The dead don't know anything, and can't talk or praise the LORD

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Scribe

Guest
#81
There is no insistence that anyone agree with what I have determined in my studies. I wonder just how people know the Author of all the Word, Who is the Word and He is our Maker would need to read in what you have declared to be eternal truth here? Now you did not say it is, however when dealing with what you Savior is and has done for us all, it would be eternal.
No, I am not actually saying you must believe me, but it is always good to pray for true knowledge from our father, for the knowledge of this age is truly foolish mess come the Kingdome.
So they did not have to be saying his name in Hebrew at the time of Christ for the teaching about saying the name in Hebrew to be valid correct? I get that. It is a matter of personal preference and I am totally on board with each persons right to such things. Whether it be observing a holyday or a sabbath or a diet or what language and pronunciation they prefer to address God or Jesus. That I can support for my brothers and sisters.

To suggest that the apostles all said it using Hebrew rather than Aramaic or to say that those of other languages must figure out exactly what pronunciation the apostles used and say it just exactly that way is what will make such teachers be viewed as false to the rest of us. It is not antisemitism but rather anti false teaching that repulses us.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,465
6,722
113
#82
So they did not have to be saying his name in Hebrew at the time of Christ for the teaching about saying the name in Hebrew to be valid correct? I get that. It is a matter of personal preference and I am totally on board with each persons right to such things. Whether it be observing a holyday or a sabbath or a diet or what language and pronunciation they prefer to address God or Jesus. That I can support for my brothers and sisters.

To suggest that the apostles all said it using Hebrew rather than Aramaic or to say that those of other languages must figure out exactly what pronunciation the apostles used and say it just exactly that way is what will make such teachers be viewed as false to the rest of us. It is not antisemitism but rather anti false teaching that repulses us.
My only hope is that all who call upone our Savior's name are aware of its meaning, My Redeemer, God. Yeshi is my Redeemer, and Yah is from Yahweh or God Who will be What He will Be.

I believe most do, but many seem too not.

I am very happy to know you do not mind people calling Yeshua by the same name His parents and Apostles called Him. I feel very much assured.
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,974
113
#83
ZEP. 3:9.
For then will I turn to the people a 'pure language', that they may all call upon the name of The LORD,
to serve Him with 'one consent'.
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#84
Moses was resurrected before CHRIST was resurrected,
Not resurrected but didn't die. The argument between Michael and Satan for Moses's body is about this. Jesus conquered death not Moses.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,989
13,627
113
#85
Not resurrected but didn't die. The argument between Michael and Satan for Moses's body is about this. Jesus conquered death not Moses.
:unsure:


So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD, and He buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
(Deuteronomy 34:5-7)
i don't think we're seeing Moses in his resurrected body at the transfiguration, because 'what we shall be has not yet been manifested' ((1 John 3:2)) but i think it's clear he died, in the physical sense...?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,989
13,627
113
#86
The argument between Michael and Satan for Moses's body is about this.
my pastor's been teaching on this topic for the last several months; we're not done yet for sure, we never will be ((ha!)), but he gave an incomplete list of the associated scriptures he felt is the minimum necessary to solve 'why' Satan is doing this, week before last. let me see if i can find it..
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,989
13,627
113
#87
my pastor's been teaching on this topic for the last several months; we're not done yet for sure, we never will be ((ha!)), but he gave an incomplete list of the associated scriptures he felt is the minimum necessary to solve 'why' Satan is doing this, week before last. let me see if i can find it..
@Benadam here:

Deuteronomy 18:15
Deuteronomy 34:5-12
Genesis 2:7
Romans 5:14
Psalm 16:10
Ezekiel 1:4
2 Kings 2:1
2 Kings 2:11
Genesis 5:22-25
Matthew 21:31
Genesis 24:13
2 Kings 13:20-21
Matthew 17:1-3
Genesis 1:3-4 ((this is the heart of it))
John 8:12
Exodus 3:14
John 11:25
Job 1:9-12
1 Timothy 2:14
Romans 5:14
Exodus 3:2-6
Job 2:1-10
Genesis 3:4
Job 38:7
Job 3
Job 42:13-15
Ezekiel 28
Isaiah 14:12-14
Psalm 10
2 Peter 3:8-9
Genesis 1:2
Genesis 1:6-7
Revelation 21:1
Revelation 21:22
Matthew 25:31-33
Zechariah 4:11-14
Revelation 11:4
Revelation 11:7-10
Revelation 11:11-14

= Jude 9

((and of course each of these verses have a dozen other passages related to them that have to be studied to understand each))



. . . you can see maybe why our study of the book of Joel has gone on for 3 years now and we're probably just a quarter of the way into it :ROFL:
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#88
:unsure:


So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD, and He buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
(Deuteronomy 34:5-7)
i don't think we're seeing Moses in his resurrected body at the transfiguration, because 'what we shall be has not yet been manifested' ((1 John 3:2)) but i think it's clear he died, in the physical sense...?
What is in-between? He is with someone who didn't die. I think the argument and the circumstances that surround his burial ...add up .....maybe the Lord corrected Satan in the desert?
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#89
@Benadam here:

Deuteronomy 18:15
Deuteronomy 34:5-12
Genesis 2:7
Romans 5:14
Psalm 16:10
Ezekiel 1:4
2 Kings 2:1
2 Kings 2:11
Genesis 5:22-25
Matthew 21:31
Genesis 24:13
2 Kings 13:20-21
Matthew 17:1-3
Genesis 1:3-4 ((this is the heart of it))
John 8:12
Exodus 3:14
John 11:25
Job 1:9-12
1 Timothy 2:14
Romans 5:14
Exodus 3:2-6
Job 2:1-10
Genesis 3:4
Job 38:7
Job 3
Job 42:13-15
Ezekiel 28
Isaiah 14:12-14
Psalm 10
2 Peter 3:8-9
Genesis 1:2
Genesis 1:6-7
Revelation 21:1
Revelation 21:22
Matthew 25:31-33
Zechariah 4:11-14
Revelation 11:4
Revelation 11:7-10
Revelation 11:11-14


= Jude 9

((and of course each of these verses have a dozen other passages related to them that have to be studied to understand each))



. . . you can see maybe why our study of the book of Joel has gone on for 3 years now and we're probably just a quarter of the way into it :ROFL:
Thank you! I'll definitely read the passages
 
Aug 16, 2020
282
55
28
Central Florida, USA
#90
And I have seen the fruit of the Hebrew Roots movement for decades now and I reject it as another form of Judaism/Gnosticism which has been around since the beginning of the church. Nothing antisemitic about that and claiming antisemiticism is like pulling the race card when there is no good defence. I am not intimidated. :)

As to your Masters in Theology, it is difficult to imagine being able to graduate without knowing that Aramaic was the common language of the Jews at the time of Christ. Modern textbooks, oldest text books, or ancient historians all agree.
But no one ever concedes in CC so we can just move on. :)
AGAIN, I am indeed aware of the current attitude among gentile scholars that Aramaic was the predominant language of Israel in Jesus' time. Please stop insisting I'm not aware of it. It is this awareness I question.

AGAIN, I assert this assumption may be flawed. These flaws have been discovered in archaeological sites in Israel as well as other nations in the Arab community. I personally walked a dig in Bahrain many years ago that had uncovered some unusual cultural facts about Solomon's kingdom. The government of Bahrain erected a monument to celebrate the discoveries there. Please don't live in the same antique attitude as those who don't get their hands dirty searching for truth. Scholars who live in dusty closets cannot be assumed to hold all things to be accurate. One has to go out there and dig, sometimes literally.

I've studied the nature of Hebrew poetry in Psalms and Proverbs. You must admit few Christians are aware it even exists. I've pointed out the existence of Hebrew idioms in the gospel of Matthew that indicate its origin wasn't Aramaic or Greek. Those idioms are there to be discovered by anyone who reads the English version of the gospel. And and and, most sentences begin with And. That's a Hebrew idiom, not Aramaic or Greek. It's not proof of course, but it's a very heavy suggestion to be sure. And that's very plain to be read, again And again And again. And it's almost aggravating to read it. And I'm sure the read must agree.

AGAIN, I was employed at a local college. During that time I interviewed professors about the efficacy of students' use of Wikipedia for research. They generally felt that Wikipedia was doing a good job of filtering information. Read the bottom of any article and you may find additions written there for clarification. I've entered a few myself and had them published there. Professors do NOT, however, consider Wikipedia the final word on anything. Ask one. Every one I consulted considered references to Wikipedia to be one of several that must be included in any student bibliography. Surely those who seek Biblical truth in historic/scholarly references ought to do the same.

AGAIN, I wish to reiterate to the reader that Hebrew was used much more than has been assumed by the gentile academic community.

For instance, I'm aware of a growing trend among Jews who study Hebrew that the written words contain musical notation. I've personally attended a few concerts by a fellow who had studied Hebrew as musical notation for many years. He even learned how to build his own harp to play them.

This is a strange development and appears to have been inspired (by something) consistently across political and geographic boundaries at the same time with the same results. The fellow I listened to played and sang several of the psalms of David, which were composed in Hebrew literary style and incorporated Hebrew musical notation in the actual Hebrew words. The melody was very soothing. I can understand now how King Saul was calmed from his demonic ravings by them.

You and I are certainly aware of the insistence of gentiles that Aramaic was predominant. You ought also be aware that these same scholars, hidden away in their dusty library stacks, are as incapable of intellectual change as the mountains are that stretch into the sky. It's a fact of life, academically speaking. I know because I worked and studied among them for many years.

It's up to those who are independent of the pressures felt by professional scholars to glean the truth of things. The journey is the reward as much as the treasure found in it.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
 
Aug 16, 2020
282
55
28
Central Florida, USA
#91
It occurs to me that there were no denominations quite yet at the time of Jesus-Yeshua. The umbrella title, Judaism, cropped up either right after His departure or a bit longer.

These of Judea considered themselves the descendants of Israel with the faith of Abraham. The only religion they had ever had was the Pentateuch, the Writings, and the Prophets.

Israel had completely strayed from what was the format at the time of Moses writings being implemented as a kind of theocratic constitution for all who believe God.

It would seem , had any in Judea taught anything related to the faith of Abraham in any other language than Hebrew would most likely offend even the least hypocritical of the hypocrites.

Yes the spirit of apostasy was quite prevalent, even at the time of Jesus-Yeshua for already there were at least three "schools of thought" on how one must practice his faith. Thought \, here, here should reveal the error of all three.

The so-called Israel on our maps today does not even begin to reflect the Israel outlined in the books of the Old Testament, nor the Israel given us by our Father.

And so the great apostasy continues its growth. Maranatha, as some borrow this transliteration from the Greek.
I agree with your post.

Without going into details as to why or how these labels were affixed to Jews or Judaism, it can be truly said that very much of gentile attitudes about Jews, Jewish history or even the Tanakh books (Old Testament) is anti-semitic. Sometimes it's hidden even from folks who are unaware of it and sometimes it's more overt. Mostly its the former.

In the days of Solomon, the borders of Israel extended from the Nile (Egypt) to the Euphrates (Iraq), from the southern regions of the Caucasus Mountains (Russia) to the waters of the Red Sea and what we call the Persian Gulf. All of this was said to be given to Israel by God.

I must add here that the present State of Israel, literally its land or Eretz, was predicted by the Bible as having been given to Jews by God. The Qur'an agrees, though most Muslims, who are too afflicted with hatred of anything Jewish would admit to it.

And We made the people who were deemed weak to inherit the eastern lands and the western ones which We had blessed; and the good word of your Lord was fulfilled in the children of Israel because they bore up (sufferings) patiently; and We utterly destroyed what Firon (pharaoh) and his people had wrought and what they built. - Qur’an 7.137

And when Musa (Moses) said to his people: O my people! remember the favor of Allah upon you when He raised prophets among you and made you kings and gave you what He had not given to any other among the nations. O my people! enter the holy land which Allah has prescribed for you and turn not on your backs for then you will turn back losers. - Our’an 5.20-21

And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment. - Qur’an 17.104

And surely they purposed to unsettle you from the land that they might expel you from it, and in that case they will not tarry behind you but a little. - Qur’an 17.76 (Mohammads' [pbuh] prophecy of attempts to remove Jews from Palestine)

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#92
AGAIN, I am indeed aware of the current attitude among gentile scholars that Aramaic was the predominant language of Israel in Jesus' time. Please stop insisting I'm not aware of it. It is this awareness I question.

AGAIN, I assert this assumption may be flawed. These flaws have been discovered in archaeological sites in Israel as well as other nations in the Arab community. I personally walked a dig in Bahrain many years ago that had uncovered some unusual cultural facts about Solomon's kingdom. The government of Bahrain erected a monument to celebrate the discoveries there. Please don't live in the same antique attitude as those who don't get their hands dirty searching for truth. Scholars who live in dusty closets cannot be assumed to hold all things to be accurate. One has to go out there and dig, sometimes literally.

I've studied the nature of Hebrew poetry in Psalms and Proverbs. You must admit few Christians are aware it even exists. I've pointed out the existence of Hebrew idioms in the gospel of Matthew that indicate its origin wasn't Aramaic or Greek. Those idioms are there to be discovered by anyone who reads the English version of the gospel. And and and, most sentences begin with And. That's a Hebrew idiom, not Aramaic or Greek. It's not proof of course, but it's a very heavy suggestion to be sure. And that's very plain to be read, again And again And again. And it's almost aggravating to read it. And I'm sure the read must agree.

AGAIN, I was employed at a local college. During that time I interviewed professors about the efficacy of students' use of Wikipedia for research. They generally felt that Wikipedia was doing a good job of filtering information. Read the bottom of any article and you may find additions written there for clarification. I've entered a few myself and had them published there. Professors do NOT, however, consider Wikipedia the final word on anything. Ask one. Every one I consulted considered references to Wikipedia to be one of several that must be included in any student bibliography. Surely those who seek Biblical truth in historic/scholarly references ought to do the same.

AGAIN, I wish to reiterate to the reader that Hebrew was used much more than has been assumed by the gentile academic community.

For instance, I'm aware of a growing trend among Jews who study Hebrew that the written words contain musical notation. I've personally attended a few concerts by a fellow who had studied Hebrew as musical notation for many years. He even learned how to build his own harp to play them.

This is a strange development and appears to have been inspired (by something) consistently across political and geographic boundaries at the same time with the same results. The fellow I listened to played and sang several of the psalms of David, which were composed in Hebrew literary style and incorporated Hebrew musical notation in the actual Hebrew words. The melody was very soothing. I can understand now how King Saul was calmed from his demonic ravings by them.

You and I are certainly aware of the insistence of gentiles that Aramaic was predominant. You ought also be aware that these same scholars, hidden away in their dusty library stacks, are as incapable of intellectual change as the mountains are that stretch into the sky. It's a fact of life, academically speaking. I know because I worked and studied among them for many years.

It's up to those who are independent of the pressures felt by professional scholars to glean the truth of things. The journey is the reward as much as the treasure found in it.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...
Thank you for your well written reply. I am open to any discoveries that contribute to our information of daily life and culture of the time of Christ.

I know that it is not a perfect science. We are always discovering new information to add to the whole picture of what life was like at that time. And yet we have an abundance of information that contributes to the understanding that Aramaic was probably what Peter spoke on the day of Pentecost, but it can't really be proven. He might have spoken in Greek. It is highly unlikely that he spoke in Hebrew. Can we know for sure? No, because it does not say. Does it matter? Not to me. It does not change anything or contribute to the message.

Maybe it is not known so that people can't make a particular language "The magic Language" or religion. ..hmmmm :unsure:
 
Aug 16, 2020
282
55
28
Central Florida, USA
#93
Thank you for your well written reply. I am open to any discoveries that contribute to our information of daily life and culture of the time of Christ.

I know that it is not a perfect science. We are always discovering new information to add to the whole picture of what life was like at that time. And yet we have an abundance of information that contributes to the understanding that Aramaic was probably what Peter spoke on the day of Pentecost, but it can't really be proven. He might have spoken in Greek. It is highly unlikely that he spoke in Hebrew. Can we know for sure? No, because it does not say. Does it matter? Not to me. It does not change anything or contribute to the message.

Maybe it is not known so that people can't make a particular language "The magic Language" or religion. ..hmmmm :unsure:
ok so now I'm going to make some assertions that generally don't sit well with post-protestant Christians. Be advised I'm not directing them at you personally.
* * *
It does seem to make a difference as to original language of the apostles and the documents of the New Testament. Of primary concern are the core meanings of linguistic essentials. Meanings can be lost in translation and interpretation. Sometimes these alterations in meaning are deliberate. I assert that with regard to the modern post-protestant church this is more often true than not.

The reader should bear in mind that the entire Bible, except for the gospel of Luke and book of Acts, is written BY Jews FOR Jews.

The reader should be aware that in the days of the early church as many as 33% of Jews living at the time believed that God became man and walked among us. (John 1:14) However, that blessed arrangement didn't last long.

Very early in the history of the church gentile anti-semitism played a large role in rejecting Jewish membership, Jewish tradition and Jewish ideology. By the third century, Jews were not included in worship services, Bible studies or fellowship at all unless they converted to gentile liturgical traditions. Today many post-protestant Christians do not -at all- acknowledge the Biblical assertion that God became man. The idea that Jews provided the bedrock of their religion is anathema (shunned) - original language notwithstanding.

It's been suggested that the original language of Hebrew wasn't used by anyone of Jesus' time, despite a growing preponderance of evidence that it was in use. This rejection of the Hebrew language opens the door to gentile interpretation of scripture and rejection of Hebrew interpretation of the Tanakh. The result of this attitude is that all sorts of anti-semitic assumptions are made (such as Replacement Theology) as well as dogmatic theology that has no place either in human logic or perverse Biblical interpretation (such as Jesuit Futurism and post-protestant Dispensationalism).

Rejection of anything traditionally Jewish, including their own language, is a symptom of gentile hatred of God's people. The Bible says this is evidence of spiritual warfare and that God opposes it. The reader would do well to consider the consequences of their assumptions.

We live in changing times. Sometimes the changes are good ones.

that's me, hollering from the choir loft...