What I envision is not important. The Scripture covers the 7th day Sabbath. I was not aware there were any Jewish when GOD blessed the 7th day or even when the mixed multitude was at Sinai and heard the 10 Words.
As far as sitting home all day, AGAIN, what does The Word read? Did Messiah live at the synagogue?
There is no other Sabbath, but the 7th day, which was declared SET APART (Holy) by GOD himself. Sunday is the 1st Day of the week and The Lords Day per the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Laodicea further removed the church from GODS Day of rest.
The Messiah stating the Sabbath (the set apart 7th day) was made for man has zero bearing on what day is the Sabbath.
Okay. I’ll just say that if you can’t explain what you think should be done, you can’t really claim that somebody isn’t doing it, and leave it at that.
You still haven't described what that would look like. Again, do you want everybody sitting at home all Sunday? Or Saturday (which was the original Jewish sabbath)? Or something else. Yes, the church is people, not a building. But when you say that a church should observe the sabbath, what do you envision? Are you saying that every member of that church should be in church all day on Saturday/Sunday/whatever? How do you square that with Jesus's statement that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath?
Well, first off, churches don't keep the sabbath. People do. But ignoring that, how do you think it should be "kept?" What do you think it would look like if it was kept? What is happening now that you object to such that you think that it isn't being kept?
Some people believe that the only legitimate sabbath is on Saturday (e.g., Seventh Day Adventists). Some legalistic folks believe that no "work" should be done, like the pharisees in Jesus's day.
Personally, I believe Jesus when he said (Mark 2:27) that “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The sabbath is a gift from God, a day when you can get some rest and downtime. And if you honor that and seek him, I think he'll prosper you. In other words, God is telling you that a 24x7 work ethic is not only unnecessary, it's ungodly. But whether that break comes on a Saturday, Sunday, Monday, or whatever, I'm pretty sure God doesn't care. I think he also loves it when families take time to build their relationships, going out and doing things together. I don't think God cares if everybody takes their sabbath on the same day and he's not looking for all stores to close on the same day. I think Chick-fil-A's stance on this is admirable, but not strictly necessary, for instance. Anyway, that's what I believe, but I was curious why you called this out, specifically.
Naomi Wolf has been reading from the Geneva Bible and comparing it to the Jerusalem Bible as well as in Hebrew. What she has noticed is that the Geneva doesn’t foreground priests and institutions as being in between the people and God. Additionally, she has noted that God in the Geneva Bible yearns for a highly personal and even intimate relationship with his people. God is approachable and he is not angry with those he loves. I’m enjoying listening to her readings as well as her thoughts on God’s relationships with the humans He created. One last thing: Wolf has hypothesized that it was the Geneva Bible that gave the Puritans the courage to sail to America and establish their colony there.
Interesting. I had noticed her doing that (I’m subscribed to her Substack), but I had basically ignored it because I already have my own daily Bible reading happening. I might go back and listen to those. The main institution that wants to interpose itself between God and the people these days is the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, that was one of the triggers of the Protestant Reformation writ large. I attend a nondenominational Bible church today, and we have no need of priests or other interposers. Indeed, the Bible is clear that we’re all priests now who believe in Jesus and that he is our high priest. Anyway, if I can find the time I’ll try to listen to Naomi’s stuff.
My sister gave me a Bible for Christmas. It's the New International Version. Easy for me to understand. I have so much to learn! Grateful that our pastor teaches from both the new and old testaments each Sunday.
If angels were standing by when God spoke the command, then something along the lines of "the tongues of angels" might be a good guess for the language.
We don't know how creation was accomplished beyond what the text says. I can tell you from looking deep within the creation, though, that it was engineered. Somehow, sometime. Or maybe time doesn't enter into it. I like to reflect upon Job 38:7, although there is so much more in that chapter, if you join in with the vision.
Aramaic was the local language of the Jews in Jesus' time and place. They called it "Hebrew". OT Hebrew, OT Aramaic, and Greek were the "distribution" languages. Israel wasn't terribly keen on its mission as a "light to the nations", and Greek seems to have played a bigger role in getting the word out. It was the lingua franca in that part of the world for a long time, thanks to Alexander, and the Septuagint was and is available as a Greek OT. All part of the plan. This is meant to mirror or complement what you wrote. I hope it does.
The 1611 AV text is not our present-day KJV Bible. KJVO adherents would for the most part be hard pressed to read from it in the original typeface, although it is available with a modern one along with a promise that nothing else was changed. I think what we have dates from the 18th century or so, but I haven't given it a lot of attention, and I am forgetting what I knew. The version we use matches well with the Greek that we have (I'm not far enough along with Hebrew to comment on the OT Hebrew let alone OT Aramaic but I would be surprised if it wasn't also a good match.)
I like the NLT for its readability, but I've had a number of experiences with reading from it and then having to ask "is that actually in the Bible?" That can be a little unnerving, and I like to double-check the translation before quoting it to others. Another interesting one is the New English Translation (NET), which I learned about through Bill Mounce.
I'm a bit leery of The Message, but there are places where it comes through best. Peterson was not at all concerned about not sounding like the KJV, and that was his strength at times. I do like the sound of the HWP!
There is more to the Word of God that written scripture, as John 1 suggests. The Word speaks to us when we pray, as well as when we study (or both at once), for our understanding. What language? The language of our minds, perhaps.
Oh this entire post is just beautiful - brought tears to my eyes!! Ending with that version of scripture that I would probably never have read or heard otherwise (although I love Hawaii and the ppl there :) left me with a lump in my throat. This will stick with me🙏🏻💕. Thank you for this!!
Thanks for this, I want to try out the NASB, am reading the new revised standard version but really like kjv for the simplicity. What is the "Word?" I never could understand the meaning of that. I take it as being just a metaphor for something unknown and unknowable; how can we know what happened before the beginning of time, one microsecond before the big bang that spoke the universe into being. The breath of God.
"What is the "Word?" A question I've been meditating on myself recently. I know there are deeper meanings, but I opt for the simplest one: the Word is how God speaks to me.
His Word could be text, pictures, sounds, a hug, the song of a bird. As long as I am seeking Him, I will be open to his Word - however he wants to communicate it.
Like you said, the breath of God. It could be anything and everything. Glory to Him =)
The NASB is great. There are two kinds of Bible translations: (1) word-for-word, and (2) phrase for phrase. The word-for-word translations attempt, within the differences between language grammars, to translate each word into its English equivalent. They are more "accurate" at some level, but they often read a bit more stiffly. The NASB and KVJ are word-for-word. Most older translations are. The NASB uses modern language versus year 1611 language, though, so it reads smoother than the KJV. The phrase-by-phrase translations are a bit looser and often try to incorporate some larger sense of equivalence at the phrase and idiomatic level. Consequently, they are smoother to read, but some people feel they are less "correct" than the word-by-word translations. The NLT is an example of a phrase-by-phrase translation. The Message Bible is a paraphrase, which is a very, very loose phrase-by-phrase version (not really a translation but a paraphrase). The point of this article was to suggest that while that's true in a narrow sense, God's Word is bigger than the words on the page.
What is God's Word? Well, it's a bit mysterious. It certainly includes the Bible. But as I wrote in the article, quoting from John 1, the Bible says Word = Eternal = God = Jesus = Creator. That's a bit hard to wrap our heads around, similar to saying that Jesus = God = Holy Spirit (the trinity).
Sola scriptura. YET, the 4th commandment is ignored.
How so? By who?
Being raised in the Bible Belt, I know of very few (if any) churches that “keep the 7th day Sabbath”.
What I envision is not important. The Scripture covers the 7th day Sabbath. I was not aware there were any Jewish when GOD blessed the 7th day or even when the mixed multitude was at Sinai and heard the 10 Words.
As far as sitting home all day, AGAIN, what does The Word read? Did Messiah live at the synagogue?
There is no other Sabbath, but the 7th day, which was declared SET APART (Holy) by GOD himself. Sunday is the 1st Day of the week and The Lords Day per the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Laodicea further removed the church from GODS Day of rest.
The Messiah stating the Sabbath (the set apart 7th day) was made for man has zero bearing on what day is the Sabbath.
Okay. I’ll just say that if you can’t explain what you think should be done, you can’t really claim that somebody isn’t doing it, and leave it at that.
If it is not the 7th day Sabbath, The Scripture bears witness..
Sola Scriptura
The CHURCH is PEOPLE (ecclesia) not a building.
Sola Scriptura, caught my attention, being raised Baptist. It is a doctrine they claim, yet refuse to follow.
What day was blessed (set apart) by GOD? My bible reads the 7th or if you like “da sefen”.
Nice word “Legalistic”. Is that the folks attempting to keep the Laws of The Creator (e.g. 7th day Sabbath) or The Lawless.
You are pretty sure GOD does not care? Enough said…
I believe I read that in the front of the book, Genesis 3:1
You still haven't described what that would look like. Again, do you want everybody sitting at home all Sunday? Or Saturday (which was the original Jewish sabbath)? Or something else. Yes, the church is people, not a building. But when you say that a church should observe the sabbath, what do you envision? Are you saying that every member of that church should be in church all day on Saturday/Sunday/whatever? How do you square that with Jesus's statement that the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath?
Well, first off, churches don't keep the sabbath. People do. But ignoring that, how do you think it should be "kept?" What do you think it would look like if it was kept? What is happening now that you object to such that you think that it isn't being kept?
Some people believe that the only legitimate sabbath is on Saturday (e.g., Seventh Day Adventists). Some legalistic folks believe that no "work" should be done, like the pharisees in Jesus's day.
Personally, I believe Jesus when he said (Mark 2:27) that “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." The sabbath is a gift from God, a day when you can get some rest and downtime. And if you honor that and seek him, I think he'll prosper you. In other words, God is telling you that a 24x7 work ethic is not only unnecessary, it's ungodly. But whether that break comes on a Saturday, Sunday, Monday, or whatever, I'm pretty sure God doesn't care. I think he also loves it when families take time to build their relationships, going out and doing things together. I don't think God cares if everybody takes their sabbath on the same day and he's not looking for all stores to close on the same day. I think Chick-fil-A's stance on this is admirable, but not strictly necessary, for instance. Anyway, that's what I believe, but I was curious why you called this out, specifically.
Kindly follow/ subscribe etc.
Naomi Wolf has been reading from the Geneva Bible and comparing it to the Jerusalem Bible as well as in Hebrew. What she has noticed is that the Geneva doesn’t foreground priests and institutions as being in between the people and God. Additionally, she has noted that God in the Geneva Bible yearns for a highly personal and even intimate relationship with his people. God is approachable and he is not angry with those he loves. I’m enjoying listening to her readings as well as her thoughts on God’s relationships with the humans He created. One last thing: Wolf has hypothesized that it was the Geneva Bible that gave the Puritans the courage to sail to America and establish their colony there.
Interesting. I had noticed her doing that (I’m subscribed to her Substack), but I had basically ignored it because I already have my own daily Bible reading happening. I might go back and listen to those. The main institution that wants to interpose itself between God and the people these days is the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, that was one of the triggers of the Protestant Reformation writ large. I attend a nondenominational Bible church today, and we have no need of priests or other interposers. Indeed, the Bible is clear that we’re all priests now who believe in Jesus and that he is our high priest. Anyway, if I can find the time I’ll try to listen to Naomi’s stuff.
Hmm
Thank you David. This brought a smile to my face.
My sister gave me a Bible for Christmas. It's the New International Version. Easy for me to understand. I have so much to learn! Grateful that our pastor teaches from both the new and old testaments each Sunday.
If angels were standing by when God spoke the command, then something along the lines of "the tongues of angels" might be a good guess for the language.
We don't know how creation was accomplished beyond what the text says. I can tell you from looking deep within the creation, though, that it was engineered. Somehow, sometime. Or maybe time doesn't enter into it. I like to reflect upon Job 38:7, although there is so much more in that chapter, if you join in with the vision.
Aramaic was the local language of the Jews in Jesus' time and place. They called it "Hebrew". OT Hebrew, OT Aramaic, and Greek were the "distribution" languages. Israel wasn't terribly keen on its mission as a "light to the nations", and Greek seems to have played a bigger role in getting the word out. It was the lingua franca in that part of the world for a long time, thanks to Alexander, and the Septuagint was and is available as a Greek OT. All part of the plan. This is meant to mirror or complement what you wrote. I hope it does.
The 1611 AV text is not our present-day KJV Bible. KJVO adherents would for the most part be hard pressed to read from it in the original typeface, although it is available with a modern one along with a promise that nothing else was changed. I think what we have dates from the 18th century or so, but I haven't given it a lot of attention, and I am forgetting what I knew. The version we use matches well with the Greek that we have (I'm not far enough along with Hebrew to comment on the OT Hebrew let alone OT Aramaic but I would be surprised if it wasn't also a good match.)
I like the NLT for its readability, but I've had a number of experiences with reading from it and then having to ask "is that actually in the Bible?" That can be a little unnerving, and I like to double-check the translation before quoting it to others. Another interesting one is the New English Translation (NET), which I learned about through Bill Mounce.
I'm a bit leery of The Message, but there are places where it comes through best. Peterson was not at all concerned about not sounding like the KJV, and that was his strength at times. I do like the sound of the HWP!
There is more to the Word of God that written scripture, as John 1 suggests. The Word speaks to us when we pray, as well as when we study (or both at once), for our understanding. What language? The language of our minds, perhaps.
I figured you would weigh in on this article. Thanks for the additional info!
Oh this entire post is just beautiful - brought tears to my eyes!! Ending with that version of scripture that I would probably never have read or heard otherwise (although I love Hawaii and the ppl there :) left me with a lump in my throat. This will stick with me🙏🏻💕. Thank you for this!!
It makes me so happy that it spoke to you. Thanks for your kind words. Share it with a friend! 😀
I plan to!😊
Thanks for this, I want to try out the NASB, am reading the new revised standard version but really like kjv for the simplicity. What is the "Word?" I never could understand the meaning of that. I take it as being just a metaphor for something unknown and unknowable; how can we know what happened before the beginning of time, one microsecond before the big bang that spoke the universe into being. The breath of God.
"What is the "Word?" A question I've been meditating on myself recently. I know there are deeper meanings, but I opt for the simplest one: the Word is how God speaks to me.
His Word could be text, pictures, sounds, a hug, the song of a bird. As long as I am seeking Him, I will be open to his Word - however he wants to communicate it.
Like you said, the breath of God. It could be anything and everything. Glory to Him =)
The NASB is great. There are two kinds of Bible translations: (1) word-for-word, and (2) phrase for phrase. The word-for-word translations attempt, within the differences between language grammars, to translate each word into its English equivalent. They are more "accurate" at some level, but they often read a bit more stiffly. The NASB and KVJ are word-for-word. Most older translations are. The NASB uses modern language versus year 1611 language, though, so it reads smoother than the KJV. The phrase-by-phrase translations are a bit looser and often try to incorporate some larger sense of equivalence at the phrase and idiomatic level. Consequently, they are smoother to read, but some people feel they are less "correct" than the word-by-word translations. The NLT is an example of a phrase-by-phrase translation. The Message Bible is a paraphrase, which is a very, very loose phrase-by-phrase version (not really a translation but a paraphrase). The point of this article was to suggest that while that's true in a narrow sense, God's Word is bigger than the words on the page.
What is God's Word? Well, it's a bit mysterious. It certainly includes the Bible. But as I wrote in the article, quoting from John 1, the Bible says Word = Eternal = God = Jesus = Creator. That's a bit hard to wrap our heads around, similar to saying that Jesus = God = Holy Spirit (the trinity).