 3:13
Deut 24:1,3
Matt 5:31, Matt 19:7, Mark 10:4
Deut 25:4
1 Co 9:9,1 Tim 5:18
Deut 25:5,7
Matt 22:24, Mark 12:19
Deut 27:26,
Gal 3:10
Deut 29:3
Rom 11:8
Deut 30:12-14
Heb 13:5
Deut 32:21
Rom 10:19
Deut 32:35-36
Rom 12:19
Deut 32:43
Rom 15:10
1 Sam 12:22
Rom 11:2
1 Sam 13:14
Acts 13:22
2 Sam 7:8
2 Co 6:18
2 Sam 7:14
Heb 1:5
2 Sam 22:50
Rom 15:9
1 Ki 19:10,12
Rom 11:3
1 Ki 19:`8
Rom 11:4
2 Ki 1:10,11
Luke 9:54, Rev 20:9
1 Chr 17:13
Rev 21:7
2 Ch 18:16, 30:2
Mark 6:34
Job 5:13
1 Co 3:19
Job 16:19
Mark 11:10
Job 41:3
Rom 11:35
Ps 2:7
Acts 13:33, Heb 1:5,5:5
Ps 2:9
Rev 2:26-27
Ps 4:5
Eph 4:26
Ps 5:10
Rom 3:13
Ps 6:9
Matt 7:23
Ps 8:3
Matt 21:16
Ps 8:5-7
Heb 2:6-8, 1 Co 15:27
Ps 10:7
Rom 3:14
Ps 14:1-3
Rom 3:10-12
Ps 16:8-11
Acts 2:25-28, 2:31,13:35
Ps 19:5
Rom 10:18
Ps 22:2
Matt 27:46, Mark 15:34
Ps 22:19
John 19:24, Matt 27:35, Mark 15:24, Luke 23:24
Ps 22:23
Heb 2:12
Ps 24:1
1 Co 10:26
Ps 31:6
Luke 23:46
Ps 32:1-2
Rom 4:7-8
Ps 34:9
1 Pet 2:3
Ps 34:13-17
1 Pet 3:10-12
Ps 34:21
Joh 15:25
Ps 36:2
Rom 3:18
Ps 40:10
Heb 10:5-7
Ps 41:10
Joh 13:18
Ps 426, 12
Matt 26:38
Ps 43:5
Mark 14:34
Ps 44:23
Rom 8:36
Ps 45:7-8
Heb 1:8-9
Ps 51:6
Rom 3:4
Ps 62:13
Matt 16:27
Pro, 24:12
Rom 2:6
Ps 68:19
Eph 4:8
Ps 69:10
Joh 2:17
Ps 69:23-24
Rom 11:9-10
Ps 69:26
Acts 1:20
Ps 78:2
Matt 13:35
Ps 78:24
Joh 6:31
Ps 82:6
Joh 10:34
Ps 86:9
Rev 15:4
Ps 91:11-12
Matt 4:6, Luke 4:10-11
Ps 94:11
1 Co 3:20
Ps 95:7-11
Heb 3:7-11, 3:15,4:3,5,7
Ps 102:26-28
Heb 1:10-12
Ps 104:4
Heb 1:7
Ps 104:12
Matt 13:32, Mark 4:32, Luke 13:19
Ps 110:1
Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42-43, Acts 2:34-35, Heb 1:13
Ps 110:4
Heb 5:6,-10, Heb 7:17,21
Ps 111:2
Rev 15:3-4
Ps 112:9
2 Co 9:9
Ps 116:10
2 Co 4:13
Ps 117:2
Rom 15:11
Ps 118:6
Heb 13:6
Ps 118:22-23
Matt 21:42, Mark 12:10-11, Luke 20:17
Ps 118:22
Acts 4:11, 1 Pet 2:7
Ps 118:25-26
Matt 21:9,Mark 11:9-10, Joh 12:13, Matt 23:39
Ps 118:26
Luke 13:35, Luke 19:38
Ps 132:11
Acts 2:30
Pro 3:11-12
Heb 12:5-6
Pro 3:34
Jam 4:6, 1 Pet 5:5
Pro 11:31
1 Pet 4:18
Pro 25:21-22
Rom 12:20
Pro 26:11
2 Pet 2:22
Isa 1:9
Rom 9:29
Isa 6:9-10
Matt 13:14-15, Mark 4:12, Acts 28:26-27
Isa 6:9
Luke 8:10
Isa 6:10
Joh 12:40
Isa 7:14
Matt, 1:23
Isa 8:12-13
1 Pet 3:14-15
Isa 8:17-18
Heb 2:13
Isa 8:23-9:1
Matt 4:15-16
Isa 11:10
Rom 15:12
Isa 13:10
Matt 24:29, Mark 13:24-25
Isa 34:4
Luke 21:26
Isa 22:13
1 Co 15:32
Isa 25:8
1 Co 15:54, Rev 7:17
Isa 26:19
Matt 11:5
Isa 35:5-6
Luke 7:22
Isa 26:20
Heb 10:37-38
Isa 28:11-12
1 Co 14:21
Isa 29:13
Matt 15:8-9, Mark 1:3, Joh 1:23
Isa 40:6-8
1 Pet 1:24-25
Isa 40:13
Rom 11:34, 1 Co 2:16
Isa 42:1-4
Matt 12:18-21
Isa 45:23
Rom 14:11
Isa 49:6
Acts 13:47
Isa 49:8
2 Co 6:2
Isa 52:5
Rom 2:24
Isa 52:7
Rom 10:15
Isa 52:11
2 Co 6:17
Isa 52:15
Rom 15:21
Isa 53:1
Joh 12:38, Rom 8:17
Isa 53:7-8
Acts 8:32-33
Isa 53:9
1 Pet 2:23
Isa 53:12
Luke 22:37
Isa 54:1
Gal 4:27
Isa 54:13
Joh 6:45
Isa 55:3
Acts 13:34
Isa 55:10
2 Co 9:10
Isa 56:7
Matt 21:13
Jer 7:11
Mark 11:17, Luke 19:46
Isa 59:7-8
Rom 3:15-17
Isa 59:20-21
Rom 11:26-27
Isa 61:1-2
Luke 4:18-19
Isa 62:11
Matt 21:5
Isa 64:3
1 Co 2:9
Isa 65:1-2
Rom10:10-21
Isa 65:17
2 Pet 3:13
Isa 66:1-2
Acts 7:49-50
Jer 5:21
Mark 8:18
Jer 9:23
1 Co 1:31, 2 Co 10:17
Jer31:15
Matt 2:18
Jer 31:31-34
Heb 8:8-12
Ezk 11:20
Rev 21:7
Ezk 37:5, 10
Rev 11:11
Dan 3:6
Matt13:42, 50
Dan 7:13
Matt 24:30, 26:64, Mark 13:26,14:62, Luke 21:27,22:69
Dan 9:27
Matt 24:15
Dan 11:31
Mark 13:14
Hos 2:1, 3
Rom 9:25-28
Hos 6:6
Matt 9:13, Matt 12:7
Hos 10:8
Luke 23:30, Rev 6:16
Hos 11:1
Matt 2:15
Hos 13:14
1 Co 15:55
Joel 3:1-5
Acts 2:17-21, Rom 10:13
Amos 5:25-27
Acts 7:42-43
Amos 9:11-12
Acts 15:16-17
Jonah 2:1
Matt 12:40
Mic 5:1
Matt 2:6
Mic 7:6
Matt 10:35-36
Hab2:3-4
Rom 1:17, Gal 3:11
Hab 1:5
Acts 13:41
Hag 2:6, 21
Heb 12:26
Zac 8:16
Eph 4:25
Zech 9:9
Joh 12:15
Zac 11:12-13
Matt 27:9-10
Zac 12:10
Joh 19:37
Zac 13:7
Matt 26:31, Mark 14:27
Mal 1:2-3
Rom 9:13
Mal 3:1
Matt 11:10, Mark 1:2,Luke 7:27
Mal 3:23-24
Matt 17:10-11
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 06:59:26 PM
Also, concerning language, the Holy Spirit taught me from the corrupted words of the KJV that the words were corrupted before I had the benefit of any insight into Greek or Hebrew.
I'm sure the HS could also have thaught you when reading the satanic bible or quran.
For me being a student doesn't just mean read an article. It also means finding the best article. In Bible studies that would mean the best possible translation and/or commentary. Personally I'm convinced reading a bit on the culture of people is important too.
Personally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 06:59:26 PM
Also, concerning language, the Holy Spirit taught me from the corrupted words of the KJV that the words were corrupted before I had the benefit of any insight into Greek or Hebrew. The simple language of Ephesians 1;9-11 and Colossians 1:16-21 was sufficient to convince me to embark on a journey of discovery that has led me through history and language and culture and philosophy for the purpose of clarifying for anyone who may be on the trail behind me and so, perhaps, reduce the struggle for some of them, who- were not convinced by man, but led by the Holy Spirit themselves, to seek and follow the golden thread that winds through the seeming paradoxes and contradictions into the wide open space of the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, where God is all in all. ;o)
Because the letter kills while the Spirit gives life, it is in discerning the Spirit of the Word that the mysteries begin to unravel and the rain begins to fall. All the rest is just details. It is the Spirit who teaches the Word, and the Spirit comes from the heart of God to rescue the heart of man from the mind of man. Peace, John
:cloud9: I say AMEN.....
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 07:01:05 PM
:cloud9: The Lord God said that His words would never pass away; He also said that the 3 main feasts were to be celebrated FOREVER.
Are we talking about the ET forever or the UR age?
QuoteNow either God is lying, or man is.
Or man mistunderstands. Still wrong but a bit milder.
QuoteOR; (and this is my stand on it) the scriptures also are "structures" that house the divine INTENT of the Spirit, which we now have, to teach us His will, and purpose behind the literal.
If OT is the foundation of the house then without proper knowledge of the OT the NT doctrines are build upon sand instead of rock.
:dontknow:
QuoteThe New Testament quotes from all Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. This does not mean they are not inspired.
And Jesus quoted from 24 different Old Testament books. Old Testament texts quoted in the New Testament:
Maybe it's more than just 24 because it's possible several books need to be merged into one.
All the new finds that men produce everyday show that man is still in the search to find what man will call wisdom (his wisdom), I will stand that with, that without the Holy Spirit interpreting what ever transalation, you find just what man intends to find...that man is the answer.
1Co 1:22 Since also Jews ask a sign, and Greeks seek wisdom,
1Co 1:23 also we--we preach Christ crucified, to Jews, indeed, a stumbling-block, and to Greeks foolishness,
1Co 1:24 and to those called--both Jews and Greeks--Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God,
1Co 1:25 because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;
1Co 1:26 for see your calling, brethren, that not many are wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;
1Co 1:27 but the foolish things of the world did God choose, that the wise He may put to shame; and the weak things of the world did God choose that He may put to shame the strong;
1Co 1:28 and the base things of the world, and the things despised did God choose, and the things that are not, that the things that are He may make useless--
1Co 1:29 that no flesh may glory before Him;
1Co 1:30 and of Him ye--ye are in Christ Jesus, who became to us from God wisdom, righteousness also, and sanctification, and redemption,
1Co 1:31 that, according as it hath been written, `He who is glorying--in the Lord let him glory.'
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 07:22:45 PM
Quote from: Cardinal on December 14, 2010, 07:01:05 PM
:cloud9: The Lord God said that His words would never pass away; He also said that the 3 main feasts were to be celebrated FOREVER.
Are we talking about the ET forever or the UR age?
My point is; basic salvation is as Passover, Pentecost is begun in the believer with the baptism of the HG. These became spiritually "observed" or implemented during the time of the Lord and the disciples.
QuoteNow either God is lying, or man is.
Or man mistunderstands. Still wrong but a bit milder.
True, but I was referencing a scripture, not making a personal accusation against anyone.
QuoteOR; (and this is my stand on it) the scriptures also are "structures" that house the divine INTENT of the Spirit, which we now have, to teach us His will, and purpose behind the literal.
If OT is the foundation of the house then without proper knowledge of the OT the NT doctrines are build upon sand instead of rock.
:dontknow:
QuoteThe New Testament quotes from all Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. This does not mean they are not inspired.
And Jesus quoted from 24 different Old Testament books. Old Testament texts quoted in the New Testament:
Maybe it's more than just 24 because it's possible several books need to be merged into one.
:dontknow:
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 07:34:57 PM
All the new finds that men produce everyday show that man is still in the search to find what man will call wisdom (his wisdom), I will stand that with, that without the Holy Spirit interpreting what ever transalation, you find just what man intends to find...that man is the answer.
Don't get me wrong Micah....Why do you even bother to come to this forum? All mortal men and women here. All people find whatever they want to find.
Isn't it better to hide in a empty dark room and wait for inspiration?
Study theyself approved doesn't mean do nothing and wait until the HS decides to inspire you.
Why did the HS even bother to inspired the writings if they are just a useless "you find what you want to find".
I truely don't understand your view.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 07:10:19 PM
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 06:59:26 PM
Also, concerning language, the Holy Spirit taught me from the corrupted words of the KJV that the words were corrupted before I had the benefit of any insight into Greek or Hebrew.
I'm sure the HS could also have thaught you when reading the satanic bible or quran.
For me being a student doesn't just mean read an article. It also means finding the best article. In Bible studies that would mean the best possible translation and/or commentary. Personally I'm convinced reading a bit on the culture of people is important too.
Personally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come,
he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
The Holy Spirit does not speak to anyone through the Quran or the satanic bible.
Without the Holy Spirit, scholarship is a ship stranded in the desert sand, it will take us nowhere. As an adjunct to the Holy Spirit's enlightenment on the Word, scholarship is absolutely excellent and of immense value.
Personally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
That statement is just kind of strange and I am not sure what you are saying..... but I am pretty sure you didn't understand what I was saying.
What I was saying is simply this- the Holy Spirit led me into my scholarly studies into the languages and cultures and history of antiquity, but had already revealed the truth of UR to me even as I read deficient translations. I certainly applaud any efforts to bring forth better translation, and spend a lot of time translating myself, Peace, John
"Let the one who has ears to hear, hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches"
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 09:16:35 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 07:10:19 PM
Quote from: eaglesway on December 14, 2010, 06:59:26 PM
Also, concerning language, the Holy Spirit taught me from the corrupted words of the KJV that the words were corrupted before I had the benefit of any insight into Greek or Hebrew.
I'm sure the HS could also have thaught you when reading the satanic bible or quran.
For me being a student doesn't just mean read an article. It also means finding the best article. In Bible studies that would mean the best possible translation and/or commentary. Personally I'm convinced reading a bit on the culture of people is important too.
Personally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
The Holy Spirit does not speak to anyone through the Quran or the satanic bible.
Why not? Didn't you write pagan religions have overlap with Christianity.
I think your answer is that those books are to far away from the real inspired Books. If that is your answer my question would be; if some books are to wrong to be useful shouldn't be do our very best to find the writing that have smallest margins of error.
In Dutch we have a saying: "A good start is half the job". Doesn't that mean a quality translation gives a good headstart?
QuotePersonally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
That statement is just kind of strange and I am not sure what you are saying..... but I am pretty sure you didn't understand what I was saying.
I did. Or I still don't after your explanation below.
QuoteWhat I was saying is simply this- the Holy Spirit led me into my scholarly studies into the languages and cultures and history of antiquity, but had already revealed the truth of UR to me even as I read deficient translations.
I'm not denying you or anyone else on this forum had all kind of revelations by using all kind of translations. That's not my point. I even took it to the extreme that becaus ewith God everything is possible He can even use the quran as a tool if He wishes so.
My comment wasn't directed only "against" you (or Micah). It seems to be a general agreement on this forum. At least that's how I read feel it. A layed back approach (correct expression?) A bit I'm to lazy to search. Or I don't bother. I just continue with whatever I have and if the HS want to tell me something He gotta use my translation. I find that very odd. I'm a bit out of sync on with spiritual affairs so the books afair doesn't add much to the insult I guess :winkgrin:
Quote"Let the one who has ears to hear, hear what the Spirit is saying to the churches"
Seems there is only one set of ears and a 1000 denominiations weren't allowed to use them for 2000 years :mblush:
PS to clarify my weird statement.
If UR people say: Jesus saves all the ETs answer in that case just lets sin because Jesus takes care of everything.
Similar: I don't bother about finding a good translation because the HS takes care of everything.
QuotePeace, John
:Peace: :Peace2:
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 08:04:04 PM
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 07:34:57 PM
All the new finds that men produce everyday show that man is still in the search to find what man will call wisdom (his wisdom), I will stand that with, that without the Holy Spirit interpreting what ever transalation, you find just what man intends to find...that man is the answer.
Don't get me wrong Micah....Why do you even bother to come to this forum? All mortal men and women here. All people find whatever they want to find.
Isn't it better to hide in a empty dark room and wait for inspiration?
Study theyself approved doesn't mean do nothing and wait until the HS decides to inspire you.
Why did the HS even bother to inspired the writings if they are just a useless "you find what you want to find".
I truely don't understand your view.
I bother to come on this forum in hope to recieve and give, share. Would you prefer that I dont? Who said anything about mortals? Did you mean "Is it better to hide in a empty dark room and wait for inspiration?" If you did, should the Lord have me in a empty dark room to wait for inspiration, then thats where I would want to be, and the inspiration would come, would it not? I to study, but one thing I believe the Lord has tryed to instill in me is not to let my mind jump at every new thing men decuce to put in my veiw, not that there are not new things that He has a desire for me to see, but just since the internet the mind of man is running amuck in every direction to find out more. I myself believe in a new thing that He is doing it now today.
Isa 43:19 Lo, I am doing a new thing, now it springeth up, Do ye not know it? Yea, I put in a wilderness a way, In a desolate place--floods.
2Ti 2:15 Give diligence, thyself, approved, to present unto God,—a workman not to be put to shame, skillfully handling the word of truth.
You said, " Why did the HS even bother to inspired the writings if they are just a useless "you find what you want to find".
I dont believe you really mean that.
Quote from: wwPersonally I think (ab)using the quote "HS will reveal" is just as wrong as "all are saved let's sin".
It's not just a matter of reveal. It's also he will guide you into all truth.
A guide, then, but each one of us is in a different landscape, so we need a guide with local knowledge, so to speak. The things that knock my socks off might mean little or nothing to you.
Everything you say is correct, of course, regarding translations. But don't forget we are on different time schedules, and walking in works prepared for us from the beginning. You need different clothes and different knowledge for hiking in the desert versus skiing in the mountains.
That's the beauty of our God--He is so personal.
For a long time now, whenever I ask a question, I get an answer multiple times within days. For you, it is something different. That's the way He works. :bigGrin:
And, you are a gift to all of us, ww.
Posted by Cardinal in another thread about a year ago;
"This is long but so worth the read; written by a Pastor friend of mine on FB. Blowing of the trumpet, and another witness hears the sound; thank You Lord. Blessings.....
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE TEACHES VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS AND THE OTHER TEACHES INVISIBLE HEAVENLY THINGS.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE BIBLE IS MOSES AND THE OTHER BIBLE IS CHRIST. 2 Corinth 3: 5-6, 13-15. This is the revelation of the divine plan of God to save souls! TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE IS HANDWRITTEN IN LETTER FROM COVER TO COVER TEACHING AND PRESENTING VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS THAT WERE OR ARE SEEN BY HUMAN NATURAL EYE/SIGHT WHICH ARE SHADOWS OF THE INVISIBLE HEAVENLY THINGS AND THE OTHER TEACHES AND PRESENTS INVISIBLE HEAVENLY THINGS BY REVELATION IN THE MIND OR ONE'S UNDERSTANDING TO ABOLISH VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS IN THAT SOUL. REV 5, 1 JOHN 2:7-8, 2 Corinth 3: 5-6, HEB 10:1-9, ROM 12: 1-2.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE BIBLE FROM COVER TO COVER, HANDWRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE IN LETTER, IS THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE THAT TEACHES VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS IN CARNAL HUMAN WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE TO THIS DAY OF 2009. 2 Corinth 3:5-6, 13-15.
THE OTHER BIBLE IN THE VERY HANDWRITTEN BIBLE IS THE PROMISED NEW COVENANT BIBLE, ALSO FROM COVER TO COVER BUT IS READ BY THE ENABLING OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD IN A CHOSEN SOUL INDWELT BY GOD AND IS BORN OF THE WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.
THE NEW COVENANT BIBLE READ BY THE INSPIRATION OF GOD TEACHES HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS WHICH ARE CONTRARY TO HISTORICAL EARTHLY VISIBLE THINGS PRESENTED BY THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE.
THE HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS ABOLISH OR REPLACE EARTHLY VISIBLE THINGS IN A SOUL THAT IS TRANSFORMED TO READ THE NEW COVENANT BIBLE BY THE POWER OF GOD.
THIS TRANSFORMATION OF THE BIBLE FROM AN OLD BIBLE OF CARNAL ORDINANCES OF DARKNESS INTO A NEW ONE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ORDINANCES OF LIGHT IS DONE IN A SOUL BUT THIS CHANGE/ TRANSFIGURATION IN THE BIBLE DOES NOT ERASE THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE ORDINANCES FROM THE BIBLE. 2 Corinth 3: 5-6, REV 5, Isaiah 45: 7-8, Pro 16: 4-6, 1 John 2: 7-8, James 1:18-21, 2 Corinth 4. Eph Chapters 1 to 4: 20, Col. 2, Heb 7:12-18.
GOD IS NOW REPLACING THE OLD BIBLE VISIBLE HISTORIC EARTHLY THINGS (COPIES OF HEAVENLY THINGS) WITH THE REAL PRESENT INVISIBLE BIBLE REVEALED HEAVENLY THINGS OF THE NEW COVENANT BIBLE IN SOULS BUT NOT REPLACED OR ERRASED FROM THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE. Col 2: 10-23, Col 3:1-16, Heb 10:1-9.
INVISIBLE transformation of souls call it rapture of souls or call it resurrection of souls is now going on from the earthly kingdom taught by carnal men using the OLD COVENANT Bible to the heavenly kingdom taught by the Holy Spirit INSPIRED WORD, the NEW COVENANT Bible.
Are you seeing (understanding) the transformation? It is happening on this wise: Two Bibles in One Bible: One is the Original and old Covenant Bible from Genesis to the book of Revelation to this day of 2009. THE OLD Bible presents and teaches earthly visible things that are copies and shadows of heavenly invisible things that are taught by the promised NEW ENGRAFTED COVENANT BIBLE.
The New Bible is the En-grafted New Covenant Bible that saves souls or gives eternal life to souls which is grafted in the Old Original Covenant Bible. The New en-grafted Bible presents and teaches invisible heavenly things that abolish, replace Earthly visible things presented by the old Bible in a every soul favored and indwelt by God but the Old Bible is not abolished from the Bible.
The earthly one kills souls and keeps souls in bondage of not fellowshiping with God. James 1: 18-21, 2 Corinth 3: 5-6, 7-15.Rom 12: 1-2. Two Bibles in One Bible: The Original/Old COVENANT/TESTAMENT BIBLE seals the promised New ENGRAFTED COVENANT/TESTAMENT Bible from the beginning BY USING EARTHLY VISIBLE VEILING THINGS WHICH ARE COPIES OF THE HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS IN PATTERN. Heb 8.
The New En-grafted Bible is appointed to be revealed in the LAST DAYS WHEN GOD abolishes the Original Bible by revealing the promised NEW COVENANT BIBLE that teaches invisible heavenly things in the soul that is enabled to UNDERSTAND the New en-grafted Bible.1 John 2:7-8, Heb 1:1-2, James 1:18-21, Ps 25:14
GOD ABOLISHES THE OLD BIBLE THAT TEACHES VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS ONLY IN THE SOUL THAT IS ENABLED TO RECEIVE NEW COVENANT BIBLE WHICH REVEALS AND TEACHES THE HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS IN PATTERN THAT MOSES, THE HANDWRITTEN BIBLE WAS SHOWN BY GOD ON THE "MOUNTAIN".
GOD DOES NOT ABOLISH OR REMOVE THE OLD/ORIGINAL BIBLE THAT PRESENTS SHADOWS OF HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS FROM THE BIBLE BUT FROM ONLY THE SOULS GIVEN THE POWER (WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD) TO SEE (UNDERSTAND) THE INVISIBLE THINGS REVEALED AND TAUGHT BY ONLY GOD AND HIS INSPIRED SONS THROUGH THE NEW BIBLE TO INSPIRED SOULS.
THESE TWO BIBLES; ONE THAT TEACHES EARTHLY VISIBLE THINGS AND THE OTHER THAT TEACHES INVISIBLE THINGS OF HEAVEN ARE THE TWO WITNESSES OF GOD THROUGH WHICH GOD RULES THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH. James 1: 18-21, by KJV BIBLE. REV 5, 1 John 2:7-8, Isaiah 45: 7-8.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE IS TAUGHT BY GOD IN GOD'S OWN WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE AND IS WRITTEN IN SOFT HEARTS OF FLESH AND ONE IS GIVEN TO MEN TO TEACH IN CARNAL MEN'S KNOWLEDGE AND WISDOM who have hearts of stone (HARD) that do not obey GOD.
Inside these stony hearts are written the OLD COVENANT Bible scriptures, handwritten in LETTER and understood with an understanding of the hearts of stone/natural (OF NOT THE HOLY SPIRIT). 1 JOHN 2: 7-8, Isaiah 45:7-8, Heb 7: 12-18. EZ. 18:18-32; 2 Cor 3: 1-6. Therefore check yourself in which type of your heart are the Bible scriptures written.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: THE HANDWRITTEN IN BLACK AND WHITE WHEN MINISTERED IN HUMAN CARNAL KNOWLEDGE ARE ORDINANCES OF DARKNESS AND THE NEW EN-GRAFTED COVENANT BIBLE TAUGHT AND REVEALED BY GOD ARE ORDINANCES OF LIGHT. 1 John 2: 7-8, Col 2 : 10-23. ISAIAH 29: 11-23, Col 2, Ps 25:14.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE: THE NEW ONE BY GOD TEACHES HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS AND OLD ONE IS GIVEN TO MEN BY GOD TO TEACH VISIBLE EARTHLY THINGS WHICH ARE COPIES AND SHADOWS OF HEAVENLY INVISIBLE THINGS. 1 John 5: 7-8, Heb 10: 1-9. KJV Bible
Two Bibles in one Bible: One is read, interpreted, explained and taught in human carnal knowledge and wisdom without the help or inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The other Bible is the One written within which is read, interpreted, explained and taught by the help or inspiration or ability of the freely given wisdom and knowledge of God when a soul is INDWELT BY THE HOLY SPIRIT (GOD).
Examples: A) MOSES: 2 Corinth 3: 13-15 Earthly historical visible Moses, a man who lead the children of Israel physically from Egypt in the Middle East to Canaan is the physical example of deliverance of God who is substituted by the invisible heavenly Moses who is the entire HANDWRITTEN BIBLE who is READ to thus day 2009. 2 Corinth 3: 13-15.
The heavenly invisible Moses is revealed by the wisdom of God to be the Old Covenant/ TESTAMENT Bible handwritten in the letter (FROM THE BOOK OF GENESIS TO END OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION) that presents the earthly visible things from the Book of Genesis to the end of the Book of Revelation read up to this day 2009 but read carnally by the Israel (ALL CARNAL BIBLE FOLLOWERS WHO ARE CHILDREN OF FLESH) of all global nations. Rom 2:28-29, 2 Corinth 3:13-15. John 6:28-34
The invisible Moses, the OLD COVENANT BIBLE HIGH PRIEST is a type of Christ who is the NEW COVENANT BIBLE HIGH PRIEST is revealed to deliver the children of GOD called Israel from spiritual slavery of worshiping different carnal god(s).
The Children of God are enslaved by the carnal "Egyptian" preachers of the Bible up this day 2009 onwards who are figuratively the "Egyptians" or the children of flesh of Agar (OF THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE Gal 4:21-24, 2 Corinth 3:5-6).
Agar is the Old Covenant Bible, a "woman" who bears children of FLESH for Abraham/God who read, understand and interpret the BIBLE in human natural Knowledge and wisdom without the HELP or ENABLING or INSPIRATION OF THE POWER (wisdom and knowledge) of the Holy Spirit.
Slaves are born as slaves as a result of the teaching, interpreting, testifying carnally of the handwritten Bible. The witnessing of the Old Covenant Bible handwritten in black and white cover to cover called the LETTER, the ordinances of darkness of DEATH and BONDAGE in human wisdom and knowledge presents the visible prince of this world and his carnal ministers as kings of this world. 2 Corinth 4, 2 Corinth 3: 5-6, 1 John 2: 7-8, Isaiah 45: 7-8, Coloss 2: 10-23, Coloss 3.
But the New Covenant Bible is presented by the revelation of the Invisible New King from heaven who is read to overthrow the physical earthly visible one who is a copy of the invisible heavenly one in souls. Col. 3.
The assignment of the INVISIBLE Old High Priest called Moses, the handwritten Bible in letter, who is READ and His special ministers appointed by God, is to fight progressively the carnal blind ministers of the Bible until Moses (handwritten Old Covenant Bible) hands over the true followers to the new High Priest, Joshua (Christ the NEW COVENANT Bible); who is also READ to lead them into the promised land of Canaan, which is figuratively the promised new Covenant Bible Land.
This is the place of promise (Canaan) to this day 2009 where the chosen followers of the Bible are set free from the carnal worship of the carnal Egyptian gods. The chosen followers that have been shown (revealed) the New Covenant Bible land are instructed to takeover the land by waging battle under the command of Joshua, the New Covenant Bible High Priest and overthrow the carnal occupants that have build up a host of carnal ministers.
But Joshua under the leadership of God (Holy Spirit) is commanded to establish the the Kingdom of God where her subjects worship ONLY ONE true God by revelation knowledge and wisdom of the Spirit of God. These are the sons of God born of the Spirit of God that the whole world is waiting for, for the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the hearts of men through interpreting the Bible Word by the ability of the Holy Spirit to become the New Covenant Bible that saves souls. Rom 8. James 1: 18-21.
The revelation knowledge and wisdom of God given to a soul by the indwelling GOD teaches the Bible in a new way that abolishes or replaces visible earthly things that are presented by the Old handwritten Bible with invisible things of Heaven in pattern. 2 Corinth 3: 13-15, 17-18. B) JESUS CHRIST. 2 Corinth 3: 13-15.
Earthly Historical visible veiling Jesus Christ who preached 2000 years ago in the Middle East is replaced with the heavenly invisible Christ Jesus, the High Priest who is READ from Genesis to the end of the Book of Revelation and is revealed to be the New High Priest called the New Covenant Bible, THE WORD OF GOD, the BIBLE, THAT WAGES WAR AGAINST HIS CARNAL ENEMIES. Heb 10: 1-9, 2 Corinth 4: 1-18, 2 Corinth 3: 13-15, Gal 4: 1-14, 1 John 2:7-8, Isaiah 45: 7-8, 1 John 5: 7-8. 2 Corinth 5:16, Heb 1: 1-2. By KJV Bible.
C) BLOOD SACRIFICES: 1 John 5: 7-8. Use KJV Bible to compare heavenly invisible things in verse 7 with earthly visible things in verse 8. Earthly Historical Visible and physical Blood sacrifice of 2000 years ago presented by the handwritten Bible that teaches earthly visible SHADOWS is abolished or replaced or substituted by the invisible heavenly "BLOOD" sacrifice which is the Holy Spirit that SPEAKS BETTER THINGS THAN THAT OF ABEL which cleanses us our CONSCIENCES from all sin of transgressing the Law of God and worship of idol gods presented by teaching the Old handwritten Covenant Bible carnally in human carnal wisdom and knowledge that kills souls. Heb 12:22-29.
EARTHLY VISIBLE BLOOD SACRIFICE THAT WAS SHED 2000 YEARS AGO FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS A COPY OF THE HEAVENLY ONE IS REPLACED BY THE INVISIBLE HEAVENLY SACRIFICE OF THE HEAVENLY "BLOOD" WHICH IS ETERNAL HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD THAT CLEANSES OUR CONSCIENCES FROM THE SIN OF CARNALLY TRANSGRESSING THE BIBLE LAW WHICH RESULTS IN WORSHIPING OF IDOLS OR SHADOWS OF THE OLD COVENANT BIBLE. HEB 9: 11-23, 1 John 5: 7-8, 1 Corinth 10. Heb 10: 1-9. By KJV Bible.
TWO BIBLES IN ONE BIBLE: ONE IS CALLED MOSES THE OLD HIGH PRIEST FROM THE BEGINNING TO THIS DAY OF 2009 ONWARDS AND THE OTHER BIBLE IS CHRIST THE NEW HIGH PRIEST SEALED FROM THE BEGINNING BUT IS REVEALED IN THE LAST DAYS AND CONTINUES TO BE HIGH PRIEST ONWARDS AND FOREVER. 2 CORINTH 3: 13-15, 1 John 2: 7-8, Heb 1: 1-2"
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 11:25:32 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 08:04:04 PM
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 14, 2010, 07:34:57 PM
All the new finds that men produce everyday show that man is still in the search to find what man will call wisdom (his wisdom), I will stand that with, that without the Holy Spirit interpreting what ever transalation, you find just what man intends to find...that man is the answer.
Don't get me wrong Micah....Why do you even bother to come to this forum? All mortal men and women here. All people find whatever they want to find.
Isn't it better to hide in a empty dark room and wait for inspiration?
Study theyself approved doesn't mean do nothing and wait until the HS decides to inspire you.
Why did the HS even bother to inspired the writings if they are just a useless "you find what you want to find".
I truely don't understand your view.
QuoteI bother to come on this forum in hope to recieve and give, share. Would you prefer that I dont?
I just answered your PM.
But because you ask alsmost the same thing here: It wouldn't bother me the slightest bit if I found 100 new posts of you when I log back in tomorrow.
QuoteWho said anything about mortals? Did you mean "Is it better to hide in a empty dark room and wait for inspiration?" If you did, should the Lord have me in a empty dark room to wait for inspiration, then thats where I would want to be, and the inspiration would come, would it not? I to study, but one thing I believe the Lord has tryed to instill in me is not to let my mind jump at every new thing men decuce to put in my veiw, not that there are not new things that He has a desire for me to see, but just since the internet the mind of man is running amuck in every direction to find out more. I myself believe in a new thing that He is doing it now today.
Isa 43:19 Lo, I am doing a new thing, now it springeth up, Do ye not know it? Yea, I put in a wilderness a way, In a desolate place--floods.
2Ti 2:15 Give diligence, thyself, approved, to present unto God,—a workman not to be put to shame, skillfully handling the word of truth.
I only half understand what you are saying.... but I think it's answered by my answer to the next quote
QuoteYou said, " Why did the HS even bother to inspired the writings if they are just a useless "you find what you want to find".
I dont believe you really mean that.
I do mean that. But I think you misunderstand what I mean by it.
IF it doesn't matter how sloppy the translation of a Bible is because the HS can teach you from that tranlation anyway then why did the HS even bother to inspire the Scriptures? The writers could just have written down what they remembered and call that the NT.
But that's not how it happened. The HS invested lots of time to guide the hand of the writes of the NT. To me that means the HS for some reason saw a need of accurate recording of Jesus teachings/life.
To me that automatically means it's important to find something as close as possible to the originals. But even that is not 100% ok because to understand words we have to understand culture.
I even notice that on this forum. Our societies are slightly diffrent. one on one translations sometimes are much different than intended. We are both living in western societies in the same time. How much more dificult is it to understand a 2000 year old society with an eastern mindset.
Everybody his/her own ways guess :icon_flower:
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 14, 2010, 12:03:34 PM
Then the question is: What exactly is the Mosaic law?
a] Manmade laws + laws directly from God
b] Manmade laws only.
I've read Jesus was a Pharisee and only had problems with the stuff they added. Not with the original/true laws.
That aligns quite well with Mat 5:17 where Jesus states He came to teach/(re)explain the law.
IMO, Jesus was talking primarily to the Jewish leaders at the end of that age; prior to the stake (cross), prior to the end of temple worship, prior to the age of grace being ushered in and Paul bringing the evangel to us - the Gentiles/pagans.
Then Paul taught the Law was passing away, that we're saved by grace not ANY works, or else we'd have something to boast about - rather than just totally depending on the Messiah - and if we attempted to justify ourselves by works, then we had "fallen from grace".
The 2 Bibles post talks about the types and shadows of the OT and old covenant, which ALL pointed to Christ - the better way, the fulfillment. :2c:
Seems strange that God would write in a Greek language, when the entire old testament is written in Hebrew, in fact the more I think about it the more absurd it becomes that the new tesament is supposedly written in Greek. Jesus was born of Jewish descent and he fullfilled the law, why would he decide to write the language in Greek. The new testament was primarily not for gentiles and not for Greeks, British or Americans, it was written for the Jews first, as Paul preached to them first.
I think the idea that the new testament is written in Greek, is mystery babylon deceiving the nations with her sorcery and fornications, corrupting the word of God.
:2c:
That very well could be tank, I'm certainly interested in more evidence. However, I'm also wanting an unbiased, accurate translation; which again, it appears it could be hard to find. :sigh:
But we are still in an age when most people are blinded--'this evil age'--and God apparently wants it that way.
I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I realized a long time ago that the nt scriptures were probably written in Hebrew. It was in response to a question I had about why Jesus called himself 'Son of man.' I finally realized he was calling himself 'Son of Adam,' as opposed to what the others called him, 'Son of David.' But you don't see that in the Greek--you just see the word, anthropos--'man.'
There is a Bible floating around that does all the translations from the Hebrew. And they use the name of Y'shua for Jesus because that is his Hebrew name.
Yet, this is our time--the time of the Gentiles--and Greek is our language. So I don't really object to the Greek. It's much more like English than Hebrew is.
It could be that now we are at the end of the age and the final harvesting, so knowledge is increasing and all these things are being made clearer [by ww's links, for instance].
Daniel 12:4
But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge."
Interesting Molly. While you were posting, I was off finding this from angelfire; :dontknow:
However, now there is evidence that Fundamentalists, like many Evangelicals and Charismatics, are coming under the baleful influence of the Hebrew Roots Movement. With this new development, there lurks the prospect that the Bible version debate may be resolved via compromise. The Judaising movement, which has infiltrated culture and religion across the board, promotes an Aramaic/Hebrew New Testament over the Greek.
The Hebrew Roots Movement is based upon the false premise that the original Gospels were written in Hebrew, or possibly Aramaic, and that the Greek New Testament is a mere translation of Hebrew or Aramaic originals. The Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, which has influenced the Messianic ministries on a broad scale, is a major source of this error. The theory of Hebrew originals of the Gospel accounts was propounded in a book published by the JSSR titled The Difficult Words of Jesus. Authors David Bivin and Roy Blizzard first cast doubt upon the original inspiration of the Greek gospels:
"Why are the words of Jesus that we find in the Synoptic Gospels so difficult to understand? The answer is that the original gospel that formed the basis for the Synoptic Gospels was first communicated, not in Greek, but in the Hebrew language. In spite of this, today's modern translations are all based upon a Greek text, derived from a still earlier Greek text, which is itself a translation of an original Hebrew Life of Jesus. This means that we are reading an English translation of a text which is in itself a translation. Since the Synoptic Gospels are derived from an original Hebrew text, we are constantly bumping into Hebrew expressions or idioms which are often meaningless in Greek, or in translations from the Greek. 1."Our reasons for writing this book are not only to show that the original gospel was communicated in the Hebrew language; but to show that the entire New Testament can only be understood from a Hebrew perspective."
The JSSR is a non-Christian, Jesus-Seminar type of institution which has connections with and sponsors seminars for various Messianic and Hebrew Roots ministries such as Moriel Ministries and Messengers of Messiah.
http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/watch-unto-prayer/pecrapta.html
:dontknow: :mshrug: :dunno2: :thinking: :dontknow:
Again, I'm very interested in the possibilities, it just seems there's so much "competing evidence" that one might need to proceed with caution - open, but not with blinders on :cool:
Quote from: Molly on December 15, 2010, 01:20:28 AM
But we are still in an age when most people are blinded--'this evil age'--and God apparently wants it that way.
I haven't had time to read this thread yet but I realized a long time ago that the nt scriptures were probably written in Hebrew. It was in response to a question I had about why Jesus called himself 'Son of man.' I finally realized he was calling himself 'Son of Adam,' as opposed to what the others called him, 'Son of David.' But you don't see that in the Greek--you just see the word, anthropos--'man.'
There is a Bible floating around that does all the translations from the Hebrew. And they use the name of Y'shua for Jesus because that is his Hebrew name.
Yet, this is our time--the time of the Gentiles--and Greek is our language. So I don't really object to the Greek. It's much more like English than Hebrew is.
It could be that now we are at the end of the age and the final harvesting, so knowledge is increasing and all these things are being made clearer [by ww's links, for instance].
Daniel 12:4
But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge."
We are living in exciting times, in some ways it's great that the sacred name of Jesus has been hidden form the masses, because that name is blasphemed constantly, maybe this was Gods great wisdom to prevent the world blaspheming his sacred name, otherwise perhaps if his name, Hebrew name was blasphemed as much as Jesus is, the world might explode, because of the power of his name and the ingnorance of people concerning the power of the spirit world, for the tongue is a deadly weapon able to kill and destroy and also bring great blessings.
:2c:
And Tony, you've posted this before;
from The Christian Bible; "The New Contract Writings were written in the Greek language. However it wasn't the Classical Greek of Aristotle; rather, they were written in Koine Greek, which was the everyday language used by almost everyone during the First Century A.D. in conversation and commerce throughout the Roman Empire...therefore, plain everyday English has been used in this Bible to properly translate the everyday Greek that the writers used, instead of using the religious and theological terms found in the other Bible translations, which distort the original meaning.
The translators of the KJV were unaware of the differences between Koine Greek and Classical Greek. The relevant manuscripts had not yet been discovered..."
As I said, let's keep diggin' :bigGrin:
Paul has it all for bringing the two languages and cultures together. He's highly trained in the law and has the revelation of the gospel of peace directly from the source. Both a Roman citizen and a Jew, he had to be multi-lingual.
I have found ancient Hebrew [which is a dead language] to be a much heavier language. Yes, it has a lot of depth, but it is also heavy. Greek is much lighter, and more appropriate to a light burden.
This is something the Jew's of the time just couldn't get--his yoke is easy and his burden is light. We get that, though, don't we? The lightness of his burden. He does all the work.
Paul brings the two cultures together. He is the apostle to the Gentiles, so I expect he was speaking Greek and Latin most of the time.
2 Timothy 1:11
Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
:thumbsup: Molly.
I'm startin' to wonder... :wink2:
Several sects and churches claim that Jesus Christ and
the apostles only spoke Hebrew or Aramaic, and that
the original monographs of the New Testament were all
written in Hebrew, and later translated into Greek. They
consider Greek to be a pagan language. What is the real
truth of the matter? Did Jesus speak Greek?
The September-October 1992 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review contains several fascinating articles which bear heavily on the questions posed for this article. For centuries, scholars have believed -- assumed -- that very few Jews of the first century spoke Greek. They have believed, and taught, that ancient Judea was a "backwater" area of the Roman Empire, and the people were ignorant as a whole of the Greek language, although it is admitted that Greek was the "lingua franca" and "language of commerce" throughout the Roman Empire.
Today, however, new archaeological discoveries have undermined the speculations of scholars and brought into clear light the fact that Greek was well known among the Jews, especially the priesthood, leadership class, and the merchant class. In particular, Greek was well understood in "Galilee of the Gentiles," the region where Jesus Christ of Nazareth was raised, and grew up as a young lad. There is no doubt, therefore, that Jesus and the original apostles all spoke Greek -- commonly, as a "second language."
http://www.ntgreek.org/answers/nt_written_in_greek.htm
:cloud9: My :2c:.....
First of all, they have an extant copy of Matthew TODAY, written in Hebrew, so it's not a big stretch to conclude that they wrote the whole thing in Hebrew. Aramaic is a "sister" language to it. Greek was a way to HIDE IT, not reveal it, except on a very superficial surface level, when compared with what is both hidden and revealed, via the Hebrew. Another snipet.....
"One of the best arguments for proving that Hebrew was a commonly used language in Israel during the first century CE (AD) is through the evidence discovered in the archeological record. Letters from Shimon Ben Kosba (Simon Bar Kockba) have been discovered in the dead sea region and were written during the second Jewish revolt of 130-135 CE. These letters are written in Hebrew, not Aramaic or Greek. What is also interesting about these letters is that they use contractions, which can only come from a spoken language. We consistently use contractions such as "I'm" for "I am" or "wouldn't" for "would not". One of these contractions is the word tashmayim, the contracted form of "et hashamayim" (the heavens)."
I can see that the Orthodox Jews and anti-semitic pagans (even some Christians) alike, would have RUSHED to destroy all the Hebrew copies they could find, over hundreds of years. The Yahshua-believing Jews were were murdered off, along with their books.
Second, it's a HOLY language, given by God, and has more mysteries hidden within JUST THE LETTERS of it, and I'm not just talking about the "Bible codes" studies; it is an awe all by itself. But here's one of the most famous things found in the Torah, via the codes.
The word תורה (Torah) found in the Torah (the first five books of the Bible). Beginning with the first ת (T) in Genesis and counting every 50 letters you find the word Torah spelled out. The same is true in Exodus. However in the book of Numbers the word Torah is written backwards, the same is true for deuteronomy except in this case the sequence begins in verse 5 and at an interval of 49 letters instead of 50. The Torah sequence is not found in Leviticus but instead the Hebrew word יהוה (YHWH/Yahweh) is found at intervals of seven. It has been proposed that this code shows the Torah pointing to Yahweh;
TORaH > TORaH > YHWH < HaROT < HaROT
Third, He created the creation with it. If Christ and the Torah are one and the same, the Word (TORAH) made flesh, and we are told everything that was made was made by Christ, well........
Another snipet.....
"When we look at all the names of Adam's descendent we find that all the names from Adam to Noah and his children are Hebrew names, meaning that their name has a meaning in Hebrew. For instance, Methuselah (Genesis 5:21) is Hebrew for "his death brings" (The flood occurred the year that he died). It is not until we come to Noah's grandchildren that we find names that are of a language other then Hebrew. For instance, the name Nimrod (Genesis 11:18), who was from Babylon/Sumer/Shinar and possibly the Tower of Babel, is a non-Hebrew name. According to the Biblical record of names, Adam and his descendants spoke Hebrew.
In addition, Jewish tradition as well as some Christian Scholars, believed that Hebrew was the original language of man."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a possibility that Hebrew will be the language of the future, since God will restore all of Israel to their promised land and restore the celebration of feasts and sabaths. If this being the case then perhaps God will also increase the intelligence of humanity so that they can understand Hebrew better, for it seems to be the case that ancient Hebrew was reserved only for the intelligent and those who are blessed by God intellectually i.e the gift of a spirit of wisdom, such as solomon had.
I have made a start already, eloihim means creator :bigGrin:, a long way to go though :laughing7:
:2c:
:cloud9: :laughing7: I wouldn't be surprised......I've asked Him to let me understand it. I know He can do it in an instant.
Quote from: jabcat on December 15, 2010, 01:18:03 AMThat very well could be tank, I'm certainly interested in more evidence. However, I'm also wanting an unbiased, accurate translation; which again, it appears it could be hard to find. :sigh:
Even the most honest and skilled translator can't turn a bad source into something good. But as strange as it may sound transltion the Greek back to Hebrew give linguists some hints to correct a few think in the Greek (and other languages)
But if the Hebrew copies are all destroyed.... well then the translations are never as good as they could have been.
Scholars have been very sure for centuries the Greek was s bad because it was written by uneducated men. Until they found evidence for a Koine dialect.
Scholars have been very sure for centuries Hebrew wasn't spoken in Jesus time. Until the DSS prived otherwise.
So maybe Hebrew documents will be found someday. (I woldn't be suprised they are in the vatican.....)
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 15, 2010, 09:17:29 AM
So maybe Hebrew documents will be found someday. (I woldn't be suprised they are in the vatican.....)
Now right there you might be on to something. Wouldn't you like to know what all they're hoarding and hiding? :mshock:
Quote from: jabcat on December 15, 2010, 01:23:30 AMHowever, now there is evidence that Fundamentalists, like many Evangelicals and Charismatics, are coming under the baleful influence of the Hebrew Roots Movement. With this new development, there lurks the prospect that the Bible version debate may be resolved via compromise. The Judaising movement, which has infiltrated culture and religion across the board, promotes an Aramaic/Hebrew New Testament over the Greek.
The Hebrew Roots Movement is based upon the false premise that the original Gospels were written in Hebrew, or possibly Aramaic, and that the Greek New Testament is a mere translation of Hebrew or Aramaic originals. The Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research, which has influenced the Messianic ministries on a broad scale, is a major source of this error. The theory of Hebrew originals of the Gospel accounts was propounded in a book published by the JSSR titled The Difficult Words of Jesus. Authors David Bivin and Roy Blizzard first cast doubt upon the original inspiration of the Greek gospels: quote]
It's usually hard to see clearly because all the mud throwing. One way to fight an opposing view is to discredit the enemy. I think Gary can tell you a few things about that.
The word infiltrated is used in a negative way. Freedom fighter to some. Terrorist for others.
The point is that the evedence supporting the Hebrew view seems to be stacking up . It's hard to admit you are wrong. But what's worse is that Hebrew originals come with a Hebrew mindset. And that Hebrew mindset is what they fear most. It dictates different translations/interpretations. And that means their denominations are wrong. And that's a very big deal in a world were people are prepared to start a war over the question if Jesus had black or brown sandals.
So the "infiltration" argument has zero impression on me because "they" have to much to lose. Sure the Jews would also love to see the Christians moving more in their way.
But if I look at the source of current Christianity, RCC church filled with statues of Roman gods, I can't say I'm unbiased.....
Quote from: thinktank on December 15, 2010, 03:13:06 AMGod will restore all of Israel to their promised land and restore the celebration of feasts
That sounds good because the Jews have the most parties of all religions... :thumbsup:
:beerburp: :Party: :drunken_smilie:
Quote from: Cardinal on December 15, 2010, 03:01:17 AMFirst of all, they have an extant copy of Matthew TODAY, written in Hebrew,
The counter argument is that the Hebrew was translated from the Greek.
- Why would the Greek be translated to a dead language nobody speaks?
- Why didn't Jesus use Greek cultural concepts while speaking Greek; instead of using Hebrew cultural concepts that died with the language (a language doesn't just fade away without external factors that change culture)
There are also secular "hints" that the Romans actively started wiping out the Jewish heritage because Jews were a irritating bunch of people that always caused trouble in the Roman empire. And "now" the Christian Jews were also annoying the Romans with their own view on Christianity.
And even if Jesus only spoke (spake?) Greek and the writing are all 100% Greek inspired by HS it still doesn't mean the Hebrew is of no use.
Does anybody have a clue what "Knot it your ears." means. It's a Dutch saying that simply means. Remember what I say. Remember very well. Other cultures may think I'm suggesting to wear ear rings. So even then we need the HS inspired Greek with a OT Jewish cultural background.
It's about culture. Not language.
What an interesting discussion! I was blessed with the chance to learn a tiny bit of the Hebrew language in university and it is such a beautiful language. I absolutely loved studying it. And Cardinal is so right, it is so full of meaning. I honestly do hope that we all speak Hebrew again someday. :happy3:
Quote from: thinktank on December 15, 2010, 01:32:27 AM
We are living in exciting times, in some ways it's great that the sacred name of Jesus has been hidden form the masses, because that name is blasphemed constantly, maybe this was Gods great wisdom to prevent the world blaspheming his sacred name, otherwise perhaps if his name, Hebrew name was blasphemed as much as Jesus is, the world might explode, because of the power of his name and the ingnorance of people concerning the power of the spirit world, for the tongue is a deadly weapon able to kill and destroy and also bring great blessings.
:2c:
I found this interesting thinktank. There certainly is something about the name of Yeshua.
Quote from: wwIt's about culture. Not language.
It's not so much about culture as it is about the God of the Hebrew Old Testament. If God were tied to culture, he would be a respecter of persons and most of us would be in trouble because most of us are not Jewish.
But, none of that can, or should, prevent us from knowing our God. Something is lost in any translation, but we have the tools today to easily dig deeper into the Hebrew and Greek words.
If we have an idiom that makes no sense to us, such as a camel through the eye of a needle, isn't it possible to easily learn enough about that idiom to understand the meaning?
The Gentiles are not going to go backwards to Judaism. Not only is the language dead, the religious impulse is dead.
I have left your house desolate...Rather, they are going to come forward with us, to a better covenant than spoken of by the blood of Abel.
Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
:cloud9: I tend to think they are going to meet us in the middle :winkgrin: :laughing7:
White Wings,
In no place have I suggested that their is an overlap between pagan religions and Christianity. I believe true Christianity is a relationship with the Creator through a revelation of Jesus Christ. I think it is important that you take the time to understand what a person is saying before you generate debate where none is necessary.
I certainly think we should pursue scholarship and the best translation we can obtain- as I said before. However, the Holy Spirit is the unique Commnuicator and Teacher of the scriptures. Without Him there is no discernment.
Illuminated by the Holy Spirit, is really easy to see the difference between YHWH and the principalities masquerading as gods of this world. They reveal it in their writings.
So we(the apostles/original witnesses) have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
(2Pe 1:19-21)
Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he *said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
(Rev 19:10)
You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
(2Ti 3:14-17)
Peace, John
Jab and Card, thx......Luv u guys!
I think Jabcat's quote is vital in trying to understand the origins of what has been incorrectly called the New Testament or New Covenant Scriptures. To label Matthew through Revelation as New Testament writings sets a stage on which we are doomed to fail in properly interpretting the contents of those writings. The New Covenant is NOT a set of Scriptures, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. Jabcat quoted:
(comment found re: this translation - "I am all for learning about Jewish roots to better understand scripture, but it needs to be understood that Jesus "came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him" (John 1:11). Many gentile Christians falsely think that Messianic Jews have a better grasp of the scriptures simply b/c of their Jewishness. The truth is that some Jewish Christians still try to find there identity in their Jewishness instead of Christ. This is a huge mistake that leads to major theological errors. The author of this book sadly falls under this category. One such blatant error taught by this book is that Jewish Christians 'should' keep the dietary Laws or "Kashrut". The author does not submit to scripture (Jesus in Mark 7:19, Peter's Vision in Acts 10, Paul writing to the Galatians, and many more places). He tries to explain these passages away by appealing to a "Jewish understanding", but Jesus continually showed most Jewish understanding to be flawed. It is the spirit that leads into all truth (John 16:13), not Jewish roots or any other.")
Gary: My wife was raised Jewish and she came to faith before I did. From the very beginning of my walk with Jesus I had an insatiable appetite for understanding the Bible and the Holy Spirit. I spend a great deal of time in Messianic Jewish congregations and read a lot of "Jewish roots" kind of material. I have read dozens of books on manners and customs in Biblical days, etc. I read several books and articles attempting to prove most if not all of the "new testament scriptures" were written in Hebrew or Aramaic, not Greek. ALMOST WITHOUT EXCEPTION THESE PEOPLE (who wrote some very valuable information otherwise), taught a legalism that brought people into bondage of man-made laws, not the law of the Spirit of the Life in Christ Jesus. The difference between the Mosaic Law and the law of the Life in Christ Jesus is the difference between life and death. I do not recall any particular article I've written or anyone else that lays down the differences well, I'm sure there are some good resources that clearly point to the differences. I know we have a Chart on the tentmaker site somewhere showing the differences between the Shadow of the Old Testament and the reality of the New. Perhaps someone can find it and post it here. But dear, brother and sister, a SERIOUS warning to you all, the law kills, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek when one understands how Paul used the phrase "the law." Cast out the woman and her son. The promises of God do not come to us by Moses. There is a higher law that the shadow of Moses cannot attain.
And this is why we must SPEAK to the rock and not STRIKE it.
Quote from: eaglesway on December 15, 2010, 07:39:15 PMI think it is important that you take the time to understand what a person is saying before you generate debate where none is necessary.
If you had taken your own advise and avoided going off-topic we wouldn't even had this 'debate'. Very few seem (if any) even to understand what my intention of this topic is and was.
Gary is the prime example of that.
I'm done with it.
:hijacked:
(feel free to continue about laws and HS)
I wonder if it's possible to get the thread back to exactly what the original intent may have been. I personally do think it's interesting whether or not the originals were in Hebrew or Greek. However, maybe we can't fully know for sure? Maybe what we have are impressions and opinions, as well as various and even opposite points of view. That seems like one issue, and maybe what the OP was addressing?
Then IMO, there are other related issues, which it seems we wandered into - and I don't think just any one person is "guilty" of that - because that's what we have in this and any thread really, is related issues. So seems to me one of those pertinent related issues would be, so whether Greek or Hebrew, then what does that mean? How might it affect translations of certain words like aion (often tr. eternal) or gehenna/hades (often tr. hell), etc. In essence, what difference might it make to us in our walk and as relates to UR.
For instance, the one Brauscher fellow who translated from Hebrew, still says "eternal torment". So does Hebrew or Greek make any difference; is he "right or wrong", and either way, then what does that mean? Does it mean anything, or can't the Spirit of God reveal whatever God wishes from either one? For example, there are at least a few members on here who actually read the KJV mostly, but are still able to "see" other things regarding the plan of God. Personally, I do think translations make a difference, especially to the "masses" - because most don't look beyond the words on the page, so are heavily influenced by the mistranslations.
Thoughts?
:cloud9: @ WW......Personally, I've enjoyed the topic and I'm glad you brought it up. I have always trusted the HS to lead me into ALL TRUTH, and that includes gleaning from Jewish sources, knowing that where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. Blessings....
:cloud9: I came to the knowledge of UR from the HS giving me revelation on the Tabernacle of Moses. It's not a new doctrine, as others have found out thru other means, it was just hidden from our eyes for a season, so to speak.
ANYTHING that is truth, has as it's root, the Hebrew "transmission" of the Torah, which includes in it the pattern for the Tabernacle, cited in Hebrews 10 as the pattern of HEAVENLY or spiritual things. Had I been taught originally by anyone (besides God), to study the Tabernacle of Moses, one cannot help but speculate on how much SOONER I might have come to the revelation of UR.
But He has ways of bringing all to the Truth, one way or another. Blessings...
Truth will win out. :bigGrin:
Following my last post; I think it's often hard to know what the absolute, most focused intent is when a thread is started. It often pushes various buttons, as we all have our own thoughts, questions/issues we may be having at any particular time. I understand the desire to know the languages of the originals, but also, that then things come up like "then should we be not only be paying more attention to what the Jews did, but following some of their practices, etc."...and I think that's what Gary's post is addressing; the differences between following Judaism vs. living in the new covenant/age of grace as Paul instructed the ecclesia.
So if those "related issues" have been addressed, maybe we can get a real clear explanation of what was intended with the OP and do some more exploring in that focused area?
Threads on forums are like conversations, they evolve and develop.
IMO the Hebrew roots of the scriptures are important considerations regarding translation and understanding the mind of God bubbling out of the prophets and Jesus and the apostles. This is not the same as returning to the culture and the practices that the Hebrews practiced as they drew back from the heart of God, as Paul put it, "practicing the law in pursuit of their own righteousness". This is why Paul said that they are "enemies for the sake of the gospel but beloved for the patriarchs sake". Legalism is not so much a uniquely Hebrew root as it is a spiritual departure from the heart of God presently very much in evidence among Christians Gentile or Messianic. What God made for man(the Sabbath, for instance) can be turned into religious bondage so easily. Straining at gnats and swallowing camels is still real popular. Isaiah 58 speaks to this wonderfully.
So, to me, perhaps it might appear that someone was talking primarily about understanding the scriptures, when they are actually trying to deal with the whole Jewish roots/Torah culture thing Gary was talking about- or vice verse. The medium only allows a certain amount of post by post flexibility, so it is sometimes difficult to maintain continuity, hence, we have admins for when things break down or get confused. I am cool with that. :o)
Jabcat said:
QuotePersonally, I do think translations make a difference, especially to the "masses" - because most don't look beyond the words on the page, so are heavily influenced by the mistranslations.
I'll have to disagree here, I think it IS important to have a faithfull translation but I believe that the Word is veilled for those it is to be veiled, so translation doesn't matter, we could all be reading Hebrew from the original writings and still preach that people are going to hell. Because as have been said, and it is important to repeat it often, it is the spirit of God which unveil the Word for us.
I've seen, from my very short experience, that those who hear the victorious gospel will hear it whatever words we might use and those who will not hear will ignore even the most obvious statements.
Where I believe the translation faithfulness to be important is in my own seeking of God and His marvelous plan. which is why I read from the CLV mostly ( and my first language is french) because I've yet to see a french translation that is not RIDDLED with interpretations.
Which is why also I find the hebrew originals to be interesting.
It is actually quite fearful for traditionnal evangelicals to be told that their translation is flawed...
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 15, 2010, 10:20:16 PM
Quote from: eaglesway on December 15, 2010, 07:39:15 PMI think it is important that you take the time to understand what a person is saying before you generate debate where none is necessary.
If you had taken your own advise and avoided going off-topic we wouldn't even had this 'debate'. Very few seem (if any) even to understand what my intention of this topic is and was.
Gary is the prime example of that.
I'm done with it.
:hijacked:
(feel free to continue about laws and HS)
What happened to your usual good self? Gary doesn't post here often, your post didn't help much.
I think there are many posts here that are usefull to your topic, what are you complaining about?
Quote from: Quaesitor on December 16, 2010, 12:52:51 AM
Jabcat said:
QuotePersonally, I do think translations make a difference, especially to the "masses" - because most don't look beyond the words on the page, so are heavily influenced by the mistranslations.
I'll have to disagree here, I think it IS important to have a faithfull translation but I believe that the Word is veilled for those it is to be veiled, so translation doesn't matter, we could all be reading Hebrew from the original writings and still preach that people are going to hell. Because as have been said, and it is important to repeat it often, it is the spirit of God which unveil the Word for us.
I've seen, from my very short experience, that those who hear the victorious gospel will hear it whatever words we might use and those who will not hear will ignore even the most obvious statements.
Where I believe the translation faithfulness to be important is in my own seeking of God and His marvelous plan. which is why I read from the CLV mostly ( and my first language is french) because I've yet to see a french translation that is not RIDDLED with interpretations.
Which is why also I find the hebrew originals to be interesting.
It is actually quite fearful for traditionnal evangelicals to be told that their translation is flawed...
I'm a little confused (which isn't the first time:). You disagree that translation is important to people who are HEAVILY influenced by faulty translations? Are you sure you read the entirety of my post, because I said people can get revelation reading the KJV, etc. I agree God reveals as He sees fit, but I still think it's in peoples' best interests to have accuracy and truth - as much as possible.
Maybe our experiences are different, because people I've dealt with are so indoctrinated by reading all their lives that "hell" is "eternal", and that most people will be tormented (tortured) forever, that again, they can't see past what they've learned all their life - and they go back to their written words in their faulty translation to "prove it" (even if just in their mind, because it's SO engrained). I've personally seen that many people have read that and been taught it for 40-50 years, and because their translation and preacher (and most of Christianity) says it, then they are "absolutely sure" that it's so. It was very helpful to me personally to hear about aion, gehenna, and their more accurate translations. I'm not saying, and have never said that's all there is to it, but I personally believe it's important. :dontknow:
Maybe we're talking about 2 slightly different things - or mostly saying the same thing differently. :bigGrin:
Blessings.
Oh brother we are not disagreeing that much. :HeartThrob:
What I wanted to say, in maybe too many words, is that whatever translation we have I believe those believing in hell WILL believe in hell.
Well that is my (short) experience anyway that even when faced against obvious arguments they will always go back to tradition.
Even if we bring "truer" translations, they will refuse them.
(if that is not clearer I apologize)
(out-topic)
And I realise that the story of the rich man is true in knowledge also because those who are the richer in religious knowledge are somewhat the more closed ones, it is hard for them to renounce to these riches.
Sorry :bigGrin:.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 12, 2010, 02:13:39 PM
http://searchwarp.com/swa413703.htm
QuoteFirst we have to look at a couple of facts. One fact is that we have a transcript of the Book of Matthew in Hebrew, which predates any manuscripts we have in Koinia Greek.
QuoteWe also have to look at New Testament passages themselves. We see that when Yeshua stopped Shaul (Saul) He didn't speak to him in Greek but rather Hebrew
QuoteDr Robert Lindsey, who was my pastor when I was growing up in Israel, translated the book of Mark from Greek into Hebrew. He discovered something rather interesting. He found that when he read the translation in Hebrew rather then from Greek, it made more sense. It wasn't as disjointed as it was in Greek, rather it began to flow and many of the things that were written even had more meaning to the Hebrew ear.
QuoteEven the Church Fathers attest to this over and over again:
Bump OP
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on December 12, 2010, 04:23:17 PM
If true, then aionios as a translated word from hebrew meaning everlasting or eternal in the absolute sense is even less likely than it is now.
followed up below
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 12, 2010, 04:43:01 PM
Very true Paul.
Then the foundation of ET gets even weaker as it is right now. Same for ED I think.
It would also explain the (little) problem I have with Hades.
Strictly speaking Hades is not the grave. Hades is the god of the underworld
So what's that pagan concept doing in the Bible?
a] Jesus was ridiculing Greek mythology.
b] Jesus agrees the god Hades exists but that Father will defeat the god named Hades.
c] Jesus never spoke the word Hades. He only used the Hebrew sheol.
I fear there are almost no original Hebrew manuscripts left to translate from. I really would like to see a NT translated from that source.
How is this so? I'd like to think so, because of olam in the Hebrew. But as I said, Brauscher (said to be a universalist) still translated as "eternal torment" and "everlasting life"...so I honestly right now don't understand this. I've understood that olam in the Hebrew has even less of a sense of eternal than aion in the Greek does. Yet at least in the one main Hebrew translation that's been mentioned, the above quoted translation occurs. If this is the norm, that even in Hebrew we still have such mistranslations, what's been gained so far - except to know more about the originals may still yet lead to better translations? :dontknow: I'll look for more evidence and how other Hebrew translations state it.
(Or is this already back off-topic?)
If we're back off-topic we can split this off into a new topic. This is from a book by TM members, David and Zoe Sulem, God's Plan For All. It talks about the Hebrew translation/meaning of olam in this linked chapter;
http://www.godsplanforall.com/translations
This author makes a case for Hebrew as the main language of Jesus
http://ccsom.org/languageofjesus/index.htm (http://ccsom.org/languageofjesus/index.htm)
:cloud9: :thumbsup:
Eusebius in his Church History, discussing the canonization of the Scriptures,
quoted Origen as follows: "Among the four gospels, which are the only indisputable
ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was
written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ,
and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew
language" (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, The Church History of Eusebius,
book VI, chap.xxv, 4, page 272).
Eusebius himself tells us, "For Matthew, who had at first preached to the
Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in
his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss
of his presence" (ibid., book III, chap. XXIV, 6, page 152).
Eusebius quotes Irenaeus also on this matter of Matthew's gospel. According to
Irenaeus, "Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews in their own language,
while Peter and Paul were preaching and founding the church in Rome" (ibid., book V,
chap. VIII, 2, page 222).
Irenaeus, in Against Heresies, made this statement. He declared, as recorded in
Ante-Nicene Fathers, "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their
own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of
the Church" (book III, chap.I, 1, vol. 1, page 414).
Eusebius also quotes Papias, (circa 60-130 A.D.), as the earliest church father
who related that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew. He declared: "But concerning
Matthew he [Papias] writes as follows: 'So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the
Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able" (Nicene and Post-
Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, The Church Hiistory of Eusebius, bk. III, chap.39, 16, page 173).
The gospel of Matthew, in the Hebrew, has now been translated into English, and
is available from Mercer University Press, in Macon, Georgia (ISBN 0-86554-4700). It
is titled simply, Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, by George Howard. It is a fascinating book
to read, and compare with our modern English versions, translated from the Greek copies
of the Gospel. The similarities are most remarkable, as well as the many insights the
Hebrew gives in many textual areas where the Greek seems mystifying.
Says George Howard, it is clear from the evidence that the Hebrew Matthew
contained in the text of Shem Tov's Evan Bohan predates the 14th century – in fact, the
evidence strongly suggests it goes back to the earliest centuries since Christ!
Howard declares that of the nine manuscripts used by Shem Tov Ben Shaprut,
two of the writings are virtually identical, are carefully copied, and show3 minimal
tendency toward scribal error or assimilation to the canonical Greek and Latin.
Shem-Tov's Hebrew Matthew is the earliest complete Hebrew text we now have
of Matthew's gospel. However, Jewish and anti-Christian writings prior to the 14th
century often quote excerpts from Matthew in Hebrew, in a Shem-Tov type form. Says
Howard, "Shem-Tob's comments, scattered throughout the Hebrew text, confirm that this
text is not a creation of the fourteenth century. The comments preserve telltale remarks
implying that Shem-Tob had before him a preexisting Hebrew Matthew" (Hebrew
Gospel of Matthew, page 173).
Although Howard says Shem-Tob's Matthew "does not preserve the original in a
pure form," nevertheless, he adds, "Considerable parts of the original, however, appear to
remain , including its unpolished style, ungrammatical constructions, and Aramaized
forms" (p.178).
The Hebrew gospel of Matthew, he points out, is saturated with literary devices,
such as puns, word connections, and alliteration, which make sense in Hebrew, but are
lost in the Greek form of Matthew. They belong to the very structure of the Hebrew text,
thus showing that the Hebrew is authentic, and was not translated from the Greek texts of
Matthew which were extant.
Interestingly, the Hebrew Matthew text of Shem Tov has "significant agreement"
with the Codex Sinaiticus, which was discovered in the middle of the 19th century, five
centuries after Shem Tov translated his copy from the Hebrew. The Coces Sinaiticus was
discovered in the monastery of St. Catherine in the Sinai Peninsula where it had been
hidden for many centuries, since the medieval period, until its discovery. As Howard
states, therefore, "The roots for their agreement, therefore, must go back to the early
centuries of the Christian era" (page 192).
Also pointing to the early age of the Shem Tov Matthew, it is striking in that it
has many agreements with the Old Syriac gospel of Matthew, which was displaced by the
Pecrapta text around the end of the fifth century, and only two copies have survived.
However, 'The many readings shared by Shem-Tob and the Old Syriac, therefore,
strongly suggest a relationship, whose roots go back to the early centuries of the
Christian era" says Howard (p. 196).
Howard points out that there are also readings in Shem-Tov's Matthew which
agree with one of the other Gospels, but disagree with the Greek version of Matthew.
This fact, he says, suggest that the author of John's gospel, for example, which was
written later,, must have known of a Shem-Tov type of text for Matthew's gospel, and
used it when he wrote his gospel.
These two posts are absolutely wonderful. The impact of this "Hebrew" understanding throws light on so many issues, notably among them- that "olam" is the key word in understanding "aion/aionios", and the idea within the writers minds when the words were spoken in the Hebrew language by Hebrew prophets and apostles.
The ISBN number in my previous post seems to be wrong or outdated. ISBN: 0865549893
Book plus a few reviews.
Quotehttp://www.amazon.com/HEBREW-GOSPEL-MATTHEW-George-Howard/dp/0865549893/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1322461202&sr=8-1
Rather large preview in Google books. (http://books.google.nl/books?id=4tdEBdVXg3AC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=0865549893&source=bl&ots=QCxy4_Gktm&sig=koojP1ckhj5qEKznfLtXSKhzLkg&hl=nl#v=onepage&q&f=false) This "Matthew" is more than just an translation.
http://www.mupress.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=433
Little fun fact: The Hebrew book of Matthew has been preserved by the Jews, not the Christians.
I have a copy of this book.
Here is some web based research on it...
An edition based on nine manuscripts of ST dating from 15th to 17th centuries; namely British Library Add no. 26964 for chapters 1:1-23:22; and JTS Ms. 2426 for 23:23-end. is available, called: The Gospel of Matthew according to a Primitive Hebrew Text by Howard, George. James D. Tabor writes:
Shem-Tov's text is basically BH (Vav Consecutive predominates) with a mixture of MH and later rabbinic vocabulary and idiom. In addition the text reflects considerable revision to make it conform more closely to the standard Greek and Latin Gospel texts. The underlying text, however, reflects its original Hebrew composition, and it is the most unusual text of Matthew extant in that it contains a plethora of readings not found in any other codices of Matthew. It appears to have been preserved by the Jews, independent from the Christian community.
I found it strange that it was edited over time to match the Greek text and not seen as being possibly a true text!
Given that historians in history documented such a possibility...
"Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could." - Papias (Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16)
"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations of the church." - Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3.1.1
Full details here...
http://www.triumphpro.com/moses-seat.pdf
Paul
Quote from: Pierac on December 01, 2011, 05:19:59 AM
I found it strange that it was edited over time to match the Greek text and not seen as being possibly a true text!
Paul, are you saying it could at least appear that the Hebrew was adjusted to fit the Greek rather than the other way around? I.e., suggesting the Greek came first?
I think not James: "Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome and laying the foundations of the church." - Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3.1.1
Almost all church fathers make such direct claims regarding Matthew. They also menttion other Hebrew NT books but never by name.
BTW the Jews kept Matthew for debunking Christianity. Why only Matthew? Perhaps that's another bit of indirect proof it was written in Hebrew. The Jews had expert knowledge of Hebrew but far less about Greek.
I can only guess why they adjusted it. Perhaps they felt their case was stronger by using corupted pieces of Greek and Latin?
IIRC they even changed the order of their own books because the original order pointed to much to Jesus.
Quote from: Pierac on December 01, 2011, 05:19:59 AM
I have a copy of this book.
Is it worth the $?
I'm curious about the famous Matthew 25:46
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 01, 2011, 07:42:21 AM
Quote from: Pierac on December 01, 2011, 05:19:59 AM
I have a copy of this book.
Is it worth the $?
I'm curious about the famous Matthew 25:46
Just a quick aside; Gary and Tony N. address that in this article, but they only seem to deal with the "aion punishment" part of it, not the "eternal life" piece. Wish they had... guess that's a different thread..
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternalPunishmentNotTrueToGreek.html
If we want to know TonyN's view we just read the CLV :winkgrin:
Seriously, I wonder why Gary didn't simply add a link to the article "for an article explaining why the punishment in Matthew 25:46 does NOT have to be the same length as the life spoken of in that verse, write to us".
Many won't take the step to ask for it, but would read it when a link is provided. (I'm one of them :winkgrin:)
Quote from: jabcat on December 01, 2011, 05:41:48 AM
Quote from: Pierac on December 01, 2011, 05:19:59 AM
I found it strange that it was edited over time to match the Greek text and not seen as being possibly a true text!
Paul, are you saying it could at least appear that the Hebrew was adjusted to fit the Greek rather than the other way around? I.e., suggesting the Greek came first?
Yes, this manuscript was altered over the centuries to fit the Greek in many areas that it did not match. It is my opinion that Matthew was first written in Hebrew. This does not mean it was a different text, only that the Greek translations that followed were lacking in translation. Thus we get the
Moses Seat translation issues. etc...
Paul
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 01, 2011, 07:42:21 AM
Quote from: Pierac on December 01, 2011, 05:19:59 AM
I have a copy of this book.
Is it worth the $?
I'm curious about the famous Matthew 25:46
Is it worth the $?Only if you can read Hebrew,... other wise you must rely on the English translation of the text. (like me) So it's nice to read but not a definitive resource. :2c:
Paul
Definitive resources don't exist for me. Imo Hebrew needs to be as good as a first language to dig into some issues. A good example of that is when Wave Sheaf/Omer is. Today's Orthodox=Pharisee Jews say Nisan 16th. While (today's) Karaite Jews claim the Sundat after the 15th. To choose side in such debates a deep understanding of the language is needed.
Yesterday evening I was reading an article of a guy that claims Jesus ministry started at 12 AD. I totally disagree with that but still it was worthwhile reading for some of his other points.
Paul, what is their translation of Matthew 25:46? Is there commentary on that verse in that book?
:cloud9: Isn't it an eye-opener when you start studying the Jewish side of things, what has been missed, overlooked, or altogether hidden?
Yes, an eye opener, especially since we [Christians] are all [the named] decesndants of Abraham. We are 'the name.' [hallowed by thy name].
But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED."
This means that Abraham's physical descendants are not necessarily children of God. Only the children of the promise are considered to be Abraham's children
For this is the word of promise: "AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON."
--Rom 9, 6-9
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 02, 2011, 08:12:04 AM
Definitive resources don't exist for me. Imo Hebrew needs to be as good as a first language to dig into some issues. A good example of that is when Wave Sheaf/Omer is. Today's Orthodox=Pharisee Jews say Nisan 16th. While (today's) Karaite Jews claim the Sundat after the 15th. To choose side in such debates a deep understanding of the language is needed.
Yesterday evening I was reading an article of a guy that claims Jesus ministry started at 12 AD. I totally disagree with that but still it was worthwhile reading for some of his other points.
Paul, what is their translation of Matthew 25:46? Is there commentary on that verse in that book?
"Then these will go into eternal abhorrence but the righteous into eternal life." The Hebrew word they translated into eternal was ‛ôlâm
עולם. This is what I meant by not being definitive!
Paul
Yes, I had found that earlier when I made this post about a year ago;
Re: The New Testament was written in Hebrew (not Greek)
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2010, 04:28:53 PM »
Been looking at some of the Aramaic translation. Tony and I have chatted about this, I think it's of note. The translator, Rev. Bauscher, especially in Matthew translated as the lost go to eternal torment, while the righteous go into eternal life.
He reportedly used to be a Baptist minister (usually believe in ET), but is cited on one forum as being a universalist. Even though he translates as eternal torment, in his notes he states that a literal hell fire should not be taken literally, that would make God "worse than Hitler"; that hell should be seen symbolically as a state of being, not a place of being.
still some "influence" somewhere?
through a glass darkly....sometimes, very darkly
All of the idioms are gone. I got several stored locally which I will repost.
If someone has one or more idiom stored on his/her PC please PM them to me. Just send what you have. Don't worry about formatting or that they possibly already have been repost. I'll sort it out.
PS the numbering used in this new thread does NOT match the old posts
Idiom #1
(Matt 12:18 [ACV])
Behold, my Boy whom I chose, my beloved in whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will declare justice to the Gentiles.
(Isa 42:1 [ACV])
Behold, my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit upon him, he will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.
(Ps 43:1 [ACV])
Judge me, O God, and plead my cause against a profane nation. O deliver me from the deceitful and unjust man.
(John 3:17 [ACV])
For God sent the Son into the world not that he might condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.
(the noun salvation is only 7 times in the Gospels
The Hebrew word for Judgement, judging, etc very often means saving, to save etc
Jesus came to save not to judge.
When David was is trouble he called for help (salvation) not the negative meaning of judgement.
(Judg 11:27 [ACV])
I therefore have not sinned against thee, but thou do me wrong to war against me. LORD, the Judge, be judge this day between the sons of Israel and the sons of Ammon.
(Isa 33:22 [ACV])
For LORD is our judge. LORD is our lawgiver. LORD is our king, he will save us.
(Gen 18:25 [ACV])
That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay a righteous man with a wicked man, that so the righteous man should be as the wicked man. Far be it from thee. Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
(Ps 94:2 [ACV])
Lift up thyself, thou judge of the earth. Render to the proud a recompense.
(Luke 22:30 [ACV])
that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
(Ps 122:1 [ACV])
I was glad when they said to me, Let us go to the house of LORD.
(Ps 122:2 [ACV])
Our feet are standing inside thy gates, O Jerusalem.
(Ps 122:3 [ACV])
Jerusalem, that is built as a city that is compact together,
(Ps 122:4 [ACV])
where the tribes go up, even the tribes of LORD, [for] an ordinance for Israel, to give thanks to the name of LORD.
(Ps 122:5 [ACV])
For there thrones are set for judgment, the thrones of the house of David.
(Ps 122:6 [ACV])
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. They shall prosper who love thee.
(Ps 122:7 [ACV])
Peace be within thy walls, and prosperity within thy palaces.
(Ps 122:8 [ACV])
For my brothers and companions' sakes I will now say, Peace be within thee.
(Ps 122:9 [ACV])
For the sake of the house of LORD our God I will seek thy good.
Jersusalem, city of salvation.
Idiom #2
(Luke 10:9 [ACV])
And heal the weak in it, and say to them, The kingdom of God has come near to you.
In Hebrew it means the kingdom is already there at that very moment
Idiom #3
(Matt 5:3 [ACV])
Blessed are the poor in spirit, because the kingdom of the heavens is theirs.
Poor in spirit is shorthand for poor, humble, lowly and broken in spirit
Blessed=blessed, happy and fortunate.
(Isa 66:2 [AKJV])
For all those things has my hand made, and all those things have been, said the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembles at my word.
Kingdom isn't a place but it's "to rule" or "to be ruled"
Heaven is a synonym for God
Theirs isn't the best possible translation because they don't own the kingdom but they are part of it.
Idiom #4 - Mashal/Nimshal
Not strickt about idioms but about parables which often are giant idioms.
In the NT we read Jesus only spoke in parables in public. That a statement of a simpel fact but it also contains a little extra info for those who know Jewish customs.
Long before Jesus was born Jewish scholars thaught people using Mashal=parable but after that Mashal they retold the same story with a Nimshal (real life example). The way I understand it Jesus only used Nimshals in private.
Read some examples http://www.theparablediscovery.com/subpage7.html
Idiom #5 - Shake the dust of your sandals means total rejection.
Luke 10
8 "When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is offered to you. 9 Heal the sick who are there and tell them, 'The kingdom of God has come near to you.' 10 But when you enter a town and are not welcomed, go into its streets and say, 11 'Even the dust of your town we wipe from our feet as a warning to you. Yet be sure of this: The kingdom of God has come near.' 12 I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.
Wipe the dust of ones sandals is often understood as "leave the town with not hard feelings toward it's citizens".
The Hebrew interpretation seems to be the opposite. After Jews had contact with gentile they symbolicly shook of the dust of their sandals. It symbolized non Jewish filth. Paganness. And "death". It's very similar to tearing clothes in front of a "dead" person. (mourning of a dead person)
I think it's also similar to Jesus calling the Scribes/Pharisees walking dead.
So (imo) shaking of the dust of the sandals was declaring someone spiritual dead. That's among the most serious Jewish insults. Not a "no hard feelings" as many Christians seem to think. It's utter rejection.
Verse 12 seems to agree with this negative interpretation. Why warn about a fate worse than Sodom if 'you' walk away with no hard feelings?
Idiom #6 - About camels and ropes
Mat 19:24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Camel likely is a copying error
Camel and rope are very similar words and can be confused very easily.
Mat 19:24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Does that make sense? I think it does if we look at the context. Verse 21 clearly states to sell your stuff. Verse 23 is telling exactly the same in the form of a parable.
21 Jesus said to him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me."
Rich men have lots of things. They are like a heavy rope with many strands.
A strand of rope can pass trough the eye of the needle. So the more the rich man sells the thinner his rope becomes. So (imo) it means every almsgiving increases the rich mans chances for heaven.
Narrow gate anyone?
Idiom #7 - My yoke is light
(Matt 11:28 [cjb]) "Come to me, all of you who are struggling and burdened, and I will give you rest.
(Matt 11:29 [cjb]) Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
(Matt 11:30 [cjb]) For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."
Yoke is easily associated with a burden. Something negative.
But in reality it was something the desire of every student. The teacher carried/pulled a "heavy load of knowledge". The aim of the students was to be able to pull the same load. Obviously the pulling is figarativelu done with a yoke. Just as an ox pulls a cart.
This explanation may sound odd because if Jesus' burden/yoke was light it seems to mean He pulled a small cart of knowledge. Big carts, big teachers. Small carts, small teachers. Humm... before I'm going to wriggle myself out if that blasphemy :mshock: the following verses about Pharisees pulling heavy loads (real smart dudes)
(Matt 23:1 [cjb]) Then Yeshua addressed the crowds and his talmidim:
(Matt 23:2 [cjb]) "The Torah-teachers and the P'rushim," he said, "sit in the seat of Moshe.
(Matt 23:3 [cjb]) So whatever they tell you, take care to do it. But don't do what they do, because they talk but don't act!
(Matt 23:4 [cjb]) They tie heavy loads onto people's shoulders but won't lift a finger to help carry them.
Obvious the Bible in no way is implying Jesus is (vastly) outclassed by the Scribes and Pharisees.
The answer is something that makes you :doh:
Think back at your study time some classes were very boring they seemed to drag on for ages. That was a class of Scribe.
But some classes were so much fun it seems they ended moments after you sat down. That the class of Jesus.
His message/class is full of joy. It teaches liberty while the Scribes thaught endless lists of forbidden things.
Jesus: Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
Scribes: Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, because I am rude and burst with pride, and my gloomy teachings will trouble your souls.
The burden is also called: cost of discipleship.
According to Ben Sira, wisdom's yoke, that is, the burden of study, will become joy, strong protection, a golden ornament, a cord of blue, a glorious robe and a crown of gladness. In other words, although the yoke is a burden, the bearer will experience it as easy and light
Idiom #8 - Hate your parents and follow me.
Hate = love less
(Luke 14:26 [CLV])
If anyone is coming to Me and is not hating his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, and still more his soul besides, he can not be My disciple."
(Gen 29:30 [ACV])
And he also went in to Rachel, and also he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
(Gen 29:31 [ACV])
And LORD saw that Leah was regarded inferior, and he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
(Gen 29:30 [AKJV])
And he went in also to Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
(Gen 29:31 [AKJV])
And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
Idiom 9 - Whole collection
| Verse | Idiom | Meaning | | Gen 4:6 | Face fallen | sad | | Gen 6:8 | Found grace in the eyes | accepted | | Gen 22.17 | Seed | descendants | | Gen 24.60 | Possess gates | capture cities | | Gen 27.41 | Said in heart | thought to self | | Gen 31.35 | The way of women | menstruation | | Gen 40.13 | Lift up your head | restore to honor | | Ex 1.5 | Loins ? | descendants | | Ex 3.8 | Flowing with milk and honey | fertile | | Ex 3.19 | Mighty hand | force | | Ex 13.2 | Open the womb | be born | | Ex 15.25 | Sweet water | water fit to drink | | Ex 32.19 | His anger burned | very angry | | Ex 34.6 | Long of anger | slow to get angry | | Lev. 20.18 | Her sickness | her period | | Lev 22.6 | Soul | person | | Deut 5.6 | House of bondage | (land of) slavery | | Deut 8.14 | Heart lifted up | proud | | Deut 15.7 | Close hand | selfish | | Deut 20.8 | Heart melt | lose courage | | Deut 21.17 | Beginning of his strength | his firstborn | | Deut 23.13 | Squat outside | defecate | | Deut 23.13 | What comes from you | excrement | | Deut 28.28 | Heart | mind | | Josh 10.6 | Slack hands | abandon | | Judges 3.28 | Deliver them into your hands | defeat them for you | | Judges 13.5 | From the womb | from birth | | 1 Sam 10.9 | gave him another heart | changed his attitude | | 1 Sam 24.3 | covered his feet | relieved himself | | 1 Sam 25.22 | one who urinates against a wall | male | | 2 Sam 1.12 | house | nation | | 2 Sam 18.25 | good news is in his mouth | he brings good news | | 1 Ki 2.10 | slept | died | | 2 Ki 2.7 | sons of the prophets | group of prophets | | 2 Ki 4.29 | gird up your loins | get ready | | 2 Ki 19.26 | small of hand | weak | | 2 Chr 25.17 | look each other in the face | meet each other in battle | | 2 Chr 36.13 | stiffened his neck | became stubborn | | Esther 1.7 | Open hand | generosity | | Esther 1.14 | Saw his face | had access to him | | Esther 2.21 | Send a hand against | assassinate | | Esther 6.10 | let fall | neglect (3) | | Job 1.12 | Put hand on | harm | | Job 20.20 | Knew no quiet in their bellies | greedy | | Job 23.16 | Soft heart | fearful | | Job 31.10 | Kneel over | have sex with | | Job 33.16 | Opens the ear | informs, reveals | | Job 35.8 | Son of man | other humans | | Ps 3.7 | Break teeth | make powerless | | Ps 4.1 | Enlarge space | set free | | Ps 5.9 | Their throat is an open grave | they speak deceitfully | | Ps 6.7 | Eye is consumed | vision is blurred | | Ps 7.3 | Iniquity in my hands | guilty | | Ps 7.9 | Hearts and kidneys | thoughts and emotions | | Ps 10.5 | Snorts | scoffs | | Ps 11.6 | the portion of their cup | their destiny | | Ps 12.2 | double heart | duplicitous | | Ps 17.8 | Little man of the eye | pupil | | Ps 24.4 | Clean hands | act purely | | Ps 25.1 | Lift up my soul | pray | | Ps 27.8 | Seek my face | seek me | | Ps 33.18 | Eyes are upon | watches over | | Ps 41.9 | Lifted heel against | turned against | | Ps 73.9 | Tongue struts through the earth | arrogantly order everyone | | Ps 75.5 | Lift horn | defy God | | Ps 89.13 | Right hand | might | | Ps 89.22 | Son of wickedness | wicked person | | Ps 90.12 | Number days | use time wisely | | Ps 94.9 | Planted | created | | Ps 102.2 | Hide your face | refuse to answer | | Ps 121.1 | Lift up eyes | look up toward | | Ps 124.3 | Swallowed alive | killed | | Pro 17.22 | Dries bones | drains strength | | Pro 22.9 | Good eye | generous | | Pro 23.6 | Bad/Evil eye | stingy | | Pro 18.20 | Fruit of the mouth | what someone says | | Pro 24.20 | lamp will go out | will die | | Song 2.4 | His banner over me is love | he loves me very much | | Song 2.17 | Until the day breathes | until dawn | | Song 4.2 | none is bereaved | none is missing | | Is 9.9 | Arrogance of heart | arrogant | | Is 14.12 | Son of the morning | morning star | | Is 35.10 | Joy will crown their heads | they will be joyful | | Is 52.7 | Feet | person | | Is 57.4 | Open mouth wide | sneer | | Is 60.16 | Suck the milk of nations | receive the wealth of other countries | | Is 61.3 | Oil of gladness | joy | | Jer 4.4 | Remove the foreskin of your heart | dedicate yourselves fully to God | | Jer 4.19 | Walls | pain | | Jer 4.30 | Seek your life | want to kill you | | Jer 5.5 | Broken the yoke | rejected God's authority | | Jer 6.10 | Ears are uncircumcised | don't listen | | Jer 7.12 | Where I caused my name to dwell | where I chose to be worshiped | | Jer 9.1 | waters | spring of water | | Jer. 25.15 | Wine of wrath | my anger | | Jer 50.33 | Sons of | people of | | Jer 51.37 | Hissing | scorn | | Lam 1.16 | Eyes run down with water | eyes flow with tears | | Ezek 3.7 | Hard forehead | stubborn | | Ezek 16.25 | Spread feet | offer self for sex | | Ezek 16.26 | Big of phallus | lustful | | Mal 1.11 | My name | me | | Mal 2.12 | he who awakens and he who answers | every single person |
|
Idiom #10 - Random collection (may overlap with other posts)
This webpage may be copied or its contents adapted if its title and compiler are cited. The following list consists of figures of speech in the Hebrew Bible, such as idioms, euphemisms, metaphors, metonymy, synecdoche, and personification. Figurative meanings are given after the literal translations. Our suggestion of the type of figure of speech (open to debate in several cases) is given in parentheses.
Gen. 4:1 know someone = have sex with someone (euphemism)
Gen. 6:8 Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD = God was pleased with Noah (idiom)
Gen. 15:15 you will go to your fathers = you will die (euphemism)
Gen. 18:27 I am nothing but dust and ashes = I am not worth much (metaphor)
Gen. 20:6 touch = harm (metonymy)
Gen. 26:8 laughing intensely with =sexually caressing, perhaps even, having sex with (euphemism)
Gen. 27:38 lift up voice = vocalize (idiom)
Gen 27.41 said in heart = thought / said to self (metonymy)
Gen. 29:1 lifted his feet = began a journey (metonymy)
Gen 40.13 lift up your head = restore to honor (metaphor)
Ex 3.8 flowing with milk and honey = fertile (idiom)
Ex 7:22 Pharaoh's heart was hardened = stubborn (metaphor)
Ex 13.2 open the womb = be born (metonymy)
Deut 15.7 close hand = selfish (metonymy)
Deut. 15:9 evil eye = stingy (metaphor)
Deut 20.8 heart melt = lose courage (metaphor)
Judges 3:22 the dirt came out =his bowels emptied (euphemism)
Ruth 3:7 feet = genitals (metonymy)
1 Sam. 24:3 covered his feet = relieved himself (metonymy?)
1 Sam. 25:22 any that urinates against the wall = any male (metonymy)
1 Kings 11:9; Psalm 76:7 God's nostils enlarged = God became angry (metonymy)
1 Ki 2:10 slept with his fathers = died (euphemism)
2 Ki 4.29 gird up your loins = get ready (metonymy)
2 Ki 19.26 small of hand = weak (metonymy)
2 Chr 36.13 stiffened his neck = became stubborn (metonymy)
Esther 1.7 open hand = generosity (metonymy)
Job 20.20 knew no quiet in their bellies = greedy (metaphor)
Job 23.16 soft heart = fearful (metaphor)
Ps 5.9 their throat is an open grave = they speak deceitfully (metaphor)
Ps 6.7 eye is consumed = vision is blurred (metaphor)
Ps 7.9 hearts and kidneys = mind thoughts and heart emotions (metaphor)
Ps 12.2 double heart = duplicitous (metaphor)
Ps. 12:3 cut off all flattering lips = bring the flattering to an end (idiom)
Ps 17.8 little man of the eye = pupil (metaphor)
Ps 24.4 clean hands = act purely (metaphor)
Ps 25.1 lift up my soul = pray (idiom)
Ps 27.8 seek my face = seek me (metonymy)
Ps 33.18 eyes are upon = watches over (metonymy)
Ps 41.9 lifted heel against = turned against (metonymy)
Ps 73.9 tongue struts through the earth = arrogantly order everyone (personification)
Ps 75.5 lift horn = defy God (metonymy)
Ps 80:3 face shine = show favor to (metonymy)
Ps 89.13 right hand = might (metonymy)
Ps 89.22 son of wickedness = wicked person (metaphor)
Ps 90.12 number days = use time wisely (idiom)
Ps 94.9 planted = created (metaphor)
Ps 102.2 hide your face = refuse to answer (idiom)
Ps 121.1 lift up eyes = look up toward (metaphor)
Pro 17.22 dries bones = drains strength (idiom)
Pro 18.20 fruit of the mouth = what someone says (idiom)
Pro 22.9 good eye = generous (idiom)
Pro 24.20 lamp will go out = will die (idiom)
Song 2.4 his banner over me is love = he loves me very much (idiom)
Song 2.17 until the day breathes = until dawn (personification)
Is. 3:16 stretched forth necks = haughtiness (metonymy)
Is 14.12 son of the morning = morning star (idiom)
Is 35.10 joy will crown their heads = they will be joyful (idiom)
Is 60.16 suck the milk of nations = receive the wealth of other countries (idiom)
Jer 4.4 remove the foreskin of your heart = dedicate yourselves fully to God (idiom)
Jer 4.19 walls = pain (metonymy)
Jer 5.5 broken the yoke = rejected God's authority (metonymy)
Jer 6.10 ears are uncircumcised = don't listen (idiom)
Jer 7.12 where I caused my name to dwell = where I chose to be worshiped (metonymy)
Jer. 15:16 eat = understand (metaphor)
Jer. 25.15 wine of wrath = my anger (idiom)
Jer 50.33 sons of = people of (metonymy)
Ezek 3.7 hard forehead = stubborn (idiom)
Ezek 16.25 spread feet = offer self for sex (euphemism)
Ezek 16.26 big of phallus = lustful (metonymy)
Jonah 3:3 a city great to God = very large (idiom)
Jonah 4:9 angry unto death = very angry (idiom)
New Testament Hebraisms:
New Testament idioms
compiled by Wayne Leman
(This webpage may be copied or its contents adapted if its title and compiler are cited.) An idiom is an expression in a language which has a unique meaning which cannot be understood from the meanings of its parts (some English idioms are "It's raining cats and dogs", "Are you pulling my leg?" and "He flew off the handle"). Many NT Greek idioms are literal translations of Hebrew idioms. The boundary between idioms and other figures of speech is not always clearcut in the literature on NT Greek. In many cases, what are called idioms should, technically, often be analyzed as other figures of speech, such as metonymy, euphemism, etc. Perhaps this is to be expected, since idioms often derive from dead metaphors. Compare the New Testament figures of speech page.
(Resources used to help make this collection included the Greek lexicon by Barclay Newman which accompanies the UBS Greek New Testament. A number of the idioms here were first pointed to me by an e-mail friend, Brent Hudson, who searched the L&N lexicon for NT Greek idioms. Abbreviation L&N = Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, by Louw & Nida)
(literal English translations with idiomatic meaning in parentheses):
Mt. 1:18 EN GASTRI EXOUSA: she having in the belly (=she was pregnant)
Mt. 3.8 POIEW KARPON: to make fruit (=to produce results)
Mt. 6:22 if your eye is good (=if you are generous)
Mt. 6:23 if your eye is evil (=if you are stingy)
Mt. 8:12 TO SKOTOS TO EXWTERON: the outer darkness [=a place which is dark and removed (from where righteous ones are)]
Mt. 10:27 what you hear in your ear (=what you hear in secret)
Mt. 10:38 he who does not take his cross (=be prepared to suffer, including die)
Mt. 11:15 whoever has ears, let him hear (=everyone should listen carefully)
Mt. 22:16 you do not look at the face of men (=you do not judge on the basis of external appearances)
Mt. 23:32 Fill up the measure of your fathers! (=finish what your ancestors began)
Mk. 1:32 those having badly (=those who were sick)
Mk. 2:19 sons of the groom (=guests of the bridegroom)
Mk. 3.21 hOI PAR' AUTOU: those beside him (=his family)
Mk. 9:1 taste death (=die)
Lk. 3:5 EIMI EIS "to be into" (=to change into)
Lk. 16:22 KOLPOS ABRAAM: Abraham's bosom (=be with Abraham, heaven)
Jn. 1:16 grace upon grace (=one blessing after another; blessed time after time)
Jn. 2:4 what to me and to you? (Hebraism; =what does that have to do with us?)
Jn. 9:24 DIDWMI DOXAN TW QEW: give glory to God (=promise under oath to tell the truth)
Jn. 20:26 Peace be to you! (=Hello; a literal Greek translation from the most common Hebraic greeting, "shalom")
Acts 11:22 News of this came to the ears of the church (=the church heard about it)
Acts 15:10 placing a yoke on the neck (=burdening with obligations)
Acts 17:21 doing/making time (=spending time)
Acts 18:6 Your blood be upon your heads! (=You yourselves must take the blame for it!)
Acts 18:14 to open the mouth (=to speak)
Acts 20:33 ARGURION KAI CRUSION: silver and gold (=money)
Acts 22:14 to hear the voice (sound) of his mouth (=hear him speak)
Acts 26:14 PROS KENTRON LAKTIZEIN: kick against the goad (=to hurt oneself by active resistance)
Acts 28:27 they hear heavily with their ears (=be slow to understand)
Acts 28:27 hear with their ears (reflects Hebraic "cognate" construction; =to listen intently)
Rom. 1:17 from faith to faith (=faith from start to finish; see Benware article in The Bible Translator journal for this meaning)
Rom. 12:9 AGAPH ANUPOKRITOS: let love be not speaking from underneath (a mask) (=love without hypocrisy)
Rom. 12:20 you will heap burning coals on his head (=you will be very kind to him)
1 Cor. 7:35 BROCON EPIBALW: throw a bridle on (=restrict, control, impose restrictions)
1 Cor. 14:9 EIS AERA LALOUNTES: talking into the air (=talking with no one understanding)
1 Cor. 15:40 SWMATA EPOURANIA: heavenly bodies (=celestial objects)
2 Cor. 3:18 are being transformed from glory to glory (=are becoming ever more glorious)
Eph. 1:23 the fullness of him who fills all in all (uncertain meaning)
Col. 1:23 hUPO TON OURANON: under the sky (=on earth)
2 Thess. 3:12 eat their own bread (=work for a living)
Heb. 8:9 I took them by the hand (=I carefully guided them)
Heb. 12:28 Let us have grace (=Let us be thankful)
James 1:23 TO PROSWPON THS GENESEWS AUTOU: the face of his birth (=his natural face)
James 3:6 TON TROCON THS GENESEWS: the wheel of birth (=the cycle of life)
1 Peter 1:13 gird up the loins of your minds (=prepare your minds for action)
Jude 13 hO ZOFOS TOU SKOTOUS: the gloom of darkness (=gloomy hell)
Rev. 16:3 YUCH ZWHS: living soul (=living creature)
Rev. 20:10 LIMNH TOU PUROS: lake of fire (=great expanse of fire, place of destruction)
Websites:
http://bible-translation.110mb.com/otidioms.htm
http://bible-translation.110mb.com/ntidioms.htm
Wow, I hadn't read these before, these are really cool! Very informative!! Where did you find these?
Idiom #11
| Verse | Idiom | Meaning | | Gen 22.17 | Seed | descendants | | Gen 24.60 | Possess gates | capture cities | | Gen 27.41 | Said in heart | thought to self | | Gen 31.35 | The way of women | menstruation | | Gen 40.13 | Lift up your head | restore to honor | | Ex 1.5 | Loins ? | descendants | | Ex 3.8 | Flowing with milk and honey | fertile | | Ex 3.19 | Mighty hand | force | | Ex 13.2 | Open the womb | be born | | Ex 15.25 | Sweet water | water fit to drink | | Ex 32.19 | His anger burned | very angry | | Ex 34.6 | Long of anger | slow to get angry | | Lev. 20.18 | Her sickness | her period | | Lev 22.6 | Soul | person | | Deut 5.6 | House of bondage | (land of) slavery | | Deut 8.14 | Heart lifted up | proud | | Deut 15.7 | Close hand | selfish | | Deut 20.8 | Heart melt | lose courage | | Deut 21.17 | Beginning of his strength | his firstborn | | Deut 23.13 | Squat outside | defecate | | Deut 23.13 | What comes from you | excrement | | Deut 28.28 | Heart | mind | | Josh 10.6 | Slack hands | abandon | | Judges 3.28 | Deliver them into your hands | defeat them for you | | Judges 13.5 | From the womb | from birth | | 1 Sam 10.9 | gave him another heart | changed his attitude | | 1 Sam 24.3 | covered his feet | relieved himself | | 1 Sam 25.22 | one who urinates against a wall | male | | 2 Sam 1.12 | house | nation | | 2 Sam 18.25 | good news is in his mouth | he brings good news | | 1 Ki 2.10 | slept | died | | 2 Ki 2.7 | sons of the prophets | group of prophets | | 2 Ki 4.29 | gird up your loins | get ready | | 2 Ki 19.26 | small of hand | weak | | 2 Chr 25.17 | look each other in the face | meet each other in battle | | 2 Chr 36.13 | stiffened his neck | became stubborn | | Esther 1.7 | Open hand | generosity | | Esther 1.14 | Saw his face | had access to him | | Esther 2.21 | Send a hand against | assassinate | | Esther 6.10 | let fall | neglect (3) | | Job 1.12 | Put hand on | harm | | Job 20.20 | Knew no quiet in their bellies | greedy | | Job 23.16 | Soft heart | fearful | | Job 31.10 | Kneel over | have sex with | | Job 33.16 | Opens the ear | informs, reveals | | Job 35.8 | Son of man | other humans | | Ps 3.7 | Break teeth | make powerless | | Ps 4.1 | Enlarge space | set free | | Ps 5.9 | Their throat is an open grave | they speak deceitfully | | Ps 6.7 | Eye is consumed | vision is blurred | | Ps 7.3 | Iniquity in my hands | guilty | | Ps 7.9 | Hearts and kidneys | thoughts and emotions | | Ps 10.5 | Snorts | scoffs | | Ps 11.6 | the portion of their cup | their destiny | | Ps 12.2 | double heart | duplicitous | | Ps 17.8 | Little man of the eye | pupil | | Ps 24.4 | Clean hands | act purely | | Ps 25.1 | Lift up my soul | pray | | Ps 27.8 | Seek my face | seek me | | Ps 33.18 | Eyes are upon | watches over | | Ps 41.9 | Lifted heel against | turned against | | Ps 73.9 | Tongue struts through the earth | arrogantly order everyone | | Ps 75.5 | Lift horn | defy God | | Ps 89.13 | Right hand | might | | Ps 89.22 | Son of wickedness | wicked person | | Ps 90.12 | Number days | use time wisely | | Ps 94.9 | Planted | created | | Ps 102.2 | Hide your face | refuse to answer | | Ps 121.1 | Lift up eyes | look up toward | | Ps 124.3 | Swallowed alive | killed | | Pro 17.22 | Dries bones | drains strength | | Pro 18.20 | Fruit of the mouth | what someone says | | Pro 24.20 | lamp will go out | will die | | Song 2.4 | His banner over me is love | he loves me very much | | Song 2.17 | Until the day breathes | until dawn | | Song 4.2 | none is bereaved | none is missing | | Is 9.9 | Arrogance of heart | arrogant | | Is 14.12 | Son of the morning | morning star | | Is 35.10 | Joy will crown their heads | they will be joyful | | Is 52.7 | Feet | person | | Is 57.4 | Open mouth wide | sneer | | Is 60.16 | Suck the milk of nations | receive the wealth of other countries | | Is 61.3 | Oil of gladness | joy | | Jer 4.4 | Remove the foreskin of your heart | dedicate yourselves fully to God | | Jer 4.19 | Walls | pain | | Jer 4.30 | Seek your life | want to kill you | | Jer 5.5 | Broken the yoke | rejected God's authority | | Jer 6.10 | Ears are uncircumcised | don't listen | | Jer 7.12 | Where I caused my name to dwell | where I chose to be worshiped | | Jer 9.1 | waters | spring of water | | Jer. 25.15 | Wine of wrath | my anger | | Jer 50.33 | Sons of | people of | | Jer 51.37 | Hissing | scorn | | Lam 1.16 | Eyes run down with water | eyes flow with tears | | Ezek 3.7 | Hard forehead | stubborn | | Ezek 16.25 | Spread feet | offer self for sex | | Ezek 16.26 | Big of phallus | lustful | | Mal 1.11 | My name | me | | Mal 2.12 | he who awakens and he who answers | every single person |
|
More info:
Simile- a likening of one thing to another, usually containing the words "like" or "as."
Example: His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. Revelation 1:14 NIV
Example: He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent.. Psalm 104:2-3 NIV
Metaphor- very much like a simile. An implied comparison between two objects without using words such as "like" or "as."
Example- You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again. Matthew 5:13 NIV
Hyperbole- an idiom of overstatement. An exaggeration to make or reinforce a point.
Example: If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. Matthew 5:29 NIV
Hendiadys- the combination of two or three things to express the same meaning.
Example: May the God of peace sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 NIV
Irony- stating one thing, but meaning the exact opposite.
Example: Go and cry out to the gods you have chosen. Let them save you when you are in trouble. Judges 10:14 NIV
Example: Doubtless you are the people, and wisdom will die with you. Job 12:1-2 NIV
Litotes- a phrase that lessens one thing in order to exalt another.
Example: Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. 1 Peter 2:10 NIV
Euphemism- substituting a harsh or offensive term with a less offensive one.
Example: After he had said this, he went on to tell him, "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up."(Jesus was speaking of the death of Lazarus) John 11:11 NIV
Antithesis- a direct contrast of one set of figures to another.
Example: For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. Galatians 5:17 NIV
Ellipsis- a passage that is grammatically incomplete which requires the reader to complete it.
Example: Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 1 Corinthians 12:30 NIV
Metonymy- the substitution of a noun for another closely associated noun. We understand the meaning of the this substituted noun by the association it produces in the readers mind.
Example: He is the one who will build a house for me, and I will establish his throne forever.(Here the word "throne" would mean kingdom)1 Chronicles 17:12 NIV
Example: I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.(Here "key" would mean authority) Isaiah 22:22 NIV
Synecdoche- a figure of speech in which the part represents the whole or the whole represents the part.
Example: Let me know that it is your hand, that you, O Lord, have done it. Psalm 109:27 NIV
Eponymy- a type of Synecdoche, in which an individual represents the whole nation.
Example: For you have as many gods as you have towns, O Judah. Jeremiah 2:28 NIV
Merismus- a combination of parts of the whole to express totality.
Example: At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat upon the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. Exodus 12:29 NIV
Personification- the representation of a concept or object as if it were a person.
Example: Wisdom calls aloud in the street, she raises her voice in the public squares; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out, in the gateways of the city she makes her speech. Proverbs 1:20-21 NIV
Apostrophe- a personification in which the writer addresses the object or concept that he has personified.
Example: "Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?" 1 Corinthians 15:55 NIV.
http://www.frontlineweb.8m.com/idioms.html
Quote from: rosered on April 03, 2012, 03:22:58 PM
I love these WW !
Do you have any about laying on hands of the sick to recover ?
From Alfred Edersheim an orthodox Jew that became a (leading) Christian scholar/minister.
Laying on of Hands
But this was only the commencement of the service. Women might bring their sacrifices into the Great Court; but they might not perform the second rite— of laying on of hands. This meant transmission and delegation, and implied representation; so that it really pointed to the substitution of the sacrifice for the sacrificer. Hence it was always accompanied by confession of sin and prayer. It was thus done. The sacrifice was so turned that the person confessing looked towards the west, while he laid his hands between the horns of the sacrifice, * and if the sacrifice was brought by more than one, each had to lay on his hands.
* If the offerer stood outside the Court of the Priests, on the topmost of the fifteen Levitical steps, or within the gate of Nicanor, his hands at least must be within the Great Court, or the rite was not valid.
It is not quite a settled point whether one or both hands were laid on; but all are agreed that it was to be done 'with one's whole force'— it were, to lay one's whole weight upon the substitute. *
* Children, the blind, the deaf, those out of their minds, and non-Israelites, were not allowed to 'lay on hands.'
If a person under vow had died, his heir-at-law took his place. The only public sacrifices in which hands were laid on were those for sins of public ignorance (Lev 4:15; 16:21), when the 'elders' acted as representing the people— which some Rabbinical authorities add public sin-offerings in general (on the ground of 2 Chron 29:23)— the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement, on which the high-priest laid his hands. In all private sacrifices, except firstlings, tithes, and the Paschal lamb, hands were laid on, and, while doing so, the following prayer was repeated: 'I entreat, O Jehovah: I have sinned, I have done perversely, I have rebelled, I have committed (naming the sin, trespass, or, in case of a burnt-offering, the breach of positive or negative command); but I return in repentance, and let this be for my atonement (covering).' According to Maimonides, in peace-offerings a record of God's praise, rather than a confession of sins, was spoken. But, as the principle prevailed that frequent confession even without sacrifice was meritorious, another formula is also recorded, in which the allusion to sacrifices is omitted.
Closely connected with this was 'the lifting and waving' of certain sacrifices. The priest put his hands under those of the offerer, and moved the sacrifice upwards and downwards, right and left; according to Abarbanel also 'forwards and backwards.' The lamb of the leper's trespass-offering was waved before it was slain (Lev 14:24); private peace-offerings, only after they had been slain; while in public peace-offerings, the practice varied.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above is about animal sacrifice. I'm not sure it's relevant to your question? Does the laying of hands "transfer" prayers into the sick person? Usally the laying of hands transfered sins.
HEBREW IDIOM MEANING EXAMPLE
a (the) door was opened door of spiritual truth Rev. 4:1
abar'ka'dabara (Aramaic) I will create as I speak Gen. 1:1
Abraham's seed same as Yah's seed Gen. 12:3
Arrogance of heart arrogant Isa. 9.9
Bad/Evil eye stingy Prov. 23.6
Beginning of his strength his firstborn Deut. 21.17
Big of phallus lustful Ezek. 16.26
bind forbid Matt. 16:19-20
Break teeth make powerless Ps. 3.7
Breath personality
Broken the yoke rejected God's authority Jer. 5.5
Clean hands act purely Ps. 24.4
Close hand selfish Deut. 15.7
Clouds without water no Torah/law Jude 12
Covered his feet relieved himself 1Sam. 24.3
Cycles of rightiousness cycles of Feasts, Sabbaths, etc. Psa. 23:3
Dead stones singular person
Deliver them into your hands defeat them for you Jgs. 3.28
Dirst came out gutted (entralls) Jgs. 3:22
Do what they did sew seed like Abraham Mark 4:8
Double heart duplicitous Ps. 12.2
Dries bones drains strength Prov. 17.22
Ears are uncircumcised don't listen Jer. 6.10
Elder torah observant man over 50..tradition
Enlarge space set free Ps. 4.1
Evil eye cheapskate, selfish, no charity
Eye of a needle impossibility
Eye is consumed vision is blurred Ps. 6.7
Eyes run down with water eyes flow with tears Lam. 1.16
Eyes are upon watches over Ps. 33.18
Face fallen sad Gen. 4:6
Face to face personally witnessed something divine Gen. 32:30
Fear respect/reverence
Feet person Isa. 52.7
Flowing with milk and honey fertile Exod. 3.8
Found grace in the eyes accepted Gen 6:8
From the womb from birth Jgs. 13.5
Fruit of the mouth what someone says Prov.. 18.20
Gave him another heart changed his attitude 1Sam. 10.9
Gird up your loins get ready 2Kgs. 4.29
Good eye generous Prov. 22.9
Good news is in his mouth he brings good news 2Sam. 18.25
Grapes of Sodom opium/poppies Deut. 32:31-33
Grapes of wrath judgement time Rev. 14:19
Hard forehead stubborn Ezek. 3.7
Having a bad eye cheap, uncharitable Matt. 6:22
He who awakens and he who answers every single person Mal. 2.12
Her sickness her period Lev. 20.18
Hide your face refuse to answer Ps. 102.2
His anger burned very angry Exod. 32.19
Heart mind Deut. 28.28
Heart lifted up proud Deut. 8.14
Heart melt lose courage Deut. 20.8
Hearts and kidneys thoughts and emotions Ps. 7.9
His banner over me is love he loves me very much Song 2.4
Hissing scorn Jer 51.37
House of bondage (land of) slavery Deut 5.6
House nation 2Sam. 1.12
Hung himself fell on his sword (suicide) 1Sam. 31:4b-5, 2Sam. 1:6, Acts 1:18,
Iniquity in my hands guilty Ps. 7.3
In that day when Messiah comes Zech. 3:10
It is finished no more sacrifices John 19:30, Rev. 16:17
Joy will crown their heads they will be joyful Isa. 35.10
Knew no quiet in their bellies greedy Job 20.20
Kneel over have sex with Job 31.10
Lift up my soul pray Ps. 25.1
Living stones multiple persons
Lamp will go out will die Prov. 24.20
Let the dead bury the dead "Let the dead bury the dead" means make a clear and total break with the spiritually dead. "Dead" is a noun. (Luke 9:59-62 Matt. 8:18-20)
Let fall neglect (3) Esther 6.10
libation fine drink
Lift up your head restore to honor Gen. 40.13
Lifted heel against turned against Ps. 41.9
Lift up eyes be aware of something Ps. 121.1
Lift horn defy God Ps. 75.5
Little man of the eye pupil Ps. 17.8
Loins descendants Exod. 1.5
Long of anger slow to get angry Exod. 34.6
Look each other in the face meet each other in battle 2Chr. 25.17
loose permit it, allow it Matt. 16:19-20,
Mercies of God 13 attributes of Yah Rom. 12:1, Exod. 34:6-7, Mighty hand force Exod. 3.19
Mountain things representing authority Matt. 17:20
Myriads of thousands millions, like grains of sand Num. 10:35,
My name me Mal. 1.11
New wineskin new teaching, expandable Luke 5:37
Nimrod fool, idiot
No man knows the day or hour Feast of Trumpets Matt. 25:13, Rev. 3:3,
No one comes to the Father but through the Son: entrance to the Holy Place John 14:6
None is bereaved none is missing Song 4.2
Number days use time wisely Ps. 90.12
Oil of gladness joy Isa. 61.3
Old wineskin someone learned in his ways Luke 5:37
One who urinates against a wall male 1Sam. 25.22
Open the womb be born Exod. 13.2
Open hand generosity Esther 1.7
Opens the ear informs, reveals Job 33.16
Open mouth wide sneer Isa. 57.4
Planted created Ps. 94.9
Possess gates capture cities Gen. 24.60
Promotion comes from the north comes from Yah
Put hand on harm Job 1.12
Rabbi torah teacher over 30..tradition
rain life & teachings (Torah) Mark 4:26
Remove the foreskin of your heart dedicate yourselves fully to God Jer 4.4
Right hand might Ps. 89.13
Rosh poppy plant head
Rooster crows Temple crier John 13:38, Mark 14:30
Sage Torah observant wise man over 70..tradition
Said in heart thought to self Gen. 27.41
Saw his face had access to him Esther 1.14
Seed descendants Gen. 22.17
Seek your life want to kill you Jer. 4.30
Seek my face seek me Ps. 27.8
Send a hand against assassinate Esther 2.21
Slack hands abandon Josh. 10.6
Slept died 1Kgs. 2.10
Small of hand weak 2Kgs. 19.26
Snorts scoffs Ps. 10.5
Suck the milk of nations receive the wealth of other countries Isa. 60.16
Sweet water water fit to drink Exod. 15.25
Soft heart fearful Job 23.16
Sons of the prophets group of prophets 2Kgs. 2.7
Sons of people of Jer 50.33
Son of Jesse, David, man Yeshua Job 35.8
Son of the morning morning star Isa. 14.12
Son of wickedness wicked person Ps. 89.22
Soul person Lev. 22.6
Spread feet offer self for sex Ezek 16.25
Stiffened his neck became stubborn 2Chr. 36.13
Squat outside defecate (toilet) Deut 23.13
Swallowed alive killed Ps. 124.3
take my yoke (not burdensome) a Rabbi's pitch 1John 5:3, Matt. 11:29
theif in the night High priest in the Temple 1Ths. 5:2, Rev. 3:3;16:15 Their throat is an open grave they speak deceitfully Ps. 5.9
The portion of their cup their destiny Ps. 11.6
The way of women menstruation Gen. 31.35
Thousand years long time, not 1000 2Pet. 3:8
Thorn in the side Putting up with the Canaanites, pagans 2Cor. 12:7, Jgs. 2:2-3,
Tongue struts through the earth arrogantly order everyone Ps. 73.9
Trees of life Torah scrolls...tradition
Twilight after 3:00pm
Until the day breathes until dawn Song 2.17
under the fig tree at peace John 1:48
under the thigh penis, place of generation Gen. 24:2
unto heaven high walls or towers Gen. 11:3-4, Deut. 1:28
Walls pain Jer. 4.19
Water of gall opium derivitive Deut. 32:31-33
Waters spring of water Jer. 9.1
Wells without water no Torah (water) 2Pet. 2:17
What comes from you excrement Deut. 23.13
Where I caused my name to dwell where I chose to be worshiped Jer. 7.12
Wine of wrath my anger Jer. 25.15
Wormwood poppies/grapes of gall Deut. 32:31-33
Yah's seed same as Abraham's seed Gen. 12:3
Yoke teachings Matt. 11:29-30
"Your seed will possess the gate of your enemies" is a Hebrew idiom meaning: "Your seed will conquer your enemies" (Gen. 22:17, Jgs. 16:3).
Idiom #13 - Heavy and light teachings
Not really an idiom but the concept many idioms an parables are based on.
Parables were used extensively. Scholars found 4000+ different ones.
Light and heavy usually means give a "light example" everyone agrees with and then how that light example can be maginified to a heavy example.
When Jesus healed/helped a sick peron on Sabbath the Scribes accused Him of working on Sabbath.
Jesus answered with a light heavy teaching. He said/asked it was permitted to help an ox that fell in a ditch. The Scribes agreed with this "light example". Then Jesus continued with His "heavy teaching". A man is more valuble to God than a beast. So if God allows/likes an ox to be saved how much more joy would it give God that a human was saved. That's an interpretation scholars generally agree on. There is less agreement on the light/heavy teaching of "pluck out your eye" Imo it simply means "stop using that eye (light) for bad things until the sin becomes so great (heavy) God will cast you in Gehenna".
Other light heavy teachings are less clear. For example when a man looks with a lustful eye to woman he already commited adultary. It could be compared with pluck out your eye. If the eye is plucked out it obviously can't look lustfully and the sin doesn't evolve into literal adultary. That interpretation is in line with the classic light/heavy method of teaching.
So what was Jesus trying to explain. Looking lustfully (light) is a lesser sin that leads to real adultary (heavy)?
Or as many Christian scholars claim looking=adultary.
Same reasoning for if you hate your brother then you have already murdered him.
Was Jesus using a light/heavy teaching which was an extremly popular way of teaching is that day? (remember Jesus used that method with the ox). Hating leads to murder.
Or hate=murder as many Christian scholars claim?
Idiom #14 - Hate your parents and follow me.
Hate = love less
(Luke 14:26 [CLV])
If anyone is coming to Me and is not hating his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, and still more his soul besides, he can not be My disciple."
(Gen 29:30 [ACV])
And he also went in to Rachel, and also he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
(Gen 29:31 [ACV])
And LORD saw that Leah was regarded inferior, and he opened her womb, but Rachel was barren.
(Gen 29:30 [AKJV])
And he went in also to Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
(Gen 29:31 [AKJV])
And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
Idiom #15 - Be blessed
(Luke 13:34 [NET])
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you! How often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you would have none of it!
(Luke 13:35 [NET])
Look, your house is forsaken! And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, 'Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!'"
In the Jewish wedding, when the groom approaches the chuppah,
these words are said: "Blessed is he who comes". In the book, "Made
in Heaven" by Orthodox Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, he explains that this is
actually an idiomatic expression which means "welcome".
So, when Jesus said you will not see me (again) until
you say, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord", this is
actually "wedding talk" and a Hebraic way of saying, "Welcome!".
Yeshua/Jesus said that He will not return back to the earth at his
second coming until He is welcomed as the bridegroom and His people
are crying out for Him to return and be married to His people !!!
Click for pictures of a chuppah (http://www.google.com/search?q=chuppah&hl=en&lr=&prmd=imvns&source=lnms&tbm=isch&ei=Cmt_T7zYOaK30QWmqOH1BQ&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=2&ved=0CCEQ_AUoAQ&biw=2560&bih=1426#q=chuppah&hl=en&lr=&sa=X&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=1&biw=939&bih=855).
Idiom #16 - Horse and donkey
Horse and donkey. ====> Jesus rode a donkey and led a horse..............................................
This is one of those idioms/deeper meaning I wouldn't have guess in a million years.
It also seems to have a (mild) UR meaning..
"A horse is prepared for times of war" (Mishlei 21:31).
"The horse is not able to provide a person salvation (when Hashem is not with him)" (Tehilim 33:17).
Six things were said of a horse: It is promiscuous; it loves war; and it is a proud creature... (Pesachim 113b)
The fact that horses represent war and conquest answers a
number of riddles. In Genesis 32:15,16 Yakov sends a generous gift to his
brother, Esav, in order to appease his anger. Yakov's gift includes
all sorts of animals -- goats, sheep, camels, cows and donkeys. I was
once asked, why didn't Yakov send Esav any horses? The answer
obviously is that he did not want to send the angry Esav weapons for
war, nor did he wish to hand him a sign of conquest.
The prophet (Zecharyah 9:9) describes the Messiah as "a poor
man, riding upon a *donkey*." The Gemara (Sanhedrin 98a) describes how King
Shevor of Persia scoffed, "Why doesn't your Messiah come riding on a
horse? If he lacks one, I'll be glad to provide him with one of my
best!" Why, indeed, should the Messiah come on a donkey? Isn't a horse
a more appropriate sign of military victory?
The answer may be learned from the words of the Gemara earlier
on that same page (ibid.). A poor man on a donkey is a description of how
the Messiah will appear if the Jews are *not* found deserving of a
spectacular salvation.
Whether we deserve it or not, we will
eventually be redeemed; however, if we are not deserving the Messiah
will only arrive riding on a donkey. A horse is a sign of proud
conquest; this Messiah will provide but a humble Exodus. As the Gemara
says in Shabbat 152a, "One who rides a horse is a king; one who rides
a donkey is but a freeman."
Similarly, when the 72 Elders translated the Torah for King
Ptolemy (Megilah 9a), they changed the meaning of a number of words in order
that he should not misunderstand them and scoff at them. One of the
words they change involved the donkey that Moshe rode his family upon,
on his way to Egypt to free the Jews. Instead of "donkey," they used
the broad term "beast of transportation," lest King Ptolemy ask them,
"Did Moshe not have a horse to ride upon?" Moshe, too, rode upon a
donkey because the Jews were not being redeemed from Egypt on their
own merit, but rather out of Hashem's mercy. He was not the proud
conqueror.
IV
On a deeper level of meaning, in the above-mentioned Gemaras
the gentile kings were not able to grasp the concept that Hashem will
redeem the Jews even if they are not worthy of it. "How can that be?"
they thought, "If the Jews are not worthy of being redeemed, let
Hashem leave them as they are, under our domain. If they are worthy,
let him redeem them proudly, with flourish and fanfare!"
What these kings did not know was that the Jewish People are
Hashem's chosen nation. Out of His love for our virtuous ancestors,
who embedded their desirable traits deep in the hearts of their
descendants, Hashem promised to always come to our rescue and to
eventually redeem us from exile. Whether he comes on a horse or on a
donkey, the Messiah is on his way -- may he arrive speedily in our
days!
In Zechariah 9:9, Matthew 21:5, Messiah comes riding on a
DONKEY. As a corporate nation, the Jewish people missed their
Messiah. After riding into Jerusalem on a donkey, Messiah wept over
the city because of it's destruction and nation's rejection of their
Messiah (Luke 19:28-44).
In Revelation 19:11-16, Messiah comes riding on a WHITE HORSE as a
WARRIOR in VICTORY over his enemies. During this time, the nation of
Israel will receive their Messiah (Zechariah 12:9-10)
This is the Jewish backround and understanding of Yeshua's /
Jesus's Triumphant entry into Jerusalem.
Idiom #17 - Under the fig tree.
John 1:48 "How do you know me?" Nathanael asked. Jesus answered, "I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you."
It means Nathaneal will be part of His millenial reign.
A huge part of the millenium is Torah study under the fig tree.
Jesus made the fig tree die......????????????????????
Idiom #18 - Nobody knows the hour
Because it's posted in this thread you can assume the literal English meaning is not correct.
(Matthew) 24:26, "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in Heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father"
When Jesus said nobody knows the day He precisely told us the exact day through this idiom
The Jewish new year, Rosh Hosanna, started at a new after the fall equinox. Only the calendar court could legally announce when the year started. So nobody knew the exact day and time of the Calendar Courts announcement.
Jewish new year wasn't a main festival but it did start the count toward a major festival. On the 10th of the same month was the day of Atonement.
Using astronomy software I can calculate the new moon with a precision that's usually far more accurate than an hour.
But that's just theoretical because the moon has to be observed with the naked eye. And therein lays the uncertainty. My software doesn't "know" the moon can't be seen because of clouds, mist or rain. A month was never suspended more than one day because a solar month is always 29 or 30 days. So guesswork can come very close. Jews of course also knew the day fairly accurate but still it was an idiom.
What's not clear to me is what Jesus was referring to. Because New year is unknown the 10th day of that month is unknown too. Simply because nobody can start counting 10 days if the first day is unknown.
So was He referring to New Year? (He was born on New Years eve)
Or was He referring to the major feast of Atonement (He was Baptized on that day)
????
(Matt 8:11 [ACV])
And I say to you, that many will come from east and west, and will sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of the heavens,
This verse is a reference to what the Jews call "The seven shepherds" Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Joseph, King David.
During Sukkot/feast of Tabernacles the seven Shepherds were symbolically invited into each booth as guests of honor.
That day was known as day of the Lord, Messianic age, 1000 year kingdom.
"For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost" (Luke 19:10)
My guess is He called Himself the 8th Shepherd.
"Idiom" #19 - Kiss the son.
As requested by Anna247
(Ps 2:12 [ACV]) Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish in the way, for his wrath will soon be kindled. Blessed are all those who take refuge in him.
Means:
- Bow down in homage.
- Do homage with purity.
Very likely it's bad translation that crept in after the 5th century. Partly because of poor translations skills and likely mostly because 'they' wanted it to refer to Jesus.
nash-ku bar
Hebrew: Bar = pure
Hebrew: Ben = son
Aramiac: Bar = son
Translators wrongly assumed the verses contained Armiac words
It's said/assumed the verse refers to Psalm 2:7 about king David
(Ps 2:7 [ACV]) I will tell of the decree. LORD said to me, Thou are my son, this day I have begotten thee.
1Samuel 10:1 - And Samuel took the vial of oil, and poured it on his [Saul's] head, and kissed him. And he [Samuel] said [to Saul], "Indeed, the Lord has anointed you to be a ruler over His inheritance."
Idiom #20 - Rightly dividing the word of truth
(2Tim 2:15 [ACV])
Be diligent to present thyself approved to God, an irreproachable workman, correctly traversing the word of truth.
Ancient Hebrew and Greek knew no spaces or punctuation. Not even upper and lower case letters. So originally the whole book of Genesis was one huge string of letters.
Does dividing point to cutting of that string into word, verses and chapters? Likely not because dividing seems to have another meaning than cutting up.
- Proper handling
- Rightly explaining
- Cutting a straight path in the right direction
(Prov 3:6 [NET]) Acknowledge him in all your ways, and he will make your paths straight.
(Prov 11:5 [ACV]) The righteousness of the perfect shall direct his way, but the wicked man shall fall by his own wickedness.
The above two verses use the same Greek word in the LXX translation (which was made by 2nd century BC by a team of 70 Rabbis)
The verses seem to be about proper guidance and/or interpretation.
What does "word of truth" mean?
Whole Bible? Just the OT or NT. Every religious teaching? Something else?
(Eph 1:13 [ACV]) In whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the good-news of your salvation, in whom also having believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the promise,
(Col 1:5 [ACV]) because of the hope being reserved for you in the heavens, which ye heard before in the word of the truth of the good-news
The word of truth seems to point to Jesus' direct teaching only. Of course it doesn't mean the OT and other NT books are false but imo it's zooming in on the Gospels.
(2Tim 2:16 [ACV]) But shun profane babblings, for they will advance to greater impiety,
(2Tim 2:17 [ACV]) and their word will have a feeding field like gangrene, of whom are Hymenaeus and Philetus,
==> Avoid all none Gospel teachings at all cost.
2 Timothy 3
10You, however, know all about my teaching, my way of life, my purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, 11persecutions, sufferings—what kinds of things happened to me in Antioch, Iconium and Lystra, the persecutions I endured. Yet the Lord rescued me from all of them. 12In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
Timothy is instructed by Paul to teach only what he learned from him. Of course that doesn't point to all sort of OT teachings every Jew knew by heart.
My interpretation of this:
Timothy must pass on the teaching of Jesus in it's purest form. No mixing with other teachings.
So it has nothing to do with:
- An instruction to divide to the Bible into words, verses and chapters.
- Neither does it mean the OT is past glory or something similar.
Idiom #21 - with four eyes
Meet "with four eyes" means meet face to face without anyone else present.
Idiom #22 - neither bears nor forest
Something completely false
Idiom #23 - buried his hand in the dish
Someone idles his time away.
| [size=-1]Teachings of YESHUA the Pharisee (Summaries in italics)[/size] | [size=-1]TALMUDIC Teachings of the Pharisees (Summaries in italics)[/size] |
| [size=-1]The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. - Mark 2:27[/size] | [size=-1]Rabbi Jonathan ben Joseph said: For it is holy unto you; I.e., it [the Sabbath] is committed to your hands, not you to its hands. - Talmud: Yoma 85b[/size] |
| [size=-1]Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. - Matthew 25:45[/size] | [size=-1]One who betrays his fellow, it is as if he has betrayed God. - Tosefta Sh'vuot, ch. 3[/size] |
| [size=-1]Insulting someone is like murder.- Matthew 5:21-22[/size] | [size=-1]He who publicly shames his neighbour is as though he shed blood.- Talmud: Bava Mezia 58b[/size] |
| [size=-1]But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. - Matthew 5:28[/size] | [size=-1]One who gazes lustfully upon the small finger of a married woman, it is as if he has committed adultery with her.- Kallah, Ch. 1[/size] |
| [size=-1]That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.- Matthew 5:45[/size] | [size=-1]Rabbi Abbahu said: The day when rain fails is greater than [the day of] the Revival of the Dead,for the Revival of the Dead is for the righteous only whereas rain is both for the righteous and for the wicked - Talmud: Taanit 7a[/size] |
| [size=-1]Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. - Matthew 6:1[/size] | [size=-1]In the case of the recital of the Shema', since everybody else recites, and he also recites, it does not look like showing off on his part; but in the case of the month of Ab, since everybody else does work and he does no work, it looks like showing off.- Talmud: Berachot 17b[/size] |
| [size=-1]But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth. - Matthew 6:3[/size] | [size=-1]What kind of charity is that which delivers a man from an unnatural death? When a man gives without knowing to whom he gives. and the beggar receives without knowing from whom he receives. - Talmud: Bava Batra 10a - 10b[/size] |
| [size=-1]But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.- Matthew 6:7[/size] | [size=-1]If one draws out his prayer and expects therefore its fulfilment, he will in the end suffer vexation of heart, as it says, Hope deferred maketh the heart sick. - Talmud: Berachot 55a[/size] |
| [size=-1]Do not worry about where your food will come from tomorrow, or your drink. - Matthew 6:25-31[/size] | [size=-1]Rabbi Eliezer the Great declares: Whoever has a piece of bread in his basket and Says. 'What shall I eat tomorrow?' belongs only to them who are little in faith. - Talmud: Sotah 48b[/size] |
| [size=-1]Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. - Matthew 6:34[/size] | [size=-1]A parable: [They were] like a man who was kept in prison and people told him: To-morrow, they will release you from the prison and give you plenty of money. And he answered them: I pray of you, let me go free today and I shall ask nothing more! - Talmud: Berachot 9b[/size] |
| [size=-1]Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No. - Matthew 5:34-37[/size] | [size=-1]A righteous yes is a Yes; a righteous no is No. - Talmud: Bava Batra 49b[/size] |
| [size=-1]At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. - Matthew 11:25[/size] | [size=-1]Rabbi Johanan said: Since the Temple was destroyed, prophecy has been taken from prophets and given to fools and children. - [/size][size=-1]Talmud: [/size][size=-1]Bava Batra 12b[/size] |
| [size=-1]And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. - Matthew 5:29-30[/size] | [size=-1]Come and hear what was taught: Rabbi Tarfon said, 'If his hand touched the membrum let his hand be cut off upon his belly'. 'But', they said to him, 'would not his belly be split'? 'It is preferable', he replied, 'that his belly shall be split rather than that he should go down into the pit of destruction'. - Talmud: Niddah 13b[/size] |
| [size=-1]But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. - Matthew 23:8[/size] | [size=-1]Shemaiah used to say: love work, hate acting the superior, and do not bring thyself to the knowledge of the ruling authority. - Mishnah: Avot 1:10[/size] |
| [size=-1]Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh. - Matthew 24:44[/size] | [size=-1]Even as R. Zera, who, whenever he chanced upon scholars engaged thereon [I.e., in calculating the time of the Messiah's coming], would say to them: I beg of you, do not postpone it, for it has been taught: Three come unawares: Messiah, a found article and a scorpion. - Talmud: Sanhedrin 97a[/size] |
[size=-1]Yeshua taught in a parable that they can please the king (God) by pleasing one another. - Matthew 25:40
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. - Matthew 25:40[/size] | [size=-1]Rabbi simeon said: if three have eaten at one table and have not spoken thereat words of torah, [it is] as if they had eaten sacrifices [offered] to the dead, for [of such persons] it is said, for all tables are full of filthy vomit, [they are] without the All-Present. But, if three have eaten at one table, and have spoken thereat words of torah, [it is] as if they had eaten at the table of the All-Present, blessed be he, as it is said, this is the table before the LORD. - Mishnah: Avot 3:3[/size] |
[size=-1]Love your enemy. - Matthew 5:43[/size]
[size=-1]Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; - Matthew 5:43[/size] | [size=-1]They who are insulted but insult not back; who hear themselves reproached but answer not; who serve out of love and rejoice in their affliction--of them it is written in Scripture: They that love God are as the going forth of the sun in its might. - Talmud: Yoma 23a, Gitin 36b, Shabat 88b[/size] |
| [size=-1]Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matthew 5:23-24[/size] | [size=-1]If a man said, "I will sin and repent, and sin again and repent", he will be given no chance to repent. [If he said,] "I will sin and the Day of Atonement will effect atonement", then the Day of Atonement effects no atonement. For transgressions that are between man and God the Day of Atonement effects atonement, but for transgressions that are between a man and his fellow the Day of Atonement effects atonement only if he has appeased his fellow - Mishnah: Yoma 8:9[/size] |
Idiom #24 - Rightousness and Salvation
Matt 5:10 God blesses those who are persecuted for doing right, for the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs.
Several problems with the above translation. Some simply because the words used in the original text had several meanings. Giving the verse a bit more depth which was lost in the translation process.
Persecuted which was translated from Greek can also mean "pursue". The Hebrew word for "persecuted"also has that double meaning. But "persue" is it's primary meaning.
The Bible translator chose to translate diuku (Greek) with persecute because of the following two verses that deal with persecution.
11 "God blesses you when people mock you and persecute you and lie about you[a] and say all sorts of evil things against you because you are my followers. 12 Be happy about it! Be very glad! For a great reward awaits you in heaven. And remember, the ancient prophets were persecuted in the same way.
Bivin & Blizzard comment that the sudden shift of the pronoun from the third person to the second is
"a clear indication that these verses were not originally a part of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, but a part of another context or story. They were probably placed after Matthew 5:10 by the editor of Matthew's source because of the word "persecution", which appears in both passages."
Doing right/rightousness is a Hebrew idiom (also) meaning "salvation"
Theirs is to strong wording because they don't own the Kingdom but are just part of it.
Combine that with Idiom#2 that explains the kingdom already arrived.
So a more correct translation would be:
Matt 5:10 Blessed are those who pursue salvation, for such as these are in the kingdom of God.
Idiom #25 - Giving and borrow
(Matt 5:42 [ACV])
Give to him who asks thee, and turn thou not away from him who wants to borrow from thee.
The above is Hebrew poetry. Hebrew poetry doesn't rhyme but it repeats the same concept in slightly different words.
So if the second part means borrow, so must the first part mean borrow.
Ask - Hebrew word with 3 meanings. 1] ask a question. 2] Request 3] Borrow something that can be returned. For example a shovel.
Borrow - Hebrew word meaning borrow something that can be returned in kind. Like borrow money or flour.
It's not another subject it's explaing not to take revenge
(Matt 5:39 [ACV]) But I say to you, not to resist what is troublesome, but whoever will strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Neither does the verse teach to give everything away because it's about loans. Not giving to everyone who asks. Be good stewards of your talents/coins Mat 25:14-30
Idiom #26 - Fulfilling and destoying the law
Math 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily, I am saying to you, Till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring.
Does this verse contradic:
(Rom 10:4 [YLT]) For Christ is an end of law for righteousness to every one who is believing,
Is or isn't Jesus abolishing the law? It's idiom time again... :laughing7:
It may come as a suprise for some but the Rabbi's didn't always agree :mblush:
When they didn't agree with a interpretation of another Rabbi they said he (the rabbi) was destroying the law (by misinterpretation)
The other Rabbi then replied he was fulfilling the law (correctly interpretating the law)
So in verse 17 Jesus simply claims He has come to give the only correct interpretation of the law.
He doesn't add, remove, change, destroy, etc. He explains it how it was meant to be for millenia.
The ancient laws will outlive heaven and earth.
Jesus didn't destroy/change the law but the following verse clearly shows He ended the law.
(Rom 10:4 [YLT]) For Christ is an end of law for righteousness to every one who is believing,
Again the answer is found in the changing of word meanings. Or in this case added word meanings.
Originally Torah=Instruction ===> Written laws directly commanded by God.
The written law was vague at points. It for example didn't decribe what "work" is. So Rabbis added lots of oral laws (which were penned down in ~200 AD)
In Jesus time the combination of written and oral laws got the name "the law". Primary or secondary meaning. Perhaps just among Rabbis. I don't know. But Jesus was refering to the combined law. He removed the manmade oral law which was never law in the eyes of God. But He left the written law fully in tact.
Idiom #27 - Giving
(Matt 5:20 [CLV])
For I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness should not be superabounding more than that (WW: righteousness) of the scribes and Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.
Should we follow the law even better than those extreme Scribes and Pharisees?
Righteousness originally had the meaning of deliverance/salvation; but during the time of Jesus it had a secondary meaning of alms giving.
For Pharisees prayer, fasting and alms giving were the three most important things of righteous life. Alms giving being the most important of them all. It became so important that alms giving became a synonym for righteousness/salvation/deliverance.
The Hebrew word is tsedakah
Scriptural tsedakah = Salvation ==> broad meaning ==> bigger meaning
Pharisee tsedakah = alms giving ==> narrow meaning ==> smaller meaning
Basically the Pharisees believed they could buy salvation by giving alms.
Jesus uses both meanings in one verse.
So Jesus said: If you want to enter heaven your definition of tsedakah should be the bigger (as in wider) than the narrow alms giving tsedakah definition of the Pharisees and Scribes.
Idiom #28 - Voilence in God's Kingdom?
Matt 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been subjected to violence,[a] and violent people have been raiding it
Professor David Flusser discovered the key to understanding it through an old rabbinic midrash. This verse alludes to Micah 2:13 One who breaks open the way will go up before them; they will break through the gate and go out. Their king will pass through before them, the Lord at their head (NIV). This verse pictures the shepherd taking the stones of the pen away in the morning, therefore "breaking open the way" for the sheep to get back out, which is the Hebrew word parats (ץרפ)[18]. While the breach-maker and the king are the same in Micah 2:13, rabbinic interpretation says that the breach-maker is Elijah and the king the Messiah. Jesus, hinting at that, is therefore saying, "The Kingdom of heaven [...] is breaking forth [...] and every person in it is breaking forth [...] individuals within the Kingdom are finding liberty and freedom." (Bivin & Blizzard 1994:86). Jesus is here declaring himself to be the Messiah, John the Baptist being Elijah. Jesus is the shepherd who leads the sheep out and onto the green fields.
So basicly the verse means Kingdom is storming the world. (in a positive way)
Idiom #29 - Binding and loosing.
Matt 16:19 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
Bind=prohibited and Loose=allow. Both in relation to rules given in the OT according to rabbinic interpretation.
But also:
Jesus was giving Peter the authority to make decisions and rules, which the young church would need (see Acts 6:1-6, Acts 15). As Stern puts it, Jesus makes Peter "both (1) shammash ("steward") [...] with the keys, and (2) dayan ("judge"), who, as the one who can prohibit and permit, establishes new covenant halakhah"
http://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/9807/980703_i.html
(Matt 16:19 [CLV])
I will be giving you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatsoever you should be binding on the earth shall be those things having been bound in the heavens, and whatsoever you should be loosing on the earth, shall be those having been loosed in the heavens."
Original meaning of bind: tie up, imprison, tether an animal or hitch a cart.
Translators used those meanings when they translated from Hebrew to Greek. The Greek is correctly translated to for example English. But....
... the word meanings where taken from the LXX, a 2nd century BC Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
After the LXX was written the Hebrew word 'bind' got an additional meaning. A meaning that at Jesus' time was the primary meaning. Same for Loose. At Jesus' time the new meaning of the words were used extensively in Rabbinic teachings.
Bind = Forbid ==> It was bound to work on Sabbath. (bound by law)
Loose = Allow ==> It was loose to walk to the Temple on Sabbath.
Jesus gave Peter authority to make decisions. "Heaven" would back up those decisions.
Idiom #30 - The eye is the lamp of the body
Matt 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
The above verses mean praying, fasting and almsgiving should be done in secrecy. Not just to put up a show.
Lightfoot explains the Matthew passage as a metaphor for generosity and
covetousness, calling it a "usual manner of speech of the nation". He equates a good
eye with generosity and an evil eye with stinginess, quoting Tractate Trumot of the
Talmud:
This is the measure of Truma (offering given to the priests). A good eye
yields one out of forty: that is the fortieth part. The school of Shammai
says, one out of thirty. A middle eye, one out of fifty. And an evil eye, one
out of sixty. He that gives a gift, let him give with a good eye: and he that
dedicates anything, let him dedicate it with a good eye.
Geza Vermes, in his book The Religion of Jesus the Jew, further explains this in
relation to other Jewish writings of the times. Vermes finds parallel between the Gospel
writings of the eye and the lamp and the sayings of Eliezer ben Hyrcanus who equated
the "good eye" with the "good way" (mAb. 2:9) – in other words, proper religious
behavior. Additionally, Vermes ties in the dualism of light and dark found in the Qumran
writings to the Gospel writings. If the eye is good, it fills the body with light, otherwise
darkness would be victorious – the fear of such dualism. In 4Q186 ("Horoscopes"), it is
taught that people consist of a nine-part mixture of light and darkness. The Teacher of
Righteousness, focusing on the individual, implies that a good eye is a divine gift as is
the light that it brings.
Hi WW: I've checked my hard copies of idioms, etc., looking for "one language" (Gen 11:1) can't find anything. In your electronic storehouse of treasures, do you have any information on "one language"...it seems to me it must have special significance. Language is so fascinating... I guess words are... and especially the Word of God... thanks, anna
Quote from: anna274 on June 18, 2012, 02:45:59 PM
Hi WW: I've checked my hard copies of idioms, etc., looking for "one language" (Gen 11:1) can't find anything. In your electronic storehouse of treasures, do you have any information on "one language"...it seems to me it must have special significance. Language is so fascinating... I guess words are... and especially the Word of God... thanks, anna
I created a new thread here (http://tentmaker.org/forum/lounge/the-language(s)-of-babel/msg136794/#msg136794).
Idiom #31 - Judgement and salvation
Psalm 43:1 Judge me, O God
Isaiah 59:9-14
New International Version (NIV)
Isa 59
9 So justice is far from us,
and righteousness does not reach us.
We look for light, but all is darkness;
for brightness, but we walk in deep shadows.
11 We all growl like bears;
we moan mournfully like doves.
We look for justice, but find none;
for deliverance, but it is far away.
14 So justice is driven back,
and righteousness stands at a distance;
truth has stumbled in the streets,
honesty cannot enter
In all the above verses judgement equals something good like rightousness and salvation.
Mat 19:28 Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Read Psalm 122 in which Jerusalem is called city of Salvation with several thrones.
Parallel between psalm 122 and Mat 19:28
Of course judgement can be really negative; but the word itself certainly isn't all doom and gloom.
Context.....
(Matt 12:18 [ACV])
Behold, my Boy whom I chose, my beloved in whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will declare justice to the Gentiles.
(Isa 42:1 [ACV])
Behold, my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit upon him, he will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.
(Ps 43:1 [ACV])
Judge me, O God, and plead my cause against a profane nation. O deliver me from the deceitful and unjust man.
(John 3:17 [ACV])
For God sent the Son into the world not that he might condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.
(the noun salvation is only 7 times in the Gospels
The Hebrew word for Judgement, judging, etc very often means saving, to save etc
Jesus came to save not to judge.
When David was is trouble he called for help (salvation) not the negative meaning of judgement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Judg 11:27 [ACV])
I therefore have not sinned against thee, but thou do me wrong to war against me. LORD, the Judge, be judge this day between the sons of Israel and the sons of Ammon.
(Isa 33:22 [ACV])
For LORD is our judge. LORD is our lawgiver. LORD is our king, he will save us.
(Gen 18:25 [ACV])
That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay a righteous man with a wicked man, that so the righteous man should be as the wicked man. Far be it from thee. Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
(Ps 94:2 [ACV])
Lift up thyself, thou judge of the earth. Render to the proud a recompense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Luke 22:30 [ACV])
that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
(Ps 122:1 [ACV])
I was glad when they said to me, Let us go to the house of LORD.
(Ps 122:2 [ACV])
Our feet are standing inside thy gates, O Jerusalem.
(Ps 122:3 [ACV])
Jerusalem, that is built as a city that is compact together,
(Ps 122:4 [ACV])
where the tribes go up, even the tribes of LORD, [for] an ordinance for Israel, to give thanks to the name of LORD.
(Ps 122:5 [ACV])
For there thrones are set for judgment, the thrones of the house of David.
(Ps 122:6 [ACV])
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem. They shall prosper who love thee.
(Ps 122:7 [ACV])
Peace be within thy walls, and prosperity within thy palaces.
(Ps 122:8 [ACV])
For my brothers and companions' sakes I will now say, Peace be within thee.
(Ps 122:9 [ACV])
For the sake of the house of LORD our God I will seek thy good.
Jersusalem, city of salvation.
Idiom #32 - My task
Luke 12:49 "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!
Hebrew meaning: My task is to cast fire on earth, how can I wish it's already burning.
So, imo, this verse says Jesus is the Judge but is not looking forward to it.
Idiom #33 - Face
(Luke 9:29 [ABU])
And it came to pass, while he was praying, that the appearance of his countenance became changed, and his raiment white and glistening.
countenance = face
(Exod 34:29 [AKJV])
And it came to pass, when Moses came down from mount Sinai with the two tables of testimony in Moses' hand, when he came down from the mount, that Moses knew not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.
34 Yet whenever Moses entered before Yahweh to speak with Him he took away the covering until he went forth. When he came forth, then he spoke to the sons of Israel that which he was instructed.
35 And the sons of Israel saw the face of Moses, that the skin of Moses's face gleamed. Yet Moses restored the covering on his face until he entered to speak with Him.
Moses and Elijah spoke to Jesus on the mountain. The Hebrew OT has 3 major divisions.
The Law (Moses), The Prophets (Elijah) and the Writings.
(Luke 9:32 [ACV])
But Peter and those with him were weighed down with sleep, and having become awake, they saw his glory, and the two men who stood with him.
(Luke 9:33 [ACV])
And it came to pass, as they were departing from him, Peter said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here, and we could make three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah, not knowing what he was sayi
(Luke 9:34 [ACV])
And while he was speaking these things, a cloud came and overshadowed them. And they were afraid as they entered into the cloud.
(Luke 9:35 [ACV])
And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son. Hear ye him.(=obey)
(Luke 9:36 [ACV])
And at the occurrence of the voice, Jesus was found alone. And they kept silent, and informed no man in those days any of the things that they have seen.
(Exod 33:9 [CLV])
It came to be as Moses entered the tent that the cloud column descended and stood at the portal of the tent, and He spoke with Moses.
Idiom #34 - Face, showbread and Jesus
This idiom is dedicated to Cardinal :cloud9:
(Luke 9:44 [CLV])
You be laying up these sayings in your ears, for the Son of Mankind is about to be given up into the hands of men."
An Hebrew idiom meaning more than just listening. It emphasises the words that follow are of extreme importance and should be remembered.
I don't know there is a similar English idiom (sharpen your ears?). The Dutch one is: Knot it in your ears. Or point your ears.
The idiom refers to a promise God made to Joshua. The war with the kingdom of Almelek will take a long time but eventually Israel will win.
But God didn't speak to Joshua directly. He spoke to Moses who passed on the message to his disciple Joshua. In the same way Jesus passed on the message to His disciples. The disciples knew every bit of the OT; so to them this little verse refers to a large portion of Jewish history. Their was added symbology for the Jews because (for them) Amalek symbolisized satan.
So Jesus warned the Disciples that they would be under constant attack (led by satan)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Face.
Let's face it, face is an idiom for 'the Lord'
(Isa 63:9 [YLT])
In all their distress He is no adversary, And the messenger of His presence saved them, In His love and in His pity He redeemed them, And He doth lift them up, And beareth them all the days of old.
Presence=face=the Lord
They where save by the angel of the Lord.
In the Temple there is a table of showbread/shewbread. It seems to be a poor translation. An attempt to translate an unknown Hebrew idiom.
(Num 4:7 [ACV])
And upon the table of showbread they shall spread a cloth of blue, and put on it the dishes, and the spoons, and the bowls and the cups with which to pour out. And the continual bread shall be on it.
(Num 4:7 [CLV])
And over the table of the presence they shall spread a blue cloth, and they will put on it the dishes and the spoons, the waste pans and the libation chalices. Also the continual bread shall be on it.
Presence=Face=Lord.
It just means table of the Lord with on top of it bread of the Lord.
Literal Hebrew reads: "Table of the Face" and "Bread of the face".
For what it's worth; my guess is that there is a connection to the Last Supper table.
Not every "face" means Lord. It's never easy
(Luke 9:51 [CLV])
Now it occurred in the fulfillment of the days of His taking up, He fixes His face steadfastly to go to Jerusalem."
In this case it simply means walk in the direction of Jerusalem.
Many idioms posted in this thread I posted before the forum issues. I recovered many using Google. Below I'll quote Cardinal and Eaglesway to keep some continuity in the chat about shewbread.
I like, WW He once spoke to me concerning the bread, and He called it the "bread of His presence", to me.
My .....it represents the natures (face denoting nature) of the 12 tribes/12 apostles being formed as Christ in us.
They are His represented as His body, ie. He broke the bread and said this is my body which was broken for you. He wasn't JUST talking about His physical body; He has a body that has always been.
Face denotes nature; if you see someone walking towards you a long way off, you don't know who they are until you get close enough to see their face. Blessings....
I replied:
"He" isn't clear enough for me.
He-Father or He-Son?
My guess from the context is He-Father because that aligns perfectly with what I wrote.
"bread of His presence"
His=Father
Presence=Lord=Jesus=Son
"bread of Father's Son"
Can you agree with that interpretation?
Cardinal replied:
Yes, I can.....
Eaglesway replied
Amen!
Shewbread
H6440
פּנה / פּנים
pânîym / pâneh
BDB Definition:
1) face
1a) face, faces
1b) presence, person
1c) face (of seraphim or cherubim)
1d) face (of animals)
1e) face, surface (of ground)
1f) as adverb of loc/temp
1f1) before and behind, toward, in front of, forward, formerly, from beforetime, before
1g) with preposition
1g1) in front of, before, to the front of, in the presence of, in the face of, at the face or front of, from the presence of, from before, from before the face of
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong's Number: from H6437
The bread of presence was set upon the table of "presence bread", or the communion table in the tabernacle, representing the fellowship in the love of God that is our bread that we break, the love between us in the Spirit, the koinonea and sharing of our union and harmony in one spirit as one soul with one heart. The Lampstand being the symbol of the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ the Spirit of Prophecy (a lamp shining in a dark place until the Day dawns and the morning star arises in our hearts). It is His presence, because He was broken, among us, let us then be broken for one another so that the Light of Day will shine out from the Tabernacle of Living Stones, the Tent of Meeting where the Lord dwells among His "called out ones" :o)
The brazen altar at the entrance was the place where baptismal washing sanctified the priests before they entered to minister unto the Lord. There was no admittance to the Holy Place until the "washing of the water with the word" was accepted by the one entering. A burial of my life in exchange for that life which awaits me within the middle court.
Idiom #35 - Son of ....
Luke 10
5 Now into whatever house you may be entering, first say, 'Peace to this household!'"
6 And if a son of peace should be there, your peace will be resting on it; otherwise, surely it will come back on you."
son of peace/house means a friend that's so close it's almost part of your family (family=house)
"Son of" is an idiom I can't explain. So I'll give a few examples.
Son of:
- the house => someone almost as close as familiy.
- death => deserves to die or condemned to die. When the Pilate sentenced Jesus He became Son of death
- gehenna => A person who surely will end up in 'hell'.
- Tentmaker ==> All dedicated members.
- eating ==> everything good for food.
So Luke said to greet the house (family). If they are friendly they welcome you. If not you retract your greetings and move on.
Idiom #36 - Baptism
49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
(Matt 3:11 [CLV])
For I, indeed, am baptizing you in water for repentance, yet He Who is coming after me is stronger than I, Whose sandals I am not competent to bear. He will be baptizing you in holy spirit and fire,
Were the tongues like fire (Acts 2:3) the baptism with fire?
Luke 12:49-50 is Hebrew poetry which repeats the same thought in different words.
Two OT examples
(2Sam 20:1 [CLV])
....`We have no portion in David, and we have no inheritance in the son of Jesse; each to his tents, O Israel..
Portion = inheritance
David = son of Jesse
(Hos 13:14 [CLV])
From the hand of the unseen will I ransom them; from death will I redeem them. Where is your plague, O Death? Where is your sting, O Unseen? Regret shall be concealed from My eyes."
Ransom=redeem
Sheol=death
49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
Baptism = fire
Baptize = cast
Came=past tense. Also in the Greek it was translated from.
Greek like English has a complex tense system. Simple past, present perfect, past perfect, past continuous, past perfect continuous etc.
Hebrew has only one past tense (that can have the meaning all mentioned above)
So the correct tense must be determined from context.
"I am come" doesn't always mean that person came to the place where you are standing. I can also mean "my task is"
(Luke 12:49 [ACV]) My task is `Fire I came to cast to the earth, and what will I if already it was kindled?
49 My task is to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?
"what will I" is a correct translation from the Greek text. But in Hebrew "what can also mean "how".
49 My task is to send fire on the earth; and how will I, if it be already kindled?
"how" is a parallel (poetry) to verse 50
50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!
Fire stands for judgement. Did Jesus really want the fire/judgement had already started? Nope.
(John 3:17 [YLT])
For God did not send His Son to the world that he may judge the world, but that the world may be saved through him;
"will I" is better translated as "How could I wish"
Still reading... (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/Smileys/Lots_O_Smileys/mblush.gif)
Kindled/burning is a correct Greek translation. But the Hebrew word burn can mean: Burning, start burning and burn up.
Burn(ed) up is past tense. Accomplished is past tense. Another poetic parallel.
What is "it" refering to in "it be already kindled". Fire can't be burned up. So it must refer to earth.
"to be baptized" - again a correct Greek translation that in Hebrew also can mean "to baptize"
It's wasn't about Jesus being baptized but Jesus baptizing the earth.
I'm aware the above has become rather complex and messy. I hope you understand... (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/Smileys/Lots_O_Smileys/mblush.gif)
Baptism was ritual to become ritual clean. Not only for humans but also for things. Jews baptized pots and pans to make the ritually clean.
A pot obviously can't baptize itself, so it's done by it's owner.
But people baptized themselfs. John the Baptist didn't really baptize people. He preached and persuded people to step into the Jordan and baptize themself. John stood on the river bank when Jesus baptized Himself.
(Mark 15:34 [ACV])
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a great voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why have thou forsaken me?
(Mark 15:35 [ACV])
And some of those who stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calls Elijah.
Why did some people assume Jesus called Elijah?
The only possible meaning of Eloi is God/My God. (including all sorts of pagan gods) ==> Aramiac
Eli is shorthand for God and Elijah. ==> Hebrew
Meaning the words were Eli Eli; otherwise nobody would have thought about Elijah.
Older Bible translations are of dubious quality because of the assumption that the used Greek was classic Greek instead of Koine Greek. A similar thing is going on for the Armiac/Hebrew translations.
Idiom #37 - Green and dry trees.
(Luke 23:31 [ACV])
Because if they do these things in the green tree, what will happen in the dry?
(Ezek 20:47 [CLV])
and you have said to the forest of the south:Hear a word of Yahweh:Thus said the Lord Yahweh:Lo, I am kindling in you a fire, And it has devoured in you every moist tree, and every dry tree, Not quenched is the glowing flames, And burnt by it have been all faces from south to north."
Green tree = rightous
Dry tree = wicked
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Luke 23:31 [ACV])
Because if they do these things in the green tree, what will happen in the dry?
==> "do in (someone)" is a Hebrew idiom meaning "do to (someone)"
(Matt 17:12 [CLV])
Yet I am saying to you that Elijah came already, and they did not recognize him, but they do to in him whatever they will. Thus the Son of Mankind also is about to be suffering by them."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Besides translations and idioms there is something else hidden in Luke 23:31.
Jesus never claimed He was the Messiah in a direct way. He used Rabbinic interpretations. One of those interpretations was: Green tree = the Messiah.
So Jesus said: I'm the green tree aka the Messiah Ezekiel wrote about.
Idiom #38 - Hate
(Luke 6:22 [CLV])
Happy are you whenever men should be hating you, and whenever they should be severing from you and reproaching you and casting out your name as wicked, on account of the Son of Mankind."
(Neh 6:13 [CLV])
so that he [is] an hireling, that I may fear and do so, and I had sinned, and it had been to them for an evil name that they may reproach me.
"as" isn't in the originals. In Hebrew adjective follow nouns.
English: ...wide road leads to destruction.
Hebrew: ...road wide leads to destruction.
So Neh 6:13 renders the words (idiom) in the correct English order. Luke renders them in the Hebrew order and inserted "as" to make it more readeble.
The real translation error isn't in the Greek-->English translation but the Hebrew-->Greek translation.
The original translator did a1 on 1 translation which wasn't nesicarily wrong but the idiomatic meaning got lost in the proces.
The Greek means "cast/throw out" while the original Hebrew has the meaning of "go out".
So the fuller meaning is "cause to go out". Placed in context "make public" or "publish"
"publish name bad" is an Hebrew idiom for "defame someone", "slander someone"
(Luke 6:22 [WW])
Happy are you whenever men should be hating you, and whenever they should be severing from you and reproaching you and slander your name, on account of the Son of Mankind."
Quoting gregoryfl
Hey WW, I love the examples you are giving. As a translator who believes in a semitic NT, it is good to read what others are finding from entering the thinking of the peoples and culture of the time. Here is an interesting example I found, from the Aramaic language. I will be translating once I finish with the Tanakh. It concerns the word 'Devil'.
The Aramaic word translated as 'devil' is
אכלקרץ
It consists of 2 Hebrew words:
אכל
קרץ
The 1st word, Strongs 398, means 'to eat'. It is also Strongs 400, meaning 'food', or 'what is eaten.'
The 2nd word is Strongs 7169, 7170, and 7171, which means 'to pry.' It is used in two senses, 'to pry into something' or 'to pry something off', by grasping or pinching.
It is used in the sense of prying off a piece of clay:
Behold, I am corresponding to you before El; I myself also was nipped [pried] off from the clay.
(Job 33:6 CLV)
It is used in the sense of prying eyes:
Who winks [pries] with his eyes, who declares with his feet, Who signals with his fingers;"
(Pro 6:13 CLV)
This action is demonstrated by opening the eye or eyes wide and leaning in the direction you are prying in.
It is also used in the sense of prying lips:
He who fixes his eyes in devising duplicity, Who twitches [pries] his lips, he determines evil."
(Pro 16:30 CLV)
This action is demonstrated by pinching the lips together and pointing them in the direction you are prying in.
The Aramaic equivalent, Strongs 7170, is also used in the sense of those who negatively pry into the affairs of others, commonly translated as 'accuse.'
Wherefore, at the stated time, the masters of the Chaldeans draw near and accuse [pry] the Jews."
(Dan 3:8 CLV)
One final word to consider is Strongs 7171, used once in Scripture to refer to an insect that 'prys' into animals, particularly cattle; commonly understood to be a type of gadfly.
Egypt is a very fair heifer; the gad-fly [prying insect] cometh, it cometh from the north.
(Jer 46:20 Darby)
The Greek word translated 'devil' means 'to accuse'. The verb form of this word is used in the Septuagint in Dan 3:8, which tells us that the Greek word 'διαβολου' is related to the Aramaic and Hebrew root קרץ.
When we put these two words together, I see the word 'Devil' in Aramaic meaning something like 'Prying Eater.' There is much that can be gleaned from this, but I will stop here.
One more thing I forgot to mention... In the 2 uses of the Aramaic word found in Daniel, we see the two words in question used together, but as separate words. Here they are:
(Dan 3:8)
ח כל קבל דנה בה זמנא קרבו גברין כשדאין ואכלו קרציהון די יהודיא
(Dan 6:24)
כה ואמר מלכא והיתיו גבריא אלך די אכלו קרצוהי די דניאל ולגוב אריותא רמו אנון בניהון ונשיהון ולא מטו לארעית גבא עד די שלטו בהון אריותא וכל גרמיהון הדקו
The phrase literally means "eat pried parts', a very vivid picture of accusation and slander.
Therefore, the 2 verses, translated this way:
(Dan 3:8 CLV) Wherefore, at the stated time, the masters of the Chaldeans draw near and accuse the Jews."
(Dan 6:24 CLV) Then the king speaks the word, and they bring hither these masters who had accused Daniel"...
Could be rendered more literally this way:
Wherefore, at the stated time, the masters of the Chaldeans draw near and ate their pried parts, that of the Jews."
Then the king speaks the word, and they bring hither these masters who had eaten his pried parts, that of Daniel"...
Quote from: rosered on April 03, 2012, 03:22:58 PM
I love these WW !
Do you have any about laying on hands of the sick to recover ?
From Alfred Edersheim an orthodox Jew that became a (leading) Christian scholar/minister.
Laying on of Hands
But this was only the commencement of the service. Women might bring their sacrifices into the Great Court; but they might not perform the second rite— of
laying on of hands. This meant transmission and delegation, and implied representation; so that it really pointed to the substitution of the sacrifice for the sacrificer. Hence it was always accompanied by confession of sin and prayer. It was thus done. The sacrifice was so turned that the person confessing looked towards the west, while he laid his hands between the horns of the sacrifice, * and if the sacrifice was brought by more than one, each had to lay on his hands.
* If the offerer stood outside the Court of the Priests, on the topmost of the fifteen Levitical steps, or within the gate of Nicanor, his hands at least
must be within the Great Court, or the rite was not valid.
It is not quite a settled point whether one or both hands were laid on; but all are agreed that it was to be done 'with one's whole force'— it were, to lay one's whole weight upon the substitute. *
* Children, the blind, the deaf, those out of their minds, and non-Israelites, were not allowed to 'lay on hands.'
If a person under vow had died, his heir-at-law took his place. The only public sacrifices in which hands were laid on were those for sins of public ignorance (Lev 4:15; 16:21), when the 'elders' acted as representing the people— which some Rabbinical authorities add public sin-offerings in general (on the ground of 2 Chron 29:23)— the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement, on which the high-priest laid his hands. In all private sacrifices, except firstlings, tithes, and the Paschal lamb, hands were laid on, and, while doing so, the following prayer was repeated: 'I entreat, O Jehovah: I have sinned, I have done perversely, I have rebelled, I have committed (naming the sin, trespass, or, in case of a burnt-offering, the breach of positive or negative command); but I return in repentance, and let this be for my atonement (covering).' According to Maimonides, in peace-offerings a record of God's praise, rather than a confession of sins, was spoken. But, as the principle prevailed that frequent confession even without sacrifice was meritorious, another formula is also recorded, in which the allusion to sacrifices is omitted.
Closely connected with this was 'the lifting and waving' of certain sacrifices. The priest put his hands under those of the offerer, and moved the sacrifice upwards and downwards, right and left; according to Abarbanel also 'forwards and backwards.' The lamb of the leper's trespass-offering was waved before it was slain (Lev 14:24); private peace-offerings, only after they had been slain; while in public peace-offerings, the practice varied.
The above is about animal sacrifice. I'm not sure it's relevant to your question? Does the laying of hands "transfer" prayers into the sick person? Usally the laying of hands transfered sins.
Later I replied:
Transferring the spirit?
(Deut 34:9 [YLT])
And Joshua son of Nun is full of the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands upon him, and the sons of Israel hearken unto him, and do as Jehovah commanded Moses.
Idiom #39 - Snakes & poison
The misunderstanding of this idiom actually killed Christians who understood it literally.
(Mark 16:18 [CLV])
they will be picking up serpents; and if they should be drinking anything deadly, it should under no circumstances be harming them; they will be placing hands on those who are ailing, and ideally will they be having it."
Serpents can literally mean serpent/snake/viper.
Jesus called the Scribes vipers. Satan is often called serpent. I don't know how satan looks, but I doubt it's a literal snake. The scribes very likely looked 100% human too.
Like in English a snake/viper/serpent can also mean a bad person. An enemy.
"pick up snakes" = "handling an enemy"
"anything deadly"=Poison = false teachings. They won't be poisoned (aka deceived) by hearing false teachings.
Idiom #40 - Plucking out eyes and cutting of limbs
(Mark 9:43 [ACV])
And if thy hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off. It is good for thee to enter into life maimed, than having thy two hands to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire,
(Mark 9:44 [ACV])
where their worm does not perish, and the fire is not quenched.
(Mark 9:45 [ACV])
And if thy foot may cause thee to stumble, cut it off. It is good for thee to enter into life crippled, than having thy two feet to be cast into hell, into the unquenchable fire
(Mark 9:46 [ACV])
where their worm does not perish, and the fire is not quenched.
(Mark 9:47 [ACV])
And if thine eye may cause thee to stumble, pluck it out. It is good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God one-eyed, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the hell of fire,
Reading the above literally a repenting Christian/Jew should mutalate himself as an act of repenting.
That seems to contradict:
(1Cor 6:19 [NET])
Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
(1Cor 6:20 [NET])
For you were bought at a price. Therefore glorify God with your body.
Does a repenting person glorify God by mutilating his body/temple?
It's a very simple idiom. If you have a bad habbit stop it.
So if a man uses his eyes to lustfully look at women he should stop doing so.
If a hand steals then repent and stop stealing.
Idiom #41 - Eyes of your heart.
Eph 1:18 the eyes of your heart having been enlightened, for you to perceive what is the expectation of His calling, and what the riches of the glory of the enjoyment of His allotment among the saints,
I think in this case it's very obvious it must be an idiom.
A heart is the organ of knowledge and understanding.
English has a similar idiom: Learn it by heart.
So the verse is about deep understanding.
Idiom #42 - Bowels
Phil 1:8 "For God is my record, how greatly I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ."
Above I wrote the heart is the organ of intelect. Bowels are the organs of compassion.
Phil 1:8 "For God is my record, how greatly I long after you all in the bowels love/compassion of Jesus Christ."
I have to admit I always thought the is the organ of love...
Idiom #43 - declare his generation
Acts 8:33 s: "In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth.
(Isa 53:8 [AKJV])
He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
It means someone doesn't have descendants.
Idiom #44 - To go = increase
John 12:11 "Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus.
"went away" is "to go" in Hebrew.
To go can mean "go away", "depart" or similar. But the idiomatic meaning is "increase".
So the verse doesn't say the Jews went away but the Jews gained more and more knowledge of Jesus. The believed Jesus more and more.
(Gen 26:13 [ACV])
And the man became great, and grew more and more until he became very great.
==> The man kept going/to go getting bigger.
(1Sam 14:19 [ACV])
And it came to pass, while Saul talked to the priest, that the tumult that was in the camp of the Philistines went on and increased. And Saul said to the priest, Withdraw thy hand.
==> To go. The camp was increasing is size.
So a house to go isn't a mobile home but a household growing in numbers :winkgrin:
Idiom #45 - slow/burning heart.
(Luke 24:25 [YLT])
And he said unto them, `O inconsiderate and slow in heart, to believe on all that the prophets spake!
==> Correct translation
(Luke 24:32 [ACV])
And they said to each other, Was not our heart burning within us while he spoke to us on the way, while he opened to us the scriptures?
==> Wrong translation
Hebrew reads heavy/sluggish heart.
The heart is the organ of understanding (Idiom #16). Having a slow heart means having difficulty understanding.
Luke 23:32 compares the deep knowlegde/expertise of the teacher with shallow understanding of the students. Or they simply said: That teacher knows far more of the Scriptures than we do.
Idiom #46 - Breath
Not really a wrong translations (in most Bibles) but it misses a wordplay.
(Luke 12:11 [KJ2000])
And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take you no thought how or what thing you shall answer, or what you shall say:
==> How you breath departs
==> It's a idiom for "how to speak propely/correctly"
(Luke 12:12 [KJ2000])
For the Holy Spirit shall teach you in the same hour what you ought to say.
==> Holy Spirit is also breath. So the wordplay is linking speech to the HS.
Thank you for posting these!! I love reading them, they shed so much light on scripture.
Idiom #47 - Blood of grapes
Blood of grapes = wine
Genesis 49:11 - "He washes his garment in wine, and his robes in the blood of grapes." Deuteronomy 32:14 - "of the blood of grapes you drank wine."
Idiom #48 - Descent to ascent
The source of this idiom lies in the world of Hasidism. Descent, in any possible form, is sometimes essential for ascent.
Slavery in Egypt, for example, was descent for the sake of ascent. We descended to the lowest possible depths in order to receive the Torah on Mount Sinai and to rise to a new dimension.
I think it aligns with what several wrote on this forum. God breaks you down and then rebuilds you into something better.
Idiom #49 - You have a long neck.
You like to cheat. You are a cheater.
Quote from: WhiteWings on June 19, 2012, 11:44:47 AM
Idiom #45 - slow/burning heart.
(Luke 24:25 [YLT])
And he said unto them, `O inconsiderate and slow in heart, to believe on all that the prophets spake!
==> Correct translation
(Luke 24:32 [ACV])
And they said to each other, Was not our heart burning within us while he spoke to us on the way, while he opened to us the scriptures?
==> Wrong translation
Hebrew reads heavy/sluggish heart.
The heart is the organ of understanding (Idiom #16). Having a slow heart means having difficulty understanding.
Luke 23:32 compares the deep knowlegde/expertise of the teacher with shallow understanding of the students. Or they simply said: That teacher knows far more of the Scriptures than we do.
Yes, this is something that I only recently came to understand regarding the "heart burning". Previously I thought it meant that their hearts were burning as with an understanding, that touched their hearts and made their hearts glow and "burn" in a good way. I was having a hard time reconciling Luke 24:25 with Luke 24:32. So I had to compare different translations.
For example the Aramaic bible reads: Luke 24:32 And they were saying one to another, "Was not our heart
dull within us when he was speaking with us on the road and expounding to us the scriptures?" Then I could see how both these scriptures say and mean the same thing whereas before I thought there was a contradiction. And he said unto them, Luke 24:25 'O inconsiderate and
slow in heart, to believe on all that the prophets spake!
I think the Aramaic bible makes Luke 24:25 even more clear. Then Yeshua said to them, "Oh deficient of mind and slow of heart to believe in all the things that The Prophets have spoken!
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 11, 2012, 07:10:16 PM
Idiom #48 - Descent to ascent
The source of this idiom lies in the world of Hasidism. Descent, in any possible form, is sometimes essential for ascent.
Slavery in Egypt, for example, was descent for the sake of ascent. We descended to the lowest possible depths in order to receive the Torah on Mount Sinai and to rise to a new dimension.
I think it aligns with what several wrote on this forum. God breaks you down and then rebuikld you into something better.
I'd like to hear more about this. My first thought was that if we don't understand earthly things then we can't understand heavenly things. But I think it means more than that. It seems it has more to do with God's will being accomplished and even through the lives of people that brings them closer to God.
Quote from: truthquest on July 12, 2012, 09:25:31 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 11, 2012, 07:10:16 PM
Idiom #48 - Descent to ascent
The source of this idiom lies in the world of Hasidism. Descent, in any possible form, is sometimes essential for ascent.
Slavery in Egypt, for example, was descent for the sake of ascent. We descended to the lowest possible depths in order to receive the Torah on Mount Sinai and to rise to a new dimension.
I think it aligns with what several wrote on this forum. God breaks you down and then rebuikld you into something better.
I'd like to hear more about this.
Maybe other can add spiritual meanings.
QuoteMy first thought was that if we don't understand earthly things then we can't understand heavenly things. But I think it means more than that. It seems it has more to do with God's will being accomplished and even through the lives of people that brings them closer to God.
I think it's a idiom that can apply to a thouand and one situations.
The true meaning is likely quite flexible.
So about God's work being accomplished... that's (often) meaning letting go of the carnal/worldly stuff. That means losing things. I think that's a form of descent. Even more if you call letting go of the world is symbolic death and so descent into the grave.
I could think of a few more applications of this idiom but to be honest it's all speculation. I know of no official list or something like that, but it simply seems to mean "you" often have to go trough bad times to harvest good times later. :popout:
After several decades of strong supposition that Aramaic was the common tongue, it was supposedly settled by archeologists a few years ago that Hebrew was the language of the Jews in the land when Jesus walked in His flesh among us. As to the idea the NT was originally in Hebrew, the only thing I've encountered are inferences drawn comparing Greek and Hebrew, no existing texts. It seems to me that the only thing we can be reasonable certain of is that people who thought, spoke and read Hebrew as native to themselves wrote the NT (with God's inspiration.)
Quote from: reFORMer on July 13, 2012, 07:58:56 AM
After several decades of strong supposition that Aramaic was the common tongue, it was supposedly settled by archeologists a few years ago that Hebrew was the language of the Jews in the land when Jesus walked in His flesh among us. As to the idea the NT was originally in Hebrew, the only thing I've encountered are inferences drawn comparing Greek and Hebrew, no existing texts.
There are of course several quotes by the Church fathers claiming a Hebrew Matthew. (only once I saw a church father claiming an other Hebrew book) Of course the only 100% certain thing is that you personally have watched an Apostle pen down the words in Hebrew.
But imo the most important question isn't if Matthew wrote in Hebrew, Greek, English, Spanish or German. In all those languages it's possible to write 100% error free texts
It the grammar rules used and the idioms that really matter. Should a translator translate the manuscripts with Hebrew, Armiac, Classical Greek or Koine Greek rules.
Koine Greek can be translated to Hebrew without reordering words. In most cases that results in a grammatically correct Hebrew verse. So even if Matthew, or any other Apostle, beyond a doubt wrote Greek it seems to me they did so with a 100% Hebrew line of thoughts.
Also let not forget the Bible itself claims Hebrew in several verses. It only claims Greek and Latin once. (the sign Pilate ordered nailed above Jesus' head) But even then Hebrew is claimed also.
Hebrews 10:1
For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Heb 2:1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
Galatians
2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Abraham's seed was one, Jesus. The law was given to prepare the world for Jesus, in whom the law was embodied in the spirit of love, for love does no ill to its neighbor, and fulfills the law- all of which is enfolded in two commandments, both of which are fulfilled for those who are walking in the spirit and in the promise- in Christ.
Quote from: WhiteWings on June 19, 2012, 11:41:03 AM
Idiom #41 - Eyes of your heart.
Eph 1:18 the eyes of your heart having been enlightened, for you to perceive what is the expectation of His calling, and what the riches of the glory of the enjoyment of His allotment among the saints,
I think in this case it's very obvious it must be an idiom.
A heart is the organ of knowledge and understanding.
English has a similar idiom: Learn it by heart.
So the verse is about deep understanding.
WW - your gracious and very generous sharings of invaluable information have truly blessed me and have greatly reduced the amount of time and energy required for my great need/search to know the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth.
Eph 1:18 has long been a favorite of mine.
Thanks so much. From my heart: may God richly bless you.
Idiom #50 - Thief in the night.
This isn't a cat burglar.
It's a thief barging in all guns blazing. Very loud and agressive.
Idiom #51 - The last trump
Idiom: Last trump isn't the last trump of Revelation but the Feast of Trumpets which is the last warning for Judgment/Atonement Day.
Rev 4:1 The voice of Jesus sounds like a trumpet.... (hint)
Idioms #52 - Retraining the wind
The angels in Rev 7:1 are restraining the wind. English and Greek give the impression it's just regular wind, but actually it's a Hebrew idiom meaning God holding back His blessing on the harvests as shown in Deut 28 and 29. The Holy Spirit is also called wind. So this verse tells us God is retracting His blessings. The land isn't harmed by actively destroying is with storm/wind but by letting evil run its cause by removing the blessing. So God punishes by doing nothing. The Holy Spirit that always worked for the benefit of man is restrained from benefitting man. One less opponent for satan. There is just one Holy Spirit but the verse is about four winds. The corners (seem to) refer to the 'tanaf'; the corners of a prayer shawl. Those corners had special tassels on them that were symbolic of God/God's authority. God and the Holy Spirit are very closely linked so that's the reason one Holy Spirit is called four winds. To take this one step further; when the angles are holding the four tassels they are holding the prayer shawl as a covering over the earth. A covering refers to covenant. The shawl is also called wings.
Mal 4:2 But to you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and you shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stone them which are sent to you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and you would not!
Restraining the winds doesn't mean God also stops blessing the righteous people. It's a punishment for sinners. God no longer covers their sins with grace.
Idiom #53 - Frog
Frog=tsephardea=idiom for temptation
Idiom #54 - Sitting on waters.
Rev 17:1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying to me, Come here; I will show to you the judgment of the great whore that sits on many waters:
Having authority over many people/mankind. (also coming out of mankind)
The sea in the Bible often represents nations. See section C4: http://home.online.nl/spamfree/Lake/index.html#C4 (http://home.online.nl/spamfree/Lake/index.html#C4)
So Revelation's beast that comes out of the can be a literal sea monster because the word sea can be a literal sea; but more likely it rises from the nations. Not from heaven, outer space etc.
Idiom #55 - Sounding the trumpet
There were 13 collection boxes for alms in the women's court.
Wide at the bottom narrow at the top. Trumpet shaped.
When a coin was dropped in the box it made a quite distinct sound.
Boasting Pharisees would throw a large number, of usually low value coins in the boxes to make it known they are great for charity.
I've never seen or heard of Hebrew manuscripts that came before the Greek manuscripts except for the Septuagint which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. I understand that the writers of the Greek scriptures were Jewish, but most of what I've read says that Aramaic and Greek were the spoken languages in the time of Christ while Hebrew was for the scholars. I think it is interesting that Paul who probably read Hebrew was chosen to be the apostle to the nations. His evangel was distinct from that of the Circumcision, and he evangelized the nations outside Israel that didn't speak Hebrew but probably spoke Greek. His epistles are to the nations other than Israel.
I understand the fascination with Hebrew culture. There was a time I wanted to join a Messianic congregation until I found out they're just Jewish church folks. My point is that I finally realized that I didn't need to be Jewish to follow Christ any more than any of Paul's converts from the nations. Paul kept getting hassled by the Jewish folks who wanted him to force the nations to be subject to Hebrew law, but I think the reason Paul himself was converted by the risen Christ outside the nation of Israel was because we in the body of Christ are not meant to be subject to Hebrew law because we are saved just like Paul was in grace through faith.
The Jewish writers of the Greek scriptures other than Paul are preaching the evangel of the Circumcision. The evangel of the Uncircumcision is the evangel for today. Now is the time God has paused in his dealings with Israel while the nations are being saved. Yes, there are believers in the body of Christ in Israel who have the same celestial destiny as us, but most of the folks in Israel look forward to their kingdom being restored in Jerusalem with their Messiah ruling and the nations being subject to Israel.
We are no longer outsiders or subject to Hebrew law as proselytes through the evangel of the Circumcision. We are saved in grace through faith apart from law. That is the evangel of the Uncircumcision with which Paul was commissioned by the risen Christ. It seems Christ chose Paul because he was the worst of sinners persecuting the ecclesia in Jerusalem, but the grace of God changes lives. That is the amazing thing about the power of God's love. We who are the worst of sinners are the most grateful when we are blessed with the grace of God. God's love overcomes all. It is the most powerful force in the universe. That's why the ultimate demonstration of God's love will be the saving of all mankind from death and the reconciliation of all on earth and in the heavens.
Hi Tom,
The church fathers quite often mention Matthew was translated from Hebrew.
Scholars seem to change their view on Hebrew vs Aramaic. The Dead Sea Scroll played a role in that.
Maybe Hebrew or Aramaic isn't even the most important question. They are sister languages and obviously closer than Greek.
Even the question in what language the original were written may not be the most important question.
It was long thought that the Greek texts were written by uneducated men and that's the reason it sounds so childish. "HS Greek", "Tired Greek" were names given to the NT.
Later it was named Koine Greek. It was really spoken during the time of Jesus. Jerusalem was on trading route..
More recent scholarship discovered something new. Just do a one one Greek to Hebrew translation and in most cases you get perfect Hebrew. Quite often with idioms.
So even if the very first manuscripts were penned down in Greek, they were just Hebrew thought patterns penned down in Greek.
So I personally don't care which language the originals were written in. I'm interested in the mindset of the writers.
QuoteThere was a time I wanted to join a Messianic congregation until I found out they're just Jewish church folks.
I think not all Messianics are the same, just like not all Christians are the same.
QuoteMy point is that I finally realized that I didn't need to be Jewish to follow Christ any more than any of Paul's converts from the nations.
That depends on how many of the OT laws you think Jesus did away. Besides that I think you at the very least need to understand Jewish thought.
Just a tiny example. Law in the Jewish mind is almost the total opposite of law in the Greek mind.
So my point isn't we should all because ultra Orthodox Jews but we likely understand Jesus better if we understand the ways of the Ultra Orthodox Jew.
Afterall Jesus was a Jewish man promoting a Jewish Book in a Jewish society...
About circumcision.... I know there are many views on that. Some even see many contradictions. I'll give you one short view as a consideration.
It all started with converted Jews only. Maybe a handful of Romans but mostly Jews. They just kept their daily routine and basically the only difference with the other Jews was that they believed the Messiah had come while other Jews are still waiting.
When Gentiles started pouring in they did not promote all sorts of OT laws for them. Circumcision is one of them. But they still held the view that the nation of the Jews was set apart. They wanted to honor God for keeping them safe during OT times.
So my point is simply: You can't fully understand the OT and NT without fully understanding the Jewish mind/culture.
Of course you are allowed to disagree with that like millions of others do :declare:
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 30, 2013, 09:15:54 AM
Hi Tom,
The church fathers quite often mention Matthew was translated from Hebrew.
Scholars seem to change their view on Hebrew vs Aramaic. The Dead Sea Scroll played a role in that.
Maybe Hebrew or Aramaic isn't even the most important question. They are sister languages and obviously closer than Greek.
Even the question in what language the original were written may not be the most important question.
It was long thought that the Greek texts were written by uneducated men and that's the reason it sounds so childish. "HS Greek", "Tired Greek" were names given to the NT.
Later it was named Koine Greek. It was really spoken during the time of Jesus. Jerusalem was on trading route..
More recent scholarship discovered something new. Just do a one one Greek to Hebrew translation and in most cases you get perfect Hebrew. Quite often with idioms.
So even if the very first manuscripts were penned down there were just Hebrew thought patterns penned down in Greek.
So I personally don't care which language the originals were written in. I'm interested in the mindset of the writers.
QuoteThere was a time I wanted to join a Messianic congregation until I found out they're just Jewish church folks.
I think not all Messianics are the same, just like not all Christians are the same.
QuoteMy point is that I finally realized that I didn't need to be Jewish to follow Christ any more than any of Paul's converts from the nations.
That depends on how many of the OT laws you think Jesus did away. Besides that I think you at the very least need to understand Jewish thought.
Just a tiny example. Law in the Jewish mind is almost the total opposite of law in the Greek mind.
So my point isn't we should all because ultra Orthodox Jews but we likely understand Jesus better if we understand the ways of the Ultra Orthodox Jew.
Afterall Jesus was a Jewish man promoting a Jewish Book in a Jewish society...
About circumcision.... I know there are many views on that. Some even see many contradictions. I'll give you one short view as a consideration.
It all started with converted Jews only. Maybe a handful of Romans but mostly Jews. They just kept their daily routine and basically the only difference with the other Jews was that they believed the Messiah had come while other Jews are still waiting.
When Gentiles started pouring in they did not promote all sorts of OT laws for them. Circumcision is one of them. But they still held the view that the nation of the Jews was set apart. They wanted to honor God for keeping them safe during OT times.
So my point is simply: You can't fully understand the OT and NT without fully understanding the Jewish mind/culture.
Of course you are allowed to disagree with that like millions of others do :declare:
Like I said, brother, I understand the fascination with the culture. I just don't share your passion for it. I've had folks tell me the Aramaic was the original language of the so called New Testament scripture, and I checked out manuscripts and different translations online. I've never seen comparable Hebrew manuscripts though. I think Greek was used because it was a common language of the nations at the time which were where Paul took the evangel. The problem I had with the Messianic folks I looked into was their church doctrine which was basically the same even though they had a lot of Hebrew ritual. What I was getting at in my post was that Christ preached to the culture which he lived in and rarely dealt with somebody who wasn't Jewish, but we're not a part of that culture. We are one in spirit with Jewish believers through the risen Christ who commissioned Paul to us, but we're not subject to Hebrew law or culture. I realize that it helps to understand the cultural context in which things happened in scripture, but I think it's necessary to be aware of the distinction of the two evangels of Peter and Paul.
For the entire law is fulfilled in one word, in this: "You shall love your associate as yourself." (Galatians 5:14)
QuoteI realize that it helps to understand the cultural context in which things happened in scripture,
That's my whole point!
Understand Jesus' background/culture = Better understanding His message
That's not just a trival hobby. Imo it should be the goal of every Christian...
(For me) it's
not about becoming a Jew following all 613 laws regulations and customs.
QuoteWhat I was getting at in my post was that Christ preached to the culture which he lived in and rarely dealt with somebody who wasn't Jewish, but we're not a part of that culture. We are one in spirit with Jewish believers through the risen Christ
Imo it's wrong to see those things seperately. To live in one spirit you/we must know what that spirit wants of us. And for that purpose understanding the background is important.
And once again understanding the background doesn't mean becoming a Jew.
I just want to make taht very clear. I've been accused before I want to convert people to Judadism. :doh:
:Peace2:
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 30, 2013, 11:42:35 PM
QuoteI realize that it helps to understand the cultural context in which things happened in scripture,
That's my whole point!
Understand Jesus' background/culture = Better understanding His message
That's not just a trival hobby. Imo it should be the goal of every Christian...
(For me) it's not about becoming a Jew following all 613 laws regulations and customs.
QuoteWhat I was getting at in my post was that Christ preached to the culture which he lived in and rarely dealt with somebody who wasn't Jewish, but we're not a part of that culture. We are one in spirit with Jewish believers through the risen Christ
Imo it's wrong to see those things seperately. To live in one spirit you/we must know what that spirit wants of us. And for that purpose understanding the background is important.
And once again understanding the background doesn't mean becoming a Jew.
I just want to make taht very clear. I've been accused before I want to convert people to Judadism. :doh:
:Peace2:
I know you're not trying to convert me to Judaism, bro, and I agree that understanding the cultural context is beneficial. I realize everything in the Hebrew scriptures foreshadowed Christ, but I think somebody can be a believer without fully understanding the evangel or the cultural context.
"if ever you should be avowing with your mouth the declaration that Jesus is Lord, and should be believing in your heart that God rouses Him from among the dead, you shall be saved" (Romans 10:9)
http://concordant.org/expohtml/TheEvangel/BelievingAndUnderstanding.html
Idiom #56 Daughters of Jerusalem
Small towns surrounding Jerusalem. When attacked the villagers went for safety behind the Jerusalem walls.
Jerusalem also represents the bride. The towns represent believers that don't have/want a very deep relationship with Jesus.
:cloud9: Just skimmed the last 3 pages of this thread I had missed. I just LOVE this thread, and I'm printing it all out. These are things we ALL should have known and WOULD have known, had not the church been Helenized. It is IMPOSSIBLE to fully understand the so-called NT without comprehending the OT, which is it's foundation, and the Tabernacle of Moses it's "blueprint". My :2c: as always.....Blessings....
The letter to the 3rd church Pergamum, meaning improper marriage.
Satan was unable to destroy the church so he used his strawman Constantine to marry the church to pagan rome.
Destroyed from within. The way of Balaam.
BTW if you need anything printed PM me...
http://www.afii.org/OJB.pdf
Idiom#57 - Heaping coals
Heaping hot coals on ones head is an act of compassion.
Live coals were needed for survival. They were used for cooking and heating a house. If a fire went out a woman would go to her neighbor and ask for coals. If the neighbor was kind she would fill the pot of the other woman brought with her with live coals. Things were often carried on the head in those things. So the woman would walk home with hot coals in a pot on her head.
Rom 12:20 Therefore if your enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing you shall heap coals of fire on his head.
Prov 25
21 If your enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
22 For you shall heap coals of fire on his head, and the LORD shall reward you.
BTW 1: Matthew 25:31-46 basically is a judgment about (not) giving your neighbor hot coals.
BTW 2: heaping is not the same as raining coals.
Finally and thank you WW for that Idiom! :dsunny:
Quote from: micah7:9 on December 21, 2013, 08:09:20 PM
Finally and thank you WW for that Idiom! :dsunny:
Yes, finally!!!... I had been hoping, maybe even praying a bit that WW would check in with an Idiom to help sort out this particular verse. Thanks again and again WW... Idioms that you have posted have certainly added much "richness"to my ongoing studies as well as helping me to connect many, many dots.
================
This verse also reminds me of
Abraham Lincoln's statement: "The best way to destroy an enemy is to make him a friend."
:cloud9: I love that. I always saw hot coals as an act of compassion anyway, because I saw it as fire destroying the enemies that have them in bondage, the first of which is their own carnal mind.
Interesting that in the wedding ketubah on Mt. Sinai when He joined Himself to His bride, coals were also present on the mountain. I have experienced the fire and the coals, in the Spirit. God is awesome. Blessings....
like the coals within the wheels beneath the seraphim, like the stones of fire, like the unquenchable fire that burns the up all chaff and thoroughly purges His threshing floor.
Quote from: eaglesway on December 23, 2013, 12:28:55 AM
like the coals within the wheels beneath the seraphim, like the stones of fire, like the unquenchable fire that burns the up all chaff and thoroughly purges His threshing floor.
:goodpost:
Idiom#58 - Caught up
2 Cor 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know--God knows.
"Caught up" can have a literal meaning but its idiomatic meaning is "have a vision".
Idiom#59 - I say to you today
This idiom expresses a fact. Something that will most certainly happen.
Luke 23:43 And Jesus said to him, "Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise."
Deut 30:18 I tell you today that you shall perish, yea perish. You shall not prolong your days on the ground where you are crossing over the Jordan to enter to tenant it.
Deut 4:26 26 I testify against you today by the heavens and the earth, that you shall perish, yea perish quickly off the land where you are crossing over the Jordan to tenant it. You shall not prolong your days on it, for you shall be exterminated, yea exterminated.
:banana: :dsunny:
Quote from: WhiteWings on March 05, 2014, 12:52:10 PM
Idiom#59 - I say to you today
This idiom expresses a fact. Something that will most certainly happen.
Luke 23:43 And Jesus said to him, "Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise."
Deut 30:18 I tell you today that you shall perish, yea perish. You shall not prolong your days on the ground where you are crossing over the Jordan to enter to tenant it.
Deut 4:26 26 I testify against you today by the heavens and the earth, that you shall perish, yea perish quickly off the land where you are crossing over the Jordan to tenant it. You shall not prolong your days on it, for you shall be exterminated, yea exterminated.
Where and when is paradise :o)
Well, wherever it is, I like the "with Me" part. :dsunny: :dsunny:
Idom #60 - Bury my father
Luke 9
59 He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."
60 Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God."
Bury my father = Let me take care of my father until he dies.
Idiom #61 - Forget it
Philemon 1:18 If he has done you any wrong or owes you anything, charge it to me
Charge it to me=Forget it.
Quote from: WhiteWings on May 04, 2014, 05:50:21 PM
Idom #60 - Bury my father
Luke 9
59 He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."
60 Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God."
Bury my father = Let me take care of my father until he dies.
Hi. I would just like to share something else attributed to Jesus that would seem to contradict what he said was more important elsewhere. For instance, one of the problems with much of Christianity, and many other religions, is people sincerely desiring to share their religion, and Christians to share Christ, but do not have any where enough experience to do so well. The existence of many denominations, meaning many differing ideas about the same written words of scripture, shows this pretty severely to us. There is also supposed to be over 70 different versions of the bible, all originating from some of the same old sources. Knowing the Hebrew of the scriptures of their day did not help the people of Israel know or be able to recognize Jesus in them and the difference that Jesus makes between good and evil with His witness of the truth of God.
The word "first" in the following scripture stands out to me. Mat_6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
Revelation says that the words of the "little book" will be sweet in OUR mouth but bitter to OUR belly. I believe that if we believe that the tree of life and the tree of good and evil were real wooden trees with some kind of physical fruit we could eat with our physical bodies through our mouth, we are already going to see things double minded. There is no fruit on some physical wood tree that has fruit that gives one life if they eat it. And there is no wooden tree that has physical fruit on it of two kinds that we can eat with our mouth and know what the difference is between good and evil.
The tree of life represents the fruit of God witnessed by Jesus Christ. He did no evil with "his life in his body". IF we eat or taste of his fruit as being the truth about God we will find life "after we seek His righteousness" for our selves. Tasting his methods {follow me, pick up our own cross, etc.} will be experiencing love, compassion, forgiveness, kindness, in a depth that by feeling these things we taste of them in our own spirit as emotions or attributes of God. There are more than these of course. These produce GOOD RESULTS upon all and IN all that they are tasted\felt\experienced by and when we treat others through these spiritual emotions. They produce kindness and life supporting results toward others, even if we experience something bad to ourselves and we forgive it and do nothing at all to the person of people who hurt us. This fruit does no work of death to anyone, even the one doing the hurtful things. {turn the other cheek, do no hurtful physical vengeance in return to anyone, etc.} This takes the indwelling love of GOD to accomplish and remain this way. The LAMB.
This is Jesus' witness of God who is LIFE.
Natural mankind, the Spirit of man, is the "tree" that responds to things in the world with good kind results at times and yet out of the same mouth and person there is also an ability to do hurtful damaging things to other people for selfish and reflex responses. Mankind as the OLD MAN is the tree or source of both good and evil results.
If we do or begin to live our life {walk} in a manner that Jesus witnessed, we are promised through Him in us to begin to be strengthened with the ability to do what He did and thus TASTE OF LIFE, His fruit. Jesus had the desires and ways of the Spirit {life} of God in Him, and in his flesh had the very same lusts or appetites that we do in our flesh. We know man, no matter what he believes, can do good to some and evil to some, sometimes even the same person he did good to can have evil done to them by that same person who was good to them. {This is quite a natural state of some marriages of a few years duration that end in divorce or even thoughts of divorce, etc.}
Our emotions can be understood as spiritual taste buds. Anger, hate, jealousy, etc. can all produce evil hurtful physical and emotional results in and upon others that these emotions dwell in or are vented upon. They are not witnessed by Jesus as being of God in him. HE did not allow them to be acted upon in him. That is what the temptations he suffered were, from other people and ways in the world.
The emotions and the results of fruit of love, kindness, forgiveness, understanding, etc. were what HE witnessed as being of the Father in him. He witnessed them by choosing to be and remain in the Spirit of the goodness of Love that is the father in him. IN doing so we SEE THE FATHER through Him. Then we are asked to walk in the world like He did, minus the preaching idea. Not all can be a preacher for if all were preachers there would be no congregations.
We are to seek God's righteousness to be in us first, and the rule of God in us first, and THEN all the rest of the abilities such as sharing Christ will be given to us. But we are not asked to mentally see his righteousness only, we are to TASTE the spirit\attributes of LIFE in us by becoming those attributes in enough strength from God {love} to remain in them or at least know enough about them that they are contrary.
IF we continue to eat only of those good emotions and thoughts that produce good kindly wise results that allow others to remain living even if they are contrary to us, we will come to know him and taste of life only. Our own ways that are in us, Christ's ways then, will be what we receive. This is a staple of scripture, our own ways being returned to us. What we live by we will receive upon us at some point, even if we live with some ways of death in us we will still physically die.
The serpent in the tree of good and evil, man's natural worldly spirit, is the law of sin in our members, which is typified by the lusts of the flesh that are contrary to the lusts of the Spirit.
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
Gal 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.
I notice for us that wrath is one of the lusts of the flesh. We know these kind of things, many of them, are an emotional "feeling" we experience, being "spiritual" as it were, having no physically represented source we can see with our physical eyes. But the produce a physical and emotional result in one when they are experienced. They "tempt" us to do or act out hurtful things upon other living things, not humans only. Any hurtful thing we physically manifest upon someone or some living thing is an act of Satan, showing works of death. If I hit someone in the nose for doing something, even though they may live, that response produced by acting upon anger or self righteousness of something like it, pride, would kill the person I am hitting if I continue to do it over and over again until they died. Just because one does not die does not mean what we do that is hurtful to someone is not an act of death, of "the devil that has the power of death". Wrath etc. The wrath of man does not work the righteousness of God. {james 1:20}
The lusts of the flesh, such and hunger and physical reproductive desires etc., are allowed to be acted upon and experienced in kept under the parameters of Jesus Christ as a man, of while we are in a flesh and blood body. We may eat food, but are not to steal or cheat or rob to get that food, IF we believe that is what Jesus asks of us. IF we do not believe of course, or do not believe that that is what Jesus is like etc., then we will not do the things of Him. Doing some of them and not doing some of them is a natural minded Christian, "No blame, just my ideas about it". When we do something evil to anyone, we betray the witness of Jesus Christ and so betray Christ in us.
If we are going to understand the bible and the two tress as being the kind of trees we see with our physical eyes in the world , we will remain blind mentally to the truth that can be found in scripture. The hidden manna. I leave it up to those who "may" have read this far to pray about this sincerely and keep on praying often until they get answers to their prayers on this matter.
God Bless. donken
Idiom #62 - Shadow
Isa 30:2 that set out to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to take refuge in the shadow of Egypt!
Psalm 17:8 Keep me as the apple of your eye; hide me in the shadow of your wings
Psalm 91:1 Whoever dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.
:cloud9: Consider it split. Members please only post appropriately here, which is a collection of Hebrew idioms, that are designed to perhaps let us see a different perspective. The new thread is called, "The Scriptures interpretation". Thanks....
:cloud9: Donken, your last post above mine here was again not in accordance with the thread, as I requested above, so it was removed. Please do not post here unless it is specifically a Hebrew idiom you have gleaned from somewhere. Thank you
Idiom #63 - Face was set
Luke 9:53 And they did not receive him, because his face was going to Jerusalem.
Jer 21:10 For I have set my face upon this city for evil, and not for good, says LORD. It shall be given into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall burn it with fire.
Jer 42:15 Now therefore hear ye the word of LORD, O remnant of Judah. Thus says LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: If ye indeed set your faces to enter into Egypt, and go to sojourn there,
Jer 44:12 And I will take the remnant of Judah, who have set their faces to go into the land of Egypt to sojourn there, and they shall all be consumed. In the land of Egypt they shall fall. They shall be consumed by the sword and by the fami
2Kgs 12:17 Then Hazael king of Syria went up, and fought against Gath, and took it. And Hazael set his face to go up to Jerusalem. ACV
Dan 11:17 And he shall set his face to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and with him equitable conditions, and he shall perform them. And he shall give him the daughter of women, to corrupt her, but she shall not stand, nor be fo
Ezek 13:17 And thou, son of man, set thy face against the daughters of thy people, who prophesy out of their own heart, and prophesy thou against them. ACV
Ezek 14:8 And I will set my face against that man, and will make him an astonishment, for a sign and a proverb. And I will cut him off from the midst of my people. And ye shall know that I am LORD.
Ezek 15:7 And I will set my face against them. They shall go forth from the fire, but the fire shall devour them. And ye shall know that I am LORD when I set my face against them.
"Face was set" = "Make up ones mind"
Idiom #64 - First of the Sabbath
The Sabbath day was from Friday evening until Saturday evening.
"First of" are the first 3 visible stars in a the night/evening sky. The stars are the end of one day and the start of the next day.
The Sabbath day started at Friday sunset* and ended Saturday evening when the 3rd star was spotted in about 40 mins after sunset.
*=Not at 3 stars after sunset. Likely this is just a case of better safe than sorry.
Idiom #65 - He opened his eyes.
His sight was restored.
Idiom #66 - I'm before you.
I'm against you.
Idiom #67 - Foot
Foot is a euphemism for male genitals
Feet = regel: A feminine noun meaning a foot. It is the common word for a literal foot, human or animal. It is used figuratively, but has acquired many other uses. ... The phrase 'me raglehem' refers to urine, water of their privates (2Ki 18:27).
http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/8183/how-does-the-act-of-foot-washing-lead-to-the-act-of-sexual-intercourse
http://www.keithhunt.com/Sex1.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2002/02/When-Foot-Means-Something-Else-Euphemisms-In-The-Bible.aspx
http://www.christianpost.com/news/what-the-bible-doesnt-say-about-sex-48947/
http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/01/24/weird-ot-euphemisms-uncovering-the-feet/
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 18, 2014, 09:05:47 PM
Idiom #67 - Foot
Foot is a euphemism for male genitals
Feet = regel: A feminine noun meaning a foot. It is the common word for a literal foot, human or animal. It is used figuratively, but has acquired many other uses. ... The phrase 'me raglehem' refers to urine, water of their privates (2Ki 18:27).
http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/8183/how-does-the-act-of-foot-washing-lead-to-the-act-of-sexual-intercourse
http://www.keithhunt.com/Sex1.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2002/02/When-Foot-Means-Something-Else-Euphemisms-In-The-Bible.aspx
http://www.christianpost.com/news/what-the-bible-doesnt-say-about-sex-48947/
http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/01/24/weird-ot-euphemisms-uncovering-the-feet/
I'm just asking, usually I learn from your idioms, and since you say the NT was written in Hebrew, when Jesus washed Peter's "feet", was it "feet" or something else? Or would the idiom not be the case? :dontknow: :HeartThrob:
Not trying to be disrespectful here
but Micah , I just about rolled off my chair :mlaugh: :msealed: :mblush: :pointlaugh: :rolllol:
I think Jesus wasn't into gay activities :winkgrin:
Not all feet are genitals, just as not all sheep are not Jesus.
In case of the foot washing I think of sandals. Sandals represent the inheritance covenant because piece of land were marked off with old sandals. You not gonna like it but it was marriage related just as a large part of the Last Supper.
That is some funny stuff. I'm just wondering where all the Hebrew manuscripts are. I figure Greek was used to spread the word to the nations mostly who didn't know Hebrew, and I've read even the Jews weren't speaking Hebrew during the time of Christ but were speaking Aramaic.
...interesting.......thinking of the woman that anointed Jesus feet..wiped them with her hair. the woman's glory being her hair...
and God giving the woman her hair as mantle.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 18, 2014, 11:30:25 PM
I think Jesus wasn't into gay activities :winkgrin:
Not all feet are genitals, just as not all sheep are not Jesus.
In case of the foot washing I think of sandals. Sandals represent the inheritance covenant because piece of land were marked off with old sandals. You not gonna like it but it was marriage related just as a large part of the Last Supper.
"You not gonna like it...." no, your works plays considerably on my mind :Peace2:
Quote from: Tom on December 18, 2014, 11:33:35 PM
That is some funny stuff. I'm just wondering where all the Hebrew manuscripts are. I figure Greek was used to spread the word to the nations mostly who didn't know Hebrew, and I've read even the Jews weren't speaking Hebrew during the time of Christ but were speaking Aramaic.
http://tentmaker.org/forum/christian-life/the-new-testament-was-written-in-hebrew-(not-greek)/msg112623/#msg112623
Quote from: Tom on December 18, 2014, 11:33:35 PM
That is some funny stuff. I'm just wondering where all the Hebrew manuscripts are. I figure Greek was used to spread the word to the nations mostly who didn't know Hebrew, and I've read even the Jews weren't speaking Hebrew during the time of Christ but were speaking Aramaic.
The Septuagint was finished around 70BC as I recall(no source material on hand right now). It was likely translated from Hebrew texts, imo. Common people may have spoken Greek, Aramaic,Syriac...and Jerusalem was certainly multi linguistic, but it is quite likely the scribes, lawyers, pharisees, Saducees. Essenes(dead sea scrolls) spoke Hebrew in the temples and Paul and Jesus were certainly fluent in, and thought in,the Hebrew mindset and language, imo. This means no matter what language translations are regarded as, they must communicate the Hebrew mindset(prophetic voice of course, as in living and active) or they do not really "translate"- because we are seeking the thoughts of God, not the words of men, and the earliest sources are the thoughts in the minds of the apsotles and the prophets- however we can best get at them. :2c:
Also, sometimes feet are just feet, in any language...... the lowest part of the body, the humblest souls/soles touching the earth, getting dirty continually, and thank God Jesus washes us continually so that we, His (beautified by grace and love) feet can bringbgood news down from the mountain tops :)
I've read information about Aramaic primacy too. All I know is I don't read Hebrew or Greek. So I'm just glad we have an English translation. I know something is always lost in translation, but I only read English.
I hope you all knew I was stretching the "feet" thing. :dsunny:
Stretching or not, bro, I always enjoy a little humor to lighten things up a little.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 18, 2014, 09:05:47 PM
Idiom #67 - Foot
Foot is a euphemism for male genitals
Feet = regel: A feminine noun meaning a foot. It is the common word for a literal foot, human or animal. It is used figuratively, but has acquired many other uses. ... The phrase 'me raglehem' refers to urine, water of their privates (2Ki 18:27).
http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/8183/how-does-the-act-of-foot-washing-lead-to-the-act-of-sexual-intercourse
http://www.keithhunt.com/Sex1.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2002/02/When-Foot-Means-Something-Else-Euphemisms-In-The-Bible.aspx
http://www.christianpost.com/news/what-the-bible-doesnt-say-about-sex-48947/
http://bycommonconsent.com/2006/01/24/weird-ot-euphemisms-uncovering-the-feet/
I agree to some extent with the attempts at understanding this idiom. I think misunderstanding leads to all sorts of misinterpretation, such as (whether jokingly or not) Micah brought out. The idiom, as I have come to understand it, only refers to the male or female genitalia when the feet are in conjunction with another word. Examples in the Tanach are:
Water of the feet (speaking of urine, as one urinates between their feet)
Hair of the feet (speaking of pubic hair that grows between the feet)
So I think it is safe to say that when Yeshua washed the disciples feet, it was truly their feet.
On another note, another foot idiom people often misunderstand is when Ruth uncovers the feet of Boaz. This is not referring to uncovering his private parts and having sexual relations with him. In the eastern culture, the foot is also likened to ownership. An example of this is where Abraham is told that everywhere his foot treads on the land, that land will be his. So for Ruth to uncover his feet, and lie just below them, is her way of telling Boaz that she is placing herself in a position to be his, if he would accept, that he would be her Ba'al, or owner, otherwise known today as her husband.
Ronen
Don't tell that to any feminist activists, bro, or you might catch some heat for it.
"On another note, another foot idiom people often misunderstand is when Ruth uncovers the feet of Boaz. This is not referring to uncovering his private parts and having sexual relations with him. In the eastern culture, the foot is also likened to ownership. An example of this is where Abraham is told that everywhere his foot treads on the land, that land will be his. So for Ruth to uncover his feet, and lie just below them, is her way of telling Boaz that she is placing herself in a position to be his, if he would accept, that he would be her Ba'al, or owner, otherwise known today as her husband."
What you say, thank you Lord, have understood. :dsunny:
QuoteSo I think it is safe to say that when Yeshua washed the disciples feet, it was truly their feet.
On another note, another foot idiom people often misunderstand is when Ruth uncovers the feet of Boaz. This is not referring to uncovering his private parts and having sexual relations with him. In the eastern culture, the foot is also likened to ownership. An example of this is where Abraham is told that everywhere his foot treads on the land, that land will be his. So for Ruth to uncover his feet, and lie just below them, is her way of telling Boaz that she is placing herself in a position to be his, if he would accept, that he would be her Ba'al, or owner, otherwise known today as her husband.
Ronen
The part about the foot washing to me can be very symbolic of cleansing the'' gospel message ''though sharing humility of servitude
Yes to Vanquish conquer , a good example was when the Lord said of the Brotherly love assembly Philadelphia in Rev 3 ...8'I know your deeds.
Behold, I have put before you an open door which no one can shut, because you have a little power, and have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie--
I will make them come and bow down at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you. 10Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing,
that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.
To me that is to honor the message /prepared the feet /teaching of the good news of the gospel , '' Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord ''
:iagree:
Quote from: Tom on December 19, 2014, 12:59:05 AM
Don't tell that to any feminist activists, bro, or you might catch some heat for it.
For anyone who might be offended, we can be thankful that, while even today many who speak the Hebrew language still refer to their husbands as ba'ali (my owner), YHWH promised that there would be a time when he would not be referred to as ba'ali, but as ishi (my man).
Hos 2:18 יח והיה ביום ההוא נאם יהוה תקראי
אישי ולא תקראי לי עוד
בעליHos 2:16 It will be in that day," says Yhwh, "that you will call me 'my husband,' and no longer call me 'my master.'
Ronen
Quote from: gregoryfl on December 19, 2014, 02:00:08 AM
Quote from: Tom on December 19, 2014, 12:59:05 AM
Don't tell that to any feminist activists, bro, or you might catch some heat for it.
For anyone who might be offended, we can be thankful that, while even today many who speak the Hebrew language still refer to their husbands as ba'ali (my owner), YHWH promised that there would be a time when he would not be referred to as ba'ali, but as ishi (my man).
Hos 2:18 יח והיה ביום ההוא נאם יהוה תקראי אישי ולא תקראי לי עוד בעלי
Hos 2:16 It will be in that day," says Yhwh, "that you will call me 'my husband,' and no longer call me 'my master.'
Ronen
Hi Ronen
:thumbsup:
Its weird I was just looking up the seven women taking a hold of one man
in Isaiah 4 1For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, "We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!" 2In that day the Branch of the LORD will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel....
I was thinking but could be wrong if it is the 7 churches/women in the right hand of the Lord in Rev 2 and 3 ?
Just curious to yours or anyone opinion
Quote from: gregoryfl on December 19, 2014, 02:00:08 AM
Quote from: Tom on December 19, 2014, 12:59:05 AM
Don't tell that to any feminist activists, bro, or you might catch some heat for it.
For anyone who might be offended, we can be thankful that, while even today many who speak the Hebrew language still refer to their husbands as ba'ali (my owner), YHWH promised that there would be a time when he would not be referred to as ba'ali, but as ishi (my man).
Hos 2:18 יח והיה ביום ההוא נאם יהוה תקראי אישי ולא תקראי לי עוד בעלי
Hos 2:16 It will be in that day," says Yhwh, "that you will call me 'my husband,' and no longer call me 'my master.'
Ronen
Can we say Love! :dsunny:
Quote from: rosered on December 19, 2014, 02:10:04 AM
Its weird I was just looking up the seven women taking a hold of one man
in Isaiah 4 1For seven women will take hold of one man in that day, saying, "We will eat our own bread and wear our own clothes, only let us be called by your name; take away our reproach!" 2In that day the Branch of the LORD will be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth will be the pride and the adornment of the survivors of Israel....
I was thinking but could be wrong if it is the 7 churches/women in the right hand of the Lord in Rev 2 and 3 ?
Just curious to yours or anyone opinion
I have not heard of that, so would have to think on it to offer my opinion. :dontknow: At first glance I see the similarity of 7, but there are differences which do not appear to mesh with both accounts as to the character of the women and the character of the assemblies.
Quote from: Tom on December 19, 2014, 12:59:05 AM
Don't tell that to any feminist activists, bro, or you might catch some heat for it.
Feminists are so cute :-)
Some people just see problems were they are not.
"I'm yours forever" is something both men and women say to each other when in love. Are they making statements of slavery and ownership? Maybe someone from another culture would assume so; but for English speaking people it just means "I really, really, really love you."
This thread started out as NT books being written in Hebrew. Later the thread became an idiom thread. Maybe I should have started a new one....
Anyway it serves as proof that literal translation of a book, any book including the Bible, rarely is the best approach.
"I'm yours forever." simply and undeniably is a statement of ownership. Every lexicon will show you that "yours" is about owning something. But we all know that's
not what those words are about. Likewise we can without any doubt prove the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words.... and still be totally wrong because idioms never are the sum of the literal meanings of the words.
Idioms are (part of) the proof that the NT was written* in Hebrew. Simply because those idioms only exited in Hebrew and not in Greek. I know the argument that they spoke Aramaic and even that the NT was written in Aramaic. While that's more and more disputed by scholars it doesn't really change the discussion because Armiac isn't Greek.
*=Likely you many times read my posts and thought something like: He did spell the words correctly but why did he switch noun and verb?
That's because I'm Dutch and I'm unable to get out my Dutch mindset, of if you wish grammar rules out of my English. Good linguists can spot Dutch, German, French, etc people from a mile away when writing in English.
The NT Greek is even worse. The translators didn't even attempt to replace Hebrew idioms with Greek idioms. When doing a one on one translation from Greek to Hebrew, the result is a verse that usually perfect Hebrew (complete with idioms)
The most important aspect is culture. No matter if the NT was written in directly in Greek or translated from Hebrew or Armiac it's writers were Jews. A Jew, especially in that time, wasn't defined as someone who speaks Hebrew. Every fiber of them was soaked in OT related thought patterns. The whole society was build around OT feasts, laws, customs and of course God and His Temple. So if <insert your favorite person> communicated with Gentiles they may have spoke Greek, Latin or any other language to them, but brain and heart were still completely Jewish.
So to summarize, even if it would be proven without a doubt the NT was originally written in Latin it doesn't remove the underlying Jewish mindset.
Quote
So to summarize, even if it would be proven without a doubt the NT was originally written in Latin it doesn't remove the underlying Jewish mindset.
This is a great point taken Tony !
You are so right and they are Gods chosen ,
and certainly as a nation and elect of God , they have suffered and made an example of from the beginning of keeping record!
Our Bible
I agree with you the patterns and concepts and language and mainly in my opinion EXAMPLE set as first chosen is an excellent learning start .
the original Eastern concept with Hebrew origin /roots
IMO it is not that simple, and that is why we labor as we do to insure proper translation/rendering of original thoughts and words.
For instance, the Latin Vulgate translated Sheol/Hades into Inferno. This introduced the yoking together of a Latin mindset concerning death and judgment distinctly different from the Hebrew thought connected to the word sheol- introducing the concept of flames in sheol, which was never there in the hebrew scriptures. 1500 years later, the KJV translators were translating from an incorrect Latin mindset and rendered the words sheol and gehenna, "hell" - imparting and reaffirming the whole abysmally distorted view of the doctrine of eternal judgment.
Idiom #68 - Knew
Introduction.
The next couple of posts won't be idioms. But I'll post them in this thread anyway because idioms are often literally understood. That gives a wrong or at best an incomplete understanding.
Many English/western verbs are about a mental activity. Things that only happen in your head. Thinking for example. Hebrew was a language with a very limited number of words, so most of them had various meanings. Not only that many verbs had both a mental and physical meaning. Knowing this may deepen the understanding of a verse because while it's not translated wrong it's only translated half.
I once read the following example to explain the difference between our view and the Hebrew view on things. Compare a cow, horse and swallow. In our mind the cow and horse are the most similar because both are big, heavy and have four legs. (looks) In the Hebrew mind the horse and swallow are most similar because both are fat and agile. (action)
I'll start with the most well known....
Gen 4:1 (AKJV)
GenAKJV
Gen 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bore Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
Know can have the meaning of knowledge. Like knowing the names of all the books in the Bible. But as so often in Hebrew it does also have physical meaning. In the verse above it means sex. It can also mean caring about someone. Or having a relationship with someone.
Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
It's a good thing to know God exists. It's also good to know all sort of facts about God. And that's exactly what knowledge means. But that's only half of it. It's the 'mental meaning'. The ancient Jews took it one step further. They added a physical meaning. Not just thoughts but also an action. So they read the verse as not just knowing stuff about God but having a real relationship with Him.
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest on him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Many Jews (and their English translations) replace 'wisdom' with 'devotion'. Both are correct. Wisdom is a good translation because wisdom is knowledge and that's the 'mental meaning' of the word. But they pick devotion because it's acting on that knowledge. I think that makes it a better translation because imo the higher goal isn't just to know stuff about/from God but actually implement it in your life.
:2c:
Idiom #69 - Listen
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
This one is easy because it's commonly used in English.
Mother: "Did you listen when I said your room has to be tidy?!"
The mother didn't just ask if the kid heard her speak a while ago. Listen refers to a command to clean the bedroom. Likewise in Hebrew.
Listen means: hearing, being obedient, doing what's asked/commanded.
Matt 11:15 He that has ears to hear, let him hear.
That verse means 'Do what I tell you". Obey. Act.
When you read a verse with the word read replace that word with obey and see how often that's logical.
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 12, 2010, 02:29:30 PM
http://www.modestapparelchristianclothinglydiaofpurpledressescustomsewing.com/new_testament_written_in_Hebrew.htm
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/topics/new-testament-was-orginally?commentId=1451550%3AComment%3A1344965&xg_source=activity
http://www.remnantofyhwh.com/Hebrew%20The%20Purel%20Language.htm
Etc.
Personally I would find it logical. Hebrew also has much more depth to hide little gems.
I didn't follow the links.. :smile: but i think this is a great topic, and I agree very logical, and yes, adds such depth to God's Word! I wonder what do you think about Paul's letters when written to a Gentile church? Hellenistic and Greek.. Do you think those were likely written in Greek or in Hebrew?
I wonder if there were Hebrew and Greek gospels circulating after a while? (shortly after the first gospels were written very likely in Hebrew).. Luke was a Gentile I guess so I wonder about his gospel?
Maybe this is covered in this thread already! :faint:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 26, 2015, 08:31:09 PM
Idiom #57 - Listen
(First read the introduction of Idiom #56)
This one is easy because it's commonly used in English.
Mother: "Did you listen when I said your room has to be tidy?!"
The mother didn't just ask if the kid heard her speak a while ago. Listen refers to a command to clean the bedroom. Likewise in Hebrew.
Listen means: hearing, being obedient, doing what's asked/commanded.
Matt 11:15 He that has ears to hear, let him hear.
That verse means 'Do what I tell you". Obey. Act.
When you read a verse with the word read replace that word with obey and see how often that's logical.
:smile: :thumbsup: That's awesome!!
to truly hear is to obey..!
.."treasure old and new.."
His Word is so enriching!
Idiom #70 - Fear
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
Prov 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.
Isa 11:3 And his delight shall be in the fear of Jehovah; and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither decide after the hearing of his ears;
The Hebrew word translated fear means fear but also awe, reverence. So it's not (just) being scared of God but also something more positive a feeling of deep respect. In Job 28:28 it leads to wisdom. In Job 4:6 it's the source of confidence.
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 26, 2015, 08:22:46 PM
Many English/western verbs are about a mental activity. Things that only happen in your head. Thinking for example. Hebrew was a language with a very limited number of words, so most of them had various meanings. Not only that many verbs had both a mental and physical meaning. Knowing this may deepen the understanding of a verse because while it's not translated wrong it's only translated half.
...actually implement it in your life.
I heard of this before.. how the Hebrew goes further and places an active verb with...
Quote from: WhiteWings on March 05, 2014, 12:23:46 PM
Idiom#58 - Caught up
2 Cor 12:2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know--God knows.
"Caught up" can have a literal meaning but its idiomatic meaning is "have a vision".
..that makes more sense.. :2c:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 26, 2015, 11:12:03 PM
Idiom #58 - Fear
(First read the introduction of Idiom #56)
Prov 9:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.
Isa 11:3 And his delight shall be in the fear of Jehovah; and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither decide after the hearing of his ears;
The Hebrew word translated fear means fear but also awe, reverence. So it's not (just) being scared of God but also something more positive a feeling of deep respect. In Job 28:28 it leads to wisdom. In Job 4:6 it's the source of confidence.
Thank you for bringing us these treasure nuggets bro.
Interestingly, in my research, the marriage root for fear is related to the word 'to sense' [primarily through the sense of sight]; hence commonly translated as 'to see' or 'to appear'. To fear, in the Semitic mind, is to actively sense the one feared, to be utterly aware of the one feared. Negatively, it is being consumed with the sensation of someone feared. With regard to God however, it is the sensation similar to standing on an overlook...that kind of fear, or, as you said Tony, awe. To walk in His fear is to walk in such a way that we are utterly aware of Him at all times, perceiving, or seeing him in everything.
Ronen
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 29, 2013, 09:04:40 PM
Idiom #55 - Sounding the trumpet
There were 13 collection boxes for alms in the women's court.
Wide at the bottom narrow at the top. Trumpet shaped.
When a coin was dropped in the box it made a quite distinct sound.
Boasting Pharisees would throw a large number, of usually low value coins in the boxes to make it known they are great for charity.
aha! pharisees/false.. "sounding the trumpet before theirself.."
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 14, 2013, 02:58:34 PM
Idiom #53 - Frog
Frog=tsephardea=idiom for temptation
thanks! that's one I've wondered about! :smile:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 12, 2012, 11:58:56 PM
There are of course several quotes by the Church fathers claiming a Hebrew Matthew. (only once I saw a church father claiming an other Hebrew book) Of course the only 100% certain thing is that you personally have watched an Apostle pen down the words in Hebrew.
But imo the most important question isn't if Matthew wrote in Hebrew, Greek, English, Spanish or German. In all those languages it's possible to write 100% error free texts
It the grammar rules used and the idioms that really matter. Should a translator translate the manuscripts with Hebrew, Armiac, Classical Greek or Koine Greek rules.
Koine Greek can be translated to Hebrew without reordering words. In most cases that results in a grammatically correct Hebrew verse. So even if Matthew, or any other Apostle, beyond a doubt wrote Greek it seems to me they did so with a 100% Hebrew line of thoughts.
Also let not forget the Bible itself claims Hebrew in several verses. It only claims Greek and Latin once. (the sign Pilate ordered nailed above Jesus' head) But even then Hebrew is claimed also.
It seems logical to me the Hebrew (a dialect of Aramaic) or the Aramaic of Assyria (as conquering) was used originally for any account or letter written to Hebrews..
Some of these idioms of course are self explanatory (like eyes of the heart).. and some of course could also take into account content around the usage.. coming under, I believe, rightly dividing.. and the Word explaining the Word..
These idioms and thread was a veRy interesting read! :smile: :thumbsup:
Idiom #71 - Law and instruction
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
The Jewish word Torah (usually referencing the 5 books by Moses) is usually translated as 'law'.
That translation isn't wrong strictly speaking because even God's suggestions carry great weight. But 'law' misses some depth.
Torah comes from the root word yarah which means teaching, point out, instruct, give direction etc.
Jewish English Bibles (OT) often use 'instruction' instead of 'law'.
You may say that law also gives direction. That certainly true but (for me) law has a bit of 'dictator feeling' while instructing is what a Father does.
For me it's the difference between enforcing rules just because He's the big boss vs giving rules for the best of mankind.
Idiom #72 - Peace
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
John 14:27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give to you: not as the world gives, give I to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
Peace isn't just the absence of war but also prosperity, wholeness, completeness, good health, feeling well.
Once again while the normal translation isn't wrong it misses depth that may add to the understanding or 'atmosphere' of the passage the words is found in.
Matt 5:23-24
23 If then you are making an offering at the altar and there it comes to your mind that your brother has something against you,
24 While your offering is still before the altar, first go and make peace with your brother, then come and make your offering.
The above verses are sideways related to this post. Likely the verses are about the peace offering. God doesn't want a peace offering unless the bringer of the gift made peace with others first.
The peace offering was partly for God and partly eaten by the person and his family. The Last Supper my have had that symbolic meaning too.
Idiom #73 - Remember
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
This is another clear one that shows mental and physical meaning of the word.
Isa 43:25 I, even I, am he that blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and will not remember your sins.
The almighty God forgetting something.....?
Remember has meaning we all know but it also has the meaning of actions relating to that memory.
That verse doesn't mean God will forget the sin but He will not take the actions that the sin requires. For example because Jesus paid off that sin on the cross.
So God 'forgets' to take action.
Idiom #74 - Faith
(First read the introduction of Idiom #56)
This word is related to the faith and works thread Click (http://tentmaker.org/forum/lounge/faith-works-and-grace-11887/msg163253/#msg163253)
Gen 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
Exod 17:12 But Moses hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun.
Deut 7:9 Know therefore that the LORD your God, he is God, the faithful God, which keeps covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;
The 3 bold words above all are translated from the same Hebrew word. -> Believe, faithful and steady. Especially steady show the word also has the meaning of works (lifting hands in this case)
The verses below show faith and works go hand in hand. Demons also believe in God, but that's not good enough.
Jas 2:17-21
17 Even so faith, if it has not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yes, a man may say, You have faith, and I have works: show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
19 You believe that there is one God; you do well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son on the altar?
I think changes in the heart and life are also works..
Quote from: marie glen on July 26, 2015, 10:28:27 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 12, 2010, 02:29:30 PM
http://www.modestapparelchristianclothinglydiaofpurpledressescustomsewing.com/new_testament_written_in_Hebrew.htm
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/topics/new-testament-was-orginally?commentId=1451550%3AComment%3A1344965&xg_source=activity
http://www.remnantofyhwh.com/Hebrew%20The%20Purel%20Language.htm
Etc.
Personally I would find it logical. Hebrew also has much more depth to hide little gems.
I didn't follow the links.. :smile: but i think this is a great topic, and I agree very logical, and yes, adds such depth to God's Word! I wonder what do you think about Paul's letters when written to a Gentile church? Hellenistic and Greek.. Do you think those were likely written in Greek or in Hebrew?
I wonder if there were Hebrew and Greek gospels circulating after a while? (shortly after the first gospels were written very likely in Hebrew).. Luke was a Gentile I guess so I wonder about his gospel?
Maybe this is covered in this thread already! :faint:
Paul's letters would very likely have been written in Greek, as he was writing to churches all over the world of Jew and Gentiles, and Greek was the common tongue. It would have made no sense to write an epistle to the believers in Corinth in Hebrew, for example.
That all being said, WW is certainly right in saying that most of the writers were Hebrew (and most of the scenes with Jesus were with Hebrew or Aramaic as the spoken language), so a Hebrew mindset is being expressed into Greek. The only writer who almost certainly has Greek as his mother tongue would appear to be Luke, who in Luke and Acts is regarded as writing in a very skilled manner.
I think it is the sort of question everyone is going to see from their own perspective, but there are interesting things to consider from the Greek side. For instance, the alliteration in Romans 1:31:
ἀσυνέτους ἀσυνθέτους ἀστόργους (asunetous, asunthetous, astorgous)
This comes in the midst of a long list of fleshly character traits. If Romans had been written in Hebrew, it would have been the most tremendous coincidence for these words to match so closely. Nor is this by any means the only place where this kind of word play occurs.
The issue of original composition is not an open and shut case, but I for one really enjoy what those with deep knowledge of Hebrew like WW and Gregory bring to the table. If anyone is interested in links that are in favor of Greek being the original language, let me know.
My own personal belief is that the language of God, rather than being any particular human language, is Spirit, and where this Spirit inspires, that language becomes spiritual, whether it be Hebrew, Greek, English or Tagalog. That being said, I also believe God created the languages for specific purposes, and the reason I believe that God created Greek for the gospel going forth, is that it offers a lot of precision that is very important when matters of doctrine arise. However, again referring to something WW said, I don't think you can divorce the Greek of the NT from the Hebrew minds behind it.
Quote from: marie glen on July 26, 2015, 10:28:27 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on December 12, 2010, 02:29:30 PM
http://www.modestapparelchristianclothinglydiaofpurpledressescustomsewing.com/new_testament_written_in_Hebrew.htm
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/topics/new-testament-was-orginally?commentId=1451550%3AComment%3A1344965&xg_source=activity
http://www.remnantofyhwh.com/Hebrew%20The%20Purel%20Language.htm
Etc.
Personally I would find it logical. Hebrew also has much more depth to hide little gems.
I didn't follow the links.. :smile: but i think this is a great topic, and I agree very logical, and yes, adds such depth to God's Word! I wonder what do you think about Paul's letters when written to a Gentile church? Hellenistic and Greek.. Do you think those were likely written in Greek or in Hebrew?
I wonder if there were Hebrew and Greek gospels circulating after a while? (shortly after the first gospels were written very likely in Hebrew).. Luke was a Gentile I guess so I wonder about his gospel?
Maybe this is covered in this thread already! :faint:
Interesting topic. New testament originally in Hebrew or Greek?? Is there an authoritative answer?
BTW two of the links do not work Marie. Only this one which I found extremely helpful.
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/topics/new-testament-was-orginally?commentId=1451550%3AComment%3A1344965&xg_source=activity
IMO Greek I believe is the originally inspired language of the NT. I know, I know some disagree. Fine.
Greek is such a precise language that I believe God used it for the NT. Just an opinion. Just look at the 3 different meanings of the word
love in the Greek. And I do agree with the connection to the Hebrew because the apostles knew both (maybe more) languages. Hebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
Can we know for sure? :dontknow:
The two richest languages! :HeartThrob:
P.S - yes interesting link, thanks! Especially these quotes
"Papias (150-170 CE) - Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. [A quote by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:39]
Ireneus (170 CE) - Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. [Against Heresies 3:1]
Origen (210 CE) - The first [Gospel] is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an apoltle of Jesus Christ who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. [A quote by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 6:25]
Eusebius (315 CE) - Matthew also, having first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. [Eccl. Hist. 3:24]"
...Matthew almost certainly, it seems, was likely written in Hebrew (Israeli dialect of Aramaic) as he sure seems to be writing to people of his own nation of Israel..
Quote from: Shev on July 29, 2015, 05:02:44 AM
.... My own personal belief is that the language of God, rather than being any particular human language, is Spirit, and where this Spirit inspires, that language becomes spiritual, whether it be Hebrew, Greek, English or Tagalog.
..it's the Spirit which gives us the right slant.. in whatever language.. and digging into the language(s) is to come up with "treasure new and old"..
Quote from: Shev on July 29, 2015, 05:02:44 AM
....again referring to something WW said, I don't think you can divorce the Greek of the NT from the Hebrew minds behind it.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: Amen! That certainly has to be true!
Quote from: joeteekay on July 29, 2015, 05:28:52 AM
Greek is such a precise language that I believe God used it for the NT. Just an opinion.
The fact that Greek is a more precise language doesn't make it more suited than Hebrew.
The NT is for a large part quoting OT stuff. When quoting Hebrew things in Greek it's impossible to translate the whole meaning. Unless footnotes were added etc.
And losing that meaning, for me speaks against Greek.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
It goes beyond that according to scholars in the Hebrew/Greek field. If the Greek is translated back into Hebrew without reordering words, the result in most cases is perfect Hebrew.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
I wrote this earlier; if we agree the underlaying thoughts are Hebrew doesn't that mean we should avoid thinging the Greek way? And only use the the Greek lexicons to figure out the matching Hebrew word? Because afterall, Hebrew thought is based on Hebrew words. And as I tried to show with idioms and last few posts with 'hidden' meanings and words having a mental and physical meaning, Greek is just unable to show us the depth of the mind of the writer/translator.
And that's not just a minor thing. It's the basis for a doctrine. :Chinscratch:
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
:thumbsup:
May God bless us all with more of HIS WISDOM in SPIRIT & TRUTH to HIS GLORY AND PRAISE :HeartThrob:
Thanks WW. Very enlightening.
I found the link you supplied very helpful.
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
:declare:
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 29, 2015, 01:49:09 PM
Quote from: joeteekay on July 29, 2015, 05:28:52 AM
Greek is such a precise language that I believe God used it for the NT. Just an opinion.
The fact that Greek is a more precise language doesn't make it more suited than Hebrew.
The NT is for a large part quoting OT stuff. When quoting Hebrew things in Greek it's impossible to translate the whole meaning. Unless footnotes were added etc.
And losing that meaning, for me speaks against Greek.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
It goes beyond that according to scholars in the Hebrew/Greek field. If the Greek is translated back into Hebrew without reordering words, the result in most cases is perfect Hebrew.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
I wrote this earlier; if we agree the underlaying thoughts are Hebrew doesn't that mean we should avoid thinging the Greek way? And only use the the Greek lexicons to figure out the matching Hebrew word? Because afterall, Hebrew thought is based on Hebrew words. And as I tried to show with idioms and last few posts with 'hidden' meanings and words having a mental and physical meaning, Greek is just unable to show us the depth of the mind of the writer/translator.
And that's not just a minor thing. It's the basis for a doctrine. :Chinscratch:
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
I understand what you are saying WW, but Hebrew is not the same thing as Spirit, which is why I think God can ordain Hebrews write in Greek for a result He desires. The problem with saying the whole NT should be in Hebrew is we have no way of knowing which would be Hebrew and which Greek. Luke appears to have Greek as his primary tongue, so therefore we should definitely have at least Luke and Acts in Greek, according to that logic. Paul was clearly multi-lingual, and his letters were to Greek speaking churches. Can we really say it would have been better for Hebrew letters to have been sent to those churches? Would not Paul have done so, if it were better, and a 'basis for doctrine'?
Another example if the Septuagint, which is as example of Hebrew
definitely translated into Greek, and which is regarded as much more stilted as a result. The NT does not have this same stiltedness, flowing much better in Greek.
I guess, to repeat myself, I would just state that all your questions could apply to those who sent out Greek epistles. You say Greek is "unable to show the depth of the mind of the writer/translator". Well then, why did Paul dare to send out Greek epistles, if they were going to veil the depths of what he was trying to say? Why not rather command the churches to all learn Hebrew?
My contention is not anything against Hebrew as a wonderful language that has been used by God, but rather against the NT all being originally written in Hebrew. I can't see how that would be so without the NT resembling the Septuagint, which it does not in the slightest.
Ultimately, the thoughts that matter are God's, and He does not limit Himself by language. I would hazard to call Him 'Omni-lingual!'!!!
Shalom Shev,
I think I can understand your concerns and questions about this. I am one who uses the Aramaic text as my primary text for study (perhaps I am the only one here who does so), and from my experience, as much as I personally love to look at the Greek as well (although not fluent in it at all), a study of the Aramaic has yielded many insights for me into why different Greek texts read the way they do. While WW is primarily writing regarding Hebrew, those same idioms hold true with Aramaic as well, and we do at least have copies of it to study from.
I am not sure how much the moderators would want to see any discussion that might be misconstrued as a bashing of those who believe in Greek originals for the 1st century writings, so hopefully what I am writing is acceptable. What I try to bring to this message board is how the Hebrew and Aramaic both give us glimpses into various aspects of Universal reconciliation. I see it much more clearly in the Hebrew and Aramaic than I can in the Greek, personally.
My personal stance is that it is important to use EVERY available resource to get the most complete picture. So, for example, although I primarily study from the Aleppo Codex of the Hebrew Tanakh and the Mosul edition of the Aramaic Pecrapta, I also find it valuable to compare these with the Septuagint and other Greek sources. I encourage others, who primarily rely on the Greek sources of the 1st century writings, to also, to the extent they are able, make use of the Aramaic Pecrapta as well.
As to God being 'Omni'lingual', I wholeheartedly agree. :thumbsup: He has never been limited to language. Having said that, and I know I am biased when I say this, because of my background and culture, but I very much love mining the riches of the Semitic languages of Hebrew and Aramaic, and trying to find ways to express those riches in English.
Ronen
Quote from: Shev on July 30, 2015, 02:50:35 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on July 29, 2015, 01:49:09 PM
Quote from: joeteekay on July 29, 2015, 05:28:52 AM
Greek is such a precise language that I believe God used it for the NT. Just an opinion.
The fact that Greek is a more precise language doesn't make it more suited than Hebrew.
The NT is for a large part quoting OT stuff. When quoting Hebrew things in Greek it's impossible to translate the whole meaning. Unless footnotes were added etc.
And losing that meaning, for me speaks against Greek.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
It goes beyond that according to scholars in the Hebrew/Greek field. If the Greek is translated back into Hebrew without reordering words, the result in most cases is perfect Hebrew.
QuoteHebrew authors were writing Hebrew ideas in Greek words
I wrote this earlier; if we agree the underlaying thoughts are Hebrew doesn't that mean we should avoid thinging the Greek way? And only use the the Greek lexicons to figure out the matching Hebrew word? Because afterall, Hebrew thought is based on Hebrew words. And as I tried to show with idioms and last few posts with 'hidden' meanings and words having a mental and physical meaning, Greek is just unable to show us the depth of the mind of the writer/translator.
And that's not just a minor thing. It's the basis for a doctrine. :Chinscratch:
http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3b.htm
I understand what you are saying WW, but Hebrew is not the same thing as Spirit, which is why I think God can ordain Hebrews write in Greek for a result He desires. The problem with saying the whole NT should be in Hebrew is we have no way of knowing which would be Hebrew and which Greek. Luke appears to have Greek as his primary tongue, so therefore we should definitely have at least Luke and Acts in Greek, according to that logic. Paul was clearly multi-lingual, and his letters were to Greek speaking churches. Can we really say it would have been better for Hebrew letters to have been sent to those churches? Would not Paul have done so, if it were better, and a 'basis for doctrine'?
Another example if the Septuagint, which is as example of Hebrew definitely translated into Greek, and which is regarded as much more stilted as a result. The NT does not have this same stiltedness, flowing much better in Greek.
I guess, to repeat myself, I would just state that all your questions could apply to those who sent out Greek epistles. You say Greek is "unable to show the depth of the mind of the writer/translator". Well then, why did Paul dare to send out Greek epistles, if they were going to veil the depths of what he was trying to say? Why not rather command the churches to all learn Hebrew?
My contention is not anything against Hebrew as a wonderful language that has been used by God, but rather against the NT all being originally written in Hebrew. I can't see how that would be so without the NT resembling the Septuagint, which it does not in the slightest.
Ultimately, the thoughts that matter are God's, and He does not limit Himself by language. I would hazard to call Him 'Omni-lingual!'!!!
:iagree:
Quote from: gregoryfl on July 30, 2015, 03:33:02 PM
....I know I am biased when I say this, because of my background and culture, but I very much love mining the riches of the Semitic languages of Hebrew and Aramaic, and trying to find ways to express those riches in English.
Ronen
What treasure the Word is! So many avenues of good in depth study.. Ultimately of course (imo) the Word (Truth) is beyond language.. The letters Hebrews and James especially, I think, seem obviously written to Hebrews so the Hebrew seems extra logical to have been used.. or Aramaic.. which Hebrew is a dialect of, from what I understand?.. I especially love seeking in the languages when I haven't received that quiet insight from the Spirit.. "treasure old and new"! Hebrews is a letter especially fascinating to dig into..
These idioms are very interesting and insightful!!
:girlheart: :banana:
Quote from: gregoryfl on July 30, 2015, 03:33:02 PM
Shalom Shev,
I think I can understand your concerns and questions about this. I am one who uses the Aramaic text as my primary text for study (perhaps I am the only one here who does so), and from my experience, as much as I personally love to look at the Greek as well (although not fluent in it at all), a study of the Aramaic has yielded many insights for me into why different Greek texts read the way they do. While WW is primarily writing regarding Hebrew, those same idioms hold true with Aramaic as well, and we do at least have copies of it to study from.
I am not sure how much the moderators would want to see any discussion that might be misconstrued as a bashing of those who believe in Greek originals for the 1st century writings, so hopefully what I am writing is acceptable. What I try to bring to this message board is how the Hebrew and Aramaic both give us glimpses into various aspects of Universal reconciliation. I see it much more clearly in the Hebrew and Aramaic than I can in the Greek, personally.
My personal stance is that it is important to use EVERY available resource to get the most complete picture. So, for example, although I primarily study from the Aleppo Codex of the Hebrew Tanakh and the Mosul edition of the Aramaic Pecrapta, I also find it valuable to compare these with the Septuagint and other Greek sources. I encourage others, who primarily rely on the Greek sources of the 1st century writings, to also, to the extent they are able, make use of the Aramaic Pecrapta as well.
As to God being 'Omni'lingual', I wholeheartedly agree. :thumbsup: He has never been limited to language. Having said that, and I know I am biased when I say this, because of my background and culture, but I very much love mining the riches of the Semitic languages of Hebrew and Aramaic, and trying to find ways to express those riches in English.
Ronen
Thank you for the very gracious reply, Ronen. I really enjoy these type threads, and both you and WW have insights into Hebrew and Aramaic I do not at all. It is easier for me to see the beauty of Greek, because I do all of my scripture reading directly from it, and it is a really wonderful blessing to me to be able to do so. I love these discussions because I am reading and hearing things that are beyond my level of knowledge, and to hear the other side of the coin (in a manner of speaking) is challenging and invigorating. But that being said, I really do believe that most of the NT was written originally in Greek, and the main reason I post replies is so that any readers can see some of the other side of the discussion.
It all goes to show we have something to share. God has surely encouraged you to become fluent in reading Aramaic, while I have had the same passion for the Koine. I have no doubt at all that your studies are exceedingly rich indeed!
Thank you Shev. Having a little bit of understanding of Greek, I know that it too, is a beautiful language, very rich in expression. May we have a long nose as we all share his riches together, in whatever language it is done in. :Pray:
Quote from: gregoryfl on July 30, 2015, 11:25:31 PM
Thank you Shev. Having a little bit of understanding of Greek, I know that it too, is a beautiful language, very rich in expression. May we have a long nose as we all share his riches together, in whatever language it is done in. :Pray:
:iagree:
By the way, if WW does not object, I have 10 pages worth of postings on another message board of my research into how the Aramaic sources help us understand some of the differences in Greek manuscripts as I compare them one to another.
http://www.originsofhebrew.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=18 (http://www.originsofhebrew.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=18)
Tony, let me know if you would rather I not post that here. I have no problem removing it. I do not wish to detract from the wonderful things you are sharing here.
Ronen
Ronen,
It seems to fit quite well in this thread. Especially with the start of it.
I didn't read all pages yet but I like post 2 and 3.
I often read that the manuscripts of the NT are quite accurate but contain like 3000 (?) tiny variances that are mostly a slip of the pen. Little spelling errors. I wonder how many of them can be traced back to your thread. For example crowd vs crowds.
So Ronen I'm not asking you to remove your post. Actually the opposite. I ask everyone to read the whole thread on your site. :thumbsup:
Quote from: Shev on July 30, 2015, 02:50:35 AMI understand what you are saying WW, but Hebrew is not the same thing as Spirit,
True, but neither is Greek or any other language.
Quotewhich is why I think God can ordain Hebrews write in Greek for a result He desires.
Or have it translated.
QuotePaul was clearly multi-lingual, and his letters were to Greek speaking churches. Can we really say it would have been better for Hebrew letters to have been sent to those churches? Would not Paul have done so, if it were better, and a 'basis for doctrine'?
Obviously Greek would be a better choice in that case. Just like an English or Spanish translation is the best choice for the majority of todays Americans. But only because most don't read Hebrew and/or Greek. So the choice is an English/Spanish Bible or none at all. The least of two evils :-)
You know in retrospect I think I made some of my posts too black and white (to bring a point across). Some books have more proof of Jewish origins than others. Matthew is quite often mentioned as written in Hebrew and translated lateron.
Speaking about writing and translating, in those days many couldn't read or write. They hired professionals to write for them. But still their name would be on the document. Just like a CEO dictating a letter to a typist.
Also keep in mind the Bible is just a fraction of the things that happend. I firmly believe Jesus spoke many more wise words that we can read in our Bibles. Likewise when we read about an Apostle traveling to a church he said more to them than the verses that are recorded. I can very well imagine that the Apostle gave a teaching that we know as 5 verses. But the 10 hour discussion explanation that followed isn't written down.
Well, in my mind that's quite obvious. An Apostle travels for months, speaks 5 verses and that's it?
Note that I'm
not saying 1000's of verses are missing from the Bible. I'm just saying not everything was written down.
QuoteAnother example if the Septuagint, which is as example of Hebrew definitely translated into Greek, and which is regarded as much more stilted as a result. The NT does not have this same stiltedness, flowing much better in Greek.
What's best is a matter of opinion. Some scholars say the Greek often makes little sense.
I'm
not (just) talking about spelling and grammar rules, but about "does it make any sense?".
Translating (back*) into Hebrew uncovers Hebrew idioms that are/were unknown in Greek.
I'll explain that with an simple example.
"Yesterday it rained pipe stems where I live."
I think that grammatically fairly correct English. But does it make sense to you? It's a Dutch idiom that should be translated into English as "Yesterday it rained cats and dogs where I live. If that idiom has a deeper meaning in Dutch that meaning will be lost to the English reader because those readers are clueless what the first translation means, and correct English translation doesn't have that deeper meaning.
QuoteI guess, to repeat myself, I would just state that all your questions could apply to those who sent out Greek epistles. You say Greek is "unable to show the depth of the mind of the writer/translator". Well then, why did Paul dare to send out Greek epistles, if they were going to veil the depths of what he was trying to say? Why not rather command the churches to all learn Hebrew?
I think I already answered that in the first quote. It's better than nothing. The audience has it's limitations. The NT is heavily rooted in the OT. The NT isn't God's way of getting rid of everything OT and start anew with all His teachings. So when Jesus refered to something from the OT He did just that. He wasn't in any way altering those Scriptures. So He pointed to the whole teaching attached to those passages. And those things were are understood with a Jewish mind. Jesus only gave sermons to Jews, not gentiles.
QuoteUltimately, the thoughts that matter are God's, and He does not limit Himself by language. I would hazard to call Him 'Omni-lingual!'!!!
He surely is but He's also limited by the strong and weak points of any language.
I appreciate your responses, WW.
I notice that many examples of idioms that are traced back come from the gospels (for instance, going through the ten pages in the link Ronen provided, I believe most were from Matthew and Mark, with a few from Luke, John, Acts and Revelation). There is no doubt that most of the time Jesus was speaking, He was speaking in Aramaic (though I believe He must have known Greek too). So I completely concede that even if any or all of the gospels were written in Greek, they would as a matter of course have an Aramaic base, owing to the language that was being spoken. Again, my contention is as to what language these oral traditions were set down in, and I do concede that there is a certain size spectrum of Greek/Aramaic likelihood across the twenty seven books, which of course were not written as one unit, but were written with one Spirit.
That being said, almost every epistle of Paul is written to the Gentiles (depending on your views of Hebrews authorship) and in the book of Acts he is often addressing Gentiles verbally too. So then, if his original words quoted were uttered in Koine, then we have Greek being the base tongue for whatever he says, with no translation from Aramaic at all. Paul was multilingual, and people who are fluent in more than one language do not have to think of something in one language, translate it in their head, and then speak it in the second language, but rather they are able to think in whichever language they are fluent in. So Paul would have been able to have Greek thoughts, spoken in Greek, written in Greek, to a Greek/Gentile audience, all describing the good news of Jesus Christ. In this case, the only Hebrew coloring comes from the genetics of Paul's natural mind, so to speak. So for instance, when Paul spoke to the Greeks in Athens, he would have been carried along by the Spirit to make utterances in Greek that were fully spiritual, and in no way needed the help of Aramaic to make them so.
Greek had already been so ingrained as the common tongue by the time of Jesus, that many Jews would have been perfectly fluent in it, as I understand, and some dispersed Jews would have had it as their primary tongue, hence the need for the Septuagint in the first place.
You said:
And those things were are understood with a Jewish mind. Jesus only gave sermons to Jews, not gentiles.
Point taken as far as Jesus giving sermons to Jews, and of course insights into their language will help with idioms, but I would contend that we don't need a Jewish mind to understand His sermons, any more than Jews need a Greek mind to understand what the Spirit says to the seven Greek speaking churches in Revelation.
You said:
He's also limited by the strong and weak points of any language.
I agree with this to a point - some languages are without contradiction more primitive than others. A people who speak in clicking sounds would have a hard time producing a quality Bible translation! But on the other hand, this plays into what I am saying too, as it is perfectly reasonable that God might choose for the Gospel to go forth in Greek (and some or all of it be originally written in it) for specific reasons.
I will say (without any concession) that the books that have the stronger cases for Aramaic primacy tend to be the gospels, where there are a lot of parables and idioms that are helped more by Aramaic insight. The books with the stronger case for Greek primacy tend to be the Pauline epistles, where Paul is often using very specific language to set doctrine and precise teaching.
Here is an excellent link for anyone interested:
http://orvillejenkins.com/languages/aramaicprimacy.html
Thanks Shev,
Thanks for your perspective and valuable contribution to this discussion. I agree with most of what you wrote.
And I may suggest here is more in the following scripture by Paul that bears on this topic , although I can cannot expound on it adequately.
1Co_1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
:Peace2:
Idiom #75 - Shoe/sandal
Ps 108:9 Moab is my wash pot; over Edom will I cast out my shoe; over Philistia will I triumph.
Shoe is symbol of ownership.
Pieces of land were marked of with old sandals.
The third of the four covenants is called the sandal or inheritance covenant.
Quick reply Shev. A short holiday started today and I already should have been in my car. I hope I don't overlook things and jump to wrong conclusions.
Quote from: Shev on August 01, 2015, 04:48:31 AM
I appreciate your responses, WW.
I notice that many examples of idioms that are traced back come from the gospels (for instance, going through the ten pages in the link Ronen provided, I believe most were from Matthew and Mark, with a few from Luke, John, Acts and Revelation). There is no doubt that most of the time Jesus was speaking, He was speaking in Aramaic (though I believe He must have known Greek too). So I completely concede that even if any or all of the gospels were written in Greek, they would as a matter of course have an Aramaic base, owing to the language that was being spoken.
I'm glad we have agreement on this.
QuoteAgain, my contention is as to what language these oral traditions were set down in, and I do concede that there is a certain size spectrum of Greek/Aramaic likelihood across the twenty seven books, which of course were not written as one unit, but were written with one Spirit.
And that Spirit isn't bound by language or culture. Well bound by the culture of truth.
Your view is that the first books (possibly) were originally in Hebrew but the other books very likely were Greek from the very start.
You also agree the first books at least have a Hebrew/Aramiac mindset. (which in my opinion is a very important point)
Now my question/thought is this: The Holy Spirit inspired the whole OT with a Hebrew mindset. The Holy Spirit also inspired some NT books with a Hebrew mindset - the ones originally written in Hebrew.
That's 1000's of year of Hebrew inspiration. A large percentage of all Scripture.
Would that very same Holy Spirit change it's approach and for the remainder of the NT inspire with a Greek mindset?
I think not.
I even think it's impossible because the "Greek teaching" are not some new invention. They reference all the previous books written in Hebrew.
Not exactly because the books were not finished yet but I'm sure you get my idea.
So Holy Spirit switched language; also mindset?
What exactly is the Greek mindset? That's a very difficult thing to answer imo. Lexicons show part of it. They show the meaning of words. Those words partly show how the ancients (possibly) understood the Teachings.
But the lexicons were written after lots of paganism crept in.
One example: Only in 288AD torment got the meaning of torture.
But many understand torment as torture by using the most recent definition that's listed as the primary meaning. So our culture is injected into the Greek culture at that time. Wrong.
QuoteThat being said, almost every epistle of Paul is written to the Gentiles (depending on your views of Hebrews authorship) and in the book of Acts he is often addressing Gentiles verbally too. So then, if his original words quoted were uttered in Koine, then we have Greek being the base tongue for whatever he says, with no translation from Aramaic at all. Paul was multilingual, and people who are fluent in more than one language do not have to think of something in one language, translate it in their head, and then speak it in the second language, but rather they are able to think in whichever language they are fluent in. So Paul would have been able to have Greek thoughts, spoken in Greek, written in Greek, to a Greek/Gentile audience, all describing the good news of Jesus Christ. In this case, the only Hebrew coloring comes from the genetics of Paul's natural mind, so to speak. So for instance, when Paul spoke to the Greeks in Athens, he would have been carried along by the Spirit to make utterances in Greek that were fully spiritual, and in no way needed the help of Aramaic to make them so.
If the Greeks, or anyone is guided by the spirit they indeed need no other guide.
But the text can still be misunderstood wrong by those who do not get help from HS. IMO a good guard against error is read in the light of culture. While Paul spoke and tough in Greek every fiber of Paul was fully Hebrew culture. His thought patterns didn't become pagan when speaking in Greek.
A prime example (in my mind) is Revelation. I think it's following certain 'Hebrew patterns'. One of them is the daily Temple routine when it still stood. It uses Temple terminology. Prime example is LoF. Greek culture paganized it into a torture pit while the Hebrew mindset sees it as utter purification (LoF is a Temple vessel).
So fluent Greek takes you nowhere with the proper background. (no pun intended Laz)
QuoteGreek had already been so ingrained as the common tongue by the time of Jesus,
Seems so; but at the same times rabbi's wrote things like "I rather eat swine than speak Greek" :winkgrin:
QuoteYou said:
And those things were are understood with a Jewish mind. Jesus only gave sermons to Jews, not gentiles.
Point taken as far as Jesus giving sermons to Jews, and of course insights into their language will help with idioms, but I would contend that we don't need a Jewish mind to understand His sermons, any more than Jews need a Greek mind to understand what the Spirit says to the seven Greek speaking churches in Revelation.
Sorry, I have to disagree Laz.
QuoteYou said:
He's also limited by the strong and weak points of any language.
I agree with this to a point - some languages are without contradiction more primitive than others.
Maybe so, but that not even what I meant.
Assume Hebrew has 100 strong points. Greek has 200 strong points. That makes Greek the superior language. But Greek still lacks when treading the area of the 100 Hebrew strong points that may be weak Greek points.
So when translating there are problems.
Thank you Shev, for sharing the alternative understanding from Mr. Jenkins. I have read it myself, as part of keeping familiar with every possible way of understanding a subject. There will probably always be debate as to who spoke what, and where. That is why I have been posting my findings as I work through the text, comparing the variations found in the footnotes of my Greek New Testament by Kurt Aland (http://www.amazon.com/The-Greek-Testament-Revised-Edition/dp/3438051109), with my Aramaic Peshiyta Text With Hebrew Translation. (http://www.amazon.com/Testament-Translation-HARDCOVER-translation-Scriptures/dp/B004QMZU3A) I believe that the texts will speak for themselves and shed light on this subject. I have not yet gotten into the Pauline Epistles, with the exception of the example I provide from Romans 5, but have been trying to move through the text in order, with the exceptions I have happened to come across in casual reading, or at someone's request. Because I am still primarily working on my Sensory Translation of the Scriptures, my progress on this other project is rather slow, but I do update it as I come across more information.
Ronen
The seed bed of the scriptures is Hebrew, and the thoughts of Jesus, being the fulfillment of, and at the same time the origin of the words of the prophets- were embedded in the hebrew mind set. So much of the NT is quotes from the OT, and the NT writers, being few, could have written in either language depending on who they were trying to reach.
I agree with Shev about the language of the Spirit. Jesus, Peter, John and Paul spoke of the Spirit revealing all truth. I also think that it is clear that spiritual understanding begins in the OT and blossom in the NT- continuously integral spiritually.
6 Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away; 7 but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; 8 the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; 9 but just as it is written,
"Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard,
And which have not entered the heart of man,
All that God has prepared for those who love Him."
10 For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. 16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.
That said, I still think Hebrew is the key that unlocks most misunderstandings about translating the thoughts of the prophets and apostles. I think when doubts arise about meanings looking into the Hebrew language is illuminating because the foundations of Christian thought(the prophets) were spoken in that langage and since the writers of the NT- whether they wrote in Aramaic or Hebrew or Greek or Syriac.....were Jews, steepd in the word pictures of the Hebrew language. The Septuagint was translated from Hebrew, so again, when doubts arise, reconstructing the Hebrew origins can reveal shades of meaning lost in the Greek. As Ronen and others have shown, the nature of the Hebrew language allows for this kind of reconstruction by its very nature.
What language did Abraham, Isaac and Jacob speak? What language did the children of Israel speak in servitude 400 years in Egypt? Why did Israel not leave Egypt speaking Egyptian?
There is, imo, something special about the Hebrew language that transcends Greek- but the Spirit is able to teach the mind of Christ through any language, and most doubts of paradox and confusions of word meanings can be answered by contextual and topical study in any language at least closely translated. I became convinced of UR by the weight of Eph 1; Col 1; 1 Cor 1:15, Romans 8, and 11; John 12:32, etc.... long before I dug into translation issues.
2 Peter 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.
IMO it is the whole context of scripture that is the surest anchor against error and the quickest destroyer of veils, and it is the Spirit of God who opens that context, converting words into thoughts and transmitting wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of God - becoming the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
".....but we have the mind of Christ"
Quote from: joeteekay on August 01, 2015, 05:05:54 AM
Thanks Shev,
Thanks for your perspective and valuable contribution to this discussion. I agree with most of what you wrote.
And I may suggest here is more in the following scripture by Paul that bears on this topic , although I can cannot expound on it adequately.
1Co_1:22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
:Peace2:
Thank you Joeteekay! :dsunny:
Thank you WW, Ronen and EW for your posts. I will exit the discussion at this juncture and make way for the continued series on idioms.
WW, I appreciate your latest response. I guess part of my perspective is with regards to the idea of mindset itself. My problem with a Hebrew mindset being intrinsically superior for spiritual understanding is that it gives advantage to one flesh over another, so to speak. Hebrew and Aramaic are clearly of great value with regards to trying to get at the base of what idioms may have ended up in Greek, but I don't think that having a Hebrew mindset gives any man superiority over another for understanding the things of God. I really liked EW's latest post with regards to this. Either way, I must say this discussion thread has made me hungrier to try and learn Hebrew (which limited time has had a hand in preventing up to now), in addition to Greek so there is that!
Ronen, thank you for your gracious posts and ongoing labor to bring light to the idioms also. I like what you say about "keeping familiar with every possible way of understanding a subject". That is always an important thing to strive for, rather than camping out and making war around preconceived positions!
EW, fantastic post as always, with a very balanced perspective. The issue of the truth of the Spirit transcending earthly languages is more important to me than simply debating the Greek side of the NT writing issue, and I think you stated that reality, and also the strengths of Hebrew very well.
:dsunny:
I think sometimes the words get between us like fences. But we kno the Spirit unifies in the love of God nd the wisdom of Christ.
If the Spirit is feeding the words as manna....the languages are just tools for eating the bread of life.
Quote from: eaglesway on August 04, 2015, 02:42:19 AM
I think sometimes the words get between us like fences. But we kno the Spirit unifies in the love of God nd the wisdom of Christ.
If the Spirit is feeding the words as manna....the languages are just tools for eating the bread of life.
:dsunny:
Idiom #76 - Redeemer
(First read the introduction of Idiom #68)
When someone had to sell his land because he was very poor a close family member, the kinsman-redeemer, was obligated to buy the land and that way keep the land in the family.
A kinsman-redeemer was also someone that bought a person out of slavery (usually because of debt). The redeemer then owned that person; but not as a slave. Boaz owned Ruth as a wife. (Ruth 4:1-13)
Within marriage a husband could also take the punishment for his wife's crime. He was her redeemer.
This related to the sandal covenant described in Idiom #75
Idiom #77 - 1000
Credits go to Ronen for this one.
When used as an idiom, it represents the totality of a thing. For example, YHWH is said to own the cattle on a thousand hills. This does not mean that there are cattle on a literal thousand hills, but it is another way of saying that YHWH owns the cattle on every hill. It specifically represents an unknown totality, at least not humanly known. The thousand hills represents every hill, but no one knows how many there are. 1000 generations is the same, the total number of unknown generations.
Deut 7:7 The LORD did not set his love on you, nor choose you, because you were more in number than any people; for you were the fewest of all people:
1Chr 16:15 Be you mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations;
Ps 105:8 He has remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.
The rather low number of 1000 is almost the total opposite of Deut 7:9 which indirectly gives numbers so vast they can hardly be comprehended. Surely the human population will never be close to 100 octillion (stars). (a 1 with 29 zeros). It even conflicts with the grains of sand on the shore which are 'only' 5 sextillion (a 5 with 21 zeros) in number.
My point is that neither of those numbers are intended as something (remotely) accurate from a scientific/literal point of view. That said, some uses of 1000 are just literally 1000.
Just like "ten thousands of ten thousands" meaning a vast number. It doesnt say exactly how many 10,000s times exactly how many 10,000s. It is meant to convey a vast number, but not an infinite number.
Idiom #78 - Wisdom
Wisdom isn't just about being smart but (also) able to function successfully in life. Being able to handle difficult situations. That includes things like weaving a cloth, paint walls, carpentry. Just all skilled laborers.
Exod 35:25 And all the women that were wise hearted did spin with their hands, and brought that which they had spun, both of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine linen.
Wise
BDB Definition:
1) wise, wise (man)
1a) skilful (in technical work)
1b) wise (in administration)
1c) shrewd, crafty, cunning, wily, subtle
1d) learned, shrewd (class of men)
1e) prudent
1f) wise (ethically and religiously)
Heart
BDB Definition:
1) inner man, mind, will, heart, understanding
1a) inner part, midst
1a1) midst (of things)
1a2) heart (of man)
1a3) soul, heart (of man)
1a4) mind, knowledge, thinking, reflection, memory
1a5) inclination, resolution, determination (of will)
1a6) conscience
1a7) heart (of moral character)
1a8) as seat of appetites
1a9) as seat of emotions and passions
1a10) as seat of courage
Idiom #79 - Love
In Hebrew love most certainly can have the meaning we find in our English dictionaries. This post is about another meaning. Obedience.
Mark 12:28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?
Mark 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Mark 12:30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength: this is the first commandment.
Something strange is going on in the common translations. The scribe asks Jesus for the first command of all (v28). Jesus gives 2 answers instead of just 1.
1. Jesus says God is one Lord which is often understood as proof for Trinity.
2. Jesus says we should love God.
So which is the command the scribe asked about? The answer is the translation is flawed.
Verse 29 is a reference to:
Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: Yahweh, is our God,––Yahweh alone.
Deut 6:5 Thou shalt therefore love Yahweh thy God,––with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might;
In Hebrew that verse reads YHWH... our God...YHWH.... one A verbless verse.
One is translated from the Hebrew word echad and according to Strong can mean:
one (number)
each, every
a certain
an (indefinite article)
only, once, once for all
one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one
first
eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal)
The last decades scholars more and more lean toward the meaning of "alone" instead of "one". So it's not about unity/trinity. Neither does it say God is number one. It goes one step further; while number one can mean there is also a number two, only means He's the only one Israel follows. In contrast to the other nations that usually worshiped a head god (#1) and several lesser gods.
In Hebrew the a verb most often has both a mental and physical action attached to it. The word "hear" in verse 29 isn't only about perceive the sound of the word Jesus is about to speak in the following verses, but also understanding and believe those words. But above all act according to those words. Just like when a mother asks her kid "Did you hear me when I said clean up you room." she isn't inquiring about the sound of her voice but referring to her commandment to clean the room.
All that combined means verses 29 and 30 should be read as:
Mark 12:29-30 "Obey the only God of Israel with all your thoughts, acts and life as good as you possibly can."
So it's more a statement of loyalty than a statement of faith.
A closer look at "love" with strengthens the above conclusion.
Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: Yahweh, is our God,––Yahweh alone.
Deut 6:5 Thou shalt therefore love Yahweh thy God,––with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might;
Is this verse really about having emotional feelings for God? Well it certainly would be great; but it's not the only meaning of the Hebrew word "ahavah".
It can also mean "act lovely towards" or "be loyal towards". When an defeated king pledged love toward a conquering king, he wasn't declaring romantic feelings but obedience.
So, when we read love as meaning obedience it aligns nicely with the meaning of "hear".
Like with the verb hear, the verb love also has a physical component. (to obey)
A closer look at "heart".
In the ancient Hebrew mind the heart was the seat of emotions and thought. So with "all they heart" means "with all your thoughts
So the Jesus gives the Scribe (Mark 12:28) just one answer instead of two. Obey the only God of Israel. The word obey is repeated several times with synonyms.
Thanks WW. I have always wondered if it meant One God or God Alone in the Shema. I have seen it debated both ways.
The word loyalty and obedience adds more depth to understanding.
http://www.jewfaq.org/prayer/shema.htm
:thumbsup:
:thumbsup: :dsunny:
Idiom #80 - In the name of
" in the name of" often means "on behalf of" or "for the sake of".
Sometimes, mostly in poetry, it means "you".
"in the name of" isn't about the persons name at all; it's about a person's identity.
Matt 10:41 The one receiving a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet's reward, and the one receiving a just one in the name of a just one will receive a just one's reward.
"in the name of the prophet" establishes the identity of that person as a prophet.
"in the name of the just one" establishes the identity of that person as a just one.
Matt 10:41 The one receiving a prophet because he's prophet, will receive a prophet's reward, and the one receiving a just one because he's a just one, will receive a just one's reward.
To clarify: When a person knows that a certain man is a prophet and for that reason receives that man will receive the same reward as the prophet.
An example:
1Kgs 17:9 Rise up, go to Zarephath that belongs to Sidon; and you shall live there. Behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain you.
1Kgs 17:10 And he rose up and went to Zarephath, and came in to the entrance of the city; and, behold, a widow woman was gathering sticks. And he called to her and said, Please bring to me a little water in a vessel, and I shall drink.
1Kgs 17:11 And she went to bring it. And he called to her and said, Please bring me a bit of bread in your hand.
1Kgs 17:12 And she said, As YAHWEH your Elohim lives, I do not have a cake, only a handful of meal in a pitcher, and a little oil in a jar; and behold, I am gathering two sticks and will go in and prepare for myself and for my son; and we shall eat it, and die.
1Kgs 17:13 And Elijah said to her, Do not fear, go, do according to your word, only first make me a little cake of it, and bring to me and afterward prepare for you and for your son.
1Kgs 17:14 For so says YAHWEH the Elohim of Israel, The pitcher of meal shall not be consumed, and the jar of oil shall not fail, until the day that YAHWEH sends rain on the land.
1Kgs 17:15 And she went and did according to the word of Elijah, and she ate, she and he and her household, many days;
1Kgs 17:16 the pitcher of meal was not consumed, and the jar of oil did not fail, according to the Word of YAHWEH that He spoke by the hand of Elijah.
The widow "received a prophet in the name of a prophet". Because it was a famine the widow hardly had any food for herself, but because she knew Elijah was God's prophet she shared her food with him. Her reward was that God sustained her during the famine.
In Joshua a prostitute gives shelter to a righteous spy. Her reward is that she receives shelter herself by being allowed to live in Israel.
:cloud9: :thumbsup:
Idiom #81 - The name in him - This idiom is very closely related to Idiom #80.
Exod 23:20 Behold, I send an Angel before you, to keep you in the way, and to bring you into the place which I have prepared.Exod 23:21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
The person who has the name in him has the the authority of the 'owner' of the name. That person acts on behalf of the 'owner' of the name. The person with the name in him was regarded as the very same person who has sent him.So when you read a verse with "in the name of the LORD" you should understand that as "in the authority of the LORD"
Deuteronomy 18:5 and 7 speak of serving in the "name" (authority) of the LORD.
Deuteronomy 18:22 speaks of prophesying in the "name" (authority) of the LORD.
In 1 Samuel 17:45, David attacked Goliath in the "name" (authority) of the LORD, and he blessed the people in the "name" (authority) of the LORD (2 Sam. 6:18).
In 2 Kings 2:24, Elisha cursed troublemakers in the "name" (authority) of the LORD.
Idiom #82 - Lying in the bosom
This idiom is about a last will and testament, about appointing an heir.
These Hebrew/Aramaic idioms are great, and more evidence of the fullness of the gospel.
Like Ronen, I read the Aramaic gospel as my primary text, and then use the Greek for reference on specific questions.
I happily refer to myself as an Aramaic primacist – the position that the gospel was most likely written in the Aramaic language of the apostles. Idioms are often strong evidence of Aramaic primacy, and also, the split word examples (two Greek words coming from one original Aramaic word) really make the case too compelling to ignore, especially in the gospel of Matthew. Indeed (as evidenced by those early Christian quotes you cited), it may be that Matthew was written in temple Hebrew rather than Aramaic. We ultimately don't know for certain, and I don't think that's some cosmic accident -- I think the Father wants us to focus on the language of the heart primarily. In that case, perhaps I'm a heart primacist :HeartThrob:
Indeed, the key point here is that people can be stumbled in any language if their heart isn't speaking in harmony with Yahshua. Aramaic & Hebrew are no exception. There are no shortage of Aramaic-speaking people today who believe in everlasting hell. They simply go along with their church-crowd that happily departs from the literal meaning of the ancient words. "Oh, it means 'world' here in this verse, but 'forever' here in this verse... because... just because that fits our theology."
Gary Amirault highlighted earlier in this thread:
Quote from: Gary Amirault on December 15, 2010, 08:07:22 PM
... the law kills, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek ...
Indeed, the bible is filled with examples where the Hebrews transgressed their commandments written in Hebrew, and so their kingdom/language/culture was taken from them (i.e., they were enslaved in Egypt under Pharaoh, then enslaved in Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar, then enslaved under the Roman Empire, and here we are today -- enslaved all over again).
Matthew 21:43-45, "Therefore, I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken from you and will be given to a people who will produce fruit.... And when the chief priests and the pharisees heard his parables, they knew that he had spoken against them."
Greek was a punishment to the Hebrews and a struggle in 30AD. Latin was a punishment and a burden to the Jews in 300AD. English is a punishment and forked weapon of our day. Even Aramaic – the language of Babylon -- was a punishment and curse to the Hebrews around 500BC. They found it coarse and bitter, and the priests & lawyers tried to preserve oaths and temple service in Hebrew over the centuries leading up to 30AD, but it was ultimately futile (indeed, it certain instances Hebrew oaths were a bit comical where two words had opposite meanings).
Key point -- in all punishment and struggle, there is opportunity for growth.
Consider Samson, who lived in a transitionary time of two languages fighting for dominance: Hebrew (Jews) & Aramaic (Philistines).
Once we realize that Hebrew = sweet honey to the Hebrews, then Samson's riddle actually makes sense in terms of biblical history:
Notice this word in Song of Songs 5:16, ממתק, which is also in Nehemiah 8:10. It comes from the root מתק ("sweet"), which is used several times in the bible and also refers to a place of the same name מתקה associated with Mt. Hor.
How should it be interpreted? We can see Ezekiel 3:3 uses the same word מתוק:
Ezekiel 3:3-6, "And He said unto me, 'Son of man, thy belly thou dost feed, and thy bowels thou dost fill with this roll that I am giving unto thee;' and I eat it, and it is in my mouth as honey for
sweetness.' And He saith unto me, 'Son of man, go, enter in unto the house of Israel, and thou hast spoken with My words unto them. For, not unto a people
deep of lip and heavy of tongue are thou sent - unto the house of Israel; not unto many peoples,
deep of lip and heavy of tongue, whose words thou dost not understand.'"
The verse in Ezekiel advises that sweetness in the mouth is the native
language (literally "tongue"; לשון) of those chosen to receive the word of אלהא.
Ezekiel 3:3 also helps one read Revelation 10:9 today - when the angel advises John the Apostle that he will eat the scroll and it will be like honey (דבשא) in his mouth but it will be bitter (נמרו) in his stomach. How do we interpret this today in the West? In English, only the surface definitions of the words can be seen. The sweetness of the language of the chosen of אלהא cannot be heard or tasted. It is beyond the face of the Western language.
In Proverbs 27:7, we read this word מתוק again, "Every bitter thing is
sweet to one hungry." And there's that word bitter again – what's beyond the surface?
Notice this Aramaic phrase in Rev 10:9 "will be bitter" (נמרו) is a prophetic wordplay for "leopard" (נמרא), as in the third beast in Daniel 7:6 that represents Babylonian power in Greece (or that Greece foreshadowed if you prefer that iteration of prophetic cycles). See also the body of the leopard in Rev 13.
Again, the only tongue that deciphered Samson's riddle about honey inside the lion was the Hebrew-speaking Samson himself. Scholars say the Philistines spoke a type of mixed Aramaic & Greek, and the bible records that they were unable to decipher the riddle. Now ask logically - was the honey bitter in the lion's belly when Samson opened it up? No, because the beast was already a carcass when the bees inhabited. But had the lion been alive, who would desire to eat honey from its belly? Inside of an acidic stomach, would that honey not be bitter?
Was it not bitter when the Israelites were carried off as slaves to the living lion of Babylon, and their עברית ("Hebrew", the language believed to "cross" (עבר) between earth and heaven) was eaten by the lion? Although forced to speak the language of Babylon (Aramaic), the Hebrews would eventually receive sweetness again in the carcass of that lion, through Yahshua, speaking Aramaic! YHVH is that awesome! As the Word was given to Yahshua, YHVH put sweet honey (Aramaic) in the carcass of the lion (Babylon). For me, Aramaic without Yahshua is like Greek without Yahshua - the language is not sweet to me.
It's ironic that Samson's riddle has been translated to sound sweet in English, "Out of the eater, something to eat; out of the strong, something sweet." We the modern like our rhymes, fresh from the mouth and right on time. But when do our rhymes deceive us, our assumptions made to lead us?
I think the lion represents wayward Judah taken captive to Babylon, a kingdom represented by a "bitter" name נמרד ("Nimrod"). Spiritually, "Babylon the Great" (Rome) and "Egypt/Sodom" (Israel) are presently usurping the throne of Judah as the Father accomplishes His will through mystery and punishment. Who will separate the איל ("strong", "ram") from theעז ("strong", "she-goat")?
Yahshua is the anointed one, the lion of Judah, chosen to end the reign of she-Babylon's countless apostate-religions, the wayward goats. At the appointed time, I trust Yahshua to rightfully restore the throne to YHVH's promised land, a land flowing again with milk and דבשא
The strength and cleverness given to Samson through the lion foreshadows the lion messiah in Rev 5:5, "Behold, the lion from the tribe of Judah, the root of David has conquered. He will open the book and its seals." Samson conquered the Philistines, David conquered the Philistines, the messiah will conquer the Philistines. They are a symbol of strong bitterness. The symbols travel across languages into deep paradigms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistinism) that examine the human character.
So, Hebrew was honey. It was sweetness to the tongue.
Quote from: greg on June 27, 2016, 01:15:14 AM
Gary Amirault highlighted earlier in this thread:
Quote from: Gary Amirault on December 15, 2010, 08:07:22 PM
... the law kills, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek ...
Indeed,
My first response/thought to that quote is often "Which Law?"
Genesis 2:7. "Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature."
Tim 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
In Psalms it's often said how great the words and commandments of God are. Nothing about killing.
When Jesus had one of His many fights with the Scribes He never said the old laws were wrong. He always showed/proved them their interpretation was wrong by quoting OT verses.
So again, the letter of which law kills?
I think the manmade laws. In Jesus time there was a written law and an oral law. That oral law was a real burden. Rules invited by the leaders
not by God.
Both the written Law (coming directly from God) and the oral law ('improvements' of man) were simply called "the law"
Otoh the law was nailed to the cross, done away with. So starting 2 millennia ago the laws against murder, theft and blasphemy are null and void. Obviously the letter of the NT kills too.
Or not? :Chinscratch:
John 14:21, "Whoever has my commands and keeps them, he loves me."
WW, you make a fine point -- but I actually wasn't trying to suggest the law is useless, or even that death is useless. To the contrary, the law is awesome, often like a sword is awesome. It kills people who need it, and it protects people who need it.
I suppose a key point here is that grace is necessary for life (beyond this world), because no one is actually able to comply with all the laws applicable to them in this world, except perhaps infants.
Who among us here would step forward and say, 'I found my life by my strict compliance with x, y, z laws.
I think people are more likely to say and believe, 'I seek life in Messiah Yahshua, and therefore strive to comply with his commandments. And I feel grateful for any grace afforded to me.'
Can we even comply with this: Matthew 22:36-40': "'Teacher, which commandment in the written law is the greatest?' Yahshua said to him, 'You shall love מריא אלהכ from all your heart and from all your soul and from all your power and from all your mind. This is the great and the first commandment. And the second which is like it is, you shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commands depend all the written law and the prophets."
When words are written on paper in Hebrew or any other language, they are not really 'alive'. The word "speak" is especially noticeable in the following verse: John 6:63, "The spirit is that enlivening; the body does not profit anything. The words that I speak with you are spirit and life."
Matthew 5:17-19, "Do not think that I have come to revoke the written law or the prophets; I am not come to revoke but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you that until heaven and earth will pass away, one yod or one stroke will not pass away from the written law until all/any will be. Anyone therefore who violates one of these small commandments and will teach thus to the children of men will be called small in the kingdom of heaven, but anyone who will do and will teach the same will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
I believe ALL that is the letter leads to death, even commandments such as "do not covet" IF they are absent the Holy Spirit. Absent the Spirit, even the command to love our neighbor will lead to death, because the more we try to follow it, the more sin will exceed within us (Romans 7). That doesn't mean there is a problem with the Law, but a problem in the heart of man, but the Law is weak to change that condition. However, with the Spirit, God places what we need in our hearts to have the morality to not covet for example. At that point, we don't need a written law to say "don't covet" because we will be controlled by God already. God doesn't need a law to tell him "don't covet." Who is going to tell God not to covet when God doesn't have coveting in his nature?
If at times we fail, grace chastens us to right our path and teaches us morality. (Titus 2:11-12)
Quote from: greg on June 27, 2016, 01:15:14 AM
These Hebrew/Aramaic idioms are great, and more evidence of the fullness of the gospel.
Like Ronen, I read the Aramaic gospel as my primary text, and then use the Greek for reference on specific questions.
I happily refer to myself as an Aramaic primacist – the position that the gospel was most likely written in the Aramaic language of the apostles. Idioms are often strong evidence of Aramaic primacy, and also, the split word examples (two Greek words coming from one original Aramaic word) really make the case too compelling to ignore, especially in the gospel of Matthew. Indeed (as evidenced by those early Christian quotes you cited), it may be that Matthew was written in temple Hebrew rather than Aramaic. We ultimately don't know for certain, and I don't think that's some cosmic accident -- I think the Father wants us to focus on the language of the heart primarily. In that case, perhaps I'm a heart primacist :HeartThrob:
Indeed, the key point here is that people can be stumbled in any language if their heart isn't speaking in harmony with Yahshua. Aramaic & Hebrew are no exception. There are no shortage of Aramaic-speaking people today who believe in everlasting hell. They simply go along with their church-crowd that happily departs from the literal meaning of the ancient words. "Oh, it means 'world' here in this verse, but 'forever' here in this verse... because... just because that fits our theology."
Gary Amirault highlighted earlier in this thread:
Quote from: Gary Amirault on December 15, 2010, 08:07:22 PM
... the law kills, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek ...
Indeed, the bible is filled with examples where the Hebrews transgressed their commandments written in Hebrew, and so their kingdom/language/culture was taken from them (i.e., they were enslaved in Egypt under Pharaoh, then enslaved in Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar, then enslaved under the Roman Empire, and here we are today -- enslaved all over again).
Matthew 21:43-45, "Therefore, I say to you, the Kingdom of God will be taken from you and will be given to a people who will produce fruit.... And when the chief priests and the pharisees heard his parables, they knew that he had spoken against them."
Greek was a punishment to the Hebrews and a struggle in 30AD. Latin was a punishment and a burden to the Jews in 300AD. English is a punishment and forked weapon of our day. Even Aramaic – the language of Babylon -- was a punishment and curse to the Hebrews around 500BC. They found it coarse and bitter, and the priests & lawyers tried to preserve oaths and temple service in Hebrew over the centuries leading up to 30AD, but it was ultimately futile (indeed, it certain instances Hebrew oaths were a bit comical where two words had opposite meanings).
Key point -- in all punishment and struggle, there is opportunity for growth.
Consider Samson, who lived in a transitionary time of two languages fighting for dominance: Hebrew (Jews) & Aramaic (Philistines).
Once we realize that Hebrew = sweet honey to the Hebrews, then Samson's riddle actually makes sense in terms of biblical history:
Notice this word in Song of Songs 5:16, ממתק, which is also in Nehemiah 8:10. It comes from the root מתק ("sweet"), which is used several times in the bible and also refers to a place of the same name מתקה associated with Mt. Hor.
How should it be interpreted? We can see Ezekiel 3:3 uses the same word מתוק:
Ezekiel 3:3-6, "And He said unto me, 'Son of man, thy belly thou dost feed, and thy bowels thou dost fill with this roll that I am giving unto thee;' and I eat it, and it is in my mouth as honey for sweetness.' And He saith unto me, 'Son of man, go, enter in unto the house of Israel, and thou hast spoken with My words unto them. For, not unto a people deep of lip and heavy of tongue are thou sent - unto the house of Israel; not unto many peoples, deep of lip and heavy of tongue, whose words thou dost not understand.'"
The verse in Ezekiel advises that sweetness in the mouth is the native language (literally "tongue"; לשון) of those chosen to receive the word of אלהא.
Ezekiel 3:3 also helps one read Revelation 10:9 today - when the angel advises John the Apostle that he will eat the scroll and it will be like honey (דבשא) in his mouth but it will be bitter (נמרו) in his stomach. How do we interpret this today in the West? In English, only the surface definitions of the words can be seen. The sweetness of the language of the chosen of אלהא cannot be heard or tasted. It is beyond the face of the Western language.
In Proverbs 27:7, we read this word מתוק again, "Every bitter thing is sweet to one hungry." And there's that word bitter again – what's beyond the surface?
Notice this Aramaic phrase in Rev 10:9 "will be bitter" (נמרו) is a prophetic wordplay for "leopard" (נמרא), as in the third beast in Daniel 7:6 that represents Babylonian power in Greece (or that Greece foreshadowed if you prefer that iteration of prophetic cycles). See also the body of the leopard in Rev 13.
Again, the only tongue that deciphered Samson's riddle about honey inside the lion was the Hebrew-speaking Samson himself. Scholars say the Philistines spoke a type of mixed Aramaic & Greek, and the bible records that they were unable to decipher the riddle. Now ask logically - was the honey bitter in the lion's belly when Samson opened it up? No, because the beast was already a carcass when the bees inhabited. But had the lion been alive, who would desire to eat honey from its belly? Inside of an acidic stomach, would that honey not be bitter?
Was it not bitter when the Israelites were carried off as slaves to the living lion of Babylon, and their עברית ("Hebrew", the language believed to "cross" (עבר) between earth and heaven) was eaten by the lion? Although forced to speak the language of Babylon (Aramaic), the Hebrews would eventually receive sweetness again in the carcass of that lion, through Yahshua, speaking Aramaic! YHVH is that awesome! As the Word was given to Yahshua, YHVH put sweet honey (Aramaic) in the carcass of the lion (Babylon). For me, Aramaic without Yahshua is like Greek without Yahshua - the language is not sweet to me.
It's ironic that Samson's riddle has been translated to sound sweet in English, "Out of the eater, something to eat; out of the strong, something sweet." We the modern like our rhymes, fresh from the mouth and right on time. But when do our rhymes deceive us, our assumptions made to lead us?
I think the lion represents wayward Judah taken captive to Babylon, a kingdom represented by a "bitter" name נמרד ("Nimrod"). Spiritually, "Babylon the Great" (Rome) and "Egypt/Sodom" (Israel) are presently usurping the throne of Judah as the Father accomplishes His will through mystery and punishment. Who will separate the איל ("strong", "ram") from theעז ("strong", "she-goat")?
Yahshua is the anointed one, the lion of Judah, chosen to end the reign of she-Babylon's countless apostate-religions, the wayward goats. At the appointed time, I trust Yahshua to rightfully restore the throne to YHVH's promised land, a land flowing again with milk and דבשא
The strength and cleverness given to Samson through the lion foreshadows the lion messiah in Rev 5:5, "Behold, the lion from the tribe of Judah, the root of David has conquered. He will open the book and its seals." Samson conquered the Philistines, David conquered the Philistines, the messiah will conquer the Philistines. They are a symbol of strong bitterness. The symbols travel across languages into deep paradigms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistinism) that examine the human character.
So, Hebrew was honey. It was sweetness to the tongue.
Truly awesome post! :thumbsup:
QuoteTruly awesome post! :thumbsup:
I have really enjoyed
ALL these posts as well Laz!! :goodpost: 's Thanks be to God for you all ...
Idiom #83 - Devoured
Lev 26:38 And you shall perish among the Gentiles, and the land of your enemies shall devour you.
Devour is an idiom for taking into captivity. Israel was inside the enemy's nation.
Idiom #84 - Hornet
Josh 24:12 And I sent the hornet before you, which drove them out from before you, even the two kings of the Amorites, not with thy sword, nor with thy bow.
The national symbol of Nothern Egypt was a hornet.
Idiom #85 - Tremble
Tremble means 'shake with great emotion'. The exact meaning is to be determined by context.
Isa 66:5 Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.
→ Tremble with joy
Gen 27:33 And Isaac trembled very exceedingly, and said, Who? where is he that has taken venison, and brought it me, and I have eaten of all before you came, and have blessed him? yes, and he shall be blessed.
→ Tremble with anger, disbelief or perhaps disappointment.
Deut 2:25 This day will I begin to put the dread of you and the fear of you on the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of you, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of you.
→ Tremble with fear.
Very interesting posts! :thumbsup:
I've always loved Isaiah 66:5.. "tremble at His Word.." :cloud9:
:cloud9: New site I stumbled upon that supports the OP....good read.
http://www.promotethetruth.com/id23.html
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Excellent!
:cloud9: Saw this link on another board....
http://www.ajewishbeliever.com/2012/07/hebrew-idioms.html?m=1