Teilhard de Chardin came to a similar conclusion. There are many ways to approach ultimate truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
|
Teilhard de Chardin came to a similar conclusion. There are many ways to approach ultimate truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Ok, I'll take the last word - thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
I'm truly sorry for upsetting you. That was never my intention. I respect your belief. I even have beliefs of my own that lack proof or evidence. When I offer them, I say as much and never claim they are "true" in any sense other than my own believing.
When people say, "You can't prove that", I agree, tip my hat, and go on my way. But my beliefs remain my beliefs.
Yes this really is getting tiresome. I tend to be very precise in my use of the language. The fact is, a fact you have agreed with, is that there is great difficulty in providing absolute proof in historical records. The older the record the greater the difficulty to the point that it becomes impossible. So we agree on that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Where we continue to disagree is your statement that historical study requires a different set of rules. Historical study has to contend with this fact, but that doesn't mean there are different rules. It means the historian has to couch his comments by saying," I believe..." or "the evidence shows ME that..." or similar qualifications. That is the point I was making to the OP. One cannot "know" something that is a matter of opinion not fact.
For you to continue to claim that the above point has not been verified by your own words, is ridiculous. You are setting up your own rules for discussion, just as I did. But since I opened that part of the discussion, you have to deal with the rules I established.
Triund,Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
Before Moses, it was a matter of faith. Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness. Joseph trusted God and was used to rescue his family from a famine and establish them in a place where they could grow into a nation. As for people who weren't part of Israel, look no further than Ruth. When decision time came, she chose to go with Naomi and follow Naomi's God. That trust earned her a place as one of three women mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus. Rahab is another good example; she realized the God of Israel was the one to follow and acted on her belief by hiding Joshua's spies and helping them escape.
When Moses brought the law down from Sinai and they built the tabernacle - and later the temple in Jerusalem - numerous sacrifices and rites were established. We now know, looking back from the New Testament, that those sacrifices etc. were looking ahead to the Ultimate sacrifice in Jesus himself. When someone trusted in the sacrifice that God had ordained to provide forgiveness for their sins, it was an act of faith and they were in fact forgiven, based on the Sacrifice that was to come. Again, we can only know this in retrospect, but the best we can gather, that's how it worked. Getting right with God and hence going to heaven at death has always been a matter of faith. The faith needed has always been based on the amount of revelation God has given people up to that time.
An excellent question!
[QUOTE=I Newton;2337632]Hi Triund
Quote:
If you want to go by the Bible, Jesus specifically said that no man has gone to heaven. You can quibble about word meanings etc, but that is what he said.
Please provide the actual scripture to back up your claim where Jesus specifically said that.
If you are confused about what the scriptures say it is because you don't understand how to rightly divide the word of truth. My Bible says this:Quote:
The only scriptures we have that may confuse us is ones that say that some men were taken up into the heavens, which of course could mean into the heavens where birds fly so as to provide a means of escape for them so they would not die at that moment.
1Corithinans 2:14 For God is not the author of confusion
HUH? Scripture please... back it up. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. I really need the scripture you are referring to where Jesus said no one has gone to heaven before him. BACK up your statements please.Quote:
The other scripture has us considering a vision of Moses and Elijah with Jesus. You can believe that this vision contradicts Jesus word that no man has gone to heaven before him or you can believe that no man DID go to heaven before Jesus.
Quote:
Jesus even spoke of John the Baptist being the greatest man on earth but even the lowest in heaven is greater than John. (John was dead at this time, so if you want to think that men went to heaven before Jesus, you would have to believe that John was not one of them
HUH?
?Quote:
Then of course, if people did go to heaven before Jesus came to earth, then there was nothing that had to be saved.
Quote:
Lazerus did not go to heaven, he was to remain in the ground until the last day when all from the tombs would hear Jesus voice and come out of the tombs.
Jesus death gave us salvation, gave us forgiveness so we could go to heaven.
Those who did not hear the word, but had good hearts would have been taken to heaven when Jesus opened the way.
Everyone had the chance to be forgiven and later go to heaven, but the Jews were chosen as God's special people; to stand out from the rest. They had God's teachings and guidance and so they also had great responsibility to do as he said.
The other nations did not have such responsibility; hence they were left to fend for themselves.
But they too were accepted into heaven when Jesus cleansed the sins of everyone; not just the Jews, not just Catholics, not just Protestants.
God is not partial, anyone can be a Jew. But if you take on the role of a Jew, you must also live up to his standards; that is the responsibility the modern day 'Jew' has to face.
What in the WORLD are you talking about. You aren't backing anything up with scripture. I don't know what you mean about Lazarus remained dead in the ground and the tomb... huh? What?
I Newton, please back up the things you say with scripture. I don't understand what you are saying but it sure isn't from the Bible.
Wrong! You should have said; some (even many) now BELIEVE...Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Again wrong! You should have said: Christians believe this in retrospect, based on the writings in the New Testament that's how it worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Now that is right on!Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Truind,
From what I can see in scripture before the death and resurrection of Christ all of the people who had faith in God were covered because of their faith. They went to a place called "paradise". That is what the Lord Jesus called it on the cross when he told the thief beside him... "today thou shalt be with me in paradise' see Luke 23:43
The Lord Jesus also told us this:
Luke 16:22The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried, He ( the rich man) went to hell, where he was constantly tortured. As he looked up, in the distance he saw Abraham and Lazarus ( the poor man)24 He yelled, 'Father Abraham! Have mercy on me! Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water to cool off my tongue. I am suffering in this fire.'"Abraham replied, 'Remember, my child, that you had a life filled with good times, while Lazarus' life was filled with misery. Now he has peace here, while you suffer.Besides, a wide area separates us. People couldn't cross it in either direction even if they wanted to.]
I believe this is a picture of where the people who had died before the resurrection of Christ went. One side was paradise, the other side was a place of torment and they couldn't cross over.
Check out what Samuel said to Saul when he had a witch bring Samuel back after he had physcially died:
1 Samuel 28:15
Why have you disturbed me by calling me back?" Samuel asked Saul. ( samuel was obviously alive spirtually speaking and didn't appreciate the disturbance.)
Jesus also told the Jews when they were questioning about ressurection this :
Mark 12:26Now about the dead rising--have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'?He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken.
Also David after he lost his first baby with Bathseheba said this:
But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me." 2 Samuel 12:23 So this baby went somewhere and David knew he'd be there with him someday...
So, Check it out. Jesus tells the thief beside him on the cross that he would be with him that very day in Paradise. ( That was before the resurrection of Christ)
The Lord Jesus tells us that God is the God of the Living.. not the dead. So where were these people who had faith and died before the resurrection??
Well according to the Lord Jesus: a place called paradise. These men and women of faith were waiting for the Lord to die and rise again so they could be taken to God the Father. Which is where anyone now who has faith in Christ Jesus goes... according to the N.T.scriptures. The Apsotle Paul puts it this way for believers in Christ... to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. 2 Corthians 5:8
With all due regards, I want to let you know that I fully understand the words know, faith and belief. The base of usage of word "know" is rooted in the Bible. I do not know what is Jesus to you. But for me HE other than HIS other attributes, is very strong and the most talked about historical figure too. And if you do not recognise Jesus' historical attribute on this earth, then I do not think I should go further on explaining why I used "know".Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottGem
I do not know what are your beliefs and faiths but I never try to be disrespectful to anybody. You can check my posts on this site. You enjoy your beliefs and I very satisfied with mine. God be with you.
Classy (and you do live up to your name!),Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
He's referring to John 3:13. Of course, as usual, he's ripping it totally out of context and wresting it to his own destruction, but that's the verse he's talking about.
AHHHH OK... gotcha now. Laughing at the picture you just painted ripping and wrestling... too funny. Ha ha. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Truind,
I am so sorry. I didn't answer your question because I misread it. I thought you were asking if people actually went to heaven.. or where they went... duh. Sometimes I am goofy at best.
Actually, it is a good question. For the most part God was dealing with the children of Israel. But we see all through the OT Gentiles who had faith in God too. Check out Rahab.. she was a harlot and then there is Ruth. By the time the Lord got through with Old King Nebby in Daniel, I believe HE had faith in God. Gentiles had to get there the same way as the Jews... by faith.
Scott and Athos, are you both language teachers? Folks, thank you for giving some language tips. ;) It is never my intention to win an argument or hurt any body's beliefs.
I am not learned and not an expert in the Christianity and the Bible. I am learning and pretty satisfied with my journey. Just wish me luck that I could grow stronger in my faith. I am fully aware that the path I am walking on is totally faith based and I am walking by having faith on Lord Jesus. HE does not talk to me, HE does not give me everyday directions and does not tell me how to handle a crucial situation. But I know HE is there. Sorry, buddies, no proof again. :o In this walk there isn't any empirical data to lead the way because it is not CSI. The Bible is still the highest selling book with millions copies being sold every year. Billions have already been sold. That's why I know what Jesus said is true. Even if you want to call it blind faith, I would accept. At least, I would have a chance for Jesus to work on me and open my eyes. On the flip side, let's take for argument sake, if billions of people are going to doom because they read wrong book, then I will have big company in hell, I won't be alone. God be with you
Thanks to Dave and ClassyT who helped me to understand how God was saving people before HE gave us the name of Jesus. The Old Testament tells us about the people who knew God and whom God knew. The mention of people in the Bible start from Adam and Eve and then moves on to Cain and Able and then their descents and so on. It does not talk about other children of Adam and Eve. Therefore, I understand that there is another stream of people who are not in the frame of the Bible. There is mention of these people in the Bible though.
This question came to my mind because, I know people who have come to Christian fold from other religions. Some of them tell their stories of having an encounter with Jesus. Many of them were hardcore against Christians and Christ. And now their faith on Lord Jesus is much stronger than some of the old Christians. Hence I was wondering that was Lord God personally talking to those who were in the other stream or was HE sending Jesus as Angel to them? Because pre-destination thing did not originate in New Testament. Or was it that God was only taking care of HIS Chosen Ones and later HE sent Jesus to save Gentiles too?
Hi All.
I don't wish to have the last word over Triund but perhaps we could sum up the disagreements in this way:
It is a matter of fact that Jesus said certain things in the Bible. Either he did or he didn't. If he did then we can ask the question. 'is what he said true or false? If it is false then our faith is misplaced. If it is true then our faith will be rewarded.
If Jesus didn't say these words then it is a matter of fact that someone or some people put these words into his mouth. The truth value of the words is not depended on who said them. In other words, the statement that no one can go to the Father except through Jesus will turn out to be true of false regardless of who said them.
Tut
First, I don't think you have been disrectful at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
Second, The only biblical use of the word know that I am aware refers to sexual intimacy.
Yes, I do recognize Jesus' "historicall attributes". Clearly he was one of the most, if not the most, influential person in history. But "know" something, is to be able to prove it. And the fact is there is not absolute proof for you to say that you "know". Again, you can qualify this by saying you believe or even you "know in your heart" or some other such qualifier. But when you say you "know" something that can't be proven you are denying the beliefs of others who do not believe as you do.
I am very happy that you have found faith and that you are comforted by that faith. But don't tell me that you can know something that there is no absolute proof of. I cannot accept that. Besides which it challenges my beliefs and the beliefs of millions of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
I couldn't agree more. Philosophical hair-splitting over words aside, I know as well. I've had my crisis of faith and emerged stronger out the other side, by God's grace. The New Testament tells us repeatedly that we CAN know that Jesus is Lord, that we CAN know that we have life in his name, that we CAN know we belong to him, and so on and so on and so on. There are those who redefine the word "know" according to certain philosophical assumptions, then try to shove their definition at us. The funny part about that is, there's no way to verify empirically that their definition is the right one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
I admire your strength, Triund. I think we can both say with Paul,
I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day. (2 Ti 1:12)
It ain't always easy to hang on, but that's why certainty is so important.
classyT agrees : I agree with you ! We are on a Christian forum... why do we need to clarify something we have settled in our hearts as the absolute truth?
This is a forum to discuss Christianity. It is not a forum of, for and by Christians. This is true of all the religious forums on this site. You do not need to clarify what you have believe, but you can not parade your beliefs as absolute truth, when there are others who are just as entitled to their beliefs.
I don't claim to know that Jesus wasn't who he allegedly claimed he was or whether what he is attributed as saying is not the truth. This is because there is no absolute evidence to support either argument. My problem is when someone claims to know a fact for which there is no absolute proof.
I agree, just as there is no way to verify empirically that yours is the right one. Which is why its not correct to state something as a fact, that can't be proven.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
http://www.nwdiveclub.com/images/smilies/banghead.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by ScottGem
http://www.nwdiveclub.com/images/smilies/rofl.gif
I'm glad we could help. Could you expand on this last part a bit? I'm especially interested in what they meant by "an encounter with Jesus."Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
Hey Dave, I will try to explain you the word "encounter", but you have to excuse me if this does not click with your definition of encounter;):D.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
I know a pastor who shares Jesus with South Asians. He records their testimonies and make DVDs. In those testimonies, people tell their experience about how they became Christians when they were very staunch believers in other faiths and religions. Some said they saw a bright light in their room, some said they heard their names called, some talked to some voice and got the answers which tells us about Jesus and so on. Other than that, I listen to a lot of Christian radio, watch TV and use internet a lot to listen to people's testimonies. There had been lots of cases in Iran, where Islamic priests have visioned Jesus and they left Islam and became Christians. Many people in North America have their testimonies about their life which was in the dark, but they got called and they came to light. On Youtube one can find tons of testimonies. Now if one wants to argue about the authenticity of the truth those people are speaking, I have no proof. However, if they are giving me wrong picture, then they would have no answer when they would be asked by Lord God that who told them to give false testimonies on HIS name. Let God deal with them.
Another thing what I learnt is that in Old Testament, it was Jesus who met with people and talked to them. Feel free to correct me that Angel who would talk to people was Jesus, whereas other angels who carried God's message was not Jesus. I am talking about Angel who wrestled with Jacob, one who was in the burning bush with Moses. (Help me or correct me with more incidences). Looking at the cases in OT and incidences from today`s life, I say people having "encounter with Jesus".
This has been interesting so far but...
If it keeps up it will be going now where.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
I think Triund's original question has been adequately answered. I had mentioned the faith chapter in Hebrews, and others chimed in with similar passages and also the word "faith." Maybe this thread has completed its mission?
In a context like this, I don't have a definition. I figure he's God and I'm not and he can do what he bloomin' well wants to. I'm interested in stories like these, that's why I asked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Triund
Thanks for sharing those. I see now where your question came from. Hopefully it's been answered to your satisfaction :cool:Quote:
I know a pastor who shares Jesus with South Asians. He records their testimonies and make DVDs. In those testimonies, people tell their experience about how they became Christians when they were very staunch believers in other faiths and religions. Some said they saw a bright light in their room, some said they heard their names called, some talked to some voice and got the answers which tells us about Jesus and so on. Other than that, I listen to a lot of Christian radio, watch TV and use internet a lot to listen to people's testimonies. There had been lots of cases in Iran, where Islamic priests have visioned Jesus and they left Islam and became Christians. Many people in North America have their testimonies about their life which was in the dark, but they got called and they came to light. On Youtube one can find tons of testimonies. Now if one wants to argue about the authenticity of the truth those people are speaking, I have no proof. However, if they are giving me wrong picture, then they would have no answer when they would be asked by Lord God that who told them to give false testimonies on HIS name. Let God deal with them.
Another thing what I learnt is that in Old Testament, it was Jesus who met with people and talked to them. Feel free to correct me that Angel who would talk to people was Jesus, whereas other angels who carried God's message was not Jesus. I am talking about Angel who wrestled with Jacob, one who was in the burning bush with Moses. (Help me or correct me with more incidences). Looking at the cases in OT and incidences from today`s life, I say people having "encounter with Jesus".
I have my own story, but that's for another time and another thread.
dwashbur,
Thanks for sharing that.
One of the mist famous encounter was when God (Jesus) and a couple of angels came to visit Abram who became Abraham
Abram has a bullock slaughter and much flower baked into bread for a feast and they ate it ALL.
Since the bible tells us that no one but Jesus has seen the Father any mention of someone seeing God in the O.T. they were seeing Jesus The Word in human form.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Yes, I know that feeling. I get it when someone admits to the truth and then turns around and repeats the incorrect info.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
Fred, thanks a ton for sharing this. God bless youQuote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Thanks for sharing the Hebrew chapter. That was pretty helpful to reaffirm my faith in HIM. God bless you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I got enough information that help me to see answer to the question. Everyone had been very helpful as usual to help me find answer to my question. God be with you all.
Genesis 19:17 (Complete Jewish Bible) When they had brought them out, he(singular) said, "Flee for your life! Don't look behind you, and don't stop anywhere in the plain, but escape to the hills! Otherwise you will be swept away." 18 Lot said to them(plural), "Please, no, my lord(singular)!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcura
Although they are two they speak as one and Lot replies to them as my lord! Who are those two men, and who is the one left behind to speak with Abraham?
24 Then ADONAI caused sulfur and fire to rain down upon S'dom and 'Amora from ADONAI out of the sky. An Adonai (Lord) caused sulfur and fire to rain down upon S'dom and 'Amora from an ADONAI out of the sky. A Lord here on earth caused sulfur and fire to fall upon Sodom and Gommorah from a Lord from the heavens. So those two men were not just angels they were the Son and the Holy Spirit incarnated.That brings on the next question!Who was the one talking to Abraham? Could it be the Father? Don't say no too fast! Before you say that no one has seen the Father and lived remember that Moses saw His back.What we can't see is the Father's face and Abraham did not see His face , he just saw the face of a man that he recognized that was God!
So to me it makes more sense saying that the three men going to Abraham were the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit in the form of men.And when we see a man we cannot die!
Brother Adam,
I understand what you ate saying and you have no argument with me about that.
There are some who think that the person who went with Lot were angels.
Really I do not know but your thought holds as much water or more than them being angels.
I do think that Jesus did appear at times in the Old Testament.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
Actually, the vowels indicate "lords," plural. OTOH, in the next verse every time Lot says "you" it's in the singular.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam7gur
Not really. Lot calls them Adonai, "my lords," whereas the ADONAI in verse 24ff is YHWH, the divine name. There does seem to be a distinction, and the two individuals are more likely angels. Note that in verse 13 one of them says "the LORD has sent us here to destroy it (Sodom)." As far as I know, the Holy Spirit is never recorded as taking any solid form, much less human.Quote:
24 Then ADONAI caused sulfur and fire to rain down upon S'dom and 'Amora from ADONAI out of the sky. An Adonai (Lord) caused sulfur and fire to rain down upon S'dom and 'Amora from an ADONAI out of the sky. A Lord here on earth caused sulfur and fire to fall upon Sodom and Gommorah from a Lord from the heavens. So those two men were not just angels they were the Son and the Holy Spirit incarnated.
dwashbur,
Thanks much for that.
I do agree.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
dwashbur
Genesis 19:17 When they had brought them out, he said, "Flee for your life! Don't look behind you, and don't stop anywhere in the plain, but escape to the hills! Otherwise you will be swept away." 18 Lot said to them, "Please, no, my lord! Although they are two and the text calls them angels, Lot calls them My lord! And in verse 21 He(the lord) replied... We see Lot talking to a lord and we see a lord talking back to him. I am not convinced that those two angels(messengers) were just angelic beings.I could be wrong but I at the moment doubt that.
Luke 3:22 the Ruach HaKodesh( Holy Spirit) came down on him in physical form like a dove;
Here we see the Holy Spirit taking a solid physical form.
You wrote.. Note that in verse 13 one of them says "the LORD has sent us here to destroy it (Sodom)" meaning if I am not mistaken that since they were sent they could not have been the Son and the Holy Spirit but read this in Isaiah 48:16 "Come close to me, and listen to this: since the beginning I have not spoken in secret, since the time things began to be, I have been there; and now Adonai ELOHIM has sent me and his Spirit. This is clearly The Son speaking and saying that God sent Him and His Spirit.When you send someone on your behalf those people are called messengers which in Greek is aggeloi which in English is angels!
As for this.. Actually, the vowels indicate "lords," plural. OTOH, in the next verse every time Lot says "you" it's in the singular.. I have written..
Although they are two they speak as one and Lot replies to them as my lord! Who are those two men, and who is the one left behind to speak with Abraham? So I really don't see what you are trying to say so please help me out here with that.
I already answered this. First, the vowel points indicate "lords" plural. Did you not see that? Second, this expression "my lord" was pretty much the equivalent of "sir," kind of like the German expression "mein Herr." It didn't necessarily have anything to do with THE Lord.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam7gur
The parallel in Mark 1:10 indicates that Jesus was the only one who saw it. Likewise for Matt 3:16. The wording of Luke 3:22 suggests the same thing: Jesus was the only one who saw the dove-like appearance of the Holy Spirit as it descended on him. Also, the Greek of the phrase "in bodily form" suggests that it only seemed to have a body like a dove, i.e. "in a bodily appearance" or "in a visible form," which is to say it appeared in a way that he could see, however briefly, so that it was clear what was happening. It's a far cry from the idea that one of the messengers Lot met was the Holy Spirit in human form.Quote:
Luke 3:22 the Ruach HaKodesh( Holy Spirit) came down on him in physical form like a dove;
Here we see the Holy Spirit taking a solid physical form.
I don't have a serious problem with the idea, I just don't think the text really supports it.
Brother adam,
I am convinced that the beings with Lot were angels.
Also keep in mind what the town people wanted to do with them.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
John 1: 32 Then Yochanan( John the baptist) gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit coming down from heaven like a dove, and remaining on him. 33 I myself did not know who he was, but the one who sent me to immerse in water said to me, `The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining, this is the one who immerses in the Ruach HaKodesh.'Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
It was not only Jesus who saw the Spirit. John saw the Spirit too as it is written Deuteronomy 19:15 at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established .
Please take the time and read this http://aramaicnt.com/files/Abraham%2...%20Trinity.pdf by David Bauscher.
Abraham worships all three men, but if one of them was an angel surely Abraham would have been corrected and instructed not to do so as it happened with John the disciple in the book of Revelation. The three men answer as one in a unity that no angel can participate but only the divine persons of the Godhead.
Genesis 18:20 ADONAI said, "The outcry against S'dom and 'Amora is so great and their sin so serious 21 that I will now go down and see whether their deeds warrant the outcry that has reached me; if not, I will know." But on the next verse.. 22 The men turned away from there and went toward S'dom, but Avraham remained standing before ADONAI. This doesn't make sense,Adonai says that He will go down and see but then He stays back and talks to Abraham while two men go down.Those two men are not just two angelic beings, they are the Presences of God and the Presences of God are always the Son and the Spirit, because where the Presence of God is,there God is!
Lot calls them Jehovah and not just lord, according to the original text.The scribes changed the Tetragrammaton name of God YHWH to Adonai which means Lord out of respect to God's Holy name so today in many places in the Bible where people referred to the Godhead with the Holy name we see it not written so but instead we see Lord.The Massorete scribes have kept a record, the Massorah in which every change like that is recorded.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
The Aramaic text translated in plain English by David Bauscher is very helpful.
Adam7,
Thanks much for that information.
Peace and kindness,
Fred
You are flat wrong about this. There is nothing in the Masorah about such a change in Gen 19. If you have such a reference, cite it because I'm looking at the Masoretic text, marginal notes and all, and there isn't any.Quote:
Originally Posted by adam7gur
And the Aramaic text is secondary. The Targums that we have were made somewhere in the intertestamental period, and the manuscripts we have are centuries later than that. We know what the Hebrew text said, and your notion that the text was changed here is way off base.
Read this on page 38Quote:
Originally Posted by dwashbur
http://www.isr-messianic.org/downloads/hrv_intro.pdf
Following is a list of these 134 places, according to Gins. Mas, Vol. I, pp. 25, 26, [section] 115:
Ge 18:3,27,30,31,32; 19:18; 20:4;
Ex 4:10,13; 5:22; 15:17; 34:9,9;
Nu 14:17;
Jos 7:8;
Jg 6:15; 13:8;
1 Ki 3:10,15; 22:6;
2 Ki 7:6; 19:23;
Ezr 10:3;
Ne 1:11; 4:14;
Job 28:28;
Ps 2:4; 16:2; 22:30; 30:8; 35:17,22,23; 37:13; 38:9,15.22; 39:7; 40:17; 44:23; 51:15; 54:4; 55:9; 57:9; 59:11; 62:12; 66:18; 68:11,17,19,22,26,32; 73:20; 77:2,7; 78:65; 79:12; 86:3,4,5,8,9,12,15; 89:49,50; 90:1,17; 110:5; 130:2,3,6;
Isa 3:17,18; 4:4; 6:1,8,11; 7:14,20; 8:7; 9:8,17; 10:12; 11:11; 21:6,8,16; 28:2; 29:13; 30:20; 37:24; 38:14,16; 49:14;
La 1:14,15,15; 2:1,2,5,7,18,19,20; 3:31,36,37,58;
Eze 18:25,29; 21:9; 33:17,20;
Da 1:2; 9:3,4,7,9,15,16,17,19,19,19;
Am 5:16; 7:7,8; 9;1;
Mic 1:2;
Zec 9:4;
Mal 1:12,14.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:09 AM. |