Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 05-24-2009, 11:02 AM

Quote:

The word for "fulfill" comes from the Greek word plerosai

Jesus was able to argue philosophical points in Greek was he? How many other examples of Greek arguments are there in Jesus's mouth?

Pyrrho · 05-24-2009, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

"It is finished".

Raises all sorts of questions - is it at Jesus' death that the law is abolished, or at his resurrection, or at his ascension or at a second coming - but if it is finished and as in Acts the spirit is with you what is this about a second coming?

It reads like more plot lines to make the story work that don't quite.

Is the second coming mentioned in Acts?

Look again at Matthew 5; it does not end "till heaven and earth pass". The earth is still here, so the law is still in effect. And let me remind you, Matthew 5 is supposedly the words of Jesus himself.

Basically, a lot of Christians want to weasel out of following the law, despite the fact that, according to the Bible, Jesus said it was still in effect in its entirety ("one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law").

Those who want to use "till all be fulfilled" to try to justify their neglect of the law should be reminded that the second coming has not yet been fulfilled, so all has not been fulfilled.

Basically, they like going with vague things that people other than Jesus said in order to avoid doing what Jesus explicitly told them to do.

show_no_mercy · 05-24-2009, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

The word for "fulfill" comes from the Greek word plerosai

Jesus was able to argue philosophical points in Greek was he? How many other examples of Greek arguments are there in Jesus's mouth?

Quote:

Originally Posted by John 3

1Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him."

3In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."

4"How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. "Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!"

5Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.' 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit."

Quote:

Originally Posted by John 3:3 (Greek)

3απεκριθη ιησους και ειπεν αυτω αμην αμην λεγω σοι εαν μη τις γεννηθη ανωθεν ου δυναται ιδειν την βασιλειαν του θεου

άνωθεν in Greek is a double entendre. It can mean both "again" and "from above". When Jesus said "you must be born from above" he could have only been talking in Greek to Nicodemus, since Nicodemus' confusion was over "again" vs. "from above". That would only happen in Greek, not in Hebrew/Aramaic.

In our English bibles, if it actually read "you must be born from above" then we wouldn't know why Nicodemus was confused. So it's translated as "born again".

JoeWallack · 05-24-2009, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jane H

The Law was never abolished, but it is obsolete.

JW:
Hee, heee!

Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page

Petergdi · 05-24-2009, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by John 3:3 (Greek)

3απεκριθη ιησους και ειπεν αυτω αμην αμην λεγω σοι εαν μη τις γεννηθη ανωθεν ου δυναται ιδειν την βασιλειαν του θεου

άνωθεν in Greek is a double entendre. It can mean both "again" and "from above". When Jesus said "you must be born from above" he could have only been talking in Greek to Nicodemus, since Nicodemus' confusion was over "again" vs. "from above". That would only happen in Greek, not in Hebrew/Aramaic.

In our English bibles, if it actually read "you must be born from above" then we wouldn't know why Nicodemus was confused. So it's translated as "born again".

The clear meaning is born anew. The fact that the greek could be read as "born from above" is an accident not intended by the writer.

Compare Mark 10:15 "Amen I say to you, whoever does not receive the Kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it."

Peter.

show_no_mercy · 05-24-2009, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

The clear meaning is born anew. The fact that the greek could be read as "born from above" is an accident not intended by the writer.

And you know the intention of the writer?

Petergdi · 05-24-2009, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

The clear meaning is born anew. The fact that the greek could be read as "born from above" is an accident not intended by the writer.

And you know the intention of the writer?

Context. Becoming like a little child being necessary to enter the Kingdom is a major NT theme.
Jesus does not correct Nicodemus for not getting that he meant "above," but rather he is astonished that an eminent teacher is having trouble with an idea which should already be part of his theology - new birth.

Peter.

show_no_mercy · 05-24-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

Quote:

Originally Posted by show_no_mercy

And you know the intention of the writer?

Context. Becoming like a little child being necessary to enter the Kingdom is a major NT theme.
Jesus does not correct Nicodemus for not getting that he meant "above," but rather he is astonished that an eminent teacher is having trouble with an idea which should already be part of his theology - new birth.

Peter.

This is assuming that [the synoptics] and John have similar salvation themes. The context of John 3 is that a person has to be born of the spirit (from above) in order to see the kingdom of god (this evangelical seems to agree with me). The context of Mark 10:15 is that a person has to have the faith that a child has in their parents in order to see the kingdom of god. This is expanded upon in Matthew and Luke:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke 10:21 / Matthew 11:25

At that same hour Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent and have revealed them to infants; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

But:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark 15:38

και το καταπετασμα του ναου εσχισθη εις δυο απ ανωθεν εως κατω

Surely the curtain of the Temple wasn't torn in half "anew".

Jane H · 05-25-2009, 08:07 AM

Clivedurdle- My use of the word “legalistic” was an anachronism caused by reading an old commentary!

However I'm not convinced the Gospels have got it wrong on the Pharisees. The older view that slipped out of me portrayed the conflict in Matthew 5 and elsewhere as religion/morality (which is wrong), whereas it is actually about politics and eschatology. The question is not “Is the Torah a good thing?”, but “What role does the Torah play for the newly constituted people of God?”. That's the question Jesus is answering. That both the Pharisees and Jesus engaged in Torah intensification is clear enough- it is the end towards which it was directed- how to “do God” that was the subject of the conflict.

The “amalgam of different views” is certainly correct- there would have been a range of views within Pharisaism itself.

JoeWallack- With apologies, but I can't see the point you're making, especially with the link. There's a laugh yet to be had...

Pyrrho- “...till heaven and earth pass...” is an idiom meaning “never”. Note the sentence continues “till all be fulfilled”, which then makes the law time-obsolescent.

arnoldo · 05-30-2009, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voice of reason

Where is this is the New Testament? Is it in the New Testament or is it ambigious and not really there at all?

The Old Testament mentions the arrival of a new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34. .

Quote:

31"The time is coming," declares the LORD,
"when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to them,"
declares the LORD .
33 "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD .
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,"
declares the LORD .
"For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

Fulfillment: 1 Corinthians 11:23-26; Hebrews 8:7-13

http://messianicbible.com/prophecies.asp

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-25-2009, 08:07 AM	#29
Jane H Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: UK Posts: 186	Clivedurdle- My use of the word “legalistic” was an anachronism caused by reading an old commentary! However I'm not convinced the Gospels have got it wrong on the Pharisees. The older view that slipped out of me portrayed the conflict in Matthew 5 and elsewhere as religion/morality (which is wrong), whereas it is actually about politics and eschatology. The question is not “Is the Torah a good thing?”, but “What role does the Torah play for the newly constituted people of God?”. That's the question Jesus is answering. That both the Pharisees and Jesus engaged in Torah intensification is clear enough- it is the end towards which it was directed- how to “do God” that was the subject of the conflict. The “amalgam of different views” is certainly correct- there would have been a range of views within Pharisaism itself. JoeWallack- With apologies, but I can't see the point you're making, especially with the link. There's a laugh yet to be had... Pyrrho- “...till heaven and earth pass...” is an idiom meaning “never”. Note the sentence continues “till all be fulfilled”, which then makes the law time-obsolescent.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.