Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat
LeClerc

Honey 56s questions

Hi Sis

Have started a new thread since I believe the questions you have asked are important and each requires an answer, hope that is okay.

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  

Do people who practice Judaism toady call themselves Jews or Hebrews?
It it the law that defines the religion of Judaism?
Who did YHWH give the law to, was it the Hebrews, the Jews or both?
Did Jesus consider himself a Jew as well as a Hebrew or just a Hebrew from the tribe of David?
I remember you commenting that Paul considered himself to be both? did I understand that correctly?
Is there any difference betwen the religion that Jesus practiced and Judaism
Is Israel (God's chosen)made up of Jews and Hebrews? (as well as those adopted into Israel on account of Jesus)
Would you seperate Israel, Gods people from Israel, the modern state?
Do you believe as I do, that it is possible for all of Israel to be saved through Christ Jesus?


Honey


LeClerc
Farmer Geddon

"Do people who practice Judaism toady call themselves Jews or Hebrews? "

Not sure what a "Judaism toady" is, but I'm pretty sure that Biblical scholars use the term 'Hebrews' to designate the descendants of the patriarchs in the Holy Writ of Israel; Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

They were also called Israel [Genesis 33:28] until their conquest of Canaan (Palestine) in the late 2nd millennium B.C.E. where they became known as The Israelites' until their return from the Babylonian Exile in the late 6th century B.C.E., from which time on they became known as Jews.

http://history-world.org/Hebrews.htm.

Hope that answers most of your 'questions'
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  

Do people who practice Judaism toady call themselves Jews or Hebrews?


Honey


Hope to try and answer you questions one by one.

In the 6th century B.C.E., the kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyria and the ten tribes were exiled from the land (II Kings 17), leaving only the tribes in the kingdom of Judah remaining to carry on Abraham's heritage. These people of the kingdom of Judah were generally known to themselves and to other nations as Yehudim, and that name continues to be used today.

The word Judaism literally means "Judah-ism," that is, the religion of the Yehudim

To answer your question, I believe most refer to themselves as Yehudim.

I believe that the use of the English word Jew and its modern meaning has really muddied the waters with regard to the definition of Yehudim contained in the Torah.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Which begs another question, and it in turn relates to the Abramic covenant.
In coming to the Jew, first, was it the Gentile that was next, or, the rest of the Abrahamic descendents who were scattered and required to return?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  
It it the law that defines the religion of Judaism?

Honey


Pharisaic Judaism (later, Rabbinic Judaism) is based on the Oral Law which later, when recorded, became known as the Talmud. From what I have read  the oldest full manuscript of the Talmud is from 1342, known as the Munich Talmud.

During Y'shua's earthly ministry The Sadducess followed the Written Law and believed that the Oral Law had no authority.

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  

Who did YHWH give the law to, was it the Hebrews, the Jews or both?

Honey


The Law of Moses was given to Israel, all of whom were Hebrew and included the tribe of Judah.

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Which begs another question, and it in turn relates to the Abramic covenant.
In coming to the Jew, first, was it the Gentile that was next, or, the rest of the Abrahamic descendents who were scattered and required to return?

bernard (hug)


Do those who refer to themselves as Jews know from which of the twelve tribes they have descended ?

Or do they believe they have all descended from the tribe of Judah.

Or is it because they practise Judaism they call themsekves Jews.

Or is it because they dwell in Judah they now call themselves Jews ?

Were all of Abrahams descendants Hebrew ?

What are the Hebrew and Greek words which you translate as the English word Gentile?

What about the Samaritans ?

Lots of more questions Bernie.

LeClerc
bnabernard

 Yes, so I say beware of greeks bearing gifts, get to the nitty gritty of what Gods purpose was following the flood and why Noah should be so disadvantage when the world would seem to have been swept clean and filled with righteous people who walked with God.

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

Thank you LeClerc, and Farmer(toady was a misprint!   thank you for the link ) and to Bernard,

Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions and I am looking forward to more of your thoughts concerning them.

Thanks again.
Honey  
Honey 56

I like this Farmer, (from the link you provided)......

"It (the Old testament) is Israel's life story - a story that cannot be told
adequately apart from the conviction that God had called this people in his
grace, separated them from the nations for a special responsibility, and
commissioned them with the task of being his servant in the accomplishment of his purpose."


Amen to that!

Honey
Honey 56

LeClerc wrote:
Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  
It it the law that defines the religion of Judaism?

Honey


Pharisaic Judaism (later, Rabbinic Judaism) is based on the Oral Law which later, when recorded, became known as the Talmud. From what I have read  the oldest full manuscript of the Talmud is from 1342, known as the Munich Talmud.

During Y'shua's earthly ministry The Sadducess followed the Written Law and believed that the Oral Law had no authority.

LeClerc


The Saducees didn't believe in the resurrection (that's why they were sadyousee)
Yeshua did believe in the resurrection and taught on it, He believed in the spirit of the Law and not the letter of it.
So do you think that Jesus was a Pharisee, or neither ? He seemed to have  a great deal to say about the way they stopped people from coming to God, perhaps He believed as they did, but could see how errors of understanding had crept in?

Honey
bnabernard

Ref above to farmer, Noah had three sons and each was given a resposibility, now I cant be exact or precise without trawling but the Gist being that one, I think we know as Ham/Cannan was given over to bad ways corruption and the like, then, I think it was Shem, was given over to proceded in rightiousness, and the other who's name escapes me, was given over to attend the camp of Shem, These last two sons I mention apear to give rise to Abram's task's and the Gentile task.

Sorry if the names are wrong but got to get down the road, have it on me toes as they say.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Ref above to farmer, Noah had three sons and each was given a resposibility, now I cant be exact or precise without trawling but the Gist being that one, I think we know as Ham/Cannan was given over to bad ways corruption and the like, then, I think it was Shem, was given over to proceded in rightiousness, and the other who's name escapes me, was given over to attend the camp of Shem, These last two sons I mention apear to give rise to Abram's task's and the Gentile task.

Sorry if the names are wrong but got to get down the road, have it on me toes as they say.

bernard (hug)


You have provided yourself with the understanding of how the Nephilim could be on the earth both before and after the flood without going down the road that the sons of God in Genesis 6 verse 4 were fallen angels having sexual intercourse with female human beings.

Genesis 6
4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:

The Saducees didn't believe in the resurrection (that's why they were sadyousee)
Honey


 

LeClerc
bnabernard

LeClerc wrote:
Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Ref above to farmer, Noah had three sons and each was given a resposibility, now I cant be exact or precise without trawling but the Gist being that one, I think we know as Ham/Cannan was given over to bad ways corruption and the like, then, I think it was Shem, was given over to proceded in rightiousness, and the other who's name escapes me, was given over to attend the camp of Shem, These last two sons I mention apear to give rise to Abram's task's and the Gentile task.

Sorry if the names are wrong but got to get down the road, have it on me toes as they say.

bernard (hug)




You have provided yourself with the understanding of how the Nephilim could be on the earth both before and after the flood without going down the road that the sons of God in Genesis 6 verse 4 were fallen angels having sexual intercourse with female human beings.

Genesis 6
4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them: the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

LeClerc



How do you read the answer that I have given myself, lest I have presented myself wrong.gh I'm begining to think this belongs on the latest thread started by Jim

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Sis

Getting through them slowly

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  

Did Jesus consider himself a Jew as well as a Hebrew or just a Hebrew from the tribe of David?
Honey


The Logos (YHWH) made flesh (Y'shua) was born of the womb of Mary. Mary and Joseph were both of the tribe of Yahudah so Y'shua is a Yahudi, and is a Hebrew.

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Sis

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClerc,
Thank you for that.

I understand now what you are saying, but I have some more questions for you  

I remember you commenting that Paul considered himself to be both? did I understand that correctly?


Honey


This gets really interesting

Quote:

In Phil 3:5 Saul called himself a "Hebrew of Hebrews," probably meaning "I speak Hebrew and I came from Hebrew-speaking parents." His father was a Pharisee (Acts 23:6). In his letter to the believers in Philippi, Saul described himself as having been circumcised as an infant on the eighth day (Phil 3:5). Obviously his Jewish parents did this in observance of the Torah commandment (Lev 12:2-3). He further confirmed this by stating that he is of the people Israel and he went on to cite his tribal descent (Benjamin), which is something few ''Jews'' can do today. We see the same in Romans 11:1, where Saul wrote that he was, "an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin."

Saul lived during the time of Rome's military occupation of Israel. Although born in Tarsus (Acts 22:3), he grew up among the ''Jews'' of Jerusalem, as a Pharisee (Acts 26:4-5). Again, the importance of the Torah in his family's life can be demonstrated. They made the considerable commitment of having him taught by Gamli'el (Acts 22:3), the foremost Jewish educator of the time (Acts 5:34). To achieve this, Saul must have been an excellent student and deeply committed to the Hebrew scriptures.

Recounting this as an adult, he described himself as "thoroughly trained in the Torah of our fathers" (Acts 22:3), he self-identified as a Jew (Acts 22:3), and he described the Jews as "my own nation" (Acts 26:4). Saul was raised as a Jew.

http://jesusisajew.org/Saint_Paul_was_a_Jew.php



Why did Saul (Paul) refer to himself as a ''Jew''

The word ''Jew'' appears to have originated during the Babylonian Exile and is derived from the Kingdom of Yahudah, which included the old tribal territories of Benjamin and Yahudah since Saul (Paul) was of the tribe of Benjamin he would call himself a ''Jew''

It is about this time that the defintion of Yahudi (Jew) changes from that given in the Torah and undergoes further changes right up to todays definition(s).

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/whojew1.html

LeClerc
Honey 56

Hi bro.  

Thanks for sparing the time to answer my questions, I am finding this thread really interesting and I am learning a great deal too.

(Had a computer malfunction (again!), but I am catching up slowly    PTL

Honey
Farmer Geddon

bnabernard wrote:
Ref above to farmer, Noah had three sons and each was given a responsibility, now I cant be exact or precise without trawling but the Gist being that one, I think we know as Ham/Canaan was given over to bad ways corruption and the like, then, I think it was Shem, was given over to proceeded in righteousness, and the other who's name escapes me, was given over to attend the camp of Shem, These last two sons I mention appear to give rise to Abram's task's and the Gentile task.

Sorry if the names are wrong but got to get down the road, have it on me toes as they say.

bernard (hug)


You are more or less there Bern.

Tradition seems to indicate that the Hebrews are descended from Shem's side of the family. Shem begat Arpachshad, who begat Salah (also known as Cainan), who begat Éver (also known as Heber), who is credited with retaining the original human language, Hebrew, a language named after Heber (Éver), also called lingua humana in Latin.

Don't forget that Abram (Abraham) is also a descendant of Shem's side of the family as depicted in: Genesis Chapter 11 http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0111.htm

Many people seem to think that the Jews were called Hebrews after Abram the Hebrew, (AKA "the passenger over Euphrates").

This is not strictly accurate as Josephus correctly affirms, the progenitor of Abraham, Heber (Éver) is the true "father" of the Hebrews.

Although there is also a good case to claim Shem can be seen as the father of all the children of Heber, or of all the Hebrews, in a history long before Abram passed over Euphrates.

Josephus: The Antiquities of the Jews - Chapter 6:

Quote:
4. Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons, who inhabited the land that began at Euphrates, and reached to the Indian Ocean. For Elam left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians. Ashur lived at the city Nineve; and named his subjects Assyrians, who became the most fortunate nation, beyond others. Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans. Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians; as Laud founded the Laudites, which are now called Lydians. Of the four sons of Aram, Uz founded Trachonitis and Damascus: this country lies between Palestine and Celesyria. Ul founded Armenia; and Gather the Bactrians; and Mesa the Mesaneans; it is now called Charax Spasini. Sala was the son of Arphaxad; and his son was Heber, from whom they originally called the Jews Hebrews.

"The Antiquities of the Jews
By Flavius Josephus"




Basically Hebrew is actually a language, but it also identifies the people who spoke this language as 'Hebrews'..

It also appears that the Hebrews of the Bible can be seen as one branch of a certain Semitic group, related linguistically to Canaanites, Edomites and Moabites, who moved from a semi-nomadic existence to settled life in the Bronze Age.
Farmer Geddon

Honey 56 wrote:
....
I remember you commenting that Paul considered himself to be both? did I understand that correctly?...



Honey


When Paul, as Saul, is introduced in Acts7/8 I'm sure he can be seen as a Sadducee.

He was at least associated with the Sadducees, as a police officer under the authority of the High Priest.

In fact it has been postulated that the writer[s] of Acts and Luke were/was related to the Sadducee Theophilus named in the titles of Acts/Luke 1.

Quote:
Jewish priest

A growing belief
[The earliest known person to suggest that most excellent Theophilus was none other than the High Priest was probably Theodore Hase who contributed a short article to Bibliotheca Bremensissome time prior to 1802 when this contribution is mentioned in the Introduction to the New Testament, tr. and augmented with notes by Johann David Michaelis and Herbert Marsh. David L. Allen, Lukan Authorship of Hebrews (2010); Richard H. Anderson, Who are Theophilus and Johanna? The Irony of the Intended Audience (2010); “Theophilus: A Proposal,” Evangelical Quarterly 69:3 (1997) 195-215; “The Cross and Atonement from Luke to Hebrews,” Evangelical Quarterly71:2 (1999), 127-149; “Luke and the Parable of the Wicked Tenants,” The Journal of Biblical Studies, Jan-Mar 2001, Vol. 1, No. 1; “A la recherche de Theophile,” Dossiers d'Archeolgie, Dec 02-Jan 03; Josep Rius-Camps, Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, The message of Acts in Codex Bezae: a comparison with the Alexandrian tradition, Volume 4, (2009) 3-4 and prior volumes] points to Theophilus ben Ananus, High Priest of the Temple in Jerusalem from 37-41.

In this tradition Theophilus would have been both a kohen and a Sadducee. That would make him the son of Annas and brother-in-law of Caiaphas, raised in the Jewish Temple. Adherents claim that Luke's Gospel was targeted at Sadducee readers.

This might explain a few features of Luke.

He begins the story with an account of Zacharias the righteous priest who had a Temple vision of an angel (1:5-25). Luke quickly moves to account Mary's purification (niddah), Jesus' Temple redemption (pidyon ha-ben) rituals (2:21-39), and then to Jesus' pilgrimage to the Temple when he was twelve (2:46), possibly implying his bar mitzvah.

He makes no mention of Caiaphas' role in Jesus' crucifixion and emphasizes Jesus' literal resurrection (24:39), including an ascension into heaven as a realm of spiritual existence (24:52; Acts 1:1).

Luke also seems to stress Jesus' arguments with the Sadducees on points like legal grounds for divorce, the existence of angels, spirits, and an afterlife (Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead). If this was the case then Luke is trying to use Jesus' rebuttals and teachings to break down Theophilus' Sadducean philosophy, maybe with the hope that Theophilus would use his influence to get the Sadducees to cease their persecution of the Christians.

One could also look at Luke's Gospel as an allegorical (רֶמֶז remez) reference to Jesus as "the man called the Branch" prophesied in Zechariah 3:8; 6:12-13, who is the ultimate high priest foreshadowed by the Levitical priesthood.

Most, if not all, of the commentaries on the Gospel of Luke say the “Question about the Resurrection” pericope presented in Lk. 20:27-40 is the only account in Luke of Jesus confronting the Sadducees.

It is true that Luke only mentions the Sadducees by name once but it is not true that this pericope is the only one concerning the Sadducees. The Parables about the Good Samaritan, the Unjust Steward, the Rich Man and Lazarus and the Wicked Tenants are directed to the Sadducees who controlled the temple establishment. These parables are about unfaithful priests.

They are the wicked sons of Eli.

All of the New Testament passages concerning alms and almsgiving, except one in Matthew, are in Luke-Acts.

Therefore, these parables may be about alms, almsgiving and the proper use of the wealth controlled by the temple authorities. Luke’s criticism focuses on the use of these temple resources by the religious aristocracy for their own selfish purposes.

This means that the religious authorities controlled tremendous wealth that had been in times past properly distributed to the people as part of the institutional form of almsgiving.

The priests in these parables are unfaithful, dishonest and disobedient because, inter alia, they have not invited the poor, the maimed, the lame and the blind to the banquet table.

Once the office of the High Priest became non-hereditary, and available to the highest bidder, the institutional role of almsgiving was abandoned or reduced as the purchaser had to recoup his purchase price.

A minority view identifies Theophilus as a later high priest: Mattathias ben Theophilus who served from 65-66. Note that Luke refers to high priest Joseph ben Caiaphas simply as "Caiaphas". Thus, the reasoning goes, Luke used this pattern when addressing Theophilus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_%28biblical%29#cite_ref-3


This is why I distrust a lot of the books in the Gospels - They seem to be written by what we could call early Spin-Doctors...
LeClerc

Hi Farmer

Farmer Geddon wrote:

When Paul, as Saul, is introduced in Acts7/8 I'm sure he can be seen as a Sadducee.


The Sanhedrin was made up of Pharisees and Sadducees.

However

(Saul) Paul was the son of a Pharisee and believed in the resurrection of the dead.

Acts 26
Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, "My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead."

(Saul) Paul cannot be seen as a Sadducee.


Farmer Geddon wrote:

Although there is also a good case to claim Shem can be seen as the father of all the children of Heber, or of all the Hebrews, in a history long before Abram passed over Euphrates.


Is that what the Tanakh teaches ?

Joshua 24
24 Then Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem and called for the elders of Israel, for their heads, for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God. 2 And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. 3 Then I took your father Abraham from the other side of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac.

Would Abraham's ancestors be called Hebrews whilst worshipping other gods ?

Notice where YHWH took Abraham from.

Abraham crossed over from worshipping other gods to worshipping the one true God, YHWH, he was then called a Hebrew.

LeClerc
Farmer Geddon

Hmm - this is where it gets complicated Sparra.

You see "Hebrew" is in fact a language, but to quibble about whether it is a race, or a manner of speech is just a case of Semitics (or Shemitic, from Shem, the son of Noah).

The question we should be pondering over is:

Is Hebrew just one of the many Semitic languages such as Canaanite, Aramaic, Phoenician, Akkadian, etc., that evolved out of a more ancient unknown language?

Or was Hebrew, and the Semitic family of languages, the original language of man?

If Hebrew was the original language of Man: Genesis Chapter 11 בְּרֵאשִׁית
א  וַיְהִי כָל-הָאָרֶץ, שָׂפָה אֶחָת, וּדְבָרִים, אֲחָדִים. 1 And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech.

Then aren't we all linguistically "Hebrews"?[see what I did there]?
LeClerc

Hi Farmer

Farmer Geddon wrote:

The question we should be pondering over is:

Is Hebrew just one of the many Semitic languages such as Canaanite, Aramaic, Phoenician, Akkadian, etc., that evolved out of a more ancient unknown language?

Or was Hebrew, and the Semitic family of languages, the original language of man?


This is what happens Farmer if we ask the wrong question.

Genesis 10
9 Therefore its name is called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.

Confusion.

But if we ask the correct question

Why was Abraham called a Hebrew

Joshua 24
24 Then Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem and called for the elders of Israel, for their heads, for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God. 2 And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods. 3 Then I took your father Abraham from the other side of the River, led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac.

We learn why Abraham was called a Hebrew, because YHWH took him from the other side, Abraham crossed over.

Simples.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Would what you are concluding, and I'm sure many are asking the same question, more apply to Noah as regards crossing over from one side to another, Abram simply a simuler event compared to a previous event?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Would what you are concluding, and I'm sure many are asking the same question, more apply to Noah as regards crossing over from one side to another, Abram simply a simuler event compared to a previous event?

bernard (hug)


Did YHWH ever say to Noah ?

Genesis 12 CJB
12 Now Adonai said to Avram, “Get yourself out of your country, away from your kinsmen and away from your father’s house, and go to the land that I will show you. 2 I will make of you a great nation, I will bless you, and I will make your name great; and you are to be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, but I will curse anyone who curses you; and by you all the families of the earth will be blessed.”

LeClerc
bnabernard

Did He? What did He say to Noah regarding his future, did he warn him that he would be faced with countless souless spirits who would be in rebellion against God despite God wiping evil off the face of the earth?

What promises where made through Enoch, prior to Noah, what was the interaction and words of God to those who remained faithful pre the deluge.
What are the actions of a just and loving God,
What were the expectations of the descendents of Adam their cue to be faithful to God?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Did He? What did He say to Noah regarding his future, did he warn him that he would be faced with countless souless spirits who would be in rebellion against God despite God wiping evil off the face of the earth?

What promises where made through Enoch, prior to Noah, what was the interaction and words of God to those who remained faithful pre the deluge.
What are the actions of a just and loving God,
What were the expectations of the descendents of Adam their cue to be faithful to God?

bernard (hug)


Please provide the scripture Bernie ?

LeClerc
bnabernard

Exactly.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Exactly.

bernard (hug)


So what does YHWH reveal to us.

Genesis 12 CJB
12 Now Adonai said to Avram, “Get yourself out of your country, away from your kinsmen and away from your father’s house, and go to the land that I will show you. 2 I will make of you a great nation, I will bless you, and I will make your name great; and you are to be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, but I will curse anyone who curses you; and by you all the families of the earth will be blessed.”

That should settle the matter Bernie should it not.

LeClerc
bnabernard

It should do one would think, however many questions arise in what was to follow. You spoke of division on another thread, yet there we are at a future date from this covenant with Abram looking at the division of the people, Ephram in one direction and Judah in another, then why not even futher division as we see a NT on an OT.

That is not to mention the enslavement in Egypt and the freedoom rent through Moses, who dies and is raised to heaven following a dispute with the devil who laid claim to his body.

Is there any reason that you can gleam from scripture that would prompt God to save eight rightious souls to face a world of souless spirits?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:

Is there any reason that you can gleam from scripture that would prompt God to save eight rightious souls
bernard (hug)


Love for us all.

Romans 6
22 However, now, freed from sin and enslaved to God, you do get the benefit — it consists in being made holy, set apart for God, and its end result is eternal life. 23 For what one earns from sin is death; but eternal life is what one receives as a free gift from God, in union with the Messiah Yeshua, our Lord.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Thats all very well come the time romans are written, but why was it that eight rightious souls were saved. Saved when sinful souls were destroyed.
That these righteous souls were put in among souless spirits, when,
Quote:
but eternal life is what one receives as a free gift from God, in union with the Messiah Yeshua, our Lord.


Considering the teaching that Yeshua is God YHWH ? or do you tech that Yeshua is not God YHWH?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Thats all very well come the time romans are written, but why was it that eight rightious souls were saved. Saved when sinful souls were destroyed.
That these righteous souls were put in among souless spirits, when,
Quote:
but eternal life is what one receives as a free gift from God, in union with the Messiah Yeshua, our Lord.


Considering the teaching that Yeshua is God YHWH ? or do you tech that Yeshua is not God YHWH?

bernard (hug)



The scriptures teach and I believe what they teach that Y'shua is YHWH manifest in the flesh.

To answer your question Bernie, answer the the following question. Why did YHWH need to be manifest in the flesh to redeem mankind.

When you have answered that question, according to the scriptures, then you will know why eight righteous souls were saved.

LeClerc
bnabernard

I have no problem with eight righteous souls being saved, neither have I a problem with why the eight righteous souls were outnumbered by souless spirits.

What I ask is, why was the eight righteous souls outnumbered by souless spirits. Is there a way that you can conclude why there was a legion in need of being cast out, and why they had no problem being cast into animals, the swine that happened to be handy.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
I have no problem with eight righteous souls being saved, neither have I a problem with why the eight righteous souls were outnumbered by souless spirits.

What I ask is, why was the eight righteous souls outnumbered by souless spirits. Is there a way that you can conclude why there was a legion in need of being cast out, and why they had no problem being cast into animals, the swine that happened to be handy.

bernard (hug)


Can you please provide a definition of ''souless spirits''

LeClerc
Honey 56

Hi Bernard..

By 'souless spirits' are you referring to the Nephilim again?

Honey
LeClerc

Hi Sis

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi Bernard..

By 'souless spirits' are you referring to the Nephilim again?

Honey


What is Bernies definintion of ''souless'' since using Hebraic understanding it means devoid of Nephesh.

LeClerc
bnabernard

The traditional Christian concept of an immaterial and immortal soul distinct from the body was not found in Judaism before the Babylonian Exile,[1] but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies.[2] Accordingly, the Hebrew word nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". Nephesh was rendered in the Septuagint as ψυχή (psūchê), the Greek word for soul. The New Testament also uses the word ψυχή, but with the Hebrew meaning and not the Greek
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
The traditional Christian concept of an immaterial and immortal soul distinct from the body was not found in Judaism before the Babylonian Exile,[1] but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies.[2] Accordingly, the Hebrew word nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". Nephesh was rendered in the Septuagint as ψυχή (psūchê), the Greek word for soul. The New Testament also uses the word ψυχή, but with the Hebrew meaning and not the Greek


I am still none the wiser as to whom or what you are referring to as 'souless spirits' Bernard ?
Could you please give us some understanding, perhaps with a scripture or two?

Thanks Bernard.

Honey
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
The traditional Christian concept of an immaterial and immortal soul distinct from the body was not found in Judaism before the Babylonian Exile,[1] but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies.[2] Accordingly, the Hebrew word nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". Nephesh was rendered in the Septuagint as ψυχή (psūchê), the Greek word for soul. The New Testament also uses the word ψυχή, but with the Hebrew meaning and not the Greek


Then applying Hebraic understanding to your post above a souless Spirit, is a dead Spirit.

Is that what you mean.

LeClerc

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum