| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Admin |
Posted - 23 Oct 2001 : 16:01:14
 Are you IN the World or OF the World?
What is the difference between being 'in' something as compared to being 'of' something? According to A Dictionary of Law, (1893), published by T. H. Flood and Company
IN. 1. English. (1) The preposition: within, inside of, surrounded by. 2. French. In ventre. In the womb.
OF. By; belonging to; upon.
'In' means simply within or surrounded by, as being in the womb, i.e., 'The sheep lived their entire lives in the pasture by the river'. This merely conveys the surroundings where the sheep lived. The Lord is Our Shepherd and We are His sheep, and We live in the pasture called earth.
'Of' means belonging to or [made] by, i.e., 'The sheep belong to the Lord' or 'The sheep are of God'. Christians are His sheep and We are of Him. We - Christians - can be grazing in any pasture, but We belong to and are of the Lord.
If you were of the world, the world would love you as *his own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. See John 15:19. *by the word 'his', Jesus is referring to lucifer, the fallen angel of God; satan; the prince of this world. [See John 12:31]
Jesus spoke these words to the Father concerning all those who believed of Him;
They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. John 17:16.
The point here is this: There is not any Christian who was, is, or is to be of this world. To be an Heir of Jesus, the Christ, is not in any way associated with or of the world where prince satan rules. Christians are of God, our Creator, who has made this world His foot stool. Where and when did Our Lord tell us to be of the world? Nowhere and never. However, We must live in this world. The confusion begins among Christians when they don't listen to what God has explicitly told them and they begin to transform themselves from those who live in the world to those who live of the world.
[click the blue floppy disk icon above to view/print the entire article]
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. - Mark 12:27 |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Mary |
Posted - 16 Dec 2007 : 06:49:19
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." - Mahatma Gandhi
Psa 25:4 Shew me thy ways, O LORD; teach me thy paths. |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 08 Jan 2007 : 19:33:07
From the Second Book of the Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew
The missing of the word SACRED changes the whole context of Matthew 17:24 as early was 200 years after the incident attests!
Introduction to the Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew
According to Eusebius (H. E. vi. 36) the Commentaries on the Gospel of Matthew were written about the same time as the Contra Celsum, when Origen was over sixty years of age, and may therefore be probably assigned to the period 246-248. This statement is confirmed by internal evidence. In the portion here translated, books x.-xiv., he passes by the verses Matt. xviii. 12, 13, and refers for the exposition of them to his Homilies on Luke (book xiii. 29). Elsewhere, he refers his readers for a fuller discussion on certain points to his Commentaries on John (book xvi. 20), and on Romans (book xvii. 32). Of the twenty-five books into which the work was divided, the first nine, with the exception of two fragments, are lost; books x.-xvii., covering the portion from Matt. xiii. 36 to xxii. 33, are extant in the Greek, and the greater part of the remaining books survives in a Latin version, which is co-extensive with the Greek from book xii. 9 to book xvii. 36, and contains further the exposition from Matt. xxii. 34 to xxvii. 66. The passages in Cramer's Catena do not seem to be taken from the Commentaries. Of the numerous quotations from Matthew only one (Matt. xxi. 35) can be definitely traced to this section of the writings of Origen; and as this differs greatly from our present text, and is moreover purely narrative, it is probably taken like the others either from the Scholia (commaticum interpretationis genus), or from the Homilies to which reference is made by Jerome (Prol. in Matt. I. iv). The majority of them may be ascribed to the Scholia. In addition to the mss. already referred to (p. 294) the old Latin version is often useful for determining the text, though it contains some interpolations and has many omissions. The omissions (cf. book xiii. 28, book xiv. x, 3, book xiv. 19-22) are not due to any dogmatic bias, but have been made by the translator or some subsequent transcriber on the ground that the passages were uninteresting or unimportant. The version is otherwise for the most part literal, and has in some cases preserved the correct reading, though it often fails just when it would have been of most service. For an estimate of the work and method of Origen as an exegete, see pp. 291-294; and for a fuller statement on some of the points here touched upon, see Westcott's article on Origen in Smith's Dictionary of Christian Biography (vol. iv.).
11. The Freedom of Sons.
And this may be put in another way. There are some who are kings' sons on the earth, and yet they are not sons of those kings, but sons, and sons absolutely; but others, because of their being strangers to the sons of the kings of the earth, and sons of no one of those upon the earth, but on this very account are sons, whether of God or of His Son, or of some one of those who are God's. If, then, the Saviour inquires of Peter, saying, "The kings of the earth from whom do they receive toll or tribute-from their own sons or from strangers? "88 and Peter replies not from their own sons, but "from strangers," then Jesus says about such as are strangers to the kings of the earth, and on account of being free are sons, "Therefore the sons are free; "89 for the sons of the kings of the earth are not free, since "every one that committeth sin is the bond-servant of sin,"90 but they are free who abide in the truth of the word of God, and on this account, know the truth, that they also may become free from sin. If, any one then, is a son simply, and not in this matter wholly a son of the kings of the earth, he is free. And nevertheless, though he is free, he takes care not to offend even the kings of the earth, and their sons, and those who receive the half-shekel; wherefore He says, "Let us not cause them to stumble, but go thou and cast thy net, and take up the fish that first cometh up,"91 etc. But I would inquire of those who are pleased to make myths about different natures, of what sort of nature they were, whether the kings of the earth, or their sons, or those who receive the half-shekel, whom the Saviour does not wish to offend; it appears of a verity, ex hypothesi, that they are not of a nature worthy of praise, and yet He took heed not to cause them to stumble, and He prevents any stumbling-block being put in their way, that they may not sin more grievously, and that with a view to their being saved-if they will-even by receiving Him who has spared them from being caused to stumble. And as in a place verily of consolation,-for such is, by interpretation, Capernaum,-comforting the disciple as being both free and a son, He gives to him the power of catching the fish first, that when it came up Peter might be comforted by its coming up and being caught, and by the staler being taken from its mouth, in order to be paid to those whose the staler was, add who demanded as their own such a piece of money.
88 Matt. xvii. 25.
89 Matt. xvii. 26.
90 John viii. 34.
91 Matt. xvii. 27.
12. The Stater Allegorized.
But you might sometimes gracefully apply the passage to the lover of money, who has nothing in his mouth but things about silver, when you behold him healed by some Peter, who takes the stater, which is the symbol of all his avarice, not only from his mouth and words, but from his whole character. For you will say that such an ode was in the sea, and in the bitter affairs of life, and in the waves of the cares and anxieties of avarice, having the staler in his mouth when he was un believing and avaricious, but that he came up from the sea and was caught in the rational net, and being benefited by some Peter who has taught him the truth, no longer has the stater in his mouth, but in place of it those things which contain His image, the oracles of God.
13. The Sacred Half-Shekel.
Moreover to the saying, "They that received the half-shekel came to Peter,"92 you will adduce from Numbers that, for the saints according to the law of God, is paid not a half-shekel simply, but a sacred half-shekel. For it is written, "And thou shale take five shekels per head, according to the sacred half-shekel."93 But also on behalf of all the sons of Israel is given a sacred half-shekel per head. Since then it was not possible for the saint of God to possess along with the sacred half-shekels the profane shekels, so to speak, on this account, to them who do not receive the sacred half-shekels, and who asked Peter and said, "Doth not your master pay the half-shekel? "the Saviour commands the stater to be paid, in which was the half-shekel which was found in the mouth of the first fish that came up, in order that it might be given for the Teacher and the disciple.
92 Matt. xvii. 24.
93 Num. iii. 47.
http://biblestudy.churches.net/CCEL/FATHERS2/ANF10/ANF1049.HTM#P8329_1805769
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 14 Sep 2006 : 04:42:27
Greetings and salutations:
Peace be unto the house.
God is Love and brother Rick's posts bring up a very important point.
There are twenty-three[1] definitions for the word world in Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language. We should probably pay particular attention to definition number 16, in our humble opinion, since it is the only one that specfically mentions Scripture, though other uses, of course, apply.
WORLD, n. [Sax. weorold, woruld; D. waereld; Sw. verld. This seems to be a compound word, and probably is named from roundness, the vault; but this is not certain.]
1. The universe; the whole system of created globes or vast bodies of matter.
2. The earth; the terraqueous globe; sometimes called the lower world.
3. The heavens; as when we speak of the heavenly world, or upper world.
4. System of beings; or the orbs which occupy space, and all the beings which inhabit them. Heb 11.
God--hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things; by whom also he made the worlds. Heb i.
There may be other worlds, where the inhabitants have never violated their allegiance to their Almighty sovereign. W.B. Sprague
5. Present state of existence; as while we are in the world.
Behold, these are the ungodly who prosper in the world. Ps. lxxiii.
6. A secular life. By the world we sometimes understand the things of this world, its pleasures and interests. A great part of mankind are more anxious to enjoy the world to than secure divine favor.
7. Public life, or society; as banished from the world.
8. Business or trouble of life.
From this world-wearied flesh.
9. A great multitude or quantity; as a world of business; a world of charms. Milton.
10. Mankind; people in general; in an indefinite sense. Let the world see your fortitude.
Whose disposition, all the world well knows— Shak.
11. Course of life. He begins the world with little property, but with many friends.
12. Universal empire.
This through the east just vengeance hurld, and lost poor Antony the world. Prior.
13. The customs and manners of men; the practice of life. A knowledge of the world is necessary for a man of business; it is essential to politeness.
14. All the world contains.
Had I a thousand worlds, I would give them all for one year more to devote to God. Law.
15. The principal nations or countries of the earth. Alexander conquered the world.
16. The Roman empire. Scripture.
17. A large tract of country; a wide compass of things.
I must descry new worlds. Cowley.
18. The inhabitants of the earth; the whole human race. John iii.
19. The carnal state or corruption of the earth; as the present evil world; the course of this world. Gal i. Eph ii.
20. The ungodly part of the world.
I pray not for the world, but for them that thou hast given men. John xvii.
21. Time; as in the phrase, world without end.
22. A collection of wonders. [Not in use.]
In the world, in possibility. [All the precaution in the world would not save him.]
For all the world, exactly. [Little used.] Sidney.
23. For any consideration.
And leading Him up into a high mountain, the false accuser showed Him all the kingdoms of the world [Roman empire] in a moment of time. And the false accuser said to Him, I will give all this authority and their glory to You, because it has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.
Endnotes:
[1] Number 23 in the facsimile edition shows only the 2; the 3 was inadvertently omitted.
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 10 Sep 2006 : 20:27:59
DISTINCTIONS IN CHRIST’S WORK FOR THE "WORLD."
When we come to examine the different applications of this word, we find some contradictory things if we try to make the word "world" always to apply to the same ones throughout the Bible. There is a world which hates Christ, as we noted in John 7:7, and it is to this world that all unbelievers belong, for to a group of the most religious, but unbelieving individuals, Jesus said, "Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world" (John 8:23). But to this world believers do not belong, for Jesus just as emphatically said of then, "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world" (John 17:16). Here is a patent contradiction, unless it be recognized that there are at least two "worlds," for John 3:16 and other texts declare that Jesus died for the world. Not only so, but in John 12:31 Jesus said that the world was to be judged, while in John 12:47, He as clearly said that He came not to judge the world but to save the world, and even more distinctly He declares in John 5:24, R. V., that the believer is not judged, but has passed from death unto life. An explanation is suggested in 1 John 5: 19: a "whole world" is declared to lie in wickedness (or, in the wicked one), while the saints are declared to be a distinct and separate class that are "in Christ." Thus, in this and several other places where the phrase "whole world" is found, not even this more extensive statement includes all mankind. See also Matthew 16:26; Romans 1:8; 1 John 2:2 and Revelation 12:9 where this phrase is also used in a limited sense.
There is a world which knew Jesus not when He came (John 1:10), yet we are told of some who did know Him when He came. The virgin Mary did, as did ancient Simeon and the prophetess Anna. So did the shepherds and the wise men from the East, but we know that all these knew Him because it had been divinely given to them to recognize and know him, and this is the only reason why any person ever knows the Lord. See John 17:25. While we are considering John 1:10, it is noteworthy that this word "world" is used in three different ways: these three usages refer respectively to the earth, for it was to the earth that He came from heaven, to the universe in the second place, for other texts, notably verse 1, tell us that Jesus created all things that are created, and then the third reference is to the world of unbelieving men, for these were the ones who rejected Him.
It should have occurred to the reader by now how many references to this word are found in John’s writings; of the 188 appearances of this word, 106 are in John’s writings, and he uses the word in the greatest number of ways as well. Of the fourteen different ways in which this word may be used, John uses it in over half these ways. Therefore, it is nothing short of folly for one to blindly try to force John 1:29; 3:16-17, et al., into a preconceived meaning, and especially when to do so will involve one in contradictions of other texts.
There is also a world which is going to pass away, and which believers are not to love, but from which they are to abstain, according to 1 John 2:15-17, yet the believer is not going to pass away, but is to abide for ever, so that it again becomes obvious that the believer does not belong to this world. The reader will note that Jesus sometimes used the demonstrative pronoun "this" with the word "world" (John 8:23; 12:31), by which is implied that there is another "world" which contrasts with the one mentioned.
There is a world for which Christ died, according to John 3:16-17, but inasmuch as John 8:23; 17:16; 1 John 5:19 et al., reveal that believers and unbelievers do not belong to the same world, it is obvious that the world mentioned in John 1:29; 3:16-17, etc., must refer to the world of the elect. They are spoken of as a definite and distinct number in John 17:2-3, 6-9, for whom Christ accomplished eternal life. They are a definite number because the Father does not do anything haphazardly, but has chosen each one of them to be the recipient of His gracious influences. They are a distinct number because the sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit sets them apart from the world in time.
It is for the world of the elect alone that Christ intercedes: "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.." (John 17:9). But Christ’s intercessory prayers are an integral part of the redemption of Christ, and it is necessary for the final salvation of any, as Hebrews 7:25 reveals: "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." If He does not pray for those of that world, then they are clearly not in His redemptive purposes, for they could not remain saved without His intercession, if they could somehow be saved.
Here we tread upon mysterious ground, for no one of Adam’s race has the capacity to fully understand the purpose of God; it is not for us to question the fact that "he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth" (Rom. 9:18). It is for us to gratefully praise Him that we have been made the recipients of His glorious grace, and to stand ready to testify to others of this grace that they might also be led to lay hold of it by faith in Christ.
http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/Davis%20Huckabee/To%20Studies%20In%20Strong%20Doctrine/strong_doctrine_appendix_2.htm
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 04 Sep 2006 : 09:05:29
Greetings and salutations, God is Love:
Peace be unto the house.
We thank you for your efforts and offer this as a supplement.
Yahuhanan [John] 15:19 If ye were of the world[G2889], the world[G2889] would love his own: but because ye are not of the world[G2889], but I have chosen you out of the world[G2889], therefore the world[G2889] hateth you
Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament gives us this for the Greek word kosmos [G2889] at meaning number one: 1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
We took one of these synonyms for kosmos, specifically government, which is supposed to be the apt and harmonious arrangement, i.e. the constitution of a nation that is purportedly[1] created to keep some semblance of order within that nation, and substituted it in place of the word world in the above verse to see if it would add some light to the subject of that verse and the intended purpose of this thread.
If ye were of the government, the government would love his own: but because ye are not of the government, but I have chosen you out of the government, therefore the government hateth you.
We perceive that it does, especially when we take into consideration who it is that will persecute/prosecute[2] us simply for choosing "another king"; even if we declare, and keep that declaration, to neither intentionally or through gross negligence, do harm to any of their subjects/citizens.
...these all do contrary to the decrees of Caesar,
saying that there is another king...
Endnotes:
[1] purport, vt. [[Etymology omitted]] 1 to profess or claim as its meaning 2 to give the appearance, often falsely, of being, intending, etc. – Webster’s 1988 New World Dictionary of American English, Third College Edition, page 1092
[2] Prosecute is merely a variant spelling of the the word persecute.
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 04 Sep 2006 : 08:10:55
There may be other worlds, where the inhabitants have never violated their allegiance to their Almighty sovereign. - William Buell Sprague (1794-1876)
brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisar'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional STATE OF ISRAEL.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19 |
| God is Love |
Posted - 03 Sep 2006 : 11:39:16
Greetings, brothers!
English term: World, translation of Greek kosmos in all but a single occurrence in the Christian Greek Scriptures, being used 187 times.
However, the King James or Authorized Version used the term "world" not only rendering kosmos but three other Greek words as well in some of the renderings. These are ge; aion and oikoumene. Also rendered were five Hebrew words, erets; hhedhel; hheledh; ohlam; and tevel. Correct understanding of the Scriptures came to be difficult due to this blurred and confused blending of meanings. With time, this confusion has largely been cleared up, however, in a number of texts these terms are still used as if they are synonymous with kosmos.
Hebrew erets and Greek ge (which is where the English "geography" and "geology" come from mean "earth," "ground," "soil," or "land." however, sometimes they are used metaphorically for people of the earth.
Scriptures using erets and ge:
Genesis 6:4 (21st Century King James Version): There were giants on the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men and they bore children to them, the same became mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Numbers 1:1 (New American Standard Bible): (The Census of Israel's Warriors) Then the LORD spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting, on the first of the second month, in the second year after they had come out of the land of Egypt, saying,
Matthew 2:6 (Contemporary English Version): 'Bethlehem in the land of Judea, you are very important among the towns of Judea. From your town will come a leader, who will be like a shepherd for my people Israel.' "
Matthew 5:5 (21st Century King James Version): Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
Matthew 10:29 (New International Version - UK): Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.
Matthew 13:5 (Worldwide English (New Testament)): Some seed fell on the stony ground. Not much earth covered the stones. The seed started to grow right away because it was not deep in the ground.
Metaphorical use:
Psalm 66:4 (21st Century King James Version): All the earth shall worship Thee and shall sing unto Thee; they shall sing to Thy name." Selah
Revelation 13:3 (New International Reader's Version): One of the beast's heads seemed to have had a deadly wound. But the wound had been healed. The whole world was amazed and followed the beast.
Hebrew ohlam and Greek aion refer to a period of time of indefinite length.
Genesis 6:3 (New King James Version): And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”
Genesis 17:13 (21st Century King James Version): He that is born in thy house and he that is bought with thy money must be circumcised; and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Luke 1:70 (American Standard Version): (As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets that have been from of old),
Aion also signifies the characterization of a certain period or epoch.
Galatians 1:4 (New Living Translation): He died for our sins, just as God our Father planned, in order to rescue us from this evil world in which we live.
Hebrew hheledh is similar in meaning to Aion and is rendered by various terms.
Job 11:17 (Contemporary English Version): and your darkest night will be brighter than noon. (here referring to one's duration of life)
Psalms 17:14 (American Standard Version): From men by thy hand, O Jehovah, From men of the world, whose portion is in this life, And whose belly thou fillest with thy treasure: They are satisfied with children, And leave the rest of their substance to their babes.
Greek oikoumene means "inhabited earth" or "world."
Luke 21:26 (English Standard Version): people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
Hebrew tevel is rendered "productive land" or "earth."
2 Samuel 22:16 (Today's New International Version): The valleys of the sea were exposed and the foundations of the earth laid bare at the rebuke of the LORD, at the blast of breath from his nostrils.
Hebrew hhedhel is found only at Isaiah 38:11 and is rendered as "world" in the Authorized Version in the phrase "inhabitants of the world."
Isaiah 38:11 (New King James Version): I said, “ I shall not see YAH,
The LORD in the land of the living; I shall observe man no more among the inhabitants of the world.
The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible Volume 4 page 874 says that the above may be rendered as "inhabitants of (the world) of cessation," however it also points out that most scholars prefer it to be read as it is in some Hebrew manuscripts using hheledh in place of hhedhel. The New World Translation reads "inhabitants of [the land of] cessation."
I hope this adds some light to the use of the term "world."
Agape!
Mount Fuji----"without equal" |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 16 Nov 2005 : 19:32:07
The following is an extract from “Jesus the Man” by Barbara Thiering first published in 1992. It is Appendix IV pages 522-529 of the paperback edition.
Was Jesus the leader of a radical faction of Essene priests. He was not of virgin birth. He did not die on the cross. He married Mary Magdalene, fathered a family, and later divorced, He died sometime after 64 AD, possibly living in France into his 70's?
Rules for the Pesharist
The modern reader working out the pesher of the gospels and Acts has to learn some new habits. In a way he or she has to become a legalist, even naively literalist, in order to learn something that is not for the naïve. The expectation is for exactitude.
The words “akribos”, ACCUTRATELY, when used in the gospels and Acts, refers to the technique that is intended to be applied. Luke prefaces his gospel by saying that he hs followed matters accurately (akribos Lk 1:3), and the same word is used in a patristic source for the method of writing Mark's gospel (Eccl. Hist. 3:39, 15). In the Acts account of the re-education of Apollos (A 18:24-28,), he os sais to have taught about Jesus accurately (akribos) but under the instruction of Priscilla and Aquila was taught MORE ACCURATELY (akribesteron), meaning that the Christian pesher was an advance of the modern reader.
The expectation of exactitude gave rise to some rules which would not be those of the modern reader.
BASIC RULES
1)One of the main principles is that NO WORDS ARE TO BE ASSUMED.
Only the words that are in the text are to be relied on. This sometimes makes a considerable difference to the meaning. An example is Acts 5:29, apokritheis de Petros kai hoi apostoloi eipan, usually translated “Peter and the apostles answered...” . The literal translation is: “Peter having answered and the apostles said..”. For the pesharist, Peter answered (with words that are not quoted), then only the apostles said the words that are quoted. As the “apostles” mean John Mark (a plural stands for a single person representing a group), and as Peter and John Mark had different political opinions, the interpretation of the quoted words is affected.
In Luke 24:40, Jesus after the crucifixion “showed them the hands and the feet” (cf. Also v39). There are no words indicating that they were injured. John 20:25 shows that there were nail holes in the hands, but there is no mention of feet. The rule that no words are to be assumed means that Jesus' feet were no injured, so that he was able to walk after the crucifixion.
The same rule applies in many places where the surface meaning seems to indicate a question, but no Greek words for a question are used. The words themselves are in the form of a statement, and punctuation has to be added to show a question. The words must therefore be read as a statement, not a question. Eg: Lk 24:18, “ouk egnos ta genomena”, apparently”did you not know the things that have happened?” in its p-sense means: “You did not know(acknowledge) the things that have happened.”
A direct question must have an indicating word usually “ei”. It normally means “if” or an interrogative particle, but in its p-sense is an interrogative particle only. In Mark 15:44, ho de Pilatos ethaumasen ei ede techneken, “Pilate wondered if he was already dead”, in its p-sense is: “Pilate asked: “Is he dead already?”. The fact that Pilate's actual words are quoted means that he could use the verb 'to die' in its ordinary sense, not in its p-sense, “to excommunicate”. Pilate did not know the special language (But the words do have a p-sense, unknown to Pilate. “Did he become defiled at 3 p.m.?)
2)Conversely, all words must be accounted for, nothing may be omitted. One effect of this is that a double negative is a positive. When Jesus said at the Last Supper, “I will not not eat” (ou me phago, Lk 22:16), he meant, I will eat and not fast”.
When Thomas said in John 20:26 “ou me pisteuso” apparently “I will not believe”, the p-sense is: “I will believe” as the words mean I will not not believe. Thomas' saying meant: “If I do not see the physical signs of suffering... I will believe”, a gnostic viewpoint.
3)Another rule is that ALL EVENTS in narrative are CONSECUTIVE. There are no flashbacks, going back to a previous event. Eg: in John 4:3 Jesus “left Judea and went .. into Galilee”. The next verse says “he had to pass through Samaria.” This means, using the rule, that he came first to Galilee, then had to pass through Samaria. It does not make sense for the literal places, as Galilee is north of Samaria, but makes sense when it is understood that both “Galilee” and “Samaria” were parts of the building at Ain Feshka. (Ain Feshka is the place where the High Priest lived while he was unclean, that is, by celibate standards, while he was married. Under Essene rules he lived for the most part celibate in a monastic community, but left from time to time in order to continue his dynasty, following the manner of life of the second kind of
Essenes refer to chapter 8).
Matthew 2:15 appears to speak of the death of Herod, then in a following verse, Mt 2:16, Herod acts again. This means that the word for “death” in v.15 does not mean death, but has a metaphorical meaning.
In Mark 6:14-17 the order of events is: i) Herod heard about Jesus (v. 14a); ii) Some people said, “John the Baptist is risen from the dead” (v.14b); iii) Herod said that he had removed John from the headship (apekephalisa v. 16) and that he was risen; iv) Herod seized John and bound him (followed by the account of the banquet at which the Baptist was condemned). This makes sense when it is understood that “to rise from the dead” means “to return to the celibate state after marriage”. The events were: i) Herod heard about Jesus; ii) The Baptist's return to the celibate life was announced (at the equinox); iii) Herod said that the Baptist was no longer Pope, but he had returned to the celibate life, so was under authority; iv) Herod acted to punish John (and at the banquet agreed to give the papacy to Simon Magus, as Helena requested. John was subsequently executed).
The rule of consecutive events in narrative does not apply to speech, where there may be references to past or future events.
Narrative may contain a time phrase and related words referring back to the past, when it indicates the grade or status of a person. Eg: the “daughter of Jairus” (Mary Magdalene) was “of year 12” Mk 5:42, meaning that she had been given initiation in year 12, AD 17. That shows that she was one of the female order encouraged by Eleazar Annas' Hellenist reforms in AD 17.
4)An assumption does have to be made, however, one not normally made in our own day. Because of the Pythagorean background of his thought (said to be characteristic of the Essenes in Ant. 15:371) the pesharist is intended to assume a system. If one or two items appear that would naturally form part of a larger system, then the larger system is to be assumed to be in operation.
If, eg: the numbers “the 7”, “the 10”, “the 12” appear, they must be part of an active system in which all numbers are used.
If the numbers 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 and 5000 all appear, and some of them relate to people (4000 and 5000 in Mark 8:9, 6:44) then there is a numerical system using all the numbers for people, and a reason for naming people in this way.
If a term is clearly a symbol, then all terms in the same class are also symbols. If people are “sheep” (John 10:2, 21:16) then all animals are symbols of people: pigs, oxen, asses, foxes, wolves, lions, wild beasts. All refer to classes of persons. So, the 2000 pigs into whom the Legion's unclean spirits went (Mark 5:12-13) weer a class of men, and the story means a change of allegiance. Legion gave up a certain loyalty under the influence of Jesus, but other men took up that loyalty, and it destroyed them.
The parable of the Sower says that members of the Church are “seed” (Mark 4:1-20). Another verse gives a hierarchy for wheat seed: “first the blade (chortos), then the ear, then the full grain in the ear” (Mark 4:28). Luke 12:28 says that the blade (chortos) “today is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven”. This means that a cooked loaf is at the end of this sequence, so “loaves” are men of a high status. When the point is associated with the practice of setting out the twelve loaves of the Presence (Leviticus 25:5-9), “feedings of the multitude” are seen as men representing holy loaves, that is, levites.
Other kinds of plants also act as symbols. A vineyard clearly stands for Israel in Mark 12:1-9, and a figtree was planted in a vineyard (Luke 13:6), so a “figtree” is also a group of people, and when the “figtree” was cursed by Jesus (Mark 11:13-14) the meaning is that he expelled these people, not that he destroyed a tree. Nathanael, who had been seen by Jesus “under a figtree” (john 1:48) had belonged to this group (the following of the tetrarch Antipas); this tells more of his history.
There are other sequences of natural phenomena. “Thunder” was a man, as James and John were “sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), so “Lightning”, “Earthquake”, “Cloud”, “Fire”, “Wind”, “Sun” “Moon” and “Star” are also men.
Birds also stand for people; the Eagle, the dove, the Raven (Luke 12:24), the Cock, the Hen, are all titles of levitical ministers.
The principle of sequences of symbols is familiar from elsewhere in the New Testament. In 1 Cor 3:12 Paul speaks of members of the church as “gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw”. “Silver” is second, so a man associated with silver is a Second in a hierarchy. Judas, who received “thirty pieces of silver” occupied the position of Second at the Last Supper. “Alexander the coppersmith” of 2 Tim 4:14 must be part of such a system also. “Sapphira”, or “sapphire” (Acts 5:1) is one of the “precious stones”.
5)The pesharist must not be selective, nothing can be overlooked or set aside. One of the most important indications that there is a puzzle to be solved is in Mark 8:14-21. Under the form of a riddle, Jesus sets out the figures for the two feedings of the multitude (5 loaves for 5000, with 12 baskets [kophinoi] of crumbs left over; 7 loaves for 4000, with 7 baskets (spyrides) left over. He then says that there is something misunderstood and the question is left open. As Austin Farrer said a generation ago, before the scrolls were well known, the “riddle of the loaves” is not to be overlooked. It is pointing to something, and if the modern reader disregards it, he is losing something of value.
6)The pesharist's main task is to look for the special meanings of words. Words in the gospels and Acts often seem generalised, vague, not giving as much information as the inquiring mind would like. The pesharist is to expect them to have precise meanings, with a great deal of important information to convey.
The special meanings come from many different sources: plays on words, pseudonyms, nicknames, names of classes, common words with an institutional meaning, associations, titles derived from incarnational theory, universals with a particular meaning, slogans, loose terms, items in a chain of symbols. All of them come from special experience, that of a man who has been a member of the ascetic community for long enough to have learned its distinctive terminology and practices.
Human institutions tend to develop a private language in order to give identity. The more exclusive the institution, the more it develops a language that acts as a set of passwords, giving admission to those who are “in the know”, keeping out those who are not. The institutional language may be so rarefied that it looks like nonsense to the outsider. To take some examples:
If someone remarked: “I saw the bench talking to a silk”, apparnently making no sense, it would, in fact, convey to a member of the legal profession that a judge had been talking to a queen's counsel.
Similarly, “the White House spoke to the Kremlin” would make sense to anyone who followed politics. “The Sharks play the Dragons” would be quite natural to an Australian fan (ed: Rugby League teams). A “foundation chair” in a University means the position of a first professor. An actor “treads the boards”; and “the House rises” means that parliament adjourns.
The purpose of this book ahs been to show that the secondary meaning is objectively there in the gospels and Acts. It has set out the story that emerges, and the elements of the basic systems that lie behind the gospel history: chronology, locations, and hierarchy. A great many lesser systems remain to be set out, with their associated vocabulary. But enough has been done to show that a quite new chapter in our understanding of the New Testament and of Christian origins has been opened up by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 30 Sep 2005 : 19:10:13
Greetings one and all...
I have read a couple of books by an american author, John Bevere: The Bait of Satan and UNDERCOVER. He has been doing the Australian conference scene recently and is an educated and well presented preacher/teacher.
I have one major query concerning his book Uncercover chapter 8. Mr Bevere seems to premise his concept of GODLY AUTHORITY based on the KJV translation of Romans 13.1 and EXODUS 9:16?
It appears that Mr Bevere has confused God's power with God's appointed authority? My reading of Ex 9:16 in context is that the Israelites are God's people under His authority not Pharoah's (they just happen to be slaves for 430 years as told to Jacob by God in advance). God authorised Moses to tell Pharoah, (which one Thutmose I,II,III), to free God's people from slavery, God also told Moses to obey HIM not Pharoah. Pharoah was permitted to remain a tyrant at God's pleasure, thus the ten plagues to demonstrate God's power for disobeying God's authority. Mr Bevere suggests that Pharoah had Godly appointed authority (like Hitler and Stalin) therefore the Saints are to submit and obey that authority because it is ordained by God irrespective of the abuse of power by the tyrant.
Moses was stuck as a slave because until God gave Moses HIS power, Moses only had God's authority to remain in obedience and submit to God's will - not Pharoah's.
Various bible versions EXODUS 9:16 below referto Pharoah:
but indeed for this cause I have made you stand: to show you my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth; (WEB)
but in very deed for this cause have I made thee to stand, to show thee my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. (ASV)
But, for this very reason, I have kept you from destruction, to make clear to you my power, and so that my name may be honoured through all the earth. (BBE)
And for this very cause have I raised thee up, to shew thee my power; and that my name may be declared in all the earth. (DBY)
And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, for to show in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. (KJV)
And in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, to show in thee my power; and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. (WBS)
But in very deed for this cause have I made thee to stand, to show thee My power, and that My name may be declared throughout all the earth. (JPS)
And yet for this I have caused thee to stand, so as to show thee My power, and for the sake of declaring My Name in all the earth; (YLT)
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 24 May 2005 : 20:18:37
quote:
Originally posted by Uncle Buck
Curious about the context of authority and power and the use of UNDER in the following verse? None of the major translations use "of" instead of "under" - which is the correct context?
Under
Matthew 8:5-10
5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, 6* And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. 7* And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. 8* The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. 9* For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. 10* When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
9* For I am a man under authority,
What does it mean to be "under authority"? The word translated here as "under" is the following Greek--
hupo {hoop-o'} prep
1) by, under
this word is most often translated as "of"use the word "of" in this case and we will see there real meaning intended--
9* For I am a man (of) authority,
This makes perfect sense now when we read the rest of the story.
The centurion is a man who has been given authority--he is a man "of" authority--He has been give authority over his soldiers by his commanders--therefore he has the right--the authority--the "authorization" to command them to do what he says.
the centurion realizes that Jesus has been given this same type of authority--the Jesus has been given the authorization by God the Father to command sickness to leave.
Jesus calls him a man of faith--because he realizes how faith operates--by speaking--
".....but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed."
The centurion realizes that Jesus is operating the authority of God by speaking--just as he operates his command by speaking to his soldiers. He realizes that Jesus has been given this authority --to "heal every manner of sickness and disease"--by the power of His word--to destroy the work of the devil in the earth.
the centurion correlates this authority to his authority--the authority that he is "of"--that he operates and functions under---not the authority that he is subject to.
If the centurion were "subject to authority" the Bible word say so--instead he says he is "of" authority" rather than "under" authority.
TRANSLATIONS
For I am also a man under authority, having under myself soldiers. I tell this one,'Go,' and he goes; and tell another,'Come,' and he comes; and tell my servant,'Do this,' and he does it." WEB
For I also am a man under authority, having under myself soldiers: and I say to this one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. ASV
Because I myself am a man under authority, having under me fighting men; and I say to this one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes; and to my servant, Do this, and he does it. BBE
For I also am a man under authority, having under me soldiers, and I say to this one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes; and to my bondman, Do this, and he does it. DBY
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. KJV
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. WBS
For I myself am also under authority, and have soldiers under me. To one I say 'Go,' and he goes, to another 'Come,' and he comes, and to my slave 'Do this or that,' and he does it." WEY
for I also am a man under authority, having under myself soldiers, and I say to this one, Go, and he goeth, and to another, Be coming, and he cometh, and to my servant, Do this, and he doth 'it'.' YLT
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty
Bless this House and ALL who ENTER!
Thanks Bros & Sister who sent the following reply to me:*********************************************************************
Re: Under or Of Authority
Interestingly enough, all true authority, other than that of Yahuwâh Himself, is delegated. Dr Strong correctly states that authority (exousia) is “delegated influence” and Brown-Driver-Briggs aptly says that it is “1a) leave or permission”. That being truth, men “of” proper authority are also “under” authority, for no man is an authority unto himself. Where the bind comes in is when we falsely believe that “authority” and “force” are synonymous; as you no doubt know, they are not; “Might does not make Right”. A man may possess the physical force to make you obey him, but that force is not necessarily properly authorized, i.e. given by the Author of all True Authority.
So the answer to your question is, both “of” (by) and “under” are correct if one is speaking of True Authority. But, what is interesting to the thinking man, is this; that captain believed he had properly delegated authority, but in order verify this to see if it be truth one must climb his chain of command to see where it leads. If it does not ultimately lead to Yahuwâh, the Supreme (Highest) Suveran of the Universe, then it is nothing more than the delegated “force” of a tyrant, but, when the AGENT truly Believes that he is under “Proper Authority” to do the things he does, he is a very convincing AGENT indeed. In some ways he is far more dangerous than his master.We hope this has been helpful.
**********************************************************************
Helpful indeed, because I was reading Lectures on the Early History of Institutions by Henry Sumner Maine 1875 [Lecture XII]
Before proceeding to speak at some length in my next Lecture
of these historical limitations on the practical value of
Austin's theories, let me repeat my opinion that if the method of
discussion which seems to me correct had been followed in his
treatise, and if the examination of Sovereignty had preceded the
examination of the conceptions dependent on it, a considerable
number of the statements which he has made respecting these
latter conceptions would have appeared not merely innocent but
self-evident. Law is here regarded as regulated force, simply
because force is the one element which has been allowed to enter
into the primary notion upon which all the others depend. The one
doctrine of this school of jurists which is repugnant to lawyers
would lose its air of paradox if an assumption were made which,
in itself theoretically unobjectionable, manifestly approximates
to practical truth as the course of history proceeds -- the
assumption that what the Sovereign might alter, but does not
alter, he commands. The same arrangement would have a further
advantage, as it seems to me, through the modifications it would
necessitate in Austin's manner of discussing Morality, though the
subject is not one which can be here treated with completeness.
The position at which many readers have stumbled -- I do not
affect to do more than state it in popular language -- is that
the sanction of moral rules, as such, is the disapprobation which
one's fellow-men manifest at their violation. It is sometimes
construed to mean that the only motive for obeying moral rules is
the fear of such disapprobation. Such a construction of Austin's
language is an entire misconception of his meaning; but, if the
order of discussion which I advocate had been followed, I do not
think it could ever possibly occur to any mind.
*********************************************************************
It may be odd how I link scripture and secular jurisprudence, however, if your state of mind is the STATE in which you live and you havitually obey a political superior (secular Government) rather than God, then your positive morals are capable of being altered against your consent by public policy and then applied to legislation as 'law' imposing sanctions on you for breaches.
It simply reinforces my belief that a church is a separate political society habitually obedient to God the creator not parliament or constitution the created! Thus the in the scripture quoted must have truly believed in the one true living God as he was under and had delegated authority and could legitimately use his power.
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 21 May 2005 : 04:06:14
Curious about the context of authority and power and the use of UNDER in the following verse? None of the major translations use "of" instead of "under" - which is the correct context?
Under
Matthew 8:5-10
5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, 6* And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. 7* And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. 8* The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. 9* For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. 10* When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
9* For I am a man under authority,
What does it mean to be "under authority"? The word translated here as "under" is the following Greek--
hupo {hoop-o'} prep
1) by, under
this word is most often translated as "of"use the word "of" in this case and we will see there real meaning intended--
9* For I am a man (of) authority,
This makes perfect sense now when we read the rest of the story.
The centurion is a man who has been given authority--he is a man "of" authority--He has been give authority over his soldiers by his commanders--therefore he has the right--the authority--the "authorization" to command them to do what he says.
the centurion realizes that Jesus has been given this same type of authority--the Jesus has been given the authorization by God the Father to command sickness to leave.
Jesus calls him a man of faith--because he realizes how faith operates--by speaking--
".....but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed."
The centurion realizes that Jesus is operating the authority of God by speaking--just as he operates his command by speaking to his soldiers. He realizes that Jesus has been given this authority --to "heal every manner of sickness and disease"--by the power of His word--to destroy the work of the devil in the earth.
the centurion correlates this authority to his authority--the authority that he is "of"--that he operates and functions under---not the authority that he is subject to.
If the centurion were "subject to authority" the Bible word say so--instead he says he is "of" authority" rather than "under" authority.
TRANSLATIONS
For I am also a man under authority, having under myself soldiers. I tell this one,'Go,' and he goes; and tell another,'Come,' and he comes; and tell my servant,'Do this,' and he does it." WEB
For I also am a man under authority, having under myself soldiers: and I say to this one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. ASV
Because I myself am a man under authority, having under me fighting men; and I say to this one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes; and to my servant, Do this, and he does it. BBE
For I also am a man under authority, having under me soldiers, and I say to this one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes; and to my bondman, Do this, and he does it. DBY
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. KJV
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. WBS
For I myself am also under authority, and have soldiers under me. To one I say 'Go,' and he goes, to another 'Come,' and he comes, and to my slave 'Do this or that,' and he does it." WEY
for I also am a man under authority, having under myself soldiers, and I say to this one, Go, and he goeth, and to another, Be coming, and he cometh, and to my servant, Do this, and he doth 'it'.' YLT
*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Uncle Buck |
Posted - 19 May 2005 : 04:03:33
DIVIDE
B're****h 1:4
"And Elohiym saw the light, that it was good, and Elohiym DIVIDED the light from the darkness."
I have spent a great portion of my study life dissecting every single word of the opening chapters of the first book of scripture. It is my personal belief that all words that are used in the rest of scripture are defined in the beginning. I have found that YHVH wastes no time in putting a difference between light and darkness. This original literal difference will remain consistent throughout scripture with respect to what is right and wrong, holy and unholy, righteous and unrighteous.
The word 'divide' used here in the English is from the Hebrew word badal. Badal means 'to put a difference', and from the beginning YHVH distinguishes between light and darkness in His creation. All His commands to mankind from this point forward will be in harmony with this initial command. When we understand this principle as it is given to us in earthly matters, then we can begin to understand what this same principle means in eternal matters.
Yochanan 3:12
"If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you heavenly things?"
It is only Torah that distinguishes between light and darkness. Here are a few other examples of badal.
Vayikra 10:10-11
"And that ye PUT DIFFERENCE between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean; And that ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which YHVH hath spoken unto them by the hand of Mosheh."
Yesha'yahu 59:2
"But your iniquities have SEPARATED between you and your Elohiym, and your sins have hidden his face from you, that he will not hear."
2 Corinthians 6:17-7:1
"Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye SEPARATE, saith YHVH, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith, YHVH Almighty. Having therefore, these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of Elohiym."
Hitgalut 22:11
"He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he that if filthy, let him be filthy still; and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still; and he that is holy , let him be holy still."
In the end it will be just like the beginning. There will be a DIFFERENCE between that which is light and that which is darkness.
Yesha'yahu 46:10
"Declaring from the beginning, the end, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel SHALL stand, and I will do all my pleasure."
Shalom Alecheim!
From:
http://www.wildbranch.org/WOTW/index.html
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 01 Mar 2005 : 18:41:58
Greetings brother Marty:
Peace be unto you and yours, my friend.
It would seem that Noah Webster too ran into a rather large variety of definitions for the word "world".
WORLD, n. [Sx. Weorold, woruld; D. waereld; Sw. verld. This seems to be a compound word, and probably is named from roundness, the vault; but this is not certain.]
1. The universe; the whole system of created globes or vast bodies of matter.
2. The earth; the terraqueous(consisting of land and water) globe; sometimes called the lower world.
3. The heavens; as when we speak of the heavenly world, or upper world.
4. System of beings; or the orbs which occupy space, and all the beings which inhabit them. Heb 11.
God--hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things; by whom also he made the worlds. Heb 1.
There may be other worlds, where the inhabitants have never violated their allegiance to their Almighty sovereign. W.B. Sprague
5. Present state of existence; as while we are in the world.
Behold, these are the ungodly who prosper in the world. Psa 73.
6. A secular life. By the world we sometimes understand the things of this world, its pleasures and interests. A great part of mankind are more anxious to enjoy the world than to secure divine favor.
7. Public life, or society; as banished from the world. Shak.
8. Business or trouble of life.
From this world-wearied flesh.
9. A great multitude or quantity; as a world of business; a world of charms. Milton.
10. Mankind; people in general; in an indefinite sense. Let the world see your fortitude.
Whose disposition, all the world well knows-- Shak.
11. Course of life. He begins the world with little property, but with many friends.
12. Universal empire.
This through the east just vengeance hurl'd, and lost poor Antony the world. Prior.
13. The customs and manners of men; the practice of life. A knowledge of the world is necessary for a man of business; it is essential to politeness.
14. All the world contains.
Had I a thousand worlds, I would give them all for one year more to devote to God. Law.
15. The principal nations or countries of the earth. Alexander conquered the world.
16. The Roman empire. Scripture
17. A large tract of country; a wide compass of things.
I must descry new worlds. Crowley.
18. The inhabitants of the earth; the whole human race. John 3.
19. The carnal state or corruption of the earth; as the present evil world; the course of this world. Gal 1. Eph 2.
20. The ungodly part of the world.
I pray not for the world, but for them that thou hast given me. John xvii.
21. Time; as in the phrase, world without end.
22. A collection of wonders. [Not in use.]
In the world, in possibility. [All the precaution in the world would not save him.]
For all the world,exactly. [Little used.] Sydney
1. For any consideration.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 21 Feb 2005 : 13:29:36
Young’s Concordance shows seven distinct Hebrew words that the King James version translators have translated into the one English word “world”.
Young’s Concordance shows nine different Greek words that the King James version translators have rendered as “world”.
Pursuant to our desire to have a proper understanding of what message the Scripture is giving to us, it has been necessary for us to take the following steps:
.......…….1. look closely at which Hebrew or Greek word Yahweh inspired the man writing His Scripture to use.
.........….2. look at the context in which the word is being used.
.......…….3. look at the word usage within that particular context.
For example….
If one does not apply the steps given above, ones understanding of the following Scriptures will be unfruitful and it will appear that an honest thinker would be forced to conclude that the Holy Scriptures and, in fact the same author (i.e.John), have (has) been contradictory.
quote:
John 3:16 says…
For [Yahweh] so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
The very same author writes in 1 John 2:15-17…
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of [Yahweh] abideth for ever.
Scripture teaches that Yahshua lived on the earth to show us how to conduct our lives. We should emulate Yahshua. But, if we look only on the surface, we are between a rock and a hard place. We cannot love the world as John 3:16 indicates we should and at the same time not love the world as 1 John 2:15-17 indicates. To reconcile this "apparent contradiction" requires "looking below the surface" and so it is with much of Scripture.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty |
| eagle |
Posted - 21 Feb 2005 : 09:45:28
I am no longer OF the world...only I live within it. Truly I was meant to be "of the LORD" but did not know it most of my life.
In retrospect, I see now why I was never happy, nor loved..in my life before truth entered in.
I had been born to be an 'eagle' but had been raised by and with 'chickens'.. lol
Different in more ways than similar.
I had never felt like I belonged, but couldn't quite put my finger on why. The world (specifically my parents) told me that I was a 'black sheep'. (??) I didn't understand that concept so much as I knew that it was intended as an insult! 
I did not know nor feel LOVE  ...so I rebelled against those who hated me...and instead I became AS the world., (to my own detriment I now see)..hoping to at least be loved BY that "world"., maybe I could "fit in" somehow.
It never quite worked out.
I had no idea that I was not meant to be OF this world, try though I might...I belonged to the LORD from on high! Meant to be soaring with eagles!
Had I stayed (pointlessly) pecking at the ground with the chickens I may never have grown to realize my potential, my calling. One day I heard a voice..unlike any other...calling to me from high places!
A faint remembrance stirred within my soul - what joy!
My soul was drawn up to it..! Hallelujah, my FATHER at last!
I may sojourn on this earth for a bit...but I will one glorious day return to those high places and eternally soar with the angels.
For now, my spirit soars as the eagles..as I live amongst this world..hoping to somehow make a difference to those that are "of" it..!
|
|
|
