Posted on 01/27/2008 7:56:14 PM PST by Manfred the Wonder Dawg
Not sure where the double posts are coming from. Will try and be more careful! LOL.
Thank you so very much for your encouragements, dear brother in Christ!
Without the resurrection how does Peter gain acceptance after denying Jesus three times. Without the resurrection why would the Apostles who fled come back to preach THE GOSPEL knowing that crucifixion was a possibility for them. It is more likely that without the resurrection the Apostles would have stayed home and gone back to their old lives.
Human action tells the truth.
>>Some of us may have thought it, but you said it.<<<
Figured that’s what you were thinking, and thought I’d help you out.
You don’t have to thank me....
More importantly, have a blessed Lent.
RD
“It is more likely that without the resurrection the Apostles would have stayed home and gone back to their old lives.”
Even with the resurrection they went home to the old occupation.
John 21:1-3, “After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed he himself. There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples. Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately; and that night they caught nothing.”
But even so, their lives were never the same after the resurrection. Spiritually they were changed.
Great point!!! Let's read one of them:
"And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon." [Rev 9:11]
That word "abaddon" comes directly out of the Biblical Hebrew, and from the Biblical Hebrew word "abaddown" meaning "destruction" and is found in Biblical Hebrew passages such as Esther 9:5, Job 26:6, 31:12, Psalm 88:11, Proverbs 15:11, 27:20.
Therefore, when John is using the word "Hebraisti" [Hebrew], as the inscription on the cross, he must mean Hebrew from the same source -- as if there is any other.
Jews were always looking for a sign/miracles. Even when He performed them, they didn’t believe He was their Messiah (the Messiah was supposed to perform miracles). They attributed some of it to the devil. Jesus couldn’t win with them no matter what (LOL)!
Oh, thank you Q. It is a Catholic (Ash) Wednesday. This year, our Calendars do not coincide. Since all EOs celebrate Easter according to the Old Calendar (makes you wonder why did some bother changing to the New one for all other events?!), our Great and Holy Lent (fast) will start in the latter part of March and end at the close of April.
Easter cannot precede Passover, as it happens with New Calendar churches. Also our Lent starts and ends on a Sunday (the Lord's Day), never on Wednesday. Ours also lasts a little longer (usually 42 days). But I appreciate the thought.
And what if that word is the same in Aramaic (Chaldee)?
Goodness . . . What a mess of convolutions!
Ah well, good wishes for brothers are not wasted.
Blessings in February, too.
“But even so, their lives were never the same after the resurrection. Spiritually they were changed.”
Don’t you think it was the Pentecost event that caused the change in their thinking and lives? It seems to me that even at the time of Jesus’ ascension they were still thinking in terms of an earthly kingdom and their places in it?
Then the word would be the same in the Hebrew [Hebraisti], the Aramaic [Syriac], and the Chaldean [Chaldaios] like some words are and some words aren't.
Mind-reading? 8~)
Exactly what I was thinking about.
Once they were back fishing, why do a 180 unless something happened?
I’m sure you’re right but the resurrection HAD to have impacted them. Once anyone is filled with the HS, their lives change.
“Once anyone is filled with the HS, their lives change.”
That was the Pentecost event and when the Holy Spirit came and filled them with his presence he brought all that Jesus said and did to their remembrance, just as Jesus said he would and does for us today. My problem is as I get older, I conveniently forget.
Actually Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit on the Apostles shortly after the Resurrection. The two stories don't mash.
Well, the Greeks say Hebraisti is Chaldee and the Jews say they spoke Aramaic. I believe tboth becuase it is about their langue. The Latins obviously translated it incorrectly, and through the Latins the error spread throughout the west.
In Greek, Ioudaisti is (OT) Hebrew. Ioudiasti is not used in the NT. It is perhaps unfortunate that they called Chaldee Hebraisti because they should have known there would be obtuse literalist translators who will create confusion and heresy in the west.
Absolutely. It was perfectly consistent with Judaic expectation of an earthly, human Messiah, a favorite of God (God's adopted, not littera, Son—a title reserved for angles and kings, who were anointed, which is what meshiyah/messiah means).
In fact, the first three Gospels never say that Jesus is God (they call Him Lord, but that's not reserved only for God), and they never pray to the Resurrected Christ or to the Holy Spirit. The verses you posted on the rich man and a beggar show that Luke (post resurrection) still did not have a concept of heaven, but only of Shoel.
In Judaism such terminology as the Kingdom of God, World to Come, Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah, Spirit (of God), etc. have completely different menings from those created by Christians.
This is like reading Robert Frost who says "my horse must think it queer to stop without a farmhouse near..." and not realize that the meaning of the word "queer" had undergone a radical change between 1920's and 1970's.
The Kingdom of God to the Jews means Israel, on earth. The Son of God is a title of God's favorites (angels and kings); the word messiah means the anointed one, a kingly human mortal whose identity must meet seven qualifying characteristics, of which Jesus meets only one! So, no wonder they didn't want to accept Him as messiah. The word Son of Man (ben adam) means simply the son of Adam, a descendent of Adam, a human being, of Adam's seed, etc. In Christianity the Son of man has this mysterious aura surrounding only Jesus.
Christian theology, like the bible, did not just fall from the sky, neatly tallied and organized into chapters and lessons. It had to undergo its own evolution which took most of the remining first century and then a few centuries to come. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to relaize thet Paul didn't always teach what the Christians teach today. He calls Jesus an "image of God" and is someone who was "raised by God" but he never calls Him God, nor does he pray to the Resurrected Jesus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.