In Today's gospel lesson we read
(from the NJB) Mark 1: 4. John the Baptist was in the desert, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
5. All Judaea and all the people of Jerusalem made their way to him, and as they were baptized by him in the river Jordan they confessed their sins.
6. John wore a garment of camel-skin, and he lived on locusts and wild honey.
7. In the course of his preaching he said, "After me is coming someone who is more powerful than me, and I am not fit to kneel down and undo the strap of his sandals.
8. I have baptised you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."
9. It was at this time that Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan by John.
10. And at once, as he was coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens torn apart and the Spirit, like a dove, descending on him.
11. And a voice came from heaven, "You are my Son, the Beloved; my favour rests on you."
Do you believe that literally all of Judea and all of Jerusalem cam to John for baptism and confessed their sins or do you believe that the statement is hyperbole meaning many people?:confused:
How many other places in the bible do you see this type of expressionism such as the sun goes around the earth?:confused:
:)Peace and kindness,:)
Fred

The scripture actually is stated as all land.. So John went unto, meaning in the mist of all, all parts country or territory for the inhabitants. (of a whole)

Mark 1:5 And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

Matthew 3:5-6 is witness to Mark 1:5

Matthew 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

So it is more that I am sure that the people who came from all the regions were baptisted.

sndbay
I agree that us what the writer meant, but some folks claim to take the words of the bible literally.
That is the question I was asking.
Do you take the bible literally?
A yes or no answer is all that is needed.
However, comments such as yours are more than just welcome.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

sndbay
I agree that us what the writer meant, but some folks claim to take the words of the bible literally.
That is the question I was asking.
Do you take the bible literally?
A yes or no answer is all that is needed.
However, comments such as yours are more than just welcome.
Peace and kindness,
Fred


Well thank you Fred... Yet some people take that scripture to mean all people of those areas or regions were baptized. That just is not the way it reads. And of course we know the Jews did not come to be baptize, nor do they today.

I can believe all that the bible says... One just has to understand the language in which it was intended, and how the words address to the subject.

Plus sometimes I see that scripture changes in the newer versions then what the King James version stand firm with from the original text. I just have to use the number system to which the original text are locked by.

Have a good day

sndbay,
Then you believe the earth stands still and the sun goes around the earth as the bible indicates.
Is that right?
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Plus sometimes I see that scripture changes in the newer versions then what the King James version stand firm with from the original text.


I'm not sure what you meant by this. Do you mean the KJ Version is the definitive Biblical text?

To answer the question - yes, I believe the Bible is filled with figures of speech including hyperbole.

As to this specific verse, I think it is hyperbole. Certainly the writer could not have literally meant ALL. Interpreting it as "land" may be true, but even then it still seems to be hyperbole.

Athos,
Agreed!
That is part of the reason some folks find the Bible difficult to understand in some areas.
One must remember that the authors of the various books in the bible wrote from their perspective of the world around THEM and in regard to their culture at the time in history they wrote.
An example is the great flood and Noah.
The bible speaks of the flood being a world flood and all people on the world but those in Noah's Aark were killed.
If so how did it happen that others in other parts of this planet recorded the great flood including people in North and South America?
I believe that the author of the story about Noah was writing about the world around him. Folks back in those days did not know of other continents thousands of miles away.
And in those days it appeared that the sun did go around the earth because they saw it rise in the east ans set in the west.
It looked like the earth stood still while the sun moved.
There was no way that they could know that the earth orbited the sun.
It was many hundreds of years later that the truth of that become known.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

sndbay,
Then you believe the earth stands still and the sun goes around the earth as the bible indicates.
Is that right?
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Fred:
I believe the earth was created perfect.. But I would like to read the scripture you have mentioned ? It would be an interesting study. Plus..There are many reflection of things that were important back years ago that today we are ignorant to the comprehension, and yet they remain of the same importance today if we knew the facts. Scripture indicates this to the world and heavenly ages, and our lack to willing acknowledge. (2 Peter 3:5)
And how we don't go beyond the principles of doctrine in Christ. We should be willing to go further in perfection with the Holy Spirit. If God permits we are open to so much more in His will and in service to Him. (Hebrews 6 )

I'm not sure what you meant by this. Do you mean the KJ Version is the definitive Biblical text?

The Kings James Version is safely kept by what is known as the Massorah.. One can look this up on the internet.. The Text itself had been fixed before the Massorites were put in charge of it. This had been the work of the Sopherim. Their work, under Ezra and Nehemiah, was to set the Text in order after the return from Babylon; and we read of it in Neh. 8:8 (*1) (cp. Ezra 7:6, 11). The men of "the Great Synagogue" completed the work. This work lasted about 110 years, from Nehemiah to Simon the first, 410 - 300 B.C.

The Sopherim were the authorized revisers of the Sacred Text; and, their work being completed, the Massorites were the authorized custodians of it. Their work was to preserve it. The Massorah is called "A Fence to the Scriptures," because it locked all words and letters in their places. It does not contain notes or comments as such, but facts and phenomena. It records the number of times the several letters occur in the various books of the Bible; the number of words, and the middle word; the number of verses, and the middle verse; the number of expressions and combinations of words, &c. All this, not from a perverted ingenuity, but for the set purpose of safeguarding the Sacred Text, and preventing the loss of misplacement of a single letter or word.

The Massorah. - Appendix to the Companion Bible (http://levendwater.org/companion/append30.html)

sndbay,
One of the laces in the bible that indicates that is 1 Chron 16: 30. Tremble before him, all the earth!
The world is firm, it cannot be moved.
Also how about there the Bible says that the whole world asked Solomon for advice.
How do you suppose the people in the American continents did that?
Because of those sorts of statements I do not read the bible ultra literally as some folks do.
Rather I try to understand why it was said that way.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

sndbay,
one of the laces in the bible that indicates that is 1 Chron 16: 30. tremble before him, all the earth!
The world is firm, it cannot be moved.
Also how about there the Bible says that the whole world asked Solomon for advice.
How do you suppose the people in the American continents did that?
Because of those sorts of statements I do not read the bible ultra literally as some folks do.
Rather I try to understand why it was said that way.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Fred.. In the verse 30, the world also shall stand stable, we reference this in the language of hebrew to find it means the world stands established... 1 Chronicles 16:23-33 are the same as Psalms 96.. hope that helps..

Please note the scripture where the whole world asked Solomon ?

arcura - OK, here are a couple of thoughts I have regarding this passage.

1) When the text says all Judea and Jerusalem, I don't think it meant every single person. It was most-likely only Jews, not gentiles, nor God-fearers (gentile proselytes). The Jews out of respect for their national heritage and the Torah, would have participated in this event because John was being recognized as a prophet. To not be present might have brought personal ostracization to an individual and perhaps even the scorn of the religious leaders (Pharisees)—which by this time was more the concern of many than anything else.

2) There is no reason, I'd argue, to suspect that the gospel writers (in your reference, Mark) intended to mean every single person alive in these areas— because presumably, as I argued above, many Romans and gentiles lived in Jerusalem and Judea. The writer is assuming the Jewish identity and therefore to say "all" would tacitly mean "all Jews." The baptism event was a Jewish event, and only Jews would have understood the weight of it. A gentile might have looked at the event and shaken his head, saying "there go those crazy Jews again." I'm merely speculating to make a point of why a gentile would not have been present.

jakester
I agree, but the point is that there are many who claim to read the bible absolute literally.
There are many paces in the bible where that attitude is ridiculous including those passages which say the earth stands still (does not move) and therefore dose not orbit the sun.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

1) When the text says all Judea and Jerusalem, I don't think it meant every single person.

2) There is no reason, I'd argue, to suspect that the gospel writers (in your reference, Mark) intended to mean every single person alive in these areas.

Of course not, hence, hyperbole. That is the very point Arcura is making.

Athos
Yes it is.
Fred

It's also interesting to note that the Bible doesn't read itself literally. Think of all the places in the NT where the Prophets need to be explained *allegorically*.

The Kings James Version is safely kept by what is known as the Massorah.. One can look this up on the internet.. The Text itself had been fixed before the Massorites were put in charge of it. This had been the work of the Sopherim. Their work, under Ezra and Nehemiah, was to set the Text in order after the return from Babylon; and we read of it in Neh. 8:8 (*1) (cp. Ezra 7:6, 11). The men of "the Great Synagogue" completed the work. This work lasted about 110 years, from Nehemiah to Simon the first, 410 - 300 B.C.

The Sopherim were the authorized revisers of the Sacred Text; and, their work being completed, the Massorites were the authorized custodians of it. Their work was to preserve it. The Massorah is called "A Fence to the Scriptures," because it locked all words and letters in their places. It does not contain notes or comments as such, but facts and phenomena. It records the number of times the several letters occur in the various books of the Bible; the number of words, and the middle word; the number of verses, and the middle verse; the number of expressions and combinations of words, &c. All this, not from a perverted ingenuity, but for the set purpose of safeguarding the Sacred Text, and preventing the loss of misplacement of a single letter or word.

The Massorah. - Appendix to the Companion Bible (http://levendwater.org/companion/append30.html)

What about the NT? Who was supposed to preserve it?

jakester
I agree, but the point is that there are many who claim to read the bible absolute literally.
There are many paces in the bible where that attitude is ridiculous including those passages which say the earth stands still (does not move) and therefore dose not orbit the sun.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Sorry, my tone may have suggested that I felt you were defending an abosolute literal rendering of the bible at every junction... I was actually siding with you in that the bible is not to be taken absolutely literally in every passage. For example, when Jesus says "if your right eye offends you, pluck it out; for it better to enter into heaven with one eye than into hellfire with both." I have heard stories of Middle Age believers cutting their eyes out as an act of piety... that's insanity; definitely. So, I agree with you, arcura... sorry I did not make that clearer.

However, I would add one thing. People sometimes fail to account for the parts which are to be taken literally and in those instances, argue for non-literal interpretation. Arcura, what are your thoughts on that? For instance, when Jesus walks on water, some try to argue the text is really saying that it was the writer's impression that he walked on the water but had experienced an optical illusion but chose to document it anyway (i.e. in the desert, the heatwaves can create an optical illusion to look like someone is walking through or on water). It's outlandish but there are people who would try to argue that. What do you think about judging between literal and non-literal interpretations?

Jakester,
I believe that the recording of Jesus miracles is relatively true.
However I also believe that in some cases where number are used that they mean differntly such as 1000 means a lot, 5000 means much more than just a lot.
That is such as in the feeding of 5000 men. That's not counting women and children which could number over 15,000 people on a hill top.
Your point about Jesus walking on water is well made.
The rest of that story is that Peter also walked on water out to Jesus but began to sink when he became frightened and his faith shaken.
The rest of the story says the walking on water was indeed taking place.
The literalists who bother me are those who do not want to believ what the bible does literally say such as that Jesus was talking directly to and about Peter when Jesus called Simon "Peter" the rock on which ke would build His Church.
And another example is when Jesus said this IS my body, and this IS my blood.
He was not talking symbolically as other passage in the bible indicate, but there are those literalists who try to claim he meant something else.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

What about the NT? Who was supposed to preserve it?

Historically Christianaity clearly is founded by Jesus through the church instrument of the Apostles. The Apostles wrote in written form the word of God. Thus we have the New Testament.

John wrote in the gospel, this is a disciple bearing witness to these things. We also confirm that each testamony was given by at least three each time. This would ensample the evident idenity of God's intervention for that which was written. The New Testament grew organically by the church under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit..

Noting that Christianity was not founded by the New Testament but rather by the Apostles instructions which is the summary of the New Testament.

The discoverage of the written inspirition of God is known as the Muratorian Canon which was dated 190, and discovered in 1740. By the end of the 4th century under the influence of St Augustine bishops met at the councils of Hippo and Carthage. They, at that time, accepted books known today as the New Testament. This further was worked by Martin Luther which brought about changes that eliminated some of the original books. After which when the council of Trent decreed on the matter in the sixteenth century it merely formalized what had been accepted for well over thirteen centuries.

sndbay,
The new Testament CLEARLY says the Jesus founded what He called "My Church" and the apostles did the work with Peter as the Jesus appointed leader.
Not only that but real authentic History also says so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

sndbay,
The new Testament CLEARLY says the Jesus founded what He called "My Church" and the apostles did the work with Peter as the Jesus appointed leader.
Not only that but real authentic History also says so.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Fred: My post in #21 says founded by Jesus,so I feel we agree...

By Christ, the right hand of God; the heart of flesh being the Love/Grace of God, was the corner stone that was the frame work that the Apostles and prophets were instructed to teach. And thus formed together an inhabitant for God. Their mind set within was directed in the heart of love for Christ, by the Holy Spirit. (Christianity) The two are connected as One with The Father... The church is the House of God that teaches Christianity..

Somehow people have to accept that Our Father reveals in the mist of the heart, mind and soul of each individual. It is those hearts, minds, and souls that find fellowship within the House of God and the teaching of Christianity.

Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner [stone];

Eph 2:21 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

The question I answered was concerning the New Testament.. The New Testament grew organically by the church under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit..

sndbay,
Like Jesus I also pray for fellowship and unity for and with all those who love and followJesus.
Peace and kindness,'
Fred

Fred, There is a web site I think you might be interested in. It is called Gospel Research Foundation. Com. Dr. Brad Young, a professor at ORU and a well know bible scholar is rewriting the new testament and has a few chapters completed. He believes that there is wrong wording when it was translated from the hebrew to the greek. You can check it all out by going to his web site. Believe me it is worth it.

Maggie 3

Maggie 3,
If and when Dr. Brad Young get his done and if it is very well recognized by highly accredited bible scholars THEN I will be interested in his work, not before.
Many people have rewritten the bible to fit what they either think should be said or what they want it to say.
I'll stick with those versions of the bible that most well recognized scholars agree are very good and accurate.
I have 8 different versions of the bible and compare what they say as a way to study the bible.
I find that the ones that are most accurate are the New American Version, The New Jerusalem Bible, and the Revised Standard.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Fred, There is a web site I think you might be interested in. It is called Gospel Research Foundation. com. Dr. Brad Young, a professor at ORU and a well know bible scholar is rewriting the new testament and has a few chapters completed. He believes that there is wrong wording when it was translated from the hebrew to the greek. You can check it all out by going to his web site. Believe me it is worth it.

Maggie 3

Maggie, From what I have viewed of Dr Brad translation, it is worth reading. I particularly favored chapter 6 on baptism. Throughtout his writing the names/ Christ Jesus, for example were the given names/ Anointed One Yeshua.

If people are aware of certain translations that have disappeared from the original hebrew and greek text, then Dr Brad work is a glance of a small extent to what disappeared.

www.gospelresearch.org (http://www.gospelresearch.org/)

Sndbay, I have got to know Brad Young from watching him on GLC TV. He has a program
Where he teaches and also tells about the bible he is writing. He lived in Isreal for 10
Years studying hebrew. Dr Young will be on GLC Saturday at 4:30 pm MT. You can watch
Him on the computer if would like. At ptcb.com (http://www.ptcb.com)
Just thought I would let you know.

Maggie 3

he teaches and also tells about the bible he is writing.

Hi Maggie 3. I've seen you refer to this before and I was wondering what you mean when you mention the Bible he is "writing". Is he doing his own new translation, or is he writing a kind of summary or re-working of the Bible? I've seen these before, so I wondered if he is doing something like this. Do you know, I mean, has he said?

Akoue,
Very good questions.
I assumed he was translating a new version.
Fred

Akoue & Fred, I am sorry for the way I put it, I am not too
Good at explaining myself. It is my understanding he is translating the bible in an English
Wording, because words in bibles mean one thing in one language and something else in another, giving you a wrong view of what is really said. He has spent many years studying and working on this. But the best way to have a clear understanding of what is going on is go to his web site and read about it. I am excited
About this translation because I can get a better understanding of what the hebrew writers of the bible were really saying. And what a big difference it will make in our
Understanding of the bible.

Maggie 3

Maggie 3
There already is a bible out there that does that.
The Composite bible has several versions in it and shows the different meaning of words from other languages.
Sometimes the meaning of a word changes depending on the context of the passage or verse.
It is very good for bible study.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Peace and kindness,
Fred

seeker08
That is an interesting point.
Thanks for making it.
It calls for some pondering.
Peace and kindness,
Fred