A Question For Torah Keeping Messianics

[Stephen Silver]

Shlama Akhi Stephen,

I apologize for saying how happy I am; that's just wrong; I see that now. How can a humble person say he's as happy as possible? Surely being miserable and knowing it is the sign of true humility. Our Savior said He was meek and humble; He must have been supremely humble, since He is the embodiment of absolute and perfect virtue, hence, he must have been supremely miserable and wretched, and would never presume to rejoice or claim to be supremely happy, for that would be a sign of pride. We are to allow others to tell us how happy we are, for others surely know better than than we do, what is in our hearts and minds .

Are you interested in learning something, or do you think you know it all and cannot possibly learn anything about this matter of Christ's return? I can show you something very powerful about how to interpret the prophecies, but I will not give it to you if you are not as humble as you say I should be- I whose head is larger than whole states and some small countries. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->


Burkta,

Dave

Shlama Akhi David:
No, your ways of teaching are foreign to me, i.e.- vitriolic diatribe. You're sarcasm betrays your feigned humility. You don't expect anyone to follow your example, do you?

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

[gbausc]

Shlama Akhi,

You seem hell bent on making me out to be vitriolic and proud. You have called it pride to say how happy I am, have you not?
What is this hang up you have about labeling me proud? Is it not a sign that you have a real problem with pride yourself?

1 ?? (MUR) There is therefore no excuse for thee, O man, that judgest thy neighbor; for by judging thy neighbor, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest, dost practise the same things. Romans 2:1

It seems we've been down this road before. You really should get a grip on yourself,Stephen; and if you are the paragon of humility you say I should be, you will take your lumps gladly and thank me for doing you a service. I don't think you can see yourself except by projecting your own problems onto someone else as your scapegoat.

Hey, I can take it. I can also dish out right back at you, so don't think you will get away with labeling me any way you like. I'll label you right back with every false accusation you throw at me and then some, for your charges are false and unwarranted. They tell us more about who you are than who I am.

I may resort to sarcasm at times, when it makes my point. Shlikha Paul also used sarcasm with the Corinthians, in case you didn't notice, and he used it quite a lot.
You may call it vitriolic diatribe; I call it "losing the argument" on your part. You respond by crying "foul", instead of dealing with the facts I have given you.

I think the topic of discussion is a worthy one; apparently you did also, but you quickly wanted to "move on" when I presented arguments which you felt uncomfortable with answering, apparently, for you did not answer them. You simply reaffirmed your position, "

I believe in the bodily return of Yeshua Mashikha as the angels foretold. History will bear this out."

I say history has already taken you out! "The coming of Our Lord is near" cannot mean 2000 years!

You also said

that obviously did not happen. Some words and phrases must be understood in the light of historical fact."

, referring to prophetic scripture.
I said that philosophy is backward, and it is. If you think about it, you will have to agree, so you choose to ignore it rather than admit you are wrong.

We cannot judge scripture or interpret scripture by history. We should judge history and interpret history by scripture. History is what man thinks and how man interprets events. Scripture is eternal truth and is how God thinks and sees things. You can't expect me to let you get away with that, can you?

Would your Pastor let you get away with that statement? If so, you should find someone with a higher standard and view of scripture.

I know the churches are infected with the very philosophy you seem to hold. I come on like gangbusters against it, as I believe The Apostles would have and as I know they did and our Lord did. And I have not even begun to point out the backwardness of Biblical interpretation used almost universally today by Christian theologians and scholars, who are nothing but modern renditions of the "Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites" of 1st century Judea. They are a "generation of vipers" and "children of Gehenna", and their converts are doubly so
(Mt 23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.)

How's that for "vitriolic"? And that's pure scripture from the very mouth of God incarnate!

You will admit you are wrong when I correct your Aramaic and Hebrew grammar and translation, but you seem to hide out in your stronghold of eschatology and prophecy views. What is that? Is that not pride? Are you not every bit as proud as you say I am?

Vitriolic? You implied I am a "flat earther" because I hold to the Preterist view of prophecy in Matthew 24 and elsewhere. That is pure insult. You wish to insult my intelligence and discredit my character. Perhaps you side with Albion also in characterizing me as an "Anti-Semite" because I am a preterist; you have not contradicted him on that point, so I assume your silence is consent to the libel. He who does not defend his brother against false accusations becomes his accuser.

Get off that high assed horse you're sitting on and meet me on level ground, if you will. Stop crying "foul" and give me facts instead of positions and answer mine.
I will tear your arguments to shreds one by one like so much confetti.

You think I am bragging? Try me.

In The Truth

Dave

[Stephen Silver]

Shlama Akhi,

You seem hell bent on making me out to be vitriolic and proud. You have called it pride to say how happy I am, have you not?
What is this hang up you have about labeling me proud? Is it not a sign that you have a real problem with pride yourself?

Shlama Akhi David:
You have taken this thread way off topic. Get to the point because I'm not interested in your banter. The one and only point I was responding to was "sherbata". If that topic is at a standstill or exhausted then move on to another "scholarly topic". You are reading way too much into my posts.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->

[*Albion*]

Well, I'd say that that is "Checkmate!" lol <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/poketoungeb.gif" alt="" title="Poke Tounge" /><!-- s -->

Shlama Akhi,

You seem hell bent on making me out to be vitriolic and proud. You have called it pride to say how happy I am, have you not?
What is this hang up you have about labeling me proud? Is it not a sign that you have a real problem with pride yourself?

Shlama Akhi David:
You have taken this thread way off topic. Get to the point because I'm not interested in your banter. The one and only point I was responding to was "sherbata". If that topic is at a standstill or exhausted then move on to another "scholarly topic". You are reading way too much into my posts.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

[gbausc]

Shlama Akhi Steve,

You wrote:

an extreme preterist view like yours is like insisting that the world is flat

Contrariwise it's not fitting to present such a vitriolic diatribe, Akhi David.

You have attempted to insult me; I have not done that to you. I have not been vitriolic. Please be specific, and don't throw out general accusations, because I don't know what you're talking about.
I certainly have not accused anyone of being an ANTI-SEMITE, as Albion has accused me; nor have you rebuked him for that groundless charge. If you are opposed to vitriol, then you might consider opposing that slander instead of acting like you approve of having a tag-team side kick for support. What's the matter? Are you afraid of hurting his feelings and losing a friend?

Viriolic diatribe? What a joke!

You have also accused me of pride for saying I am happy. ("Let another man praise thee, and not thine own lips.", you quoted) That really is funny, but indicates a strange way of thinking and a Pharisaical tendency in you, which seems to crop up now and again. I have called you on it, but I guess you are too embarassed to deal with it, because you know its indefensible.

You say you're not interested in my banter; you certainly seem interested in yours. Albion seems to enjoy it as well.

Somehow I don't think I'll get a fair hearing on this topic, or any other, for that matter. I am spending far too much time on these posts, and I don't think its worthwhile.

I have given you a lot of information, Steve, which you have ignored and continue to ignore on the topic of interpreting Matthew 24. I will not give you anymore, until you read it and answer it.You could start with how Sharbatha is used in Matthew 1, Matthew 12,Matthew 13,Matthew 16,Matthew 17,Matthew 23, especially Mt 1,12 and 23, but the others as well. Then we can deal with the Greek translation in Mark 13,Luke 21 as well as Mt 24, and in the other chapters.
I also listed verses which proclaim the Lord's return to be soon or that they were in the end time in the 1st century, in John, Peter James and Revelation.

If you weren't interested in banter, you might have responded to those things instead.

We shall see what you are interested in.


Peace,

Dave

[Stephen Silver]

David Glen Bauscher wrote:

Somehow I don't think I'll get a fair hearing on this topic, or any other, for that matter. I am spending far too much time on these posts, and I don't think its worthwhile.

Shlama Akhi David:
Once again as I have already stated.

The one and only point I was responding to was "sherbata". If that topic is at a standstill or exhausted then move on to another "scholarly topic". You are reading way too much into my posts.

Oh, I agree that "sherbata" means "generation" everywhere it appears. However, its extended meaning is "tribe, nation or people" and Matthew 24:34 must use the extended meaning. Take for example, the prophetic verse Jeremiah 31:37. The continuing existence of the Jewish nation precludes that Matthew 24:34 could not have been entirely fulfilled before 70 A.D. (destruction of the Second Temple) as is the preterist view, akhi. We cannot ignore prophesy and interpret any passage of scripture in the New Testament isogetically. There are too many eschatological prophesies in the TN"K to be ignored, akhi David. Each one will have its complete fulfillment in the Mashikha. (Deuteronomy 18:15-22) Be well akhi David.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

[Yochanan5730]

Now, you may argue that your translation is superior to that of John Wesley Etheridge, whom in 1848 (more than 150 years ago) devoted himself to the translation of the New Testament from then existing manuscripts into King James English. However, I took considerable time to collate his paragraphic work to line up with my transcription of the Khabouris Codex. I took the time also to place his notes in the column by each corresponding verse. I did this because I wanted to honour his work, make it more easily readable and available to enquiring minds, but mostly as a guide for sourcing words and phrases in the Khabouris text. Wesley's accuracy is unimpeachable and his sensitivity to the original pronunciation of personal and place names preserves a dimension of the Peshitto/Peshitta text that one loses in the Anglicised translations. His notes are very helpful indeed.
When I defer to the interpretation of John Wesley Etheridge, I do it with humility because I respect his translation. It's withstood the test of time. His use of King James English does not mar his accuracy in translation. He's not perfect but he's very close to it. As I said in my last post "'nuff said", let's move on to something else, Akhi David.

<!-- s:onfire: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/onfire.gif" alt=":onfire:" title="On Fire" /><!-- s:onfire: -->

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

Shalomie Homie,
i did the same thing with Etheridge's New Testament and added chapter and verse to it... it took alot of patients to do so. i have e-sword, and found modules for Etheridge, Murdock and Lamsa, as well as the Peshitto (not Peshitta) in syriac script. the Etheridge is divided up by chapter and verse for the e-sword. i wish i would have found it before i went through all that work lol

i was wondering, is the dukhrana site your's? i love that site <!-- s:onfire: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/onfire.gif" alt=":onfire:" title="On Fire" /><!-- s:onfire: -->

in Yeshua,
Z'ev Yochanan

[Stephen Silver]

I was wondering, is the dukhrana site your's?

in Yeshua,
Z'ev Yochanan

Shalom Z'ev:
Well, Dukhrana (memorial/remembrance) is the genius of Lars Lindgren. Lars is a computer scientist and has created the useful interfaces for the Peshitta the Aramaic Lexicon and the Khabouris Look-Up Tool. My Khabouris Codex Transcription is hosted on Dukhrana. Together, we share the vision of making what we believe to be the New Testament "autograph" freely available to all. I'm glad you are enjoying the site.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->

[gbausc]

Shlama Akhi Stephen,

I am Glenn David Bauscher, not David Glenn, but you can call me Dave. I have never been called by my first name.

You write:

Oh, I agree that "sherbata" means "generation" everywhere it appears. However, its extended meaning is "tribe, nation or people" and Matthew 24:34 must use the extended meaning. Take for example, the prophetic verse Jeremiah 31:37. The continuing existence of the Jewish nation precludes that Matthew 24:34 could not have been entirely fulfilled before 70 A.D.

You cannot "keep your cake and eat it too". If "Sharbtha" (this is actually the correct transliteration and pronunciation; I have previously mis-printed this; The Red book has "Sharbetha") means "generation", then we should stick with that unless context forces us to use a less common meaning.

You seem to be saying that "Sharbtha" means "generation" normally, but that it must mean "tribe, nation or people"- (What happened to "race"?) in Matthew 24 (Mark 13, Luke 21) because of the prophecy in Jeremiah 31:36,37, which says essentially that the nation of Israel will not cease from being a nation.You do understand the normal meaning of "generation", don't you, Stephen? It refers to "all the people born and living at about the same time". Another is, "the average period between the birth of one generation and that of the next". If sharbtha means "nation" in Matthew 24:34, then it would conflict with Jeremiah 31: "This nation will not pass until all these things be fulfilled.", which would be tantamount to saying: "The universe will not come to an end until all these things be fulfilled." That would be sheer nonsense.
That tells nothing about the time of fulfillment of anything; nor does it even seem coherent.

The normal sense of Sharbtha-generation as "all the people born and living at about the same time" is the only one that makes good sense, and that is the meaning in almost all of its occurrences in the NT.

Are we understanding each other?

Burkta,

Dave

[Stephen Silver]

Dave wrote:

You seem to be saying that "Sharbtha" means "generation" normally, but that it must mean "tribe, nation or people"- (What happened to "race"?)

Right, and "race" too.

in Matthew 24 (Mark 13, Luke 21) because of the prophecy in Jeremiah 31:36,37, which says essentially that the nation of Israel will not cease from being a nation.

Right again, Dave.

You do understand the normal meaning of "generation", don't you, Stephen? It refers to "all the people born and living at about the same time". Another is, "the average period between the birth of one generation and that of the next".

"Generation" in this case is more specific. Yeshua is speaking to the Jewish people, so he is referring to "his race/nation/people". Take the blinders off Dave.

If sharbtha means "nation" in Matthew 24:34, then it would conflict with Jeremiah 31: "This nation will not pass until all these things be fulfilled.", which would be tantamount to saying: "The universe will not come to an end until all these things be fulfilled." That would be sheer nonsense.
That tells nothing about the time of fulfillment of anything; nor does it even seem coherent.

Tell that to Jeremiah the prophet who wrote it and to Yeshua who quoted it, Dave.

The normal sense of Sharbtha-generation as "all the people born and living at about the same time" is the only one that makes good sense, and that is the meaning in almost all of its occurrences in the NT.

Let's agree to disagree and move on to something else, Dave.

Are we understanding each other?

Is that a rhetorical question?

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->

[gbausc]

Steve wrote:

Yeshua is speaking to the Jewish people, so he is referring to "his race/nation/people". Take the blinders off Dave.

Wrong, Steve. He was speaking to 4 disciples (Kapha,Yaqob,Yokhannan and Andraus; see Mark 13:3). Just because they are Jewish does not mean He was speaking to all Jewish people or the nation of Israel. Those four were the only people there, according to the text: Cephas and James and John and Andrew asked him, privately:Tell us, when will these things be? and what will be the sign that these things approach their consummation? -Mark 13:3

For the life of me, I cannot ascertain from your position the Lord's answer to the disciple's question: "When shall these things be?"

I am trying to take off the blinders, but you are the one wearing them, and you seem quite determined to keep them. So be it. If you do not wish to reason with me about your position, that's fine. You are simply "digging in" and refusing to deal with facts inconvenient to your position. I understand this, but it saddens me. What you are saying is: "My mind is made up. Please do not ask me to explain my position or to compare evidence for the other side; I refuse to think any more on this issue."

Is that a rhetorical question?

No, it was an honest question.

But I won't ask any more, since you are obviously threatened by questions and would rather not answer them. You simply state your position dogmatically and call someone who differs a "flat earther". Even if I were a "flat earther", I think I could find higher ground than where you are standing.

Move on? Move on to what? How would your obstinance allow open debate or discussion on another subject? I don't see that happening.

Happy moving!

Dave

[Stephen Silver]

David Bauscher wrote:

Wrong, Steve. He was speaking to 4 disciples (Kapha,Yaqob,Yokhannan and Andraus; see Mark 13:3). Just because they are Jewish does not mean He was speaking to all Jewish people or the nation of Israel. Those four were the only people there, according to the text: Cephas and James and John and Andrew asked him, privately:Tell us, when will these things be? and what will be the sign that these things approach their consummation? -Mark 13:3

Shlama Akhi David:
It makes no difference whether Yeshua was speaking to four Jewish disciples in Mark 13 or to all of his Jewish disciples in Matthew 24. It's the same message. Matthew 24:34 uses the word "sherbata" and its extended meaning is "race, tribe, nation or people" beside "generation". Basically, "extreme preterism" does not allow one to look at things flexibly from either an historicist or futurist eschatological viewpoint. The text is the same, but it is interpreted differently for each view. I will be vigilant, never to narrow my viewpoint by sucking up to any of these camps. I love the scriptures too much to do violence to the Word of God.
Also akhi, I have no personal feelings or opinions that will be of any use here. Keep your opinion and live a happy life. I'm just trying to weigh each passage in light of the rest of scripture so that I don't analyze any passage of scripture isogetically. One can err by narrowing one's view so much as to ignore the prophecies of the TN"K. That's about it, akhi. Be well.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->