Hebrew study for beginners

[Brother Paul]

Hi thanks for the reply.

John 1 King James Version1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God

It boils down to the word faith as a work or called albor of Christ love .same thing work of faith labor of love.

Many form my experiences try and separate the inseparable . Faith is a work of God .God is not a word he is Spirit

I would offer my paraphrase of the King James paraphrase above one of many.

My paraphrase. . .In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was of God.. . .( again coming from)

The paraphrase the word was God and not of as ownership coming from God does not seem to work out in the end of the matter .

God is not a word. He is a Spirit that creates words ... Let there be and His testimony the bible is good.

In that way by the finger of God he created the word of God called the book of prophecy or book of the law the Bible called the letter of the word . Not to be confused with the spirit of the word

The law of faith,( Christ’s faith). . . No faith from us born faithless dead in our tresspases and sin without God in this present corrupted world .

Faith is a work that testifies . The testimony cannot be separated from faith the power of God not seen.​

​

​

A) Paul makes it clear that Faith is Not a work

B) The Word of God is Yah'hoveh man
ifest and was already referred to by this phrase in pre- Christian Judaism

He came and dwelt among us!

 

[Brother Paul]

Did you mean write out what I think the passage is saying.?

We know that the lamb of God slain speaks to the sufferings work of Christ the Holy Spirit of God . He performed that work of sufferings in jeopardy of his own Holy Spirit from the foundation of the world the six days the Father as God did work .

Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. . . .(not the demonstration of that unseen work, thousands of years later .)

The promised three days and night demonstration of the work finished during the 6 days when God was still working,

The promised demonstration came during the first century reformation when Jesus the Son of given words from the father he replied . ( it is finished )

No more demonstrations of the work which again was finished from the foundation. . We rest in Hs eternal rest (seventh day) not in respect to the outward demonstration . .three days and nights a shadow or the foundation

No the Lamb defeated them "because HE is the Lord of lords"

 

[Garee]

No the Lamb defeated them "because HE is the Lord of lords"

The lamb of God was slain from the foundation of the world. . . . the six days the Father did work. Not in regard to the three days and nights promised demonstration thousands of year later .

The lamb represent the Spirit of our Father the spirit of son ship, The unseen spirit of adoption by which us like our brother in the Lord Jesus cried out Abba father.. .give us this day our daily bread.

God alone is the only one without mother or father beginning of Spirit life or end thereof .

The spirit of sonship not having to do with dying flesh and blood that could ever enter heaven

Hebrew 7: 3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

All believers are reckoned . as sons of God born of God, the second birth.

 

[Garee]

A) Paul makes it clear that Faith is Not a work

B) The Word of God is Yah'hoveh man
ifest and was already referred to by this phrase in pre- Christian Judaism

He came and dwelt among us!

I see that differently. looking at the phrase. The word was God. Again, God is not a word he is a Holy Spirit that uses words as a law of faith or labor of love ."Let there be" and its testimony seen it was very good. God alone is good. The law of Christ work of faith. Faith cannot be separate from works faith is dead . let there be and nothing appeared

james chapter 2 begin with a warning not to have the faith of Christ the power of God which produce the works of Christ in respect to any man seen

James 2:1 King James Version2 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

God will not share his glorious work of faith with dying mankind . verse 7 identifies it as blasphemy

James 2:17 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

The same faith of Christ (when your see the word faith) , it is not of Abraham a sinner or Rehab the prostitutes' .but rather a imputed faith coming from Christ who through a labor of his love worked in them to both will and empower to do to it the good pleasure and power of God not seen (Philippians 2:13.)

James 2:22-26 Seest thou how faith (Christs not abrahams ) wrought with his works, and by works was (Christ's) faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. (Work of faith as a labor of God's love.) Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works,Christ in her) when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
For as the body without the spirit is "dead", so faith without works is dead also.

Faith is a work . "let ther be "and it "was very Good " God alone is good

 

[Brother Paul]

I see that differently. looking at the phrase. The word was God. Again, God is not a word he is a Holy Spirit that uses words as a law of faith or labor of love ."Let there be" and its testimony seen it was very good. God alone is good. The law of Christ work of faith. Faith cannot be separate from works faith is dead . let there be and nothing appeared

james chapter 2 begin with a warning not to have the faith of Christ the power of God which produce the works of Christ in respect to any man seen

James 2:1 King James Version2 My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

God will not share his glorious work of faith with dying mankind . verse 7 identifies it as blasphemy

James 2:17 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?

The same faith of Christ (when your see the word faith) , it is not of Abraham a sinner or Rehab the prostitutes' .but rather a imputed faith coming from Christ who through a labor of his love worked in them to both will and empower to do to it the good pleasure and power of God not seen (Philippians 2:13.)

James 2:22-26 Seest thou how faith (Christs not abrahams ) wrought with his works, and by works was (Christ's) faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. (Work of faith as a labor of God's love.) Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works,Christ in her) when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
For as the body without the spirit is "dead", so faith without works is dead also.

Faith is a work . "let ther be "and it "was very Good " God alone is good

God is not a word, He is the Word which is a hypostases of Himself by which humans can know Him. As Jesus Himself says no man has seen God's form, yet the Old Testament is filled with examples where this has taken place, So what does He mean? After telling us this He says the Son (or Word as the Jewish sages knew Him) declares Him (which means makes Him manifest). So when Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and a host of others see and hear Yah'hoveh, it is as the Son (Word).

Now when I say faith is not a work I am referring to the works they all say do not save (the works of the Law). Faith which we see in Abraham BEFORE the LAW saved Abraham (he BELIEVED GOD and it was counted as Righteousness, not believed IN God which the devils also do). What Paul and others teach us is that we cannot be saved by works of our own merit. We are not saved because we kept the list of do's and don'ts perfectly. If we could do that we would not need Christ or His effecasious work. We must seek His Lordship and His righteousness. There are also works God expects from us but these do not save but if one IS saved they will do them (because the Holy Spirit in us motivates us to do so).

 

[Rhema]

He often said things like "Before Abraham was, I AM"

I would point out that the phrase ought to be rendered, "Abraham was before; ... I am now." But lordy, I just don't have the three hours to explain the grammatical intricacies. And you'd likely ignore it anyway.

Please write out what the Holy Scriptures say in John 1:1 here?

The only accurate way to present such writing would be this....

εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος​

And again, I just don't have the three hours to lay out the supporting parameters for how this is to be translated, but given the style and grammatical sequence of this passage, not to mention the register and vocabulary that places this text as a Greek philosophical declaration.... we can start with this:

(John 1:1) The Pattern (λογος) was suffused throughout the cosmic protoplasm, and the Pattern was only of the Divine Good, and Sovereign is the Pattern.​

It's wonderful text, less ambiguous, more impactful; Inviolate and expansive in scope and obliterates the doctrine of duality while establishing sovereignty.

It will enlighten or scandalize you.

Enjoy,
Rhema

 

[Brother Paul]

I would point out that the phrase ought to be rendered, "Abraham was before; ... I am now." But lordy, I just don't have the three hours to explain the grammatical intricacies. And you'd likely ignore it anyway.



The only accurate way to present such writing would be this....

εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος​

And again, I just don't have the three hours to lay out the supporting parameters for how this is to be translated, but given the style and grammatical sequence of this passage, not to mention the register and vocabulary that places this text as a Greek philosophical declaration.... we can start with this:

(John 1:1) The Pattern (λογος) was suffused throughout the cosmic protoplasm, and the Pattern was only of the Divine Good, and Sovereign is the Pattern.​

It's wonderful text, less ambiguous, more impactful; Inviolate and expansive in scope and obliterates the doctrine of duality while establishing sovereignty.

It will enlighten or scandalize you.

Enjoy,
Rhema

Well all the Greek speakers and all the Greek scholars throughout the history of the church until now must have got it incorrect I guess!

 

[Rhema]

Well all the Greek speakers and all the Greek scholars throughout the history of the church until now must have got it incorrect I guess!

Your snarky insult wasn't appreciated, but if you like to baptize yourself in the fallacy of Appeal to Authority.... clean up when you're done.

But the Greek scholars understood the Greek text with no problem. It's you English people who are peculiar. Your "Greek Scholars" couldn't even figure out Koine.

“One man is to be given the credit for the discovery of the Koine – a German pastor named Adolf Deissmann. Even though one or two perceptive scholars had noted the true character of NT Greek as early as the middle of the nineteenth century, their statements made no impression on general opinion. Deissmann, on a visit to a friend in Marburg, found a volume of Greek papyri from Egypt, and leafing through this publication, he was struck by the similarity to the Greek of the NT. He followed up this observation with continued study, and his publications of his findings finally led to general acceptance of the position that the peculiarities of the Greek NT were, for the most part, to be explained by reference to the nonliterary Greek, the popular colloquial language of the period. He first published his results in two volumes of Bible Studies (1895, 1897) and later on in the justly popular Life from the Ancient East (1908).”​

- The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, pg. 486.​

My bad for forgetting you have an insular mind.

Rhema

 

[Brother Paul]

Your snarky insult wasn't appreciated, but if you like to baptize yourself in the fallacy of Appeal to Authority.... clean up when you're done.

But the Greek scholars understood the Greek text with no problem. It's you English people who are peculiar. Your "Greek Scholars" couldn't even figure out Koine.

“One man is to be given the credit for the discovery of the Koine – a German pastor named Adolf Deissmann. Even though one or two perceptive scholars had noted the true character of NT Greek as early as the middle of the nineteenth century, their statements made no impression on general opinion. Deissmann, on a visit to a friend in Marburg, found a volume of Greek papyri from Egypt, and leafing through this publication, he was struck by the similarity to the Greek of the NT. He followed up this observation with continued study, and his publications of his findings finally led to general acceptance of the position that the peculiarities of the Greek NT were, for the most part, to be explained by reference to the nonliterary Greek, the popular colloquial language of the period. He first published his results in two volumes of Bible Studies (1895, 1897) and later on in the justly popular Life from the Ancient East (1908).”​

- The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, pg. 486.​

My bad for forgetting you have an insular mind.

Rhema

So then how the Orthodox always read the Byzantine majority text were wrong?
Seriously, not a snarky insult but a serious inquiry!

 

[Brother Paul]

Your snarky insult wasn't appreciated, but if you like to baptize yourself in the fallacy of Appeal to Authority.... clean up when you're done.

But the Greek scholars understood the Greek text with no problem. It's you English people who are peculiar. Your "Greek Scholars" couldn't even figure out Koine.

“One man is to be given the credit for the discovery of the Koine – a German pastor named Adolf Deissmann. Even though one or two perceptive scholars had noted the true character of NT Greek as early as the middle of the nineteenth century, their statements made no impression on general opinion. Deissmann, on a visit to a friend in Marburg, found a volume of Greek papyri from Egypt, and leafing through this publication, he was struck by the similarity to the Greek of the NT. He followed up this observation with continued study, and his publications of his findings finally led to general acceptance of the position that the peculiarities of the Greek NT were, for the most part, to be explained by reference to the nonliterary Greek, the popular colloquial language of the period. He first published his results in two volumes of Bible Studies (1895, 1897) and later on in the justly popular Life from the Ancient East (1908).”​

- The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, pg. 486.​

My bad for forgetting you have an insular mind.

Rhema

Remember, the writers thought like Hebrews thought and they were trying to communicate Hebrew concepts in Greek and often times used many words to factually communicate what was a single concept for their mimd. This is why John uses three verses to equate the Word with the Memra-YHVH of Judaism. There was no simple Greek equivalent.

 

[Garee]

God is not a word, He is the Word which is a hypostases of Himself by which humans can know Him. As Jesus Himself says no man has seen God's form, yet the Old Testament is filled with examples where this has taken place, So what does He mean? After telling us this He says the Son (or Word as the Jewish sages knew Him) declares Him (which means makes Him manifest). So when Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and a host of others see and hear Yah'hoveh, it is as the Son (Word).

Now when I say faith is not a work I am referring to the works they all say do not save (the works of the Law). Faith which we see in Abraham BEFORE the LAW saved Abraham (he BELIEVED GOD and it was counted as Righteousness, not believed IN God which the devils also do). What Paul and others teach us is that we cannot be saved by works of our own merit. We are not saved because we kept the list of do's and don'ts perfectly. If we could do that we would not need Christ or His effecasious work. We must seek His Lordship and His righteousness. There are also works God expects from us but these do not save but if one IS saved they will do them (because the Holy Spirit in us motivates us to do so).

Hi thanks.

I would offer. The faith of Christ by which we are saved is a work of God .

God is not a word .Three things as the very essence. God is Spirit. God is light. God is love .

He uses powerful words as thoughts as the law of his faith . "Let there be" and there was "light separating the darkness .

God entering the picture the beginning .God is light and not that he can only create it .

Just like . . God is Love. God expresses his love as a labor (let there be)

God was the literal light the first three days before he found sin in the heart of Lucifer . He then created two temporal as . The Sun the source or power, and other the reflected. Moon reflecting the glory of God

He uses that idea to represent his own self as glorious light (Sun)and Jesus (Moon) the lesser light a reflection of His glory .(Sun) He sets aside a whole Psalm as a parable to help represent.

Psalm 19:1-5King James Version The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun,Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race


In the new heaven and earth the Sun representing Christ and the moon the son of man Jesus become one source no more night

Revelation 21:22-25 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

 

[Brother Paul]

You're welcome, but I didn't. If you'd like, we can put the discussion under peer review to settle that misconception.


Blame the teacher, not the student. (Especially in this case, were that the case.)


This proves you did not read my posts, in that I did NOT avoid Zechariah, but said THIS (and I quote....)

So don't go accusing me of avoiding something that I actually commented on.


You KEEP MAKING this claim, .... several times now, at least .... and yet despite my repeated requests, you have STILL NOT presented any support to back that up. The "me" is NOT implicated. The "me" is there.. in the text. Otherwise prove that it isn't. PLEASE I beg you.

So I say once again...

Why, after all the solid reasons I've given to show that the "me" IS present in Isaiah, do you still keep saying it isn't?

Prove it.

Make a solid case for your claim that all the translations which have the word "me" in Isaiah 48:16 are wrong. Could they be wrong? Yes, I can allow for that, but prove it.

Or stop making that claim.

This is an issue of honesty, and yes, Honesty is a hill that I'm willing to die on.

Rhema

You do realize that I (me) did not say it is "wrong" but that it must be implied because the word for "me" is not present in the Hebrew phrasing. You indicated that it is and I disagree. Our discussion was about who the me is. I say it is YHVH when 'on earth' as the Word/Son (who came and dwelt among us) and I believe this is bore out in Zechariah 2 and the reason why is because one cannot attribute the descriptive adjectives to the prophet (unless he is God). The same 'sense' is brought out in 12:10 when YHVH says they shall look upon (consider) ME whom they pierced (or ran through). It literally says they shall look upon the pierced, the me is implied, but this makes it YHVH, the one who is speaking. I am sorry you must need to insult me with me being snarky and having an insular mind for I do not accept either pseudo-Ad Hominem. Be at peace and thank you for the insight on the sword of the Spirit as that was enlightening (never bothered to look there before)

 

[Rhema]

So then how the Orthodox always read the Byzantine majority text were wrong?
Seriously, not a snarky insult but a serious inquiry!

Okay, thank you.

I'm not challenging that the Greek text is written as - "εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος." Both textual traditions have it written that way and I don't know of any significant variants.

But as a matter of translation, let's take the word αρχη. The simple gloss is "Beginning." However, in Greek philosophy, the word αρχη means the stuff out of which the stuff of creation was made (cf. Kittle's). Remember it was these very same Greeks who gave us the Atomic Theory.

In other words, to the readers of Philo, and other well educated Hellenistic Jews, αρχη means "the cosmic protoplasm." But neither Orthodox priests nor later Roman Catholic Bishops were well educated in arcane Greek philosophy. (They likely didn't even care....) But Philo did. Philo had a deep almost mystical view of THE LOGOS, and while the Logos was (to him) the vehicle by which creation was made by God, the Logos was not a person. But now the author of the Gospel named John comes along and says otherwise.

Considering the stylistic nature of the themes and the "register" of this gospel text (how it "sounds" when reading the Greek); when one has read a sufficient amount of Philo, it readily becomes apparent that the Gospel named John is either an antithetical treatise to Philo, or written by a disciple of Philo who then converted to Christianity.

So let's take the word "εν." The simple English gloss is "in." And yet when reading certain Greek medical (or alchemical) authors, we find this word to describe mixtures wherein a certain liquid is suffused throughout (a solution).

The initial phrase of John 1:1 can read "The Logos was suffused throughout the Cosmic Protoplasm." It's a valid translation given the stylistic nature of the Gospel named John.

(But what pastor or translator is going to dig that deep?)

Rhema

And yes, the Aramaic reads as follows...
ܒܪܫܝܬ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܡܠܬܐ ܘܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܘܐܠܗܐ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܗܘ ܡܠܬܐ

 

[Garee]

I'm not challenging that the Greek text is written as - "εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος." Both textual traditions have it written that way and I don't know of any significant variants.

We would need to look at John 1 :1 You are challenging that God is a word and not a spirit that conveys words .

 

[Rhema]

We would need to look at John 1 :1 You are challenging that God is a word and not a spirit that conveys words .

Well then... here ya go.... here is John 1:1 -

(John 1:1 TR) εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος​

Have at it bro.

Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Remember, the writers thought like Hebrews thought

I consider that absurd. Read Philo. He was trying to make Plato and other Greek philosophers Judaic. Hellenistic Jews thought like Greeks thought, especially the scholars outside Jerusalem at that time.

You do realize that I (me) did not say it is "wrong" but that it must be implied because the word for "me" is not present in the Hebrew phrasing.

YES IT IS. The Hebrew word for "me" is contained in the ending letters.
And I gave you MORE than sufficient proof of this.
But since you have blocked your ears to my words, go find someone who can actually speak Hebrew and let them tell you.

Our discussion was about who the me is.

How is it even possible to have a discussion about who the "me" is if the "me" isn't there?
(That too is absurd.)

the me is implied

Oh for the love of the stiff necked Jew.

My apologies, Brother Paul, that my words were not sufficient to convince.

Kindly,
Rhema

 

[Garee]

Well then... here ya go.... here is John 1:1 -

(John 1:1 TR) εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος​

Have at it bro.

Rhema

The work came from God "Let there be." God is Spirit and that seen "it" was good . The law of his faith as a labor of his love

God is Spirit not a word.

 

[Rhema]

The work came from God "Let there be." God is Spirit and that seen "it" was good . The law of his faith as a labor of his love

God is Spirit not a word.

( You can't read it, can you..... )

 

[Garee]

( You can't read it, can you..... )

The word or God who is not a man but is eternal Spirit ? His thoughts revealed as His eternal word are not ours thoughts


I am interested in why you it would seem to need to give an eternal Spirit that has not flesh and bone. flesh and bones.

Which we can see Jesus the son of man did have .He like us did the will of the father .he alone did it without error. He declared . . .Not as I will the one with no power. . . but you Holy Father alone the one with power to raise the dead and rebuke the spirit of lies .

 

[Rhema]

I am interested in why you it would seem to need to give an eternal Spirit that has not flesh and bone. flesh and bones.

And I am interested in you being honest to admit that you cannot read Greek.

He declared . . .Not as I will the one with no power. . . but you Holy Father alone the one with power to raise the dead and rebuke the spirit of lies .

Where did Jesus say this? (He didn't, did he.)

Rhema