I was introduced to Hebrew idioms before going to Israel in 1989. For three weeks before the trip, our group met with a Messianic Jewish Rabbi, who explained these verses to us, although he didn’t bring the receipts, like you did.
A thought occurred to me afterwards, before we left:
1. When studying the Tenach, ‘Why read commentaries written by Gentile theologians with a PhD in Hebrew and ‘Old Testament’ rather than Jewish scholars.’ After all, they grew up with the language and ‘knew their history better than you Christian’s,’ according to Rabbi Feldman.
2. More recently, an encounter with one of those Gentile theologians with that PhD, not only discounted the research of a Jewish scholar, who recently received his PhD based on his research. but compared it to what was written on a cereal box!
The dialogue between this man and another teacher (with degree in some science) was not only dismissive, but also mocking and even critical of believers who have followed and learned from the Jewish scholar they were critical of. even though they both teach the ‘Old Testament’ from a Hebraic perspective.
3. Even more recently I’ve wondered why Hebrew idioms are not included in Hermeneutical discussions or OT commentaries. My thought is that knowing and understanding them would disrupt their dispensational approach to Bible study on many levels.
I pray someday that Jewish scholars say, "Hey, wait a minute, we're taking back that Jewish book, lol." Then we'll get some deep commentary. However, we can't forget David Stern and the few others who have tried their hardest to get things to come across. 🙏
I shouldn’t try to comment here when I’m texting with my son who lives in California. I was probably thinking of Howard Hendricks who wrote ‘Living By the Book’ which teaches how to study the Bible. . .the subject of a comment on an article you wrote. 🤷♀️
Maybe I just need a nap or to go for a walk to clear the mind fog. 😂
excellent comment! 8-) my personal experience has taught me to never, ever trust any theological “expert” regardless of their chosen religion. i've heard entirely false Biblical teachings from both mainstream Christians, as well as Jewish converts.
i find it to be most wise to seek guidance through the Holy Spirit of God while digging into the meanings of the original words throughout the scriptures, as many so called Biblical “scholars” seem to regularly dispense with doing so.
as to the “why”... my opinion is that it most often has to do with pride. we humans have a most difficult time admitting we may have been wrong about a subject. perhaps many learn this from the STATE, as i don't recall many (if any) politicians who ever admit they were wrong.
for that matter, not many church denominations ever admit they were wrong about their own erroneous Biblical understandings either — and when someone challenges one of their false teachings (like their precious “hell” doctrine), they often condemn the challenger because they really cannot refute the overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.
in like manner as church organizations, many people have made a “religion” out of what should otherwise be “political science” and they refuse to engage in critical thinking and reasoning because they would then be considered “heretics”. then again, they also make a “religion” out of their personal insane beliefs which refute actual biological Science by falsely believing men can get pregnant and have babies, and support men playing in women's sports.
the masses have been indoctrinated into the philosophy of Collectivism... which is satanic. the world is deceived by satan. so really, we shouldn't be all that surprised to witness the total insanity which continues to grow all around us.
so there's my personal opinion as to the “why”. ;-)
Ty for this word lesson. So hard for gentiles to grasp the whole meaning when we don't know Hebrew. These word studies are invaluable. I have a question that isn't a word study per se. But it's similar - it's about the promises God makes to the Israelites. I have been taught they are out for us as well. That may be a big topic but I need to understand better. Have you addressed this before? And if so please point me to it. I am learning so much from your teaching. It is like the fullness of the living Word unfolding before me. Beautiful. Ty.
great article on this very misunderstood subject which has plagued the mainstream church for ~2000 years, and mostly all over the erroneously understood definition of one word which the mainstream “scholars” appear to willingly ignore. in doing so, they also willingly ignore using any kind of rational thought about their very irrational argument which claims Jesus “did away with His law”. but who knows what kind of way of explaining the truth about this important subject might get through the wall of indoctrination that has been fortified all their lives by those who were taught to believe the lie. so we continue to try and help others see a bit better in this world of darkness. Godbless... 🙏🏼😎❤️♾️
In my experience, there is usually a hint of animus when someone is arguing a gulf of separation between the Jews (i.e., the OT) and the Christians (the church in the NT) - and there is ALWAYS confusion within that argument. It is obvious, even in the English, that when Jesus said "fulfill" that he was not talking about closure / erasure / putting on the shelf. There are many places where he exalted the Word of God, or where he explained how the teachers were hung up on the letter of the law, but missed the spirit of the law (which, as we learn in many places, is timeless). I always smile when I read him say "Have you not read....." because of course they had read it, they just didn't apprehend it. And remember, he told the Pharisees that their problem was not that they did not study (search) the Scriptures enough, but that they refused to believe who was being pointed to. The Bereans studied, and then they followed. Imagine the experience of Saul of Tarsus, who certainly knew the OT cold - but after he met Jesus, he had to go and re-learn (re-evaluate) everything, with a new perspective. It took awhile. He had to learn what it meant for the law to be fulfilled in Christ.
I agree he did not have to "re-learn" the OT - he probably had the equivalent of 2 Ph.Ds in it (as Sproul used to say), but I think he would have needed to re-evaluate the whole thing (from Gen. 1 and Gen. 3:15 all the way thru to Malachi). Some verses, like the Righteous Branch and Isaiah 52-53 and the brand plucked from the fire, would be crystal clear, but much of the text would need a new lens. The story of Jonah would have needed a new look, along with all the allusions to the Son of David. I have always wondered if Saul heard Jesus in the Temple, as he walked around with Gamaliel. If so, he would have thought about that quite a bit as well. And imagine being an observant Jew in Jerusalem in 31 AD, standing next to a slightly dusty, non-descript man in the courtyard of the Temple, on a cool morning. If only you knew.....
The true prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Huldah, Ezekiel, Amos, etc.) were typically surrounded by false prophets and priests. If that is what you mean by "man's influence", I understand. Too often, the priests were like Eli and his sons, or the sons of Samuel. And there were way too many Korahs and Hananiahs and Pelatiahs who claimed what they did not possess. But I think Saul would have known the difference - he was not a 'false' priests, he just a veil over his heart.
Paul was a Pharisee who took the blinders off and saw scripture for what it always was. It wasn't that he didn't know Scripture, as he was trained with blinders on.
It's no different than people listening to the Baptist Convention, the Book of Mormon, the Watchtower, or Calvin.
Baal of peor… The men brought women to their tents, though they had wives, and with the women came their ideas, their religion, their interpretation, their idols. This caused Israel to continue in faith, but a faith that had become segmented, wandering — equivalent to denominations. Notice how denominations are named after the leaders who created the split, usually. That is exactly putting an idol in the place God (in the tabernacle, in the Camp, in your body and blood) should be. This is what Paul saw through.
Arguably the smartest Pharisee and expert in the law around, hence a “great instrument”. And he realized the debates, and the teachers, and the interpretations, and the ideas that had formed differing opinions and camps were no different than what Israel had always done. Only this time, it caused them to be blind to God face to face, Jesus. Something like scales, certainly, from blind to seeing.
Yes, and that Baal is exactly what we deal with in Christianity today. That Baal was men's opinions: the Pharisees and Sadducees. Paul was a Pharisee who took the blinders off and saw Scripture for what it always was.
The real debate isn't whether Torah matters. It's in what form, under which covenant, and under whose authority it now reaches the believer.
The New Testament's answer appears to be: through Christ, not through a return to Sinai.
How do you reconcile your reading with Acts 15, Galatians 5:18, Romans 6:14, Colossians 2:16-17, and Hebrews 8:13? Those passages seem to address the covenant question directly.
I was introduced to Hebrew idioms before going to Israel in 1989. For three weeks before the trip, our group met with a Messianic Jewish Rabbi, who explained these verses to us, although he didn’t bring the receipts, like you did.
A thought occurred to me afterwards, before we left:
1. When studying the Tenach, ‘Why read commentaries written by Gentile theologians with a PhD in Hebrew and ‘Old Testament’ rather than Jewish scholars.’ After all, they grew up with the language and ‘knew their history better than you Christian’s,’ according to Rabbi Feldman.
2. More recently, an encounter with one of those Gentile theologians with that PhD, not only discounted the research of a Jewish scholar, who recently received his PhD based on his research. but compared it to what was written on a cereal box!
The dialogue between this man and another teacher (with degree in some science) was not only dismissive, but also mocking and even critical of believers who have followed and learned from the Jewish scholar they were critical of. even though they both teach the ‘Old Testament’ from a Hebraic perspective.
3. Even more recently I’ve wondered why Hebrew idioms are not included in Hermeneutical discussions or OT commentaries. My thought is that knowing and understanding them would disrupt their dispensational approach to Bible study on many levels.
I pray someday that Jewish scholars say, "Hey, wait a minute, we're taking back that Jewish book, lol." Then we'll get some deep commentary. However, we can't forget David Stern and the few others who have tried their hardest to get things to come across. 🙏
I was introduced to Howard Stern back in the 90s and have ‘The Complete Jewish Study Bible.
Before going to Israel, our Baptist group was also encouraged to read ‘Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith’ by Marvin R. Wilson.
A more recent book by Brad H. Young is ‘The Newer Testament’ (Hear What They Heard).
Readers Edition
An English Translation which affirms the New Testament’s authentic Hebrew heritage.
Hebrew idioms are identified in the footnotes in addition to Hebrew word meanings, etc. 😉
Was it Howie or David? Lol
🤦♀️ David!
I shouldn’t try to comment here when I’m texting with my son who lives in California. I was probably thinking of Howard Hendricks who wrote ‘Living By the Book’ which teaches how to study the Bible. . .the subject of a comment on an article you wrote. 🤷♀️
Maybe I just need a nap or to go for a walk to clear the mind fog. 😂
excellent comment! 8-) my personal experience has taught me to never, ever trust any theological “expert” regardless of their chosen religion. i've heard entirely false Biblical teachings from both mainstream Christians, as well as Jewish converts.
i find it to be most wise to seek guidance through the Holy Spirit of God while digging into the meanings of the original words throughout the scriptures, as many so called Biblical “scholars” seem to regularly dispense with doing so.
as to the “why”... my opinion is that it most often has to do with pride. we humans have a most difficult time admitting we may have been wrong about a subject. perhaps many learn this from the STATE, as i don't recall many (if any) politicians who ever admit they were wrong.
for that matter, not many church denominations ever admit they were wrong about their own erroneous Biblical understandings either — and when someone challenges one of their false teachings (like their precious “hell” doctrine), they often condemn the challenger because they really cannot refute the overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.
in like manner as church organizations, many people have made a “religion” out of what should otherwise be “political science” and they refuse to engage in critical thinking and reasoning because they would then be considered “heretics”. then again, they also make a “religion” out of their personal insane beliefs which refute actual biological Science by falsely believing men can get pregnant and have babies, and support men playing in women's sports.
the masses have been indoctrinated into the philosophy of Collectivism... which is satanic. the world is deceived by satan. so really, we shouldn't be all that surprised to witness the total insanity which continues to grow all around us.
so there's my personal opinion as to the “why”. ;-)
Yes!
Jesus and Paul said it first,…the Holy Spirit guides us in to all the truth (John 16:13) which is spiritually appraised (1 Corinthians 2:14).
Ty for this word lesson. So hard for gentiles to grasp the whole meaning when we don't know Hebrew. These word studies are invaluable. I have a question that isn't a word study per se. But it's similar - it's about the promises God makes to the Israelites. I have been taught they are out for us as well. That may be a big topic but I need to understand better. Have you addressed this before? And if so please point me to it. I am learning so much from your teaching. It is like the fullness of the living Word unfolding before me. Beautiful. Ty.
You are grafted in; every promise is now yours to cherish. 💙
🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 wow! Ty for clearing up a long time question. 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
great article on this very misunderstood subject which has plagued the mainstream church for ~2000 years, and mostly all over the erroneously understood definition of one word which the mainstream “scholars” appear to willingly ignore. in doing so, they also willingly ignore using any kind of rational thought about their very irrational argument which claims Jesus “did away with His law”. but who knows what kind of way of explaining the truth about this important subject might get through the wall of indoctrination that has been fortified all their lives by those who were taught to believe the lie. so we continue to try and help others see a bit better in this world of darkness. Godbless... 🙏🏼😎❤️♾️
In my experience, there is usually a hint of animus when someone is arguing a gulf of separation between the Jews (i.e., the OT) and the Christians (the church in the NT) - and there is ALWAYS confusion within that argument. It is obvious, even in the English, that when Jesus said "fulfill" that he was not talking about closure / erasure / putting on the shelf. There are many places where he exalted the Word of God, or where he explained how the teachers were hung up on the letter of the law, but missed the spirit of the law (which, as we learn in many places, is timeless). I always smile when I read him say "Have you not read....." because of course they had read it, they just didn't apprehend it. And remember, he told the Pharisees that their problem was not that they did not study (search) the Scriptures enough, but that they refused to believe who was being pointed to. The Bereans studied, and then they followed. Imagine the experience of Saul of Tarsus, who certainly knew the OT cold - but after he met Jesus, he had to go and re-learn (re-evaluate) everything, with a new perspective. It took awhile. He had to learn what it meant for the law to be fulfilled in Christ.
Hobie, in reading your comment, this is the biggest misconception.
Paul didn't have to relearn Scripture; he had to unlearn man's skewed beliefs. Which is the exact same message I've been preaching for years.
I agree he did not have to "re-learn" the OT - he probably had the equivalent of 2 Ph.Ds in it (as Sproul used to say), but I think he would have needed to re-evaluate the whole thing (from Gen. 1 and Gen. 3:15 all the way thru to Malachi). Some verses, like the Righteous Branch and Isaiah 52-53 and the brand plucked from the fire, would be crystal clear, but much of the text would need a new lens. The story of Jonah would have needed a new look, along with all the allusions to the Son of David. I have always wondered if Saul heard Jesus in the Temple, as he walked around with Gamaliel. If so, he would have thought about that quite a bit as well. And imagine being an observant Jew in Jerusalem in 31 AD, standing next to a slightly dusty, non-descript man in the courtyard of the Temple, on a cool morning. If only you knew.....
It goes back to dismissing man's influence.
The true prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Huldah, Ezekiel, Amos, etc.) were typically surrounded by false prophets and priests. If that is what you mean by "man's influence", I understand. Too often, the priests were like Eli and his sons, or the sons of Samuel. And there were way too many Korahs and Hananiahs and Pelatiahs who claimed what they did not possess. But I think Saul would have known the difference - he was not a 'false' priests, he just a veil over his heart.
Paul was a Pharisee who took the blinders off and saw scripture for what it always was. It wasn't that he didn't know Scripture, as he was trained with blinders on.
It's no different than people listening to the Baptist Convention, the Book of Mormon, the Watchtower, or Calvin.
Baal of peor… The men brought women to their tents, though they had wives, and with the women came their ideas, their religion, their interpretation, their idols. This caused Israel to continue in faith, but a faith that had become segmented, wandering — equivalent to denominations. Notice how denominations are named after the leaders who created the split, usually. That is exactly putting an idol in the place God (in the tabernacle, in the Camp, in your body and blood) should be. This is what Paul saw through.
Arguably the smartest Pharisee and expert in the law around, hence a “great instrument”. And he realized the debates, and the teachers, and the interpretations, and the ideas that had formed differing opinions and camps were no different than what Israel had always done. Only this time, it caused them to be blind to God face to face, Jesus. Something like scales, certainly, from blind to seeing.
Yes, and that Baal is exactly what we deal with in Christianity today. That Baal was men's opinions: the Pharisees and Sadducees. Paul was a Pharisee who took the blinders off and saw Scripture for what it always was.
The real debate isn't whether Torah matters. It's in what form, under which covenant, and under whose authority it now reaches the believer.
The New Testament's answer appears to be: through Christ, not through a return to Sinai.
How do you reconcile your reading with Acts 15, Galatians 5:18, Romans 6:14, Colossians 2:16-17, and Hebrews 8:13? Those passages seem to address the covenant question directly.