IRENT Vol. III Supplement, No.

Updated

r.2.4.7
7/28/2016

IRENT Vol. III. Supplement

WALK THROUGH THE SCRIPTURE
No. 1

Words, Words, and Words

No. 2

(Text, Translation and Translations)

No. 3

(Names, Persons and People)

No. 4

(Place, Things, and Numbers)

No. 5

(Time, Calendar and Chronology)

No. 6

(Passion Week Chronology)

Files in the Collection #1 to the Supplement:

The Nefarious Is
Hans Kng on Justification
Simut - The Development of the Doctrine of Justification
Religion and Science (2 articles)
Atonement (Ch. 10 of Hicks, The Metaphor of God Incarnate)

Note: When a word or phrase is underlined in blue font, it is always for

hyperlink to online on the web, whether it is easily recognizable as
such by the presence of www or http://.
E.g. Wikipedia when <Left> clicked (in PDF files) or <Ctrl> + Left
mouse click (in MS Word files) with a mouse on a computer, it lets open
www.wikipedia.org/ or http://www.wikipedia.org/ .

The Vol. III of IRENT series of a new translation of N.T. holds

several files to serve as the Supplements and being updated
continually. It is being uploaded at tiny.cc/bostonreaders as well as on
www.scribd.com/ounbbl; being only possible as an online serial, not in a
print book.

The purpose of these supplements is

to share it with the readers of IRENT to help
understand how and why IRENT has been created.
The supplement is for depository of my study material collected - bits of
material, often duplicated, repetitious, and poorly organized. Some are
from my own and more are from many others writings. Be known that
not all of what one says is true, correct and useful; but not everything is
said is wrong or incorrect, whichever their ideological and theological
bent is.
May the readers be able to rescue something useful for them from this
unpolished work.
[Note: Ref. means reading material I have found useful, not only to solve
problems but also to find challenges. Not all things written there are relevant to
the topics under the discussion here. Not all written can be be correct, right, or
accurate. The readers should exercise their own judgment to make use of them.]

No. 1 Words, Words and Words

Not only one should know well what it is,
but also know what it is not whatever this it is,
as it is harder to unlearn.
A word is word is word? No.
Literally the word of truth is what gives us life
and it is what challenges us
and with such we deceiceve ourselves and others.
'Word' and 'meaning'
two most difficult words to pin down.
What are the meaning of them
and how to define and to get sense of them?
What a word does not mean is as important
as what it means in the context;
what the author indends with a word is more
important.
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just
what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.' (Lewis Carroll)

Purpose and goal of this volume:

It is not so much to present informations and my personal thoughts, but to
make available those materials and what I have gained in understanding for the
readers to see why some words and phrases are avoided and some are used in
translation of N.T. to stand on the sound and logical principle of linguistic and
literary approach to the Scriptrue, completely divorced from doctrinal
approach. It is to challenge, not to simply inform those who love and study the
Scripture devoting time and effort in reading and studying with Bibles, not with
the Bible.
There is an important by-product a rare opportunity, truly once in a life time,
for thorough re-examination of all the doctrinal arguments, be it fundamental
or controversial. When arguments meet counter arguments, it is plain that both
sides cannot be right. I have found that neither side to be right on many issues.
In other words, both sides are deficient and wrong, each with myopic sight,
failing to go beyond their narrow and fixed mindset. What we need in most
such cases is dialectic, finding synthesis in harmony with Scriptural statements,
not thesis and antithesis of arguments of sophistication and sophistry. Any
statements, assertions, claims, arguments and explanations are product of
mortal human mind with limited wisdom. Unless we remove every kind of
contradiction, confusion, conflation and have them judged by the whole of the
Scripture, these remain useless and harmful to unity of the Body of the
Mashiah, but serves status quo of religions and religiosity with all the harms
religions have inflicted on humankind throughout human history. What they
have done is that they killed even God in the name of God, as in the pursuit
of power and pleasure, often colluding with political powers that be. [Rm 13:2
Tyndales translation.]

To be true to how it is made, the title of this writing has been changed
from the original title Basic Words in the Scripture. It is my own journey,
walking through the Bible wresting with words and the Word. It would be
just like so many writings published as articles and books without much
worth by itself unless it is to be shared with others on their own
journey, exploring and sharing paths on their pace shared free. The
only payment I would love to receive from the reader is their challenge
to me as well as to themselves.

This cannot be to be something like a dictionary or encyclopedia for

Scriptural, Biblical, theological, religious, or other related words. It is
rather something out of personal confrontation and struggle on
words, with life continuously encounter words, phrases, and ideas.
Not just words in the Scripture and the Bibles and the related words,
but also those I encounter in the process of translation of work, my
last project, of the New Testament. I have to taste words and

phrases in the literary work, as well as the terminology in the related

fields, such as linguistics and grammar, language learning and
education, etc. It is hope to help the readers of Bibles get the words
retrieved from a wasteland in which words (terms and jargons) are
used in theological, scholarly, religious (church-related) statements
and expressions which are ideologically and doctrinally colored. This
work in the continuous process of editing and correcting to present it
to the readers so that not only they may get something out of it, but
they may be challenged to be on their own journey to the Scriptural
knowledge and truth, completed immune to the religious and worldly
mindset. This writing would need editing hundred times over to be
polished comparable to a skillful writer, until it makes it clear,
concise, and coherent. It is hoped that the readers may put up with it,
as some ideas coming up repetitiously, taking each chunk as a bitesized morsel to read and find useful for their own mind. For any
claim, statement, or opinion contained here the readers should not
have any mercy to treat.
What is in here is in different categories data, information,
knowledge, authors thought or opinion. As for collected data, such
as cross-referencing of the relevant Scripture verses or references,
they are appropriately to be placed in the End-notes. By nature, the
same themes or expressions are found here and there, more than
once. Though some may be too detailed, it is not to be encyclopedic,
but rather to provide rationale and validity of particular translation
practices in the work of IRENT online serial of an English NT
translation of the Greek NT, taking a fresh linguistic and literary
approach from the view points of the original intended audiences as
well as the implied audiences, including the modern readers all in
their own Sitzen im Leben.
Many themes treated here are by themselves interlinked; some
overlap or duplication are found here and there, unavoidably so.

Those reference resources, which have been consulted with, quoted

from and abstracted, do provide essential data and information.
However, their knowledge and thoughts (insights, ideas, and
interpretations) are something for the readers to put to test before it
is ever to be accepted to see whether they are in harmony of the
whole Scriptural truth, no matter where these are from and by whom.
Beware of those articles on online Wikipedia some are highly bent for
ones idea and agenda (for propaganda or promotion) as anyone can edit
and then any editing can be overwritten and does not provide a space for
discussion.

Those belonging to the category of data (e.g. concordant style

Biblical text list) are put in the end-notes (EE) within this file. [As

some editing is often made affecting typography, transliteration, etc.,

the quoted texts may not be exactly as in the original.

Regrettably it is impossible for me to show the sources of all the ideas,

expressions, and statements out there from which I have culled and
plucked and alerted for my work. Whether I have found there or have
come on my own, nothing is really new under the sun. I do not claim any
originality as I have no need of it.

In the footnotes and end-notes of IRENT translations, this file is

referred to as BW [after its original title, Basic Words in the
Scripture.]

For a note for word search in MS Word or PDF in IRENT work in

general, see EE here.1
All which are found in this URL address are freely open to the public. Its
available to anyone who has an access to internet and ability to download
and read the files (mostly in PDF format) with minimal proficiency to
English. The readers are free to quote for ones own use. You may say, yes,
no, or not so. However, one thing is important not to quote out of the
context. If you are not associated with Christianity, Christian religions, or
Christian Churches/denominations, and if your English is at beginning
level, you all may feel easy with my invitation to IRENT to share. Simply I
ask you to be open-minded to see where it may take you with surprises and
some shocks.
As to accuracy of the material for data and information, you have to take
what you see here. As my own writing is continually evolving, it is prudent
for the readers to check the latest update before quoting from it.
As the word in the title of IRENT translation work of N.T., all is my
invitation, open and free. It is meant not only for invitation, but also for
indictment. Im inviting you not to comfort but conflict. It is to bring
challenge to all, including myself to anyone who cares about things
which are important in the life, of a person or of human beings. I hear a
challenge in what Yeshua said Yeshua came not to give peace as such, but
a sword to cause them divided over the truth of who I am. (Cf. Mt 10:34).
What I prattle, ramble, and rant here and there, is out of my brain the
pouring from my heart and venting of my spleen. On what ground people
are supposed to ask their God the blessings they crave?

This is a collection of some basic words

frequently appearing in the text of the Scripture,
which the readers need to be familiar
in order to understand the Scriptural text properly
and not misled often by presumption and presupposition.
Material is a collection which is taken off from the footnotes
to avoid duplicated treatment
as it also needs space more than footnotes should take up.

Each entry is provided with what should be essential to understand when

reading any translation work of the Scripture. A special consideration is given
to explain how a particular rendering is considered and chosen for IRENT
work to touch on translation practice and principle involved.
Difficulty words are actually not difficult to learn; many familiar
words are easy, deceptively so easy to mislead as they are
often not what they mean. Through a language a our thoughts
are expressed and communicated; at the same time, it affects
and alters how and what of our thoughts.
0F0F

Languages can come as a great barrier and a troublesome

hindrance. With misunderstandings and misconceptions along
with faulty communication fuel is fed into conflicts between
persons and groups on the trivial level at mundane everyday life
as well as at the power struggle on the lofty ideological and
doctrinal level.
What the readers see here is: a certain amount of data which is
pulled and presented as pieces of information to be useful and
handy. A very limited tool was used to limit the quality of its
result for detail, accuracy, and precision.
Much better, abundant and detailed, scholar works than one
finds here are available and within easy reach of everyone,
thanks to the Age of Information we now live in. All these cannot
be accurate even at the source level and as they are presented
here. Needed disclaimers would overwhelm it if all were possible
to put in.
Most of things here are from what have learned, unlearned,
studied, read, listened, got disgusted, got frustrated, got
confused, got inspired, got misled questioned, searched and rea

Language is what makes us live; logic keeps us think clear.

searched, and stumbled across, stumbled over, and bombarded

with, encountered to find serendipities, and awed, put thought
on; admired, copied, plagiarized, altered, lifted from others
works digested, extracted, squeezed out, condensed, corrected,
changed, altered, edited, and polished; slept on them, chased
after illusive words and slay them in dream, and, chasing them,
wake with them, my world is wide web of words all so that as
much as I desire to put here in as little as the space allow:
not constrained by the number of pages which is unlimited
by the nature of electronic format, unlike the print-book
format, but the personal space for each reader can spare in
effort and time to search through and read up no, not to
accept but to challenge [read also as incite] it. Not only the
work of mine but also of all others, one should challenge and
above all challenge ones own self and put it into questions.
Ultimately in our life, we have to confront our whole being,
which is often called soul and put it against the Truth, the
divine reality.
Before being lured to be safe and secure, better be critical, even
be cynical; do not be fooled by the language people playing with.
Do not forget that the humanity independent from God has its
purpose in the pursuit of power and pleasure to possess, to be
possessed and to peddle. Thats how we all are sinners; we are
not sinners because we sin, but we sin because we are sinners;
we are in sin our human nature is in sin and everything of our
humanity is in sin, including our personality and our sexuality
as well as our intelligence. SINS are only symptoms of SIN! Yeshua did
NOT die for the SINS of the world! [Jn 1:29 it is sin, not sins. He died to
take away sin nature and sin power.] a
1F1F

There is no short-cut or wide gate and open road for those who
want to hear what Yeshua told the people who flocked after Him,
either accepting or rejecting as God has in His grace bestowed
mortal human beings the precious freedom, the very freedom to
choose right and wrong, and life and death.

Cf. all became sinners (Rm 5:19) not unbiblical idea of all are born sinners.
SIN and SINS - after Jaja Azikiwe of YEN with minor editing:
(Jn 1:29) SINS are only symptoms of SIN. Yeshua did NOT die for the SINS of the world.
(Jn 3:14-21) SIN is the failure to come to the Father through His Mashiah, Yeshua! If this is not done
with we remain in darkness, lawless (= living away from Gods law) and prone to committing SINS!
But don't those in the light commit sins too? Yes, the whole world does! But the SYMPTOMS OF SIN
(sins) WERE AND ARE ALL FORGIVEN!]
a

Life? Its all about words, all with words

and all from the Word!
Nothing else we can leave to others
when our early life is done.
Its worth to fight for and to fight with them
and honored are those called to die for the Word.
Life is free gift of God, free but costly on God Himself.
It is given but we have borrowed it.
It is to be paid back in freedom, by living fully in God.
To unlearn is the hard part of any learning;
its harder if not attended at the beginning of it.
To argue for or against, everything we can collect and think of
must be laid open on the table
and be dealt with in whole, not in a piecemeal and partial
manner.
What I have written down here is now just beyond the stage of
collecting my scraps of my scripts in need of editing, cutting
out, filtering, changing, correcting, tearing apart, stitching up,
amending, polishing, refining, redrawing, re-searching, recreating; is in need to be challenged, questioned, critiqued,
reprimanded, scolded, slapped on, chuckled at with a dose
of criticism, cynicism, and sarcasm, so that I can see things not
from within myself but rather from without. What better way is
to learn than seeing from the other side? Thesis, antithesis, and
synthesis; if blessed, my foes will turn out to be truly my
friends.

Lexicons; dictionaries; word lists; text bibles:

F.W. Danker, The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (2009)
[It does not provide information on synonyms and antonyms.]
Cf. W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, F. W. Gingrich & F.W. Danker, A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BAGD 3rd
Ed. 2000)
(http://ntresources.com/blog/documents/UsingBDAG.pdf )

Note: James Strong (1890), Strongs Dictionary of the Bible, Greek and
Hebrew.
an outdated namesake dictionary of a historical merit only; it not a
lexicographic work, but a glossary of collecting the translation words in KJB2
nothing to do with meaning and sense of words.]
[Cf. Strongs (or New Strongs) Exhaustive Concordance, which is not a
dictionary.]

Kurt Aland, ed., Synopsis of the Four Gospels Greek-English Edition of

the Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum, 12th Ed. 2001.

John J. Pilch (1999), The Cultural Dictionary of Bible

Granger and Paquot (2012), Electronic Exicography
See
http://termcoord.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/presentation_granger.pdf
www.academicvocabulary.info/ Corpus of Contemporary American
English (COCA)

References
[It is prudent to read several reviews on the published books or article, simply to
get acquainted and to get most of it not all the arguments can be correct or lead
to truth and we simply dont have enough time in our life to read all as we wish
to.]

Moiss Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical

Semantics (1983; Rev. 1995)

Moiss Silva, (1990), God, Language and Scripture Readig the Bible in the
light of general linguistics.

James Barr (1961), The Semantics of Biblical Language

Stanley Porter and Mark Boda (2009), Translating the New Testament Text,
Translation, Theology [a valuable book for translators.]

Lawrence Venuti (1995), The Translators Invisibility: A History of Translation.

Ref: Schulte & Biguenet, ed. (1992), Theories of Translation An Anthology of

Essays from Dryden to Derrida. [Not about Bible translation, but very
informative for Bible translators.]

A Brief Guide to Better Bible Study | Grace Communion International

(www.gci.org/bible/study)

http://english.stackexchange.com/ For English language and usage.

www.ditext.com/runes/index.html dictionary of philosophy

Other reading materials:

Adrian Thatcher (1990), Truly a Person, Truly God A Post-Mythical View of

Jesus. for the terms, words, and phrases related with the subject Trinity

Hans Kng (1992), Credo. The Apostles Creed Explained for Today.
Donald Brake (2011), AVisual History of the King James Bible
Christopher Upward, et al, (2011), The History of English Spelling
Denise Eide (2013), Uncovering The Logic of English: A Common-Sense
Approach to Reading, Spelling, and Literacy
Jason David BeDuhn (2003), Truth in Translation Accuracy and Bias in
English Translations of the New Testament [See Introduction (pp. xiii xix)]3

Notes on words and vocabulary in the translationn

Anything here written for the words, phrases, and
expressions such are first of all found within the
Scripture. It touches on the words and phrases,
unbiblical as well as nonbiblical, which we often
encounter and get confused and misled. Something
you are meandering through them in your life to be
confronted. Bits of pieces of data, information, and
knowledge are here for you find useful and feel
challenged. It is hoped that you gain some insights so
that a path of your own may be taken to find
solutions for the problems some of which may not
have adequate answers. The treatment of words and
phrases cannot be comprehensive and scholarly, but
rather compendious and personal. Until it gets
polished up enough, listing of words and writing on
them will remain rather haphazard and unorganized.
In the work of translating the Greek N.T. and in reading
English version, it should be reminded that a large
vocabulary is Greek translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic of
words in addition to those words transliterated, such as
proper names. As a typical example of a translated word, the
word theos (God) is a translation of Hebrew word Elohim,
just as the English word God in the N.T. is translation of the
Greek.
I have tried to show what, why, and how the words are to be treated with
utmost care and attention to be shown in the sacred space on every page of a
translation work, to be worthy of the Gods name, the name which Yeshua
Himself came to reveal when He came into the midst of our humanity as the
Incarnate Logos of Elohim not Incarnate God or God Incarnate. Lot
more to learn, digest, think and edit! Nothing is foolish than a slogan of Just
Do It. It should read Dont Just Do It. Dont just accept others views,
even as they come in the name of scholars and sponsors.
The words we use in every day do not actually mean same to all people, in all
places and in all the time. Especially so the words in the Scripture. They may
not carry meanings one assumes to be. The Scripture being read with such
assumption breeds new presumptions and reinforces wrong presumptions
which are in the end to bear delicious but noxious fruits of doctrines, dogmas,
philosophy and ideology to fuel religious power engines. The meaning of a

word in the Scripture does not correspond to the lexical meaning (that is
listed in lexicons). It only comes a live with the text supported with the
contexts. The situation for us is much worse as the words, phrases, and
expressions are from the Bible of our translation and our choice. Many
doctrinal contentions begin at the level of a word which each one brings the
meaning of their preference.

Words, words, words!

Everyone can and should rely on being taught, but only so
long without actually learning to study for themselves. It is
not saying that being taught is to be done away, however
learning how to study for oneself is the only way to lead to
find truth. We are to re-search and study for ourselves to
see if what is taught and learned is truth.
We only need to set on a journey on each own carrying
questions with an open mind not blinded by
presuppositions and presumptions and hoodwinked by
persuasive words from knowledge-peddlers, as all we hear is
something from the minds of mortal humans in prominent
robe philosophical, religious, political and ideological mindcontrol. Compare and challenge. We have to kill the powerful
God, the Sacred Self, but should not allow others God to
take the place of the ultimate Truth, the divine reality, as
revealed in the Scripture.
From the words come phrases and sentences which create a
variety of statements, arguments, and claims, each of which
can hardly stand logically on its own, as they are necessarily
lifted out of text context and devoid of speech setting that the
intention and agenda of speakers are not easily discernable.
Ones statements stand contradicting others, not because
they are wrong or erroneous, but they assume that things
are talked about mean same to others.
What used to be Biblical words are high-jacked and have lost their true
sense, becoming jargons of particular churches or religions
(denominations); Christian or theological jargons. When these words
are read off the Bible, different thought lines are colluding, contradicting,
and getting conflated and mixed up Scriptural vs. religious or
secularized usage. Anachronism, isegesis, and lack of understating the
Scripture text in the original setting of language and culture, as far
removed from modern, especially Westernized and Americanized.
There are words as seen in the various English translations,

Some ought to let go from translation, as they have become

archaic or inaccurate, as those in KJV.

[E.g. meat for food, trump for shofar, brass for bronze, or
Ghost for Spirit]
Some should be retained. Though they are biblical words, there
are no other words to carry the special sense and association
with the usage in the Scripture and have become church or
Christian jargons.
[E.g. tabernacle vs. tent]
Some should be rejected, since now it has built up non-Scriptural
sense.
[E.g. hell vs. GeHinnom]
Anachronism misleads and confuses.
E.g. cross for execution stake as a Roman execution device,
in contrast to the use of the word in the symbolic sense of
death of Yeshua.
E.g. Baptist for the Baptizer (Yohanan).
E.g. trumpet for shofar
Some should not be hidden (leading to ignorance and neglect in
danger of confusing with non-Scriptural word idea, such as a
Cosmic God) where the word itself is something to be revealed.
[E.g. YHWH in place of Lord]
Some should be re-discovered to be more appropriate in the
Scriptural text.
[E.g. Elohim in place of the God (arthrous Greek ho theos)
as English convention does not use the definite article. The
capitalized God cannot by itself distinguish from a generic
notion of God (God, a God, a god, etc.)] [Since Heb. elohim is in
several different sense (singular as well to be applied to other
than the true God), just as Gk. theos and English God/god are,
the word used as the translation word in IRENT is akin to
loanword from Hebrew and it is a short hand for Most High
Elohim, who has revealed Himself to be known as YHWH as
His sacred name.] [See also WB #3].
Some should be re-discovered to be more appropriate in the
Scriptural text.
[E.g. *Miqdash a in place of Temple for the Greek hieron; and
*Mishkan b in place of Sanctuary. The latter, naos in Greek, is
often inconsistently translated either as Temple or as Sanctuary.
The two are used in the Scripture distinctly as the latter is a part
of the other.]
2F2F

3F3F

Miqdash (> Mikdash); Heb. meaning dwelling, residence. [Etym. related to Qodesh
sacredness, set-apart.] LXX naos. In N.T. sanctuary but many translate as temple to make it
difficult to distinquish.
b
Mishkan Heb. meaning dwelling, residence. LXX hagion (adj).. In O.T. it is usually translated
as tabernacle. In N.T. 5x - as tabernacle tent. [Cf. (Lake) Michigan from Chippewa Indian
word meicigama meaning great water.] [skn LXX uses it to translate four different Hebrew
words.]
a

Vocabulary and issue of readability

By the very nature of the Scripture which has a long history behind before it
reaches us, there are unfamiliar words (besides proper names). Some of which
are biblical only and carry special meaning derived from the context. However,
unfamiliarity itself does not presuppose that it means difficulty in reading.
Without ongoing continued and consistent learning process, there is no way the
Word of the God can be revealed, and the Bible itself will remain shelf books
for book sellers and shelf-help for those who buy them. Modern translations or
pseudo-translations are easy to read as far as English language goes, but they
are no more than adulterated profit-makers targeted for the gullible population
with polluted messages with powdery sugar. To choose words to translate the
original words is not simple one to one replacement as in so-called literal
translation. Words in English have a semantic field of different size. Its
counterpart in the original has its own in different way. The enemy of Scripture
translation is anachronism 4 , jargonism 5 , all bordering on smart aleck of
frivolity in addition to archaism6 (found mostly in the older translations).
To communicate clearly and effectively, with our vocabulary the word needs to
have a definition and a semantic field. However, in everyday speech, we take
the words as they come with presumption and assumption, which may be very
biased, inaccurate, or even incorrect. Usually the context and the unspoken
elements of language resolve the ambiguity. However, when we are dealing
with the written text only, which are separated from its original setting, the
problem often becomes acute and bring people to jousting for power to get the
upper hand. The power of words is well depicted in idioms and proverbs in
various languages.7
At a difference level than text readability is visuality which concerns
typography and formatting book, page and paragraph to present to the eyes
of the readers is also important, to which online IRENT has given special
attentions which is not affordable as wished when the text is presented in a
print-book form.
*meaning; *definition; meaning of word;
definition; dictionary (lexical) definition; stipulative definition; Circular
definition
[The meaning of a word is not settled until it sits in the context and in the
discourse. Lexical meanings are simply collection by a lexicographer of how
the word appears in the language in different senses and usages hardy a
definition to give an elusive precise meaning. The worst is the word literalism
a word has one meaning everywhere by everyone. (Not to be confused with

literal translation. Cf. interlinear translation.) [Cf. linguistic gloss; glosses;

glossary (from Lat. glossarium)]
[ www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/resources/glossing-rules.php ]
List of glossing abbreviations - ] [A (linguistic) gloss is a summary of the meaning of
a morpheme or word, suitable for use in interlinear text displays. www01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAGloss.htm ]

On definition
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/special-programs/sp-2h3-ancient-philosophy-andmathematics-fall-2009/readings/MITSP_2H3F09_Definitions.pdf
lexical,
contextual, intentional, extensional, ostensive, operational, theoretical, circular,
recursive, stipulative, prcising, or persuasive definition; definition by genus
and difference;
Michael Hancher (1981). Humpty Dumpty and Verbal Meaning. Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism 40 (1):49-58. (access through www.jstor.org/ )
Since one of the aim of IRENT is to remove from the translation words any
alien meaning which has accumulated since the time period of the original text
formation, somehow having clear definitions which would be necessary for
mutual understanding. A few special terms are easiest to deal with in this
aspect. However, the vast majority of common words is a challenge. E.g. god
does it mean a mighty one? What does it mean by mighty one? [?
transcendental; demanding worship; having control from?] From its common
usage in and out of religious connotation, a god-being or a god-like being
should be the lowest common denominator at the core of its semantic field in
order to be acceptable to all. Otherwise such simple word god or God is
used differently by different people in different context.
[Lexical meaning vs. grammatical meaning.]
["Words do not have meanings") is a wrong statement (Geoffrey Williams,
English lexicographer/dictionary builder. http://asp.revues.org/1320.) Meanings
(which are inherent in a semantic field0 out of a word come to the fore when it
is in the context.]

When I use a word, Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone,

it means just what I choose it to mean neither more nor less. Lewis
Carroll, Through the Looking-glass
How many legs does a dog have if you call its tail a leg?
Four.
Calling a tail a leg doesnt make it one. attributed to Abraham Lincoln

Lexical semantics: From the summary

in http://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist1/Rdgs/JM19.pdf Jurafsky
and Martin (2007), Speech and Language Processing: An
introduction to natural language processing, computational
linguistics, and speech recognition.

Lexical semantics is the study of the meaning of words, and the

systematic meaning-related connections between words.
A word sense is the locus of word meaning; definitions and meaning
relations are defined at the level of the word sense rather than wordforms as a whole.
Homonymy is the relation between unrelated senses that share a form,
while polysemy is the relation between related senses that share a form.
Synonymy holds between different words with the same meaning.
Hyponymy relations hold between words that are in a class-inclusion
relationship.
Semantic fields are used to capture semantic connections among
groups of lexemes drawn from a single domain.
WordNet is a large database of lexical relations for English words.
Semantic roles abstract away from the specifics of deep semantic
roles by generalizing over similar roles across classes of verbs.
Thematic roles are a model of semantic roles based on a single finite
list of roles.
Semantic selectional restrictions allow words (particularly
predicates) to post constraints on the semantic properties of their
argument words.
Primitive decomposition is another way to represent the meaning of
word, in terms of finite sets of sub-lexical primitives.

*sign, *symbol; signal; signifier; icons; *symbolism

sign points to itself representing something else directly. [e.g. mighty

works (x: supernatural miracles) to points the presence of Immanuel
with works of God.]
symbol points beyond itself to represent something else. [e.g. the
*Cross of Christianisms symbol of redemptive death of Yeshua.]

symbol word or non-word symbol.

E.g. A Gods mighty work (/x: miracle - unbiblical word) is a sign for people
pointing to the divine reality.
Ref. Signs and symbols - Encyclopedia.com
[vocabulary: Cf. wonders, mighty works, signs]
[vocabulary: type; antitype, typology, analogy]

*Lexicon, *dictionary, *glossary (book); *thesaurus; *encyclopedia;

word list; glossary; dictionary, lexicon, thesaurus, encyclopedia.
lexicography; translatology.
Interesting notes from Henri Bejoint (2000), Modern Lexicography An Introduction
The main object of lexicography is to define words and terms.
The discreteness of lexical units-word, lexical item, lexical element, lexeme, vocable,
etc. -is rarely questioned in linguistics. Every grapheme used in discourse is attached to
a 'unit', which is a potential candidate for inclusion as an entry-word in the dictionary.

how far can one say that words are units, and, supposing they are indeed, how
discrete are those units?

In the traditional dictionary, every single lexical item has a semantic content, a
meaning of its own out of all context.
All linguists admit the existence of word meanings, and the fact that some words have
only one (monosemy) while others have more than one (polysemy). But if one believes
in the discreteness of the word, then one may wonder what the basic unit is: is the
word a cluster of meanings, or is it the association of one form with one meaning?
Defining words by words that are more frequent is a necessity if the definition is to be
accessible to the users. But this is not possible if the word to be defined is very
frequent, and it may not always be advisable in other cases. On the one hand, the more
frequent a word is the more polysemous it is; this is one of the problems encountered
by dictionaries that use a limited defining vocabulary. On the other hand, a rare,
scientific word is not only more precise, but it may also act as the trigger for the user to
trace a 'chain' of concepts

What's a dictionary?
- It's when the teacher doesn't know what a word means.

Cf. Dictionary of idioms and phrases, dictionary of etymology;

collocations dictionary; monolingual vs. bilingual dictionary.
All languages make use of a lexicon and a grammar. The lexicon is a mental
dictionary containing all lexical items (such as words and fixed expressions) in
a given language. The grammar is a set of rules for the usage of these lexical
items, especially for ways of combining them with each other.
www.uio.no/studier/emner/hf/ikos/EXFAC03-AAS/h05/larestoff/linguistics/
www.uio.no/studier/emner/hf/ikos/EXFAC03AAS/h05/larestoff/linguistics/Chapter%202.%28H05%29.pdf
Lexicographic fallacy Often the translators fall into a lexicographic fallacy,
by having their translation dictated by lexicographic material. A lexicon is the
result of arranging all the possible meanings or functions for a particular word
which can be found in the corpus of material they collect and into suitable
categories, along with other related date and information, such as
pronunciation, spelling, etymology, thesaurus (synonym, antonym, and related
words) with or without actual citation and history of a word. They are not
meant to provide encyclopedic information. It should be differentiated from a
dictionary and a glossary is often erroneously titled as a dictionary, or even a
lexicon (e.g. *Strongs Lexicon). The meaning of a word is not determined by a
dictionary, not by a lexicographer. It is only by the context and the usage as
dictated by the intention/agenda of the author.
Sir Thomas Elyots LatinEnglish Dictionary of 1538 was the first
attempt at a large-scale dictionary of English with classical, as opposed to
medieval, Latin. It was also the first English book to have Dictionary as
its title.

Some common or familiar English words may not be suitable for

Bible translation:
There are number of common or special words in English shown in many
English bible translations that should not remain without due and serious
consideration in the relevant books in the Bible. These should not be because
of doctrinal implications for different theological stands. These carry a lot of
baggage with the word itself from secular as well as religious usage which
invariably brings them back into the translated texts. Several factors
anachronism, archaism, modern jargons, cultural clash, etc.
Examples:
Eastera (in one place Act 12:4 in KJV left over from earlier English
translations meaning Passover.) for Pasch (Passover in most
English Bibles);
Sunday (GNB, GW, CEV, ERV, NLT, AUV, MSG) or day of
worship (GW) for first day of the week;
preach for proclaim, other than in the sense of preach to repent or
preach for ethical exhortation. [See for repent vs. turn ones heart]
priests also used as a religious and church jargon.
Examples of proper names and titles see under *Jesus *Christ for
detail.
Jesus for Yeshua; Christ for Mashiah (> Messiah); Jesus Christ
for Yeshua the Mashiah (> Yeshua the Messiah); Lord Yeshua
Mashiah (> Lord Jesus Christ); James for Yaakob, Paul for
Paulos; Saul for Shaul, Mark for Markus etc.
Thats why it is of utmost importance to find and adopt as much as possible
only those words and phrases which are uncontaminated with non-Scriptural
ideas especially from ecclesial practices and doctrines, which all are of all
human tradition with inherent danger of being used to keep people enslaved.
(2) Alien concept or words hell for GeHinnom (Gehenna; Hinnom
valley); Holy Ghost (KJV) for holy spirit. [In the vocabulary of KJV,
hell is in the same category with Ghost inappropriate choice for
Biblical terms, having borrowed from then current pagan ideas.]
(3) Lack of appreciation in cultural aspect have sexual relations
Easter - In the old Anglo-Saxon service-books the term Easter is used frequently to translate the
word Passover. In the translation by Wicliffe [Wycliffe], the word paske, i.e., passover, is used. But
Tindal [Tyndale] and Coverdale used the word Easter, (Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible, 17981870, comments on Acts 12:4). Act 12:4 is the one place where it was leftover in King James Version.
In non-English language, the liturgical Easter, which has a pagan connotation in their custom, is called
resurrection day, true to the biblical sense.
a

(JNT, GNB), have intercourse (NWT); make love to (NIrV), sleep

together (CEV) for know which is used Semitic euphemism for sexual
relation.
(3) Difficult to render specialized words Words of Hebrew vs. Greek
mindset. E.g. soul or love now almost as a religious jargon are used
as translation words in both OT and NT. However, it is used in different
context and cannot be adequately translated. In NT Gk. psuch [from
which many English words are derived psyche, psychogenic,
psychology, psychiatry, psychoanalysis, psychic, psychosis, psycho,
psychotic, psychedelic, etc.] has been translated as soul, and is now
translated as life but in what sense of the English word life as it has
many different and distinct meanings?]
(4) Jargonism (jargon a , jargonish, jargonistic) [the term often used
pejoratively.]
E.g. communion (KJV) Gk. koinnia (sharing together e.g. in 1Co
10:16) is very misleading in the context, which is now a church jargon
for a liturgical practice (called Eucharist by some). Cf. fellowship
E.g. DNA (CEB) for seed.
4F4F

Many verbal expressions (words or phrases) appearing in a translation is likely

to have a particular meaning and usage which, consciously or unconsciously,
the readers are accustomed to in the language they use. Many in fact become
mixed up with meaning and usage which are not of the Scripture. Many also
become a part of jargons religious, cultic, ecclesiastical, scholarly.
Idiomatic phrases or expressions should follow, the original cultural and
linguistic settings closely if possible, and not be simply replaced with our own
modern ones which may not be in harmony with the culture in which the
original ones live.
Examples of neologism
A. Used within the text for translation in IRENT:
spirital of spirit concerning spirit. It replaces a common word
spiritual which has different nuance and usage (i.e. in spiritual style;
something of spiritualitism)
soulical replacing a common English word soulish which rhymes with
ghoulish. [English translations of the New Testament have used a
bewildering number of different words to translate Gk. adjective psuchikos:
(e.g. natural, sensual, worldly, unspiritual, worldly-minded, without the
spirit, and a phrase, to follow their natural instinct)]
jargon (1) A characteristic language of a particular group, (2) Specialized technical terminology
characteristic of a particular subject.
a

Mashiahn of Mashiah [used in the phrase Mashian Community [in lieu

of Church]; having different nuance used also for a replacement of
Messianic or Christian which has different nuance and is anachronistic
within the setting of the New Testament.
Satirized of different sense from satanic.
B. Used outside the text for translation in IRENT:
Christianism(s) Christian religions. [An inclusive term for various
Christian or self-claimed Christian religions, denominations, and sects. It is
in contrast to Christianity, which itself is often counted as a religion.
Whether *orthodox, *heterodox or cult, they are all connected to one slender
thread he (ho Iesous) is who he is, and he is who he claimed to be,
whether the name is translated as Jesus or Yeshua, etc. They are all
separated out into each position as they differ on who he is and how he
claimed to be who he is. The two branches of Christianism are those
claiming that Jesus/Yeshua is God and those claiming that Jesus/Yeshua
is not God. Cf. Jehovahs Witnesses: Jesus is a god, mighty, but not the
almighty God as Jehovah is. Both positions, logically contradictory, are
ironically not incorrect; each side simply uses the words God/god as well
as is in different sense.] [Note: orthodox means not more than to be true to
their own beliefs and claims their own truths.]
Christianity:
Mashiahnity which is what the Scripture presents replaces the common
term Christianity which is now more or less a collective term for
Christianisms (Christian religions).a The term Messianism is of different
nuance and connotation, as an ideology and a doctrinal movement (generic
term of messianic movement and messianic). [Note: the word
Messianity is used for the name of a Japanese non-Christian cult.]

Christianity as a religion vs. Christianity without religion vs. a religion (e.g. Christianism) from
Christianity. Cf. religion(s) vs. faith(s) vs. belief(s). [Examples of Christianism Catholicism
(Constantine and medieval), Protestantism, Lutheranism, etc. they are not a same religion, but
religions of different variety human religious traditions and practices. Practice of a religion
entertainment element] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christianity (1) Chalcedonian vs.
(2) Oriental Orthodoxy; the former into (a) the Eastern Orthodox Church and (b) Roman Catholic
Church, which spilts off the Protestiantism.]
a

Examples of words translated in IRENT differently from other

translations:
In addition to transliteration of words of Hebrew Hebrew/Aramaic origin of
proper names, such as Mattithyahu (> Matthew), Shimon (> Simon), Kefa
(> Cephas), etc., important words are translated in IRENT, the table below
lists those different from other translations:
How to find corresponding words in other English Bibles
IRENT
in Other Bibles
Notes
Elohim
YHWH
Mashiah
Anointed
one
BABEL
sofer;
soferim

God
Lord (LORD)
Christ
Christ
Babylon (from Gk.)
scribe; scribes; /x:
publicans

Only for arthrous Gk. ho theos the God

equivalent to Jehovah
Gk. anointed (as king)

(Gk. grammateus)

(Gk nomos b6 )
Law; Cf. Law of Moses
Torah5F5Fa
[pronounced to-rah with the last syllable accented]
(Gk. nomikos - Lk 7:30 etc.)
Torah-sage > /x: lawyer, /law-expert;
(Gk. nomodidaskaloi - Lk 5:17);

The Nebiim

/x: expert in the law;);

/x: doctor of the law; /x:
teacher of the law; /x:
expert in the law;
/the Prophets

kohen;
kohanim;

priest; /priests;
/priesthood

English from non-Christian origin;

used in pagan, in Catholicism, etc.

> trumpet;
/x: trump KJV.

(made of rams horn)

Torah-teacher

A collective noun for the O.T. Books of the

Prophets; [By transliterating Hebrew word,
it helps to remove confusion with
prophets, plural of prophet.]7Fc

Kohanims office

shofar

Torah [pronounced to-RAH with accent on RAH.]: Gods teaching, instruction, guidance,
that which carries Gods Word in the history of Israel; not a legal system. /> the Law of
Mosheh. (cf. law of Mosheh when the word is used in a narrower sense.)In its narraw sense
it is synonymous to Pentateuch (= Five Books of Mosheh. Torah (as synonym of the Five
Books of Moses), Nebi'im ("Prophets") and Ketubim ("Writings") constititue the whole
canon, TaNaKh. The name "Miqra" (), meaning "that which is read", is another Hebrew
word for the TaNaKh.
a

is used in many different senses (e.g. rule, principle, etc. See examples in Romans) and all
cannot be rendered in literal concordant manner as law/Law.
b

The Prophets vs. the prophets In Korean two distinct words are there ( vs. ), though
most translations make a wrong choice of ( in older translation) (prophet).
c

Yehudim;
Yehudite

Jews; Jew

Kingdom
reign of
Elohim

kingdom of God.

mighty works

- KJV;
/x: miracles - many

[= people in the line of the Tribe of

Yudah] [cf. a Jewish, a Judaic] [Cf. an
Israelite; a Hebrew]
[IRENT avoids the word Jews which
suffers anachronism and wrong word
association, contrary to the real sense in
the text];
[It is the God, not God of a generic
notion.]

Lists of words with details discussed elsewhere:

soul is not something a separate part of a person (as in body and soul
similar to body and mind. (1) person per se; (2) a persons whole being
(in mind and body with all the thoughts, feelings, sayings, and doings);
life existence and experience and, (3) biological life (also in metonymic
in reference to animals). [See *soul, anthropology in BW #3]

soulical (in the sense of pertaining soul related to soul) >

soulish (- soul-like; rhymes with ghoulish).

spirital (a neutral technical neologism with the sense of concerning

spirit related to spirit) > spiritual (which is opp. material). Akin to
societal vs. social8. Cf. spirituality, spiritualism, spiritism. [See
for problem of adjectives; genitive problem]

supra-natural > supernatural. Of God. Actually belongs to that

which is beyond the nature, rather than something extraordinary within
the realm of physical nature.

*mighty work reflects true sense of the original Greek; /x:

*miracle [this common English word has a different nuance
miraculous, awesome things supranatural things often
associtated with spiritism and spiritualism; spritualisticism;
charismatics, shamanistic practices in Christianism; shamanistic
religions (vs. shamanism), paganism.

*forever and ever (for ever and ever- KJV), H5769 + 5703
vs. forever H5769 /x: to time indefinite NWT3

Adverbial phrase eis ton aina tou ainos an expression

something/someone is forever and ever is non-sensical. Cf.
syntax in Heb 1:8

*eternal, from or belonging to (the realm/dimension of) eternity,

that is, of God. Often translated as everlasting (KJV), which is
not a biblical sense. Eternity (often metonymic for God-being)
refers to divine time-dimension, totally different from our time
dimension of past, present, and future. It does not mean endless
duration or far end of time limit. In terms of time, the sense is
not lasting, enduring, remaining, persistent, or even coming in
the future, but decisive and present now.
Used frequently with life(44x) variously as life eternal, eternal
life, life everlasting, everlasting life:
Mat 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Luk 10:25; 18:18, 30;
Jn 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2, 3;
Act 13:46, 48; Rom 2:7; 5:21; 6:22, 23;
Gal 6:8; 1Ti 1:16; 6:12, 19;
Tit 1:2; 3:7; 1Jn 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jud_1:21;

Other phrases:
1. tin olethron ainion (pay eternal ~) 2Th 1:9. [olethros destruction,
ruin, disaster 1Co 5:5 (of flesh); 1Th 5:3; 1Ti 6:9 (eis olethron kai
apleian)]
2. eis kolasin ainion (into eternal ~) Mt 25:46 [kolasis punishment
1Jn 4:18]
3. puros ainiou (~ fire) Jud 7
4. the eternal kingdom 2Pe 1:11
5. ~ paraklsis (consolation 2Th 2:16
6. Covenant Heb13:20; chain Jud 1:16; gospel Rev 14:6; (weight of) glory
2Co 4:17; 2Th 2:10; 1Pe 5:10; judgment Heb 6:2; salvation Heb 5:9;
deliverance Heb 9:23; spirit Heb 9:14; inheritance Heb 9:15

Life eternal; eternal life; /xx: everlasting life; /

false-gods > pagan idols > *idols [Now the sense of objects of
worship limited in modern English usage includes carved
images/statures or icons. (an image or other material object
representing a deity to which religious worship is addressed or any
person or thing regarded with admiration, adoration, or devotion).
Anything or anyone (including oneself) taking the place of the true God
is a false god or idol, whether human beings, ideologies, philosophies
or religions. [Guard yourselves from idols. 1Jn 5:21]

[Gods] Word > commandment commandment now belongs to

biblical specialty vocabulary or jargon = command (as of Gods). The
word in Hebrew for Ten Commandments means simply Ten Words.

*Faith As used in the Scripture which is entirely unrelated to faith in

English usage synonymous to belief religion e.g. faiths even
firm conviction) is not something one can acquire or build up, nor what
one does, but a trusting relation to ones master (Lord)

one believes in Him because of who He is,

and one knows [experientially] who He is as He Himself revealed in
the Scritpure [Cf. belief],
and one believes what He says. Living faith in contrast to faith as a
belief.
It is not something one does exercise or claim as if a magic word or
mantra. The word is better understood as a concrete verb rather than an
abstract noun.
Faith we have itself is a gift from God. In a few places, it is in the sense
of faith from God rather than faith in God.
E.g. a unique occurrence in Mk 11:22 exete pistin theou most (incl.
KJV and Bishops) renders it as faith in God. Cf. faith of God
MKJV, LITV, YLT; (the faith of God Geneva); Cf. Gods faith (in
BBE). Here the possessive case of God is ambiguous with the sense
unclear. The Gk. genitive anarthrous theou is adjectival (not of
possossive) in sense (such as divine god-like) and it is better
understood as faith such as from God. IRENT has it God-given faith
(alternative; faith from God). [See *Adjectival noun] Even with the
word standing alone (as an abstract noun), it should be in that sense, e.g.
1Co 13:13 in the phrase faith, hope, and love.
the faith of Christ
Gal 2:16, ek pistes Christou 2:20 en pistei z t (dative) tou huiou tou theou
Gal 3:22 ek pisteous Iesou Christou
Phi 3:9; Rom 3:22; Rev 14:12
NET fn: Gal 2:16
tn Or "faith in Jesus Christ." A decision is difficult here. Though traditionally
translated "faith in Jesus Christ," an increasing number of NT scholars are arguing
that (pisti Christou) and similar phrases in Paul (here and in Gal_2:20;
Rm_3:22, 26; Gal_3:22; Eph_3:12; Phi_3:9) involve a subjective genitive and mean
"Christ's faith" or "Christ's faithfulness" (cf., e.g., G. Howard, "The 'Faith of Christ',"
ExpTim 85 [1974]: 212-15; R. B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ [SBLDS]; Morna D.
Hooker, " ," NTS 35 [1989]: 321-42). Noteworthy among the arguments
for the subjective genitive view is that when takes a personal genitive it is almost
never an objective genitive (genitive pronouns! not genitive of a specific person: cf. Mt
9:2, 22, 29; Mk 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Lk_5:20; Lk_7:50; 8:25, 48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32;
Rm_1:8; 4:5; 1Co_2:5; 15:14, 17; 2Co_10:15; Phi_2:17; Col_1:4; 2:5; 1Th_1:8; 3:2, 5,
10; 2Th_1:3; Phm_1:6; 1Pe_1:9, 21; 2Pe_1:5). (faithfulness vs. faith of Abraham);
Rm_1:12; 3:3; 4:12; 4:16; Tit_1:1 On the other hand, the objective genitive view has
its adherents: A. Hultgren, "The Pistis Christou Formulations in Paul," NovT 22
(1980): 248-63; J. D. G. Dunn, "Once More, ," SBL Seminar Papers,
1991, 730-44. Most commentaries on Romans and Galatians usually side with the
objective view.
sn On the phrase translated the faithfulness of Christ, ExSyn 116, which notes that
the grammar is not decisive, nevertheless suggests that "the faith/faithfulness of Christ

is not a denial of faith in Christ as a Pauline concept (for the idea is expressed in many
of the same contexts, only with the verb rather than the noun), but implies
that the object of faith is a worthy object, for he himself is faithful." Though Paul
elsewhere teaches justification by faith, this presupposes that the object of our faith is
reliable and worthy of such faith.
Gal 3:22
tn Or so that the promise could be given by faith in Jesus Christ to those who believe."
A decision is difficult here. Though traditionally translated "faith in Jesus Christ," an
increasing number of NT scholars are arguing that (pisti Christou) and
similar phrases in Paul (here and in Rm_3:22, 26; Gal_2:16, 20; Eph_3:12; Phi_3:9)
involve a subjective ge itive and mean "Christ's faith" or "Christ's faithfulness" (cf.,
e.g., G. Howard, "The 'Faith of Christ'," ExpTim 85 [1974]: 212-15; R. B. Hays, The
Faith of Jesus Christ [SBLDS]; Morna D. Hooker, " ," NTS 35 [1989]:
321-42).
Noteworthy among the arguments for the subjective genitive view is that when
takes a personal genitive it is almost never an objective genitive (cf. Mat_9:2, 22, 29;
Mar_2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luk_5:20; 7:50; 8:25, 48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32; Rom_1:8, 12;
3:3; 4:5, 12, 16; 1Co_2:5; 15:14, 17; 2Co_10:15; Phi_2:17; Col_1:4; 2:5; 1Th_1:8; 3:2, 5,
10; 2Th_1:3; Tit_1:1; Phm_1:6; 1Pe_1:9, 21; 2Pe_1:5).
On the other hand, the objective genitive view has its adherents: A. Hultgren, "The
Pistis Christou Formulations in Paul," NovT 22 (1980): 248-63; J. D. G. Dunn, "Once
More, ," SBL Seminar Papers, 1991, 730-44. Most commentaries on
Romans and Galatians usually side with the objective view.
sn On the phrase because of the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, ExSyn 116, which notes
that the grammar is not decisive, nevertheless suggests that "the faith/faithfulness of
Christ is not a denial of faith in Christ as a Pauline concept (for the idea is expressed in
many of the same contexts, only with the verb rather than the noun), but
implies that the object of faith is a worthy object, for he himself is faithful." Though
Paul elsewhere teaches justification by faith, this presupposes that the object of our
faith is reliable and worthy of such faith.
tc Gal 2:20
A number of important witnesses (46 B D* F G) have (theou kai Christou,
"of God and Christ") instead of (huiou tou theou, "the Son of God"), found in
the majority of MSS, including several important ones ( A C D1 0278 33 1739 1881 lat
sy co).
The construction "of God and Christ" appears to be motivated as a more explicit
affirmation of the deity of Christ (following as it apparently does the Granville Sharp rule).
Although Paul certainly has an elevated Christology, explicit "God-talk" with reference to
Jesus does not normally appear until the later books (cf., e.g., Tit_2:13; Phi_2:10-11, and
probably Rom_9:5). For different arguments but the same textual conclusions, see TCGNT
524.

*Faithfulness vs. Faith - www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/faith-andfaithfulness/ [A copy in Supplement (Collection #1).]

immersion-rite > baptism; get immersed, receive immersionrite > be baptized.
It was a rite with simple act of immersion into water. The words
baptize and baptism are now a very typical Biblish jargon, church
word. Such baptism is not same as what it is in the Bible and
anachronistic to be used in the translation of the Scripture.

believe
believe (a thing, a person) take (something, sayings) as
true.
believe in (a person) have trust in (a person) and abide in.
come to believe in > believe in for the most cases of
Greek phrase pisteu eis. [See *believe into.]
turn around > be converted [conversion is like proselytize a high
charged religious jargon]

fulfilled as in to fulfill the promise, the prophecy, the Scripture, the

Torah (Cf. Law), etc. - Mt 3:15; 5:17 it is to fill up (bring up) to
fullness; not to finish up and be done with.

*execution stake vs. *Cross: The former is used to render the Greek
stauros when the device itself is meant as in the Gospels. It helps to
avoid anachronism and reading into the text something is not in there.
The traditional word Cross as capitalized is used to translate as in the
Epistles.

scroll > book;

The word book (as a print book) in English translation is anachronistic.
It is a scroll, which later evolved into a codex. a
8F8F

Hades, sheol; GeHinnom (> Gehenna) > hell, inferno;

(Gk. geenna, meaning valley of Hinnom in Hebrew) [Note: As to the
Hebrew word sheol which is translated into Greek (in LXX) as hades.
KJV (along with Geneva, Bishops, and DRB) is notable to have GehHinnom (and others) in N.T. as hell, and sheol in O.T. incorrectly
rendered as hell which should be better rendered as a familiar word
Hades (from Gk).

For the Greek biblios (scroll; book) in the title verse of Mt 1:1, see Appendix in GMt on which most English translations mistake as Book of Genealogy instead of a
Written-down Life-History.

Many English translations after KJV still stick to such an incorrect and
inaccurate translation practice.

shabbat (> sabbath) IRENT renders it as shabbat (Hebrew word)

for which most renders as sabbath, which carries a different meaning,
connotation and nuance which are not there in the original word. The
word sabbath is now automatically understood as coming on
Saturday, while shabbat in the Scripture is to be on 7th day of the lunar
week and does correspond to Saturday.

anoint; anointed; anointing In IRENT it is only retained to

translate Greek chrin which is used in special sense in which it belongs,
as anointing for a king, prophet, or kohen (> priest). [English word
anoint is used as a typical (Catholic) church jargon, as in anointing of
the sick, or as a figurative sense.
For Gk. christos IRENT renders as Mashiah but in a few places as
Anointed one (capitalized) (e.g. Mt 16:16 //Mk 8:29 //Lk 9:20; Jn 4:25).
Cf. Many English Bibles render Greek aleiph as anoint as well with
the word used as a religious jargon.

fellow brethren The plural word brothers outside the Gospels

usually refer to followers of the Mashiah (> Messiah) in common
fellowship. Traditionally it is simply translated as brothers. [To
have it translated as brothers and sisters (as in NET, CEV, ERV, GW,
etc.) totally inappropriate and frivolous and actually confuses the readers
with misinformation.]

holy spirit; the holy spirit; the holy Spirit

When the phrase in Gk is anarthrous it is consistently rendered as
holy spirit (with no capitalization e.g. Lk 11:13) in IRENT. It is
only the Greek arthrous phrase functioning as the
grammatical or thematic agent in the sentence (cf.
personification as God acting in power) that it is rendered
as the holy Spirit (with the initial S in capital letter). In
case of the promised gift (e.g. Act 2:33) it is rendered as
the very holy spirit, the [promised] holy spirit or the [gift
of] holy spirit according to the context. Here the very sense
of holy spirit is Gods spirit, not the third person of
Godhead, God the Holy Ghost, in Trinitarian jargon.

The Divine names and titles:

Elsewhere discussed in detail for problem of translation and for rationale and
validity of IRENT solution. Here is a list with brief notes. [See Walk through the
Scripture #3 Names, Persons, and People.]

*Elohim a > God [Throughout N.T. the translation in IRENT consistently

renders the arthrous Greek ho theos (the God) (the true God of the Scripture)
as Elohim, not as God.]
9F9F

*YHWH vs. *Adonai > Lord; LORD

For the Gk Kurios as a title of Elohim (the God of the Scrpture) and the
Yeshua (the risen Mashiah) in the N.T., most English translations inattentively
render it Lord. In not a few number of places this leads the readers to
confusion as to who is referred to. b
10F10F

IRENT free from doctrinal constraints takes only a linguistic and literary
consideration, which is based on the principle of * logic and reasoning. Thus,
when the word is found to refer to the very God who has revealed His own
name in the Scripture, it is rendered not as Lord as most English Bibles do,
(1) but as YHWH c in a small number of places, where His personname d itself needs to be known. e
1F1F

12F12F

13F13F

www.myredeemerlives.com/namesofgod/adonai-elohim.html
www.messianictorah.org/en/pdf/Chapter%203.pdf
www.gci.org/God/Elohim3
www.gci.org/god/elohim4 Is Elohim a plural word?
(Elohim vs. El; - similar to Adonai vs. Adon).
A typical example of confusion with Lord having two different referents: Mt 22:4345 where David is quoted calling the Mashiah as Kurios (Lord or Master) and it the
quoted passage has the same word in Greek twice, one which is referred in the
TaNaKh to YHWH Elohim (as in LXX) and another one to the Mashiah for Davids.
b

YHWH (or YHVH), the so-called Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Scripture (TaNaKh). This
is seen as kurios in LXX, though a few early mss show the Tetragrammaton in paleo-Hebrew
script). In the Old Testament of English Bibles, some renders as Jehovah (ASV, NWT,
pronounced as je-HO-v) and as Yahweh (e.g. JB and NJB, pronounced as ya-WHE). Many
simply follow the style of LXX, rendering it as LORD (all in capitals). KJV has it as Jehovah
only in a few places.
The phrase person-name in distinction to personal name, denotes a name of
being of person-in-relation; not as used for a name as of a person of such as a
human person. Elohim has a person-same, not a person name, a name which
belongs to a person.
d

His name has to be known and should not be left buried in the Greek language and
thoughts. It is so, not because a translator has decided to do so. Cf. Jn 17:6, 26

(2)

in most places, as Adonai (which is the way His name is

vocalized as in the tradition of Masoretic text of TaNaKh.
Comparable to LORD of English translations of O.T.

Note: Used as translation words in IRENT work, two words Elohim and
Adonai are to be recognized as Hebrew loanwords for the purpose of
translation. As such, though they may be used even in everyday
language. However, in no way it suggests that they should replace the
corresponding English words (God and Lord). The use of loanwords is
found to remove much of confusion when reading English translations,
some affecting vitally important doctrines which are derived from the
different Bible translations and formulated to fit ones dogma and
traditions.

Master > Lord.

[When the Greek word Kurios refers to Yeshua, IRENT renders it as
Master in the Gospels. The word Lord is used only when this title is
applied to the risen Lord.]

Yeshua > Jesus (= Iesus in KJV 1611 with J used for capital I in Gothic
font.)

Mashiah (> Messiah) > Christ

[The Greek Christos is translation of a Hebrew word meaning the
anointed one. To translate it as Christ, especially within the Gospels, is
anachronistic, since the word Christ became to be equated to Yeshua
himself and, moreover it is now burdened with too much unscriptural
overtone as acquired through the history of Christian religions. It was
Yeshua who came as the Mashiah (> the Messiah) of YHWH Elohim
(Yahweh God) (Lk 2:26).

Common words and phrases often used in the Scripture with

different meaning and nuance:
The [range of] meaning of a given word is determined and comes alive in the
text and in the context. There are some words which are problematic. Aside
from those belonging to the special words of personal name, title, place name,
festival name, there are those difficult or uncommon English words and words
derived from the original languages or transliteration. On the other hand, the
readers may be unaware of problems some familiar words may give when
here again it is much more than having a focus and attentions on the spelling and the
pronunciation of the name itself and how often the name should appear on religious
pages and speeches so that the name is to our satisfaction to become well known.
[The phrase person name, instead of personal name, means the name of a person,
not a human person, but a being of person-in-relation.]

they appear in different sense and nuance. For example, in all the
occurrences of the word day in the Scripture it is what begins at the sunrise. It
has nothing to do with and should not be confused with a day as a date in a
calendar, which arbitrarily set to start from midnight (as in Julian and
Gregorian calendars), or from sunset (as in rabbinic Jewish calendar since
Hillel II).
When Yeshua said believe me, it is not as if Im not lying, but it is Im telling
it from the truth, with the truth and for the truth.

Translation vs. paraphrase; metaphrase

Transliteration (vs. translation):
Since personal names and other proper names cannot be translated,
and only be transliterated. Transliteration of these should accurately
and closely reflect the original as possible and not content with modern
equivalent in English speaking culture and society. Otherwise, it would
be anachronism and bring ideas and word-pictures which are unbiblical
and alien to the Scripture.
[See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_transliteration
transliterating Hebrew words.]

for

problem

in

kohen (pl. kohanim) > priest (priests); head-Kohanim > chief priests;
high priests; Kohen haGadol > the High Priest; the Chief Priest;
kehunnah > priesthood, priestly office/service.
Praise Yah > (HalleluYah) > Hallelujah, Alleluia;
shalom > peace (that humans wish to have on earth);
Eliyahu > Elijah; Yosef > Joseph; Yeshayahu > Isaiah; Yisrael > Israel
Mattithyahu > Matthew; Yaakob > Jacob; /x: James; Kayafa >
Caiaphas
Elisheba > Elizabeth; Mariam > Mary;
Yudah for all, except one, Judas, the betrayer of his master.
Shimon > Simon;
Kefa > Peter; Cephas [Note See what kind of picture the English

Biblical names, John, James, and Peter brings to the readers.

See how different their original names in the Scripture, Yohan,
Yaakob, and Kefa come to the readers! As rendered so in IRENT,
these names belong to those who lived in the culture two
thousand years ago, devout Judaic totally unrelated to Christian
religions which are tied down and buried in the modern
westernized culture.]

John as used in most English Bibles (also a very common name in

English) is a Hebrew name Yohanan. IRENT renders it as Yohan in
most places, except as Yohanan for three different persons of the same
name

(1)

Yohanan the
Baptizer/Baptist)

Baptizer

(instead

of

John

the

(2) Yohanan the one called Markus (instead of John the one
called Mark Act 12:12ff BarNabbas cousin), and
(3) Yohanan, a high priest (Act 4:6).
[It would be natural to have a name (spelt closely reflecting the original) be
rendered same consistently throughout any translation work. An important
exception is made in IRENT, however, to help the readers distinguish different
people with a same name.]

Note on *gender issue in language:

[<< there is no connection between gendered language and gender
identity>> quoted from Ben Witherington III, Biblical Views: Spirited Discourse
About God Language in the New Testament, in the May/June 2012 issue of Biblical
Archaeology Review.]

In our current socio-political and cultural climate in the Western nations,

where sexuality itself is confused and marriage as such of covenant and
family union is in danger of becoming downgraded to refer to some sort
of relation primarily of sexual copulation, we have so far become hypersensitive and at the same time desensitized for a lot of things.
Gendered language is one of these to which people becomes hypersensitive. E.g. use of the word man in generic sense of common man
human being becomes unseated from its place in lexicons and it by
itself tends to confuse people whether it might refer to a male person
unless the context is clear. The pronoun he becomes to be referred to
only a male person, not to any person.

The use of gendered language such as he his him or father

in reference to God has nothing to do with maleness of God or a
gender-biased patriarchy. The pronouns of the third person
singular masculine are used (he, his, him) as the undisputed
historic convention followed and this simply corresponds to the
grammatical gender.

For man (i.e. human beings), except when the context tells a
male person can be presumed safely from the context, the
nominative case he is avoided. When everyone whosoever
anyone is referred to, singular they is adopted and they, their,
them, or theirs is used in place of usual he, his, or him.

See also fellow brethren'.

See under *holy Spirit for the grammatical neuter gender of the
Greek word pneuma (spirit) vs. the gender of the pronouns it
takes, esp. when it is personified.

Grammatical gender has nothing of biological gender/sex (male-femaleness).

God is in masculine gender but does not mean to be a male entity or element,
though the customarily called as He. It is, however, in harmony with God
being Father throughout the Scripture. [Note: In our modern times, gender
neutrality, gender equality, and gender inclusiveness are becoming issues which carry
a host of human sexuality problems, and show in areas physiological, psychological,
social and political, and, importantly for our task, in linguistical area as well. [Cf. Gk.
word hamartia for sin is feminine gender.]

*anachronism
placing or attributing a custom, event, or circumstance, or object to a period to
which it does not belong. The problem with this is it is often unrecognizable and it
often misleads on the facts and confuses their sense and significance and, in case of
the Scripture and Bible texts, results in wrong interpretations and unfounded doctrines
and dogmas. [From ignorance, inattention, doctrine or church tradition ]

church for Mashiahn (> Messianic) congregation or community;

baptism for immersion-rite;
Baptist (as in KJV) for Baptizer;
cross for execution stake in the Gospel narratives;
saints for consecrated people to God; [It is customary to use to
apply the Gospel evangelists, e.g. St. Matthews Gospel.]
charity for love (noun). [KJV in 28 places esp. 1Co 8:1 and on; from
Vulgate caritas. (Cf. Mt 24:12, etc. love KJV; /charity DRB)]
Compared these with the words in their modern usage and nuance:
charity almsgiving.
church a building; denomination, or organization
hierarchical structure
baptism an ecclesial practice in various forms.
Baptist a member of a Baptist Church.
saints those special people canonized in Catholic Church.

with

*jargon, *jargonism
Special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are
difficult for others to understand. [Often carries a derogatory tone. Cf. etym. late
Middle Engl. (twittering chattering later gibberish).]
Particular jargons are found which belong to different cultures and languages, and
particularly to a different line of scholarly and ecclesiastical traditions of various
Christian religions. Church jargons, biblical jargons, religious jargons, theological
jargons, etc.
Frequently used here in IRENT Supplement this word is a used as a technical term ad
should not be mistaken as in pejorative sense.

[Reading material: on http://jargonism.wordpress.com/ ]

English syntax problem
E.g. Jn 3:17 Most renders as [God] did NOT send his Son into the world to
which sounds very strange because of the placement of not which should

negate the reason for his being sent. God did send his Son into the world NOT
to ~.]

Sentence break problem

Rm 14:11a and 11b two are not contiguous speaker confusion
Speaker confusion:
Zec 3:2 the angel of YHWH said to Satan: May YHWH refuke you, O Satan,
NWT-4, (NWT-3), ERV, GNB.
Cf. Most renders as the LORD said to Satan May LORD ~.

Power of Words and Tyranny of Words

Many difficult words are ofent not complicated words, but rather simple
common words within or without religion believe be saved God, pray,
bless, is, spirit, soul, heaven, immortality, world, wicked, evil,
church, preach, condemn, eternal, word, Lord, etc. simple but
ambiguous with large semantic fields which overlap in synonyms.

Ref: Dave Brunn (2013), One Bible, Many Versions Are All Translations
Created Equal? [Ch. 4 What is in a Word? More, And Less, Than Meets the
Eye. (pp. 71-84)]
The power of words is immeasurable. [A three-inch tongue can relieve a debt
of talent.]. Though words are what makes communication possible, its
inherent fluidity, flexibility, and limitation contributes miscommunication,
which can be disastrous by failing to convey the intention/agenda of a speaker,
clearly and fully. (Cf. Jam 3:5) Just as all the creation in God began with words.
All the evil in humanity begins with words. Words quicken Life and words
also slay. Words are dangerous things, like fire.
Examples of common words often abused or misused God believe love
be saved Lord, church, etc. E.g. While there is large overlap of Hebrew
word Elohim, the Greek word theos and the English word God, there is little
semantic overlap a of love in the Bible (translation word for Gk word agap)
and a common English word love. [Cf. KJV which renders it as charity. b]
14F14F

15F15F

[A Venn diagram may be drawn to show sematic overlap of related words between synonymous
words (synchronic or diachronic), or between two languages of translation words] [Cf. Euler diagrams]
a

*charity instead of love in KJV: (x 28 in 24 vv.)

Every word in the Scripture must not be lightly treated; every word should be
attended before putting into the Bible translation.
No single word is bad or wrong; its usage makes it so. The common word hell
is not a wrong word, but when it is used as if it is a Scriptural word. Yes, it
appears in many English Bible translations traditional but now inappropriate.
The word itself is a very useful to describe aptly what one want to as in such
expressions, hell with, what the hell, or hellish. No other word can do as it
does. Our task is to remove it from the Bible vocabulary.
In reading the Scripture one of the most difficult words is is. a E.g. what does
.is mean in such sentences? is is is same is equal is identical stands for
is like? How does it relate the subject to the predicate? Everything stands
relative in the realm of language like everyone is given an instrument for
music, all out of tune with different pitch. There, who can say others are
playing wrong, when the instrument, that is, language is the culprit.
16F16F

YHWH is my shepherd (Psa 23:1) is non-literal.

and the Word was God Jn 3:1 (KJV and most others) is the problem
with God?
and God is spirit Jn 4:34 is the problem with spirit? God is as
spirit? [Cf. /x: a spirit KJV; /Spirit many] [Note: The verb is in
ellipsis in the Greek text.]
God is love 1Jn 4:8.
the enemy is the devil (Mt 13:39). one of you is a devil (Jn 6:70)
a devil meaning someone like the devil?
Your throne is the God Heb 1:8 [literal translation with the God =
Elohim; the absent verb supplied]? How does it differ from reading it
God is your throne (as in NWT)? Is the reverse statement correct,
always? If the statement the Word is God is true, its reverse God is
the Word can be true? If not, why not?

What is the meaning of meaning anyway? Sense? Or the meaning or

defintion of definition?

1Co 8:1; 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13; 14:1; 16:14; Col 3:14; 1Th 3:6; 2Th 1:3; 1Ti 1:5; 2:15; 4:12;
2Ti 2:22; 3:10; Tit 2:2; 1Pe 4:8; 5:14; 2Pe 1:7; 3Jn 6; Jud 1:12; Rev 2:19.
a

See a file in Collections #1 The Nefarious Is.

Cf. Bill Clinton It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
Cf. K.C. Cole wrote: Words, after all, are only what we make them. And remake them. So it

isn't all that surprising that we sometimes can't agree on what the proper meaning is.
Or even what "mean" means, or "is" is.
http://articles.latimes.com/2001/may/14/news/mn-63298

What is the meaning of a word? Or perhaps better, how does one determined
the maing of a word? quoting from Daniel Fabricatore (2010), Form of
God, Form of Servant An Examination fo the Greek Noun morp in Phi
2:6-7. p.1)
Chilton and Neusner (2004), Classical Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism - Comparing
Theologies
p. 15
To do theology is to think philosophically about the revealed truth that a religion puts
forth. To think philosophically is to address systematic questions of definition, logic,
cogency, coherence, and proportion. A theological system emerges from the answers to
those questions. An analogy then presents itself: theology is to religion as language is to
experience and perception. Theology constitutes the language of religious faith,
knowledge and experience, defining its vocabulary (category-formations), laying out its
grammar, setting forth its syntax. Just as language turns inchoate experience into
propositions subject to general intelligibility in public discourse, so theology expresses
in appropriate language the attitudes and feelings and intangible but very real
perceptions of religion. It puts them into intellectually accessible terms and categories,
subject to generalization and systematization. Transforming what is private and
inherently individual into something that is public and intentionally shared, theology
does for religion what language does for experience and perception.

God problem; believing God

God what is God?; What is the name? What does it mean that God has a
name? WB #3 Names, Persons, and People.
*word; Problems of word;
Definition of word:

a single unit of language that has meaning and can be spoken or written.
Orthographic (written) vs. philological (spoken) word vs. lexical item;
Ref.

What Is a Word?
http://youtu.be/Vu3eDf4p0r0 What Even Is a Word?
What is a word? - SIL International ;

Cf. sentence > phrase > word > syllable

Cf. vocabulary, jargon (specialty word), term terminology, etc.

It is one of few things important in our life to be clear and precise in use of

words and phrases. A word comes alive only with all the meaning,
sense, nuance, connotation usage as well as intention/agenda of the
speaker/writer. Caveat: a word remains no longer same; it keeps changing in
time slowly or abruptly, unconsciously or intentionally [Cf. gobbledygook;
double-talk; Orwellian doublespeak, newspeak; humpty dumty language,
jargon, etc.; cf. words of political incorrect expression or nuance]. At a
given time period a word cannot mean exactly same to everyone. It is simply
unconscionable and logically impossible to translate a word as literally as
one wants and be content with. A lexical meaning is simply a make-believe
and is good enough only for a dead language. working definition,
stipulative definition, circular definition; obfuscation, word play, rhetoric,
poetic license, euphemism, circumlocution, merism, etc.
A poem begins with Rose is a rose is a rose. a What about words? Can we say,
Word is a word is a word? Not really. The fact is, word (which I say) is not the
word (which you say) is not the word (which others say). A word is not a word is
not a word (as a person may think so understand). [E.g. holy is not holy all the
time. See *holiness] [Christians are not Christians; unless specified it may lead no
where e.g. Catholic Christians, Protestian Christians, Mormon C., Charistmatic C.
they are not same and cannot be same. They live different and think different; they
know what their God is, different from others.] [Even within the Bible text a
specialzed word does not mean same. E.g. Gk. christos does not mean Mashiah (>
Christ) throughout, but rather as Anointed one by Elohim. Cf. Gk. phrase Iesous
Christos, which IRENT renders as Yeshua the Mashiah (> Jesus Christ), Cf.
Yeshua as Mashiah the one who is to come as the prophets announced in
TaNaKh Scripture.
17F17F

Unless people realize this, much of endless and useless arguments and conflicts
from every day conversation to doctrinal and thelogical heated debates results from
the tyranny played by words we use. While each word has it meaning obvious in
the context, what one is thinking is not same as what one writes from it. What a
person reads is not same as what is written. An interpretation is further away from
what one reads. It is remarkable how communication with language is still possible
without much difficulty when there is such inherent ambiguity. However, when one
makes a truth claim, it is the readers duty to be a word inspector as well as a fruit
inspector. b A word may have only a functional role but not meaning. The meaning
of word is just one element it has. Depending on how it is used in the context, it is
affected also with association, allusion, echoes, connotation, word collocation, word
play, sound-effects, and word picture (imagery) c.
18F18F

19F19F

[a verse in Gertrude Stein's poem Sacred Emily (1913)

www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/15900.html ]
b
[Cf. You are to recognize them by their fruit (Mt 7:20) not only what they say or write but
also what they do and what they are especially when they wield power with position, pride
and pomp, placating and pleasing themselves.]
word imagery what kind of imagery would the readers to form in their mind when the text says
they were fishers (- KJV. fishermen ESV; Mt 4:18; //Mk 1:16)? Would it be like outdoor men
with fishing as a hobby, anglers? Or fishers on a idyllic fishing village, or, on a commercial fishing
ship? Or rugged and rough, uneducated, rough-and-tumble, sweaty? What about they will be made
fishers of men (Mt 4:19; Mk 1:17)? In some culture, fishing men means baiting men with a hook.
c

A word, when it is written down, is only a poor representation of a spoken word

which carries tone and mood (not in grammatical sense, but in literary sense), such
as cynicism, sarcasm, rhetoric, gloom, exasperation, combatative, jocularity, etc.
Translation has to bring out vividness, force, tone, etc.
Examples,
A Christian (you say) is a Christian (I say) is a Christian (others say)? No. It
cannot be.
Easter is Easter is Easter? No.
You say, Im saved. So? Saved from what? Saved to what? And then? How
does it get connected to all to be saved (1Tm 2:4)? The Gk soz save, deliver,
preserve, heal, make whole. What sense is coverd by the English word be saved?
Soul is soul? No, if the word is used as in immortal soul of Greek philosophy. It
is NOT same as the word soul translated in the Bible. Yes, anyone can belive
immortal soul, but it has nothing to the Biblical ideas. Resurrection of soul?
resurrection of the body? soul sleep?
God (you say) is God (others say) is God (in the Bibles)? No.
Is Jesus Jesus? No.
The holy spirit is the holy spirit is the holy spirit? No, while it may be true to say
that holy spirit is holy spirit is holy spirit, [What the phrase holy spirit or the
holy spirit means is solely determined in a local as well as a larger context. See its
full discussion under *holy spirit in BW #3.]
This simple observation is also applicable even to the words which are found in the
Bibles:
Truth is not truth is not truth. Same for spirit, love a, faith, soul b, etc. in
fact every word that has some weight on it.
20F20F

21F21F

All this is not from our relativistic way of thinking. Every word used is in such
linguistic and logical dilemma. Each of us has different exposure, experience, and
experiment with words during entire period of our life to make us burdened with
presumptions and assumptions, to bring up different associations and word pictures.

The boat they were riding on? A pleasure rowing boat? There is no way to translate them literally
or in formal equivalence (whatever the pompous techinacl word means) without distorting what the
Scripture says.
E.g. welcome, accept, receive, take someone in, etc.
love the word love in common English usage has little to do with the notion of the word in the
Scripture, a pale shadow. E.g. sexual love sex has nothing to do with love itself.
a

soul it is used as a translation word in many English Bibles and only so much overlap in the
semantic field. Hence ideas of soul immortality and soul sleep (the expression not found in the
Bible) are concocted, being infected with common pagan beliefs. Can someone first explain what is
meant by soul anyway? We have to start at where words, all the words especially weighty words, are
being used in our everyday language, not from agenda-driven mindset craving for doctrines and
theologies.
b

As human beings live in language and with language, this is the ultimate source of
animosity between people. Simply we dont have common ground to stand to
effectively communicate each other. It has become a tool or means for the pursuit of
power and pleasure. God is God is God. Is it? Or, rather should we say God is
not God; God is not God, God is not God? That is, God (who I say it) is not God
(who you say) is not God (who others say). [The statement everyone believes in
God is correct, as far as it goes, since God (for someone) is not God (for others).
The focus is who God is.]
God is God is a god; god is God. Only with the God we can see the word is
intended to be understood differently, until the true Elohim is known by the very
name. [Ch. Hebrew word HaShem (lit. "the name") which is used to refer to

Elohim when avoiding God's more formal title in Hebrew, Adonai (lit. "My
Master").
God is God. It seems that the main problem besetting our humanity is whether one
believe in God or not believe. A truth is that one does not come to the Bible to
believe in God, because everyone does believe in a God. The problem is who God
is. The Scripture does not tell that people should believe in God they can
understand and accept, but it reveals who God is, that is, the God of Scripture the
very Elohim of Abraham, Elohim of Yitzchak (> Isaac), Elohim of Yaakob (Mt
22:32, etc.) whom Yeshua called Abba, Father. When we utter the word God in
our everyday language, most of time it does not have or require a connection to the
God of the Scripture, Elohim whose revealed name is YHWH.
Most difficult word in terms of logic is the verbe is. A is A does not mean A=A
in mathematical language. In literary, both A may mean different things, refer to
different things, originate from different spheres. Thus, while A = A if only in
logical argument with A being well defined.
When we hear the statement as simply as A is B, we should not put A=B (same,
equal, identical, as if = is same as sign), but always take it as A is as B, telling
that A and B are somehow interrelated, but it is not a statement of identity. We can
see it is the problem of the verb is is at the root of all the conflicts and contentions
(resulting in battle, wars, killings) in human endeavor at a higher level (intellectual,
ideological, scholary, etc.).
God is God, because God is as God. That Yeshua is the Logos of Ehohim purports
the fact of that Yeshua is as the Logos. The reverse is not true the Logos is not
Yeshua, nor God the Son.
Ref. The Burden of Proof ; Evidence of absence Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence
https://youtu.be/MFBjCM0mZHg negative evidence is not same as absence of

evidence.
vocabularies: *logic, proof, inference, premises, preposition, presupposition,
bias, tautology, * arguments, statements, contradiction, contingency, paradox;
inductive reasoning vs. deductive reasoning; hypothesis, theories, syllogism,

logical equivalents, symbolic; fallacies, rhetoric; literal-metaphoricalallegorical interpretation;

www.math.northwestern.edu/~mlerma/courses/cs310-05s/notes/dm-logic.pdf
John Beekman and John Callow (1974) give an elaborate footnote in their book
Translating the Word of God (p. 68) about the historical use and varying terminology
for these classes of lexical symbols:
Probably the earliest analysis in terms of such classes is found in George
Campbells The Philosophy of Rhetoric, first published in 1776. A recent edition
(1963) has been edited by Lloyd Bitzer and published by the Southern Illinois
University Press. On page 385, Campbell labels the four semantic classes as (1)
things, (2) operations, (3) attributes, and (4) connectives. [an acronym TEAR]
Gustaf Stern (1931), in his Meaning and Change of Meaning (p. 19), says,
Words are signs which name that for which they are signs: table is the name of
an object, red of a quality, run of an activity, over of a relation.
Wilbur Urban (1939), Susanne K. Langer (1942), and Edward Sapir (1944), each
proposed a set of labels to represent these basic classes of semantic elements.
More recently, E. A. Nida (1964), in Toward a Science of Translating (p. 62)
speaks of four principal functional classes of lexical symbols, which he labels as
object words, event words, abstracts and relationals.

From www.edah.org/backend/JournalArticle/1_2_intro.pdf (2001)

Contemporary thinkers from diverse fields have taught us that language does more than
describe the objective universe around us: Words shape our understanding of reality and
how we relate to the world. The logos creates, as it were, our universe. The Torah
considers names crucial, expressing and perhaps determining the character and destiny of
their bearers. If this is true about persons in space and time, it is true a fortiori about how
we understand God, who has no independent empirical character. Halakhahs insistence
on the careful use of the divine Name reflects this philosophic awareness. That
sanctifying God is conceived of as qiddush Ha-Shem sanctifying Gods Name is
no coincidence.

meaning; *definition; translation

[meaning, usage, nuance, word picture, word association] [characterization,

categorization, specification]
A word a is alive only when it is placed discriminatory and clear in the text,
unless with intentional and literary device with ambiguity, word play, rhetoric a,
ellipsis, paradox, etc.
2F2F

23F23F

word vs. *term - Often the word term is used where word is simple and appropriate.

[*Literary devices: literary elements and literary techniques

www.literarydevices.com/ ]
The semantic field of a word overlaps with the fields of other synonymous
words in varying degree. We have to deal with this not only for English words,
but also the Greek words. A word with most accurate meaning is not
necessarily the right word to be in the text. An idiom cannot be simply put into
other languages, unless the whole context linguistic and cultural setting9 is
considered.
There is no such thing as literal b translation of a word into different language;
what it means by that is nothing more than putting words into glosses. Literal
translation (also called metaphrase) of the text is not possible except in the
sense of translation with concordant principle (a word or phrase is rendered to
another language always same throughout the text), which by itself is a
linguistical and literary absurdity. It should not be confused with a principle of
consistency the same word appearing in the same context should be rendered
same. All translation work should be dynamic. It is also paraphrase, putting
a phrase into a different phrase simply because its into another language.
However, when the term paraphrase is applied to Bible translation work, it
actually points to free style rendering without much restriction or rules to fit
the translators agenda (something which is at stake) and ideas, be it literary
(e.g. easy reading, modern English style, spoken English style, etc.) or
doctrinal, importing in varying degree into the text which is a frivolous with
personal fanciful stupefying blarneying, penchant, useless, alien and foreign to
the Scripture, and often contradictory to the original text itself.
24F24F

Words have meanings and carry senses as well as functional roles. Only
within a sentence these begin to surface up and its semantic field becomes
narrowed down. Words, however significant they may be with thematic
weights, are just building blocks for a whole structure and are steps to a long
journey, which is what the readers are drawn into that is, words are there to
contribute the entire discourse, not to draw the readers attention to themselves.
Only viewed from the whole, each word is found to be there alive interacting
each other. A Greek word may be rendered in different English words (or even
phrases). An English word may be used to render more than one Greek words
(or phrases). The same English word may be of different grammatical unit (e.g.
Ref. C. Clifton Black (2001), The Rhetoric of the Gospel Theological Artistry in the
Gospels and Acts. a must reader for translator as well as readers. rethoric generally
bears on those distinncitve properties of human discourse, sep.ecially its artistry and
argument, by which the authors obiblicallitearture hase vedeaveored to convice others of the
truth of their beliefs. (p. 2) Related words rhetorical criticism
b
literal translation [A literal translation is a good choice for literal reading of the Bible to
lead to literalism and legalism totally dissociate from what the Scripture says.]
a

[Ref. Vincent Crapanzano (2000), Serving the Word Literalism in America from the Pulpit to the
Bench. (pp. xv-xxvi, Preface; pp. 1-28, Introduction.) The main part of the book covers the relevance
of literalism on American religious (esp. of fundamentalism) and judicial landscape.]

noun vs. verb vs. adjective, etc.). Thus, searching a word is not simple task, if
more than looking up a collection of words in style of a thesaurus. When a
concordance is used, it has its own limitation - it is not possible to be
exhaustive to include all the words in the Scripture and at the same time clearly
categorizing. Each Bible translation needs a concordance on its own. For this
one solution would be to have the main entries under Greek words and phrases,
complemented by a cross-reference index or hyperlink. As to translation work,
a word in the original language in the Scripture is impossible to be put in the
target language as exact and precise representation. A word in the translation
text may for the readers have a meaning different from what the translator
intended. Such ambiguity of meaning of words is unavoidable. Arguing with
words often gets mired, simply because words mean differently to different
people in different mindset. When this happens on issues and interpretative and
doctrinal issues, its consequence is enormous, often resulting in divisiveness,
seeing parting away into different versions of theology seprated from each
other with lost common ground and broken communication even in what is
supposed to be on faith in God!
From the level of words, moving to the phrase, to the sentence, and to the large
segment of the text, at each level, meaning and sense are developed to tell the
readers what the author intended to express and deliver in harmony with the
whole Scripture. a
25F25F

Problem of dealing with *statements, *arguments, and *claims

Any of these can be right, but only within the paradigm. Without precise definition of
terms and words, the end will be an unending pile of confusion, contradictions, and
contentions. People keep creating their own new jagon and new meanings to convince
others that they are right, better, and true, without realizing everything man can come
up is relative. [Cf. authortarinism; Orwellian doublethink, newspeak, doublespeak, etc.;
mind control, brain washing, etc.] [Exceptional case is found in dealing with the logics
and mathematics. Contasted is artistic or poetic lincence. Cf. double talk; word play;
rhetoric]
*If A = B, does it mean A = B?

A simple statement with the verb is (third person singular) is not simple as it
seems. When A and B both are nominative and B is not b (adjective) and when
A is a person noun (pronoun), the verb is does not mean A B with such
mathematical precision and logical definition. In the literary work like the
Scripture, it is invariably in the sense of A is as B (or A is as B is)
descriptive and explanatory. To take is literally is same as reading it as is
a

[Ref.

http://thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the_profit_of_employing_the_biblical_
languages_scriptural_and_historic ]

equal to similar to reductio ad absurdum. [Cf. A is B; A is as B; A is like B;

A stands for B, etc. Cf. analogical, metonymic, metaphoric (figurative), rhetoric
use. See Nebfarious IS in the Supplement collection.]
E.g. Elohim is Love (1Jn 4:8, 16)
Here Elohim (= the God) cannot be equated with an abstract noun love.
Also the reverse love is Elohim is not true. Similar examples are Elohim is
spirit (Jn 4:24 God is spirit - often mistranslated as is a spirit. The
English word God is a countable noun, but the God (Elohim) in the text is
not. Elohim (the God) of the Scripture is not a countable noun, neither He is
a person, nor a being, but the Ultimate Reality).
E.g. This is my body (Mt 26:26; Mk 14:22; Lk 22:19). This (= the bread)
cannot be equated as Yeshuas body. The sense is that the bread is as His body
symbolizing it.

E.g. kai theos ho logos (Jn 1:1c most translates as and the Word was God
it is nonsensical linguistically and literarily when the same word God is
used to translate ho theos the God in v. 1b.) It is also true when it is rendered
in both occurences as Elohim.
E.g. Yeshua the Son of Elohim at the literary level, it means Yeshua is as
the Son of Elohim. The words son and father simply bring out dynamic
relationality of Yeshua and Elohim, only using anthropomorphism.
E.g. YHWH is my shepherd (Psa 23:1), I am the Way (Jn 14:6), etc.

Words and Terms (special)

Many words and terms of general or special meaning are not
found in the Scripture.
At the same time, to a great confusion for the readers,
many words in the Scripture
which are common in our speech outside the Scripture
often do not mean exactly same. (See *semantic field)

Note: The word entities below are in random order. Since the words are
grouped according to a common theme, simple alphabetical ordering is not
possible. An index (with hyperlinking in HTML) a is worthy to be added.
26F26F

Related words and terms:

*meaning; meaning of meaning; *sense.

word, gloss, term; idea; concept; conception (misconception), construct;
phrase, *idiom (words, phrases, expressions. Cf. dialect jargon);
*sense, nuance, *meaning b , meaning of meaning; usage, context,
intention/agenda; description, designation, referent vs. indexical, notion,
connotation vs. denotation, association, usage (common, idiom, and
literary, wordplay, paradox; logical paradox (www.iep.utm.edu/parlog/) , ambiguity, double entendre, equivocal, vagueness, pun, quibble,
euphemism, minced oath, circumlocution, periphrasis, solecism;
ipsissima verba (the very words) c , ipsissima vox (the very voice);
etymology, neologism; loan-word; synonym, antonym, homonym,
27F27F

28F28F

HTML format As for Bible translation, now common HTML format is full of potential and
promised with its sheer versatility. Hyperlinking would spare the readers spending unnecessary time
and effort in looking up footnotes, cross-references, and endnotes, as well as external reference
sources, without having trouble to continue reading the text. In the interlinear text, the sublines of
English glosses can be hidden until needed.
b
[Reading material: www.fb10.uni-bremen.de/homepages/wildgen/pdf/Meaning and Reality.pdf
a

ipsissima verba Often a question is raised which represents the words actually spoken

by our Savior? as with an example of Mt 28:19 vs. Mk 16:15]. Such a question misses its
point, since all we read in the Scripture was written, collected, and edited by many hands, out
of from the memory of the disciples, not from a recorded verbatim off Yeshuas utterances, to
be copied, distributed and transmitted.

homophone; sound, rhyme, cadence, echoes, tone, accents, emphasis,

focus, prominence, discriminatory power; multiword expressions
(MWEs); phraseology; phraseme vs. semi-phraseme vs. idioms;
proverbs; text segmentation; (word segmentation; topic analysis. Cf.
speech segmentation); rhetoric, rhetorical device, rhetorical hyperbole,
figure of speech (or rhetorical figure locution: idiom, metaphor (What Is
a Metaphor?), simile, hyperbole, personification, or synecdoche, zeugma,
zeugma and syllepsis a etc.)
29F29F

*definition; definition of definition

A term can be defined anyway one wants. However, in order to be
effective in communicating ideas following logic and reason, it has to
have something essential, necessary and sufficient. Without it, it cannot
stay consistent throughout ones own argument; a working definition can
only go so far. When someone writes about something, to check
definitions is the first thing the readers to do before delving into it deeper.
As said, word is not a word and not a word. No one cannot say anything
with presumptions and premises, which often are hidden, especially when
the argument or proposal is agenda-driven. b
30F30F

*meaning10 vs. *sense semantics c; semantic field; lexical meaning; *

definition technical or textual (definition needs to be established within
the whole of the Scripture); change of meaning as the word or phrase is
being used ( - quantum jump where the meaning of quantum changes
opposite to what it is, a smallest thing to deal with; etc.)

*usage of a word, context, and intention/agenda

31F31F

Since the semantic field of a word may be large, it is often necessary to

cathegorize when we discuss its meanings, definitions, usage. A word is
not a word and is not a word by itself. In reality, we have word
problems which lies at the root of our mental activity of different langue.
One example is God problem, when no one tries to define the word
a

Garner's Usage Tip of the Day: Although commentators have historically tried to distinguish
between zeugma and syllepsis, the distinctions have been confusing and contradictory: "even
today agreement on definitions in the rhetorical handbooks is virtually nil." The New Princeton
Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics 1383 (Alex Preminger & T.V.F. Brogan eds., 1993). We're
better off using "zeugma" in its broadest sense and not confusing matters by introducing
"syllepsis," a little-known term whose meaning not even the experts agree on.
b
One may find some books even not bother to define the terms which they appear in the book
title itself and are supposed to be dealt with.
c
Ref. Stephen Ullmann (1962), Semantics An Introduction to the Science of Meaning.

God so that people understands what it is meant unambiguously. Each

use a word by each person is to make it become a babel, not just to result
in confusion, but misunderstanding and conflicts [and even theological,
dogmatic, religious, and political wars including pogroms.]
Context:
Text context within the text; extatexualy context beyond the text, e.g.
historical (geographic, locative, temporal), cultural, socio-linguistic
contexts.
Usage of a word rhetoric, polemic, Orwellian, pejorative, different
senses, word picutres or associations; sematic field overlap; tongue in
cheek; intention or agenda (hidden) (idealogical or personal);
gobbledygook; chimericala (use of a word or term);

Function of the definite article in Enliglish, (more so) of the article in

Greek particularizes, connect to referents, identifies. Often the sense is
signicantly altered. It appears as if deliberately done so to change holy
spirit into the Holy Spirit so as to color into a picture of it being a
Person (Cf. an equivalent to Mr. Holy Spirit in a Korean translation.
[Anarthrous noun often takes an adjectival function.] [e.g. spirit holy
spirit, sin, evil, god, God, etc.]
study of the verbal system tense, aspect, mood, modality (- esp. for
Hebrew language); telicity vs. perfectivity; transivity; subject, object,
agent, patient. Present tense gnomic, habitual, historical, literary present;
tense shift; stative vs. dynamic verbs.
genre; narrativeb, discourse, history, historiography, biography; semantic
field; figure of speech, *metonym, metonymic shift, synecdoche;
metaphoric; allusion; anologic; poetic; word picture; locution; parlance;
construal; context; word or phrase collocation; Semitism, Hebraism,
Aramaism; referral, referring expression, referent; anaphora vs. cataphora;
endophora vs. exophora; deixis (time or space deixis); parataxis;
asyndeton; causus pendens; genitive absolute; speech acts, locutionary act,

chimerical unreal; imaginary; widely fanciful.

The "narrative" is the text (the signifier, the discourse, or the "how") which convey the "story" (the
signified, the content, or the "what"). Narrative time may then be distinguished from story time.
[Gerard Genette, Narrative Discourse quoted in Culpepper (1983), The Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel A Study in Literary Design (p. 184)]
a

illocutionary act, perlocutionary act; prose, poem, epic, fiction, Maxims or

Proverbs; euphemism, (dramatic license, poetic license, etc.),
controversys sake; controversy; dialectic; discourse,; rationality;
discourse analysis; disagreement, argument, debate, dispute, debate,
discussion; apologetics; polemics; hullabaloo, fuss, commotion, hue and
cry, uproar, outcry, clamor, storm, furor, hubbub, ruckus, brouhaha, blah,
blah blah blah; rambling, long-winded, verbose, wordy, prolix; digressive,
maundering,
roundabout,
circuitous,
tortuous,
circumlocutory;
disconnected, disjointed, incoherent; exaggeration, Hyperbole; Figures of
Reasoning; Cf. literalness; literal reading; literal translation; literalism
(one of most insidious noxiousness, regarding literature and scriptures a
major source of all kinds of arguments and conflicts be it
denominational as well as religious, philosophical-ideological, historical,
and political-legal arguments).
[Ref. http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/jtomlins/rhetorical_devices.htm
www.literarydevices.com/rhetoric/ http://rhetoric.byu.edu/

Example of metonyms
Heavens for Elohim (G-Mt)
Shabbat for shabbat day
Sin for sin sacrifice
Passover (Pesach) for Pesach meal Pesach Festival pesach meal

*editing, emendation (cf. amendment), conflation, *midrash (rabbinic,

Pauline, Gospel Evangelists, Christian, Church ~) , bricolage; text
corruption;

linguistics; philology; phonology vs. phonetics; morphology, grammar,

solecism; phraseology; discourse analysis; literary criticism; stylistics;
semiotics a (syntax, semantics or semasiology, pragmatics); SapirWhorf
hypothesis
32F32F

Handbook of International Phonetic Association

International Phonetic Alphabet
Unicode ; ASCII;

On semiotics study of signs http://users.aber.ac.uk/dgc/Documents/S4B/sem02.html

*logic a , *rhetoric, irony, figure of speech, metonyms; argument from

silence; logical fallacies b;
3F3F

34F34F

Statement vs. proposition; argument; propositional variables; negation (not ),

disjunction (or ), conjuction (and ) ; paradox; contradiction; connotation;
detonation; poetic license; artistic license (e.g. portrates of Jesus)
www.math.toronto.edu/preparing-for-calculus/3_logic/we_3_negation.html

www.cs.utexas.edu/~eberlein/cs301k/propLogic.pdf
An argument consists of a sequence of statements called premises and
a statement called a conclusion. An argument is valid if the conclusion
is true whenever the premises are all true.

*jargon (biblical, theological, religious and ecclesiastical jargon, etc).

Biblish, Christianese; translese; jargonism; translation, interpretation,
exposition, *exegesis, eisegesis, rendering, paraphrase; metaphrase;
transcription vs. transliteration; amplification; ellipsis; (read) betweenthe-lines; anachronism, prolepsis; hermeneutics; proof texting; unspoken
and unwritten communication c;
35F35F

Note: Matthean practice of midrashic exegesis of OT texts e.g. esp. Mt

1:22-23, etc.

Ref: www.angelfire.com/ks2/fallacies/falltext.htm
(Textual interpretation methodology errors, incl. theological language
fallacy 11)
logic essential ingredient of any statement which carries meaning, not only for apologetics, but
hermeneutics. Reading, understanding, interpreting, and translating (all interwoven) would be
meaningless and usefulness without logic and reason. Several reading materials:
(1) Vern S. Poythress (2013), Logic: A God-Centered Approach to the Foundation of Western
Thought
(2) Jason Lisle (2011), Logic & Faith: Discerning Truth in Logical Arguments
(3) K. Scott Oliphint (2013), Covenantal Apologetics: Principles and Practice in Defense of Our
Faith.
b
logical fallacies grammatical, lexicographical, etc. e.g. etymological fallacy Gk. musterion
revelation vs. mystery.
c
Unspoken and unwritten communications: how do we see such things in the text of the Scripture and
make it reflected on translation?
Quotation of the Day: (Bryian Garner of Modern American Usage) "To say, 'Leave the room',
is less expressive than to point to the door. Placing a finger on the lips is more forcible than
whispering, 'Do not speak.' A beck of the hand is better than, 'Come here.' No phrase can
convey the idea of surprise so vividly as opening the eyes and raising the eyebrows. A shrug of
the shoulders would lose much by translation into words." Herbert Spencer, Philosophy of
Style 17-18 ([1871]; repr. 1959).
a

translation principles and philosophy; agenda-driven; ideology-driven;

theology-driven.
literalness; principle of concordance vs. principle of consistency;
interlinear translation.
text, variants, manuscripts, exemplar; versions; translations; autograph;
papyri, parchment; scroll; codex; (book, booklet); majuscule, minuscule,
uncials, cursive; lectionaries; autographs.

Bible (as translation literery work - Cf. Christian Bible, Hebrew Bible);
Scripture; Word of Elohim;

New Testament vs. Old Testament (< Hebrew term Tanakh). Cf.
Apocrypha.
Cf. Hebrew and Greek Scritures the latter label having a problem with
the LXX (Greek O.T.)
Differernce in the Tanakh and Christian O.T. number of books and
names and divisions.

[Ref. Where did the terms Old Testament - Standing on Shoulders

The first recorded time this kind of designation was used was by Melito of Sardis in
the late second century (recorded in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 4.26.14 available online at www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.ix.xxvi.html. In his listing
of the books of the Hebrew Scriptures, the first such list among the extant Christian
writings, he called the group of writings the Old Testament Covenan (Greek:
palaia diatheke). The Greek word for covenant (diatheke) was translated by
Jerome in the fifth century into the Latin Vulgate as testamentum. Since the Latin
Vulgate was widely used throughout the Middle Ages, it greatly influenced later
translations into vernacular languages. Thus, for example, one of the first English
translations of the Bible, made by John Wyclif in the fourteenth century (1382),
translated it as testament, following the Latin testamentum. William Tyndales
sixteenth-century English translation followed suit (1524), along with the Geneva
Bible (1557), as did the translators of the 1611 King James Bible. Thus, today the
two divisions of the Christian Bible are known as the Old and New Testaments [in
English], although in the English text diatheke is usually translated as covenant.
The two words are therefore regarded as basically synonymous.

<a comment> Erasmus who helped popularize the term Testament.

His first edition of the Greek New Testament published in 1516
was titled Novum instrumentum (containing a purified Greek text
with notes together with a Latin translation altering sections of the
Vulgate). But by the time his second edition was published, it was
entitled Novum Testamentum.

<The entire New Testament is simply the story of how Israel

struggled in transitioning from serving God under the Mosaic Law
(Old Covenant) to the New. It was the addition of the Gentiles which
complicated things to make us think God now had a new people and a
new ecclesia. Even a new, gentler, kinder God. We miss that we who
are not Jewish have been grafted into their tree (Romans 11) which
is the ecclesia of Abraham. Again its one ecclesia (congregation)
of chosen offspring in Messiah from Genesis to Revelation. We are
all one family heading for a great big reunion.]

dictionary (words, idioms, reverse dictionary; mono-lingual vs. bilingual),

glossary, lexicon; thesaurus; word-stock; corpora; concordance;
collocations, multiword untis (MWUs); lexicography; calques; hapax
(legomenon/legomena)
Eisegesis refers to interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that
it introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto
the text. (It is formed from the Greek preposition eis "into" and the ending
from the English word exegesis, which in turn is derived from
eksgesthai "to lead out".) It often compounds the effect of exegesis into
translation of the Scripture.
Transcription, in its linguistic sense, has been defined as the process of
recording the phonological and/or morphological elements of a language
in terms of a specific writing system, as distinct from transliteration,
which is the process of recording the graphic symbols of one writing
system in terms of the corresponding graphic symbols of a second writing
system. Transcription, in other words, is writing down a language in a way
that does not depend on the prior existence of a writing system, whereas
transliteration does.
Notation - Alphabetical Notations: Roman and Non-Roman
http://ccil.org/~cowan/temp/phon-hist.pdf A Kemp, (2006) Phonetic
Transciption: History

*Vocabulary, glossary, gloss;

terminology, nomenclature, classification

Biblical languages
Ref. James W. Voelz (1992), The Linguistic Milieu of the Early Church, Concordia
Theol. Quarterly Vol. 56, No. 2-3, pp. 81-98
Ref. Robert Gundry, "The Language Milieu of First Century Palestine: Its Bearing on
the Authenticity of the Gospel Tradition", Journal of Biblical Literature, 83 (1964), pp.
404-408.

*Hebrew language
www.hebrew4christians.com/Grammar/Unit_One/History/history.html

Periods of Hebrew Scholars of ten divide the Hebrew language into four basic periods:
1. Biblical Hebrew - aka Classical Hebrew; by the time of Jesus, Aramaic was the common
language, but Hebrew was used in synagogues and in Temple worship. Jesus knew and spoke
Biblical Hebrew.
2. Mishnaic Hebrew - aka Rabbinic Hebrew; Talmud and Midrash; 2nd century CE. Note that
the grammar and vocabulary of this Hebrew is very different than Biblical Hebrew.
3. Medieval Hebrew - Used to translate Arabic works into Hebrew, e.g., Maimonides and
other medievalists.
4. Modern Hebrew - 19th century to present. Eliezar Ben Yehuda (1858 - 1922) led the rebirth
of Hebrew as a spoken language. After immigrating to Israel in 1881, he began promoting the
use of Hebrew at home and in the schools.

Languages spoken by Jesus: Q on Aramaic priority

Greek language of N.T.

Koine Greek (koine dialectos).

Languages - English
Old English (5th centucy-c.1150)
Middle English (c.1150-c.1476)
Early Modern English (c.1476-c.1660) KJV!
Modern English (c.1476-present)

Verbs [See *I Am (Gk. eg emi) in WB#3]

The verb phrase is the main verb plus the complement, object, and/or
adverbial.

Reading material: Copular clauses - Linguistics

http://philpapers.org/rec/CORALS
Predicate (grammar)
zero_copula (= copula deletion) (in various languages)
subject complement (predicate nominative) vs. Predicative Adjective
(subject complement) [e.g. I feel good vs. I feel well http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/Good-And-Well.htm ]
Inverse copular constructions
copula (= linking Verb ) equational sentence ("Mary is the boss"), an
ascriptive sentence ("Mary is happy") Double Copula
Stative Verb (= Verb of Being) Although in English most being verbs
are forms of to be (am, are, is, was, were, will be, being, been), other verbs
(such as become, seem, appear, own) can also function as verbs of being.
vs. dynamic verb

get-Passive

Cleft

It-Cleft
Wh-Clause

Aspect
Aphorism

Six Ways to Use the Present Tense in English

Simple Present
Gnomic Present
Habitual Present
Historical Present (in narration)
Literary Present
Future

Ten Quick Questions and Answers About Verbs and Verbals

Ten Types of Verbs
Auxiliary Verbs and Lexical Verbs
Dynamic Verbs and Stative Verbs
Finite Verbs and Nonfinite Verbs

Transitive Verbs and Intransitive Verbs

Regular Verbs and Irregular Verbs
Causative verbs, Catenative verbs join with other verbs to form a
chain or series. Copular verbs performative verbs, prepositional
verbs, iteratives, reporting verbs. passive or subjunctive.
Existential verb http://goo.gl/SCMjRe
http://lingweb.eva.mpg.de/apics/index.php/
there is as identical to (to) have.
Existential, locative, possessive verbs
www.englishpage.com/gerunds/verb_location_ing.htm

Hyperbaton
Inversion
What Is a Sentence? sentence,

[Ref. A book by the linguist Beth Levin classifies three thousand English verbs
into about eighty-five classes based on the constructions they appear in; its
subtitle is A Preliminary Investigation. (Stephen Pinker, The Stuff of Thought,
2007).]
http://grammar.about.com/od/terms/

Ref:
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/35285/is-there-a-word-for-a-verb-whichrequires-an-adverb-or-prep-phrase-in-order-to To get all linguistics about it, we can
talk about the generalization of how verbs work. In traditional grammar, we talk
about verbs having subjects and objects and whether they are transitive or
intransitive. If we generalize this, we can talk about verbs being a kind of function
that takes arguments, where subjects and objects are examples of kinds of argument
verbs can take. The number of arguments a verb takes is called its valency.
Intransitive verbs are monovalent, taking just one argument, the subject. Transitive
verbs are divalent, taking two arguments, the subject and the object. There are more
esoteric types like avalent verbs like rain which really take no argument (that is, the
dummy pronoun it in its raining doesnt refer to anything and so is not an
argument, and is just the way English syntax forces all verbs to have a subject even if
they are avalent). And put, the word from the original question, is trivalent, requiring
not just a subject and an object, but also a location.
The different kinds of arguments a verb takes are called thematic relations, and have
names like agent, experiencer, theme, patient, and location (see the Wikipedia
article for definitions of all the different kinds of relations). Many verbs can take
many different kinds of thematic relations as arguments, and the different
combinations of arguments that a verb can take are called its subcategorization
frame. The specific thematic relations that a particular verb requires in its
subcategorization frames are called its theta roles, and verbs are said to assign theta
roles. The verb put is exceptional in that its subcategorization frame assign three
theta roles, including a location argument.

From words to sentences

For the meaning at the level of *sentences formed by phrases, the basic triad12
is here, slightly modified from Franois Recanati (2004), Literal Meaning:
[http://jeannicod.ccsd.cnrs.fr/ijn_00000290/en/ ]
(1)
(2)
(3)

what is stated (> sentence meaning), vs.

what is said, vs.
what is implicated.

When we move to the level of a discourse, the translator and the readers of the
Scripture have to be concerned with the intention and the purpose by the author.
In the syntax there are two which present unexpected difficulty in translation.
Since it is not a mathematic level relation, effect of rhetoric or figurative usage
has to be considered:
I. A phrase with genitive case the sense of genitive case varies and it
need to be find in the context;
II. A statement in the form of A is B, where A and B both are arthrous or
nominative the verb is for indentity or being identical;
III. A statement in the form of A is b, where b is nominative anarthrous
noun b is used as adjectival and descriptive. [Cf. b is the form of a
clause, such as a that-clause].
Examples:
For the category I E.g. Mt 26:13 /x: (memorial of) her KJV;
For the categories II E.g. 'You are the light' Mt 5:14 < you are as the
light a figurative speech, since it is difficult to read as you = light. I
am Light to the world rather than light of the world (Jn 8:12; 9:5). Cf.
You are as the light. - the literary force of the sentence is subtly affected;
the original sentence comes to the readers without ambiguity.
For the categories III E.g. 'Elohim is as spirit' (Jn 4:24 is in ellipsis.
Note: in this verse spirit is not a spirit a Spirit nor Spirit); Elohim
is Love (1Jn 4:8, 16) (Here, Greek is ho theos the God, or the very
God)
Some points in English language use:
(1) Problem of plural you vs. singular you, without using KJV English words
(thou and ye).
(2) Problem of overuse of pronouns (3rd person singular) in a given sentence or
a short paragraph with multiple referents.
(3) Possessive pronouns (my, your, his, their) when translationg similar Gk.
genitive. Subjective? Obsective? Source?
(4) Predicate: To know what is Gods will vs. To know what Gods will is

(Rm 12:2).
(5) Word collocation and collusion problem phrase order and phrase break.

Words related to Bible, Scripture, Translation

*unbiblical contrary to what the Bible says. = nessessarily nonbiblical and

*unscriptural
*nonbiblical not appearing in what the Bible says. = necessarily unscriptural.

Textural history and criticism

Manuscripts (mss), Papyrus, Parchment; Scroll; Codex,
text variants (v.l.); Versions; Editions;
Various texts of New and Old Testaments Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and other
languages.
Various translations into vernacular languages
Translation; *interpretation, *exegesis, hermeneutics; paraphrase; metaphrase;
rewriting; midrashic exegesis.
*Bible, *Scripture, *Gods Word; Texts; Canon;

'*biblical' (also Biblical) - 'related to the Bible' (e.g. biblical words); also
'attributing to the Bible' (e.g. biblical doctrine).
*Scriptural is not same as 'biblical'. Bible is that which is a canon of
the Church, an authorized translation approved for use.

To read the Bibles to study the Scripture to hear what

God says so that the Spirit of Elohim may quicken our spirit
with His Life.
Bibles are human work through Biblical scholary interpretation. Often
contaminated by theological and doctrine interpretation.
Literary Genre;
History; Hagiography; Biography
Emendation; Corruption (as to in copying process); conflation;
Canon; canonical; canonization (making it included into the biblical canon, not
declaring someone died as church saints);
Application interpretion (cf. eisegesis) the text is read, interpreted, translated for
application to fit ones agenda. One can application from the biblical text, but that
does not change the meaning and usage of the text in the Greek.[E.g. Mounce Archive
17 Translating Father (and Mother?) reading fathers as parents Eph 6:4] hoi

pateres (the fathers) is used here, without anything tied to the concept of
mothers.]
*Religions, *spirituality; *rituals; *rites; *theology; *doctrines; *dogma; (religious)
traditions; *faiths; religiosity < religionism; *Christianity; *Christianisms; scientism
(science as a religion), spiritualism, spiritism, spiritualitism, mysticism; Gnostic;
Ref.
Harvey Cox (2009), The Future of Faith]
Louis Charles (2009), Jesus Religion: A Critical Examination of Christian Insanity
Cf. Believing as Jesus = God. www.angelsghosts.com/jesus-religion

The word religion as innate human endeaver to deal with such things (as the Ultmate, the
Absolute, the Truth, the meaning and purpose of life, etc.) should not be confused with a
religion, which is practical result in human activity with power control and (plausible)
promise of solutions to human problems, predicament, absurdity, and inherent contradictions.
[Religion vs. religion(s); similar to sin vs. sin(s)] [Cf. ones faith vs. ones religion vs. ones
belief] [Cf. believe (in) religion? Have religion? (esp. in Korean expression such as for
Christian: Christ-religion-person; Syn. Christ-person.]
Religions are always clothed with power the power which gives rise to conflict,
contention, coversion-ism (to conquer), etc.
Word study: religion, a religion, religions, cf. religious powers (church powers and power
structure/organization); primitive religions (indigenous, tribal, cultic); rudimentary religious
practices.
Cf. religious practices (godliness, piety, devoutness, religiosity, ritual, rites, festivals,
ceremonies, indoctrination/cathechism, church laws)
Word study; faith(s), belief(s); religiosity (vs. religious hypocricy; theocracy;
authortrianism; legalism; sectarianism)
Word study: Christianity as a religion; Christianity without religion [How a religion can
prove its claim to be a true religion? No. It simply believes it is true, for otherwise it
cannot be labelled as religion.
As a translation word religion within the text of NT. (church jargon).
Ioudaismos Gal 1:14 Yehudism (Judaism)
threskeia Act 26:5; Col 2:28 Jam 1:26, 27
ethelothreskeia Col 2:23
eusebia 1Tm 6:3 /godly life GW; /godliness most; /x: piety /x: religion BBE;
anosios -2Tm 3:2 ungodly, irregious, /x: unholy
Through the human history, religions have been dangerous and often proven evil. Thou
shall not believe religions. Cf. Karl Marx: "Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes" and
is often rendered as "religion... is the opiate of the masses" (often opium of the people).
Note: this is opium not something to help relieve pain, but to be used to control people. The
idea was to dismissive of religions as practiced, but religion.

Religions (or faiths) intellectual vs. experiental [Attitude Behavior Conduct];

Heart (feeling, knowing) vs. mind (thinking, desire, and will).
A religion as a faith; faith as a religion?

faiths, cults, denominations, schools, people-group;

Christianity, Christiandom, Christianism, Evangelicalism, Catholicism,
Protestiantism, etc.
Judaism, Rabbinc Judaism; Yehudism;
anti-Semitism (www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/antisem.html )
See * theologies

Cf. What is Evangelicalism? Who are the Evangelicals?13

Evangelical Christianity; Pietism; Reformation movement;
Revivalism; post-evangelicals; Christian Right;
Doctrines vs. dogmas vs. theology these are not the doctrines and dogmas which can
be found in the Scripture, but of human products with religious power behind
mixture on biblical, non-biblical and also unbiblical ideas all these become orthodox
as supported by ecclesiastical power.] [Cf. non-religious dotrines and dogmas.]

Dogma: derived from the Greek dogma, which means opinion. In our
context, it would mean opinions about God and cannot be opinions
derived from God.
Doctrine: derived from the Latin doctrina, which means teaching. In
our context, it would refer to teaching about God and cannot be same
as teaching from God.
Theology: a compound of two Greek terms: theos, which means God,
and logos, which means word. The suffix -logy, however, came to
mean study of, and so theology could be understood to mean the
study about God, not study of God.
[other related terms used in Catholic Churcha]
A reading material on religion:
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (2015), Not In God's Name: Confronting Religious Violence
a

In Catholicism: www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=564105 http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/15558/what-is-the-difference-between-adogma-a-doctrine-an-infallible-statement-an [Dogma; Doctrine; Infallible statement;

Infallible papal teaching; Statement made ex cathedra; Definitively proposed doctrine;
Authoritative statement.]

religious conflict and violence; individualism; dualism (us and enemies; good and evil ones);
dehumanization and demonization of ones opponents; victim mentality; moral responsibility;
altruistic evil (in the name of God); de-secularization; retaliation and retribution; sibling rivalry (of
Abrahamic descents); radicalization;
www.npr.org/2015/10/08/446980200/not-in-gods-name-confronts-religious-violence-with-adifferent-voice
www.firstthings.com/media/religious-violence-and-biblical-answers?
https://vimeo.com/144072248 (Religious Violence and Biblical Answers: A Conversation with
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks)
https://youtu.be/iQbTNPblkKo Jonathan Sacks: "Not in God's Name: Confronting Religious
Violence" also other youtubes.

Ref. www.evolutionofgod.net/excerpts_appendix an excerpt from Appendix: How

Human Nature Gave Birth to Religion from Robert Wright (2009) The Evolution

of God
Ref. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/christianity.html (on definition of
Christianity) the teaching and activity of Jesus cannot be properly described under
the heading "*Christianity" but should rather be seen in the context of the religious,
social, and political ferment in Palestine at the end of the Second Temple period, and
in relation to the various sectarian movements at the time. Christianity can be
viewed as a religious institution (whether as a universal church or as distinct
churches), as a body of beliefs and doctrines (Christian dogma and theology), or as a
social, cultural, or even political reality shaped by certain religious traditions and
mental attitudes. When the reference is to the human societies shaped by these
traditions and attitudes, the noun "*Christendom" rather than Christianity is
sometimes used. [The way it is used, Christianity cannot be other than a religion
of Christians as we encounter diverse Christians with diverse Christian religions, i.e.
Christianisms (e.g. Catholicism, Protestantism, etc.). There is a semantic problem with
the expression Christianity without religion. Does religion mean religiosity a
(particular form of) traditional religion, etc.? ARJ]
[Meaning (from English dictionaries) of *Christianity a religion based on the
person, life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth with its beliefs and practices. Cf.
Christian religion(s). (i.e. religion of Christians and Christian Churches
Christianisms). Religion as an area of human endeaver or an organized instutition with
power and control dealing with problems of supernatural, spiritual, etc. Also used
motonymically as Christian character or practice. What is *Christian (noun)? = a
person belonging to Christian religion, belief, or church. Etymologically a person who
believes in Christ. Christian (adj) of or related to Chritian person, people,
organization; related to Christian practices or beliefs. Not of Christ or related to the
person of Christ.]
[For related words, see the next entry: Christianity, the Way] [Cf. *spiritualitism;
Euhemerism (an approach to the interpretation of mythology in which mythological
accounts are presumed to have originated from real historical events or personages.)]
There are so many ways to define the word religion. [Here is EE for the
concordance study on the word religion itself as appearing in English Bible
translations. 14 ] It involves history, tradition, teaching, dogma, doctrine, theology,

system of beliefs, canonization, ecclesiastical hierarchy and power organization,

different class or caste of people (esp. priestly class and lay class), rules-regulationsrewards-punishment (such as excommunication and shunning, as well as acting as if a
civic authority with judicial power) as well as rites-rituals-routines-ruts. Religion itself
is a social construct and at its core it is something of ideology which itself is in
pursuit of power and pleasure. In such pursuit man as political being does not care for
persons or people. He does not concern about future. Man of religious being, on the
other hand, is fond of future including after-life along with shamanistic touch,
prosperity gospel, hellfire preaching bordering on scare tactics, and with scent of love
for curing all evil and humanitys problems. With carrot and stick, they exert control
over people, often working in collusion with political powers, keep people in
psychological and spiritual bondage from the effect of mind-control, group hypnosis,
and brain-washing.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/religion/rel_1.htm A *religion is a system of

beliefs usually involving the worship of supernatural forces or beings.
Religious beliefs provide shape and meaning to one's perception of the
universe. In other words, they provide a sense of order in what might
otherwise be seen as a chaotic existence. Religions also provide understanding
and meaning for inexplicable events such as a loved one being killed in an
earthquake or some other unpredictable force of nature. For most religious
people, their beliefs about the supernatural are at the very core of their world
views.
The performance of rituals is an integral part of all religions. *Rituals are
stylized and usually repetitive acts that take place at a set time and location.
They almost always involve the use of symbolic objects, words, and actions.
For example, going to church on Sunday itself is a common religious ritual
for Christians around the world. Religion cannot be religion without riturals.
A religion is likened to an onion garbed in religiosity and pomp (glory); when
peeled off layer by layer organization and hierarchy, liturgies, rites, traditions,
dogmas and doctrines nothing is left over and at its core is the image of Adamic
Man (Gen Ch. 3) in pursuit of power and pleasure. A feature of a religion
formularism (offers neat formulae for all the problems a person faces); biblical
jargonism (e.g. baptism saves person be baptized in order to be saved a ),
doctrinarism (believe doctrines, church teaching, etc. to be assured to go to heaven),
shamanistic practices (fending off evil; sickness misfortune), entertain-ism, etc.
What makes a religion different from others Though there are differences on the
significant and weighty issues, at the core is what does it mean by when people say
God. Note that God is not different from god (except what they are referring to).
Such a typographic scheme does not help. Since God/god is a title in English, which
had nothing to do with the God in the Bible, but imported from the pre-Christian folk
religions or traditions. [This applies equally to non-English languages.]. It is
quintessential in that it comes before people go on every conceivable theological path
for any meaningful intellectual engagement, where logic and reason should prevail.
There is what I would call the great Trinitarian confusion. It provides an apt
Is baptism is necessary for salvation? Cf. Act 2:38; 22:16; Mk 16:16, Jn 3:5; Gal 3:27;
1Pe 3:21)
a

descriptive phrase when we are confronted with peoples misconception on the very
word God. It remains alive whenever the Bible verses are read. The case in point is
the Johannine text of Jn 1:1b and 1:1c and the Word was with God and the Word
was God (KJV). The anti-Trinitarian position wants to make a different translation,
for example, to read as and the Word was a god (NWT). The Trinitarian position is
such that they leave people confused and fail to provide an intelligent and articulate
answer with complicated theological sophistry to a natural question, (which is of
simple linguistic but not theological concern): how it is possible that the Word was
God with whom he was?. [For discussion and resolution on this issue, see * Elohim,
* God.]
The word religion (in contrast to religions) is a domain of human endeavor which
deals with an existence of supernatural powerful beings (deities or gods), but still a
part of pursuit of power and pleasure of humanity always creating a caste which
takes up power to exert control over people. Throughout human history we see great
evil against humanity have been inflicted by various religions in the name of religion.
Yeshua came to fulfill Torah (Mt 5:17). That means, He is the End of Religion. He did
NOT come to become a founder of any religion. All the religions (in variety of cults,
sects, or denominations) are mans products, ostensively with divine revelation and
sanction. If Christianity is not Christianity apart from religion and behaves just like a
religion, it is a dead religion. Even the term Christianity has become tainted and now
become a suspect whether Christianity even without the religion (Christianity apart
from religion) will survive becomes shaky. It is not simply a matter of religiosity vs.
spirituality.
Related words: paganism, heathenism; Gnosticism (Encratism); shamanism a ;
polytheism; religious movements; doctrinal movements; world views; ideologies (e.g.
Marxism, Humanism (cf. humanitarianism), Materialism, Scientism; Hedonism);
cults, sects, denominations; churches; *atheism b ; anti-theism; skepticism (cf.
cynicism, sarcasm); spirituality; *spiritualism and *spirits; ecumenism c ; divine
6F36F

37F37F

Shamanism www.weyanoke.org/reading/jdf-Shamanism-NewAndOld.html <...there is no such

religion as "shamanism", since all of the religions of the world make use -- perhaps equally -- of the
tools of the "shaman" including liturgy (ritual), songs, incantations (recited prayers or formulas) and
direct contact with the spiritual world (visions, ecstasy) in order to bring about changes on the physical
plane. But what about the idea that the "shaman" believes in "an unseen world of gods, demons, and
ancestral spirits..."? Roman Catholics believe in "an unseen world" of Mother Mary, Father God, Jesus,
the Holy Ghost, the Devil, many angels and a pantheon of saints (ancestral spirits), plus various
demons which can be exorcised. Most Protestants believe in Father God, Jesus, the Holy Ghost, the
Devil, numerous angels and a certain number of saints. All of these non-human, non-physical beings
would be called "gods" or "lesser gods" if we were being objective, that is, not talking about
supposedly "monotheistic" Christianity.>
a

twitter@rzimcanada Fascinating deconstruction of the "New Atheism" by Theodore Dalyrymple

... at http://ow.ly/tXHd6 www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_oh_to_be.html
twitter@ounbbl Atheists do believe God. Just different name, SELF. Sartre, your puny God does
exist, dead - the bastard!
Ecumenism: the aim of unity among all Christian churches throughout the world (Collins
English Dictionary).
c

analogy, doctrine of analogy;

faiths (religious faiths); religions beliefs synonymous; cf. ideological,
scientific beliefs, etc. primitive indigenous religions. Egalitarianism.
A Catholic spirituality of private revelations (e.g. Fatima; Medjugorje)
- www.newadvent.org/cathen/13005a.htm

Three common characteristics of all the religions people believe

are outward manifestations of various degree of (1) suppression of individual freedom
of spirit and (2) submission to the human powers, and (3) suspension of reasoning and
logic by various socio-psychological and political-ideological means:
1. Ritualism elaborate rites, liturgies, icons, relics, saints, totems, shamanism,
superstitions, group hypnosis (e.g. elaborate church pageantry with pomp and
pride, charismatic shows);
2. Legalism dogmatism, authoritarianism, initiation, catechism a ,
excommunication,
prohibitions,
inquisitions,
persecution,
execution;
hypercritical mind-set; intolerance and hate of others
3. Formularism mantra, teachings, prescriptions, blessings and rewards,
promise of happiness-prosperity in the future with denial of human reality;
blaming Satan for evils.
Most are faade with false and fake, with as if, make believe, and going through
the motions along with going through the flow of the world system while claiming
to go against the flow - of hypocrisy, banality, compromise, and superficiality.
[JR Miller if by this one simply means a respect for those of different denominations
and a willingness to treat those of different traditions as genuine brothers and sisters in Christ;
then no, Ecumenism is not bad. Unfortunately, the pursuit of ecumenical unity goes far
beyond these simple goals. Biblical unity has never been about shared theology, mission,
or vision.Unity, in the Scripture, has always been our gift of salvation from the Father
through the Holy Spirit (1Co 12:1-27). Consequent to Gods gift, the Church has been
charged with maintaining the unity of the Spirit; not creating it (Eph 4:3). In other words, our
charge is to remain obedient to all God has given us through the Apostles, and to stand firm in
His gift. If unity demands we compromise Gods salvation, than it is not biblical, but worldly
unity we are building. [Here is from Hermon Hoyt, The Ecumenical Movement in
Present Day Professing Christendom: Revelation 17:5, Grace Journal Vol. 6, no. 3 (1965):
4-11 about a recent position of WV:
Recognizing the ideal [of unity] in the true Church, the purveyors of false doctrine seek to
use this structure for the promotion of their own schemes. Any one of the segments of
Christendom would hardly be sufficient to bring ultimate satisfaction and give universal
approval to false doctrine, so the effort is under way to remove the external fragmentation
and bring together the various segments of professing Christendom in one universal
organization. For justification the words of Christ are cited, that they may be one, even as
we are one (John 17:22) But these words are misused, for they refer to spiritual unity and
not to external union.]
World Vision, Ecumenism, and Moral Confusion - Part 2 | More Than Cake
(www.morethancake.org/archives/7871#ixzz2y8TiPVML )
a

Words doctrines, teachings, rules, beliefs, creeds, catechism, statements of faith, etc.

*Myth a technical term, different from another common use with negative sense
(fictions, legends, made-up fabricated stories, etc.). [As for IRENT, when it is in this
sense the word mythos is used, a Greek loanword, in order to disconnect a wrong
word picture.] [See a definition on myth in Andrew M. Greeley, The Jesus Myth
(1971) which is a volume in his three-volume book, Myth of Religions (1989). Cf.
mythologies (e.g. Greek, Roman, etc.); folklores; [Cf. symbols; Cf. In N.T.,
mystery, not mysterious unknown things, but the things hidden, now revealed.]
*tradition what kind of, when, from whom. Religious, philosophical, cultural,
modern scholarly, etc. Judaic tradition of the Elders.
*context, *contextualization; *contextual theology
Context and Concept.pdf
Superstition Ref. Towards a Theoretical Conceptualization of Superstition

Essential Christian DOCTRINE

Acronym: *DOCTRINE D.O.C.T.R.I.N.E.
Hank Hanegraaff What Is Essential Christian D-O-C-T-R-I-N-E?
Memorable Keys to Essential Christian D-O-C-T-R-I-N-E (flipchart) or The Complete Bible
Answer Book
[The article was written from the position of the Trinitarian doctrine. (Correction of the original is
in purple)]
Divine fullness in Mashiah (/x: DEITY OF CHRIST)
Original sin < Adams primal sin; (not born sinners)
Cross (/Canon)
Truth (x: Trinity)
Resurrection
Immanuel YHWH and Incarnation LOGOS (not God incarnate)
New creation and a New Heaven and a New Earth.
Eschaton = the Mashiah (x: eschatology)
Hank Hanegraaff:
Essential Christian doctrine is the foundation on which the gospel of Jesus Christ rests. From His
deity to the eschatological certainty that He will appear a second time to judge the living and the
dead, essential Christian doctrine is foundational to the gospel. All other religions compromise,
confuse, or contradict these essentials. Muslims, for example, dogmatically denounce the doctrine
of Christ's unique deity as the unforgivable sin of shirk. They readily affirm the sinlessness of
Christ, but they adamantly deny His sacrifice upon the cross and His subsequent resurrection as the
only hope of salvation.
Deity of Christ. [deity, god, god-being, etc. Cf. Godhead?? Cf. deity vs. divinity (= divine
essence) of Jesus vs. Jesus has deity] [Christ itself means anointed (by God) to be a king.
Then how do say Christ is God? What does it mean by God which does not sound different at all
from god?] [Deity of someone or something cannot make him/it God. An example is not the
evidence.] The biblical witness is clear and convincing that Jesus Christ is the eternal Creator God
(Jn 1; Col 1; Heb 1; Rev 1). Throughout His earthly ministry, Jesus claimed to be God in word and

deed (Mk 14:6162; Jn 5:18, 20; 8:58; 10:3033) and vindicated His claims to deity by living a
sinless life (Jn 8:46; 2Co 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1Jn 3:5; 1Pe 2:22), by manifesting His power over nature
(Mk 4:39), over fallen angels (Lk 4:35), over sickness (Mt 4:23), and even over death itself (Jn
4:50; 11:4344; 1Co 15), and by accurately prophesying God's judgment on Jerusalem through the
destruction of the Temple that occurred in CE 70 (Mt 24:12, 3235).
God: "I am the Alpha and the Omega" (Revelation 1:8)
Christ: "I am the First and the Last" (1:17)
God: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End" (21:6)
Christ: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the
End" (22:13)
Original Sin. [The Augustinian doctrine of original sin is unbiblical.] Sin is not just murder, rape,
or robbery. "Sin" is a word that describes any thought, word, deed, or state of being that fails to meet
God's standard of holiness and perfection. The Bible unambiguously proclaims that "all have sinned
and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). While the notion of generational curses and spirits
is foreign to the text of Scripture, there is a sense in which all people are cursed as a result of an
ancestor's sin. Adam's rebellion brought death to us all and tainted every aspect of our being (Genesis
3; 1 Corinthians 15:2122; cf. Ephesians 2:3). God, however, has provided redemption through the
atoning work of the "last Adam," Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:22, 4549; Cf. Romans 5:1221).
"Just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in
justification [biblical jargon] and life for all people. For just as through the disobedience of the one
man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be
made righteous." Romans 5:1819
Trinity. Though the word "Trinity" is found nowhere in the Bible, it aptly codifies the essential
biblical truths that (1) there is only one God (Deu 6:4; Isa 43:10) [No, there are many. In JudeoChristian faith, only one Elohim to worship YHWH (Yahuah, Yahweh, etc.)]; (2) the Father is
God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God (1Co 8:6; Heb 1:8; Acts 5:34) [this is not based on
the Scripture]; and (3) Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are eternally distinct (Mt 28:19; Jn 15:26; 17:1
26). [So, what does it mean?]
It is important to note that when Trinitarians speak of one God, they are referring to the nature or
essence of God. Moreover, when they speak of persons, [what is meaning of person? It is
translation from Latin which is translation from Greek theological jargons, which have nothing to do
with the English word person people use], they are referring to personal selfdistinctions within the
Godhead. [Christian religious jargon Godhead how is different from deity god?] Put another
way, Trinitarians believe in one What and three Who's. [The Bible does not say so.]
"As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and
he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said,
"This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Matthew 3:1617 NIV [Holy Spirit is
simply the Spirit of God, not God the Spirit. With capitalized words and the article, the Holy Spirit,
would not turn into a person. Same for God God is beyond the concept of person, but suprapersonal Hans Kng), not a person. He is the Ultimate Reality. With personification and
anthropomorphism, to bring down God to the level of human mind.]
Canon. The thirtynine books of the Hebrew Scriptures along with the twentyseven books of the
Greek New Testament are divine rather than merely human in origin and constitute the entire
Christian canon (meaning "standard of measurement"). In addition to the internal testimony of the
Bible about itself (2Tm 3:16), the divine inspiration and preservation of the Bible can be
demonstrated by the early dating and consistency of the many available manuscripts, the
corroboration of archaeology, and the fulfillment of predictive prophecy.
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
2Tm 3:1617
"Your word is Truth"
Yeshua in Jn 17:17

Resurrection. All four canonical gospels record the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the
dead. The immutable fact of Jesus' resurrection is the cornerstone of Christian faith, because it not
only vindicates Jesus' claims to deity but also ensures the future bodily resurrection unto eternal life
of all who believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior and proclaim Him as Lord (1Co 15; 1The 4:1318).
The historical reality of the resurrection can be demonstrated through the fatal torment of Jesus on
the cross; the empty tombearly Christianity could not have survived an identifiable tomb
containing the corpse of Christ; the postresurrection appearances of Jesus; and the transformation of
believers throughout the ages whose lives have been radically altered upon experiencing the
resurrected Lord.
"What I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to
the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five
hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have
fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me
also, as to one abnormally born."
the Apostle Paul, in 1Co 15:38 NIV
Rm 5:12 based on the fact that they all sinned [+ after the manner of Adam] (See Rm 3:10-12,
23; 5:19) /?: [+ in and through Adam] - ARJ; (/sin sin reality and sin nature is collective
participatory and for humanity)
[Transgression of the law may be a sin committed, but sin cannot be defined as transgression of the
law as KJV rendered inadequately 1Jn 3:4b for sin is the transgression of the law.]
[Cf. The idea (fact) of Original Sin stands by itself, since it all depends on simple definition - Fall
of Adam as Original Sin (which should be corrected as the Primal Sin, not as the origin or cause of
sin of humanity. However, the Doctrine of Original Sin elaborates much more. The sin should not be
seen as corruption which is to follow after. Should not have the expression inherited as if sin is
subject of inheritance, be it biological or metaphoric. Cf. unbiblical doctrine of Total Depravity of
Calvins doctrine of TULIP. Adams original sin, which was consequent of his disobedience in his
exercise of freedom against Gods desire/will, requires restitution/ restoration/ redemption
(salvation) by Elohim, not punishment. To say "Adam sinned, so you are going to pay for it" is
simply not grounded in the biblical truth. Punishment, whatever it may be, is simply all which
humanity is to experience as the consequence of its acts. Here conceptually sin should be
differentiated from a sin or sins. OT sacrifice for sin is for sins; not for sin reality (in humanity
and in human nature) in estrnanged relation to God. (Cf. Rm 6:10; Heb 10:18)

*Spirituality;
It is often confused with spiritualism (something observed outside Christianity
proper).
A precise definition is difficult to obtain. However, this term should be understood as an
abstract notion of something belonging to spirit and realm of spirit (in contrast to the realm
of soul and material). Thankfully this word is not found in the Bible. At the word root level,
it should stand at the level of word category as personality (not personhood) or soulicality
(a neologism made of soul = persons being). Unfortunately it is universally put at the same
level with religion, as in such phrases as spirituality vs. religion or Spiritual but not
religious. Furthermore, it needs to be differentiated from praxis of spirituality
(spiritualitism a neologism) to keep it conceptually clear. We have to settle to a working
definition for the purpose it can serve in a manner of least common factor, rather than greatest
common factor (Cf. LCM or LCD vs. GCM or GCD). A variety of definition can be sampled
from a plethora of books and online articles.15
[Ref. Lucy Bregman, Spirituality Definitions: A Moving Target
(www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bregmanspaper.pdf)]

Its practice in various flavors is prominent in Eastern religions and Christian

mysticism. The word spirituality has recently been gaining popularity among the
masses. It is now difficult to be differentiated from with psychological-spiritualistic
technique and practice.
Related words secular spirituality Christian spirituality; non-Christian
spirituality; mysticism; tongue-speaking (glossolalia); meditation; self-awakening;
flow, ki a; yoga; mind-control, spiritism b, Shamanism.
38F38F

39F39F

Christian atheism a rhetorical expression reflecting its denial of number of gods.

No Zeus, Hera, Hermes, Mithras, Isis, or whoever. Similarly, gods of our culture are
denied.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/from_moral_majority_to_evil_disbeliev
ers_coming_clean_about_christian

religions vs. politics

Religions (not religion) and politics, both running under the principle of power and
pleasure, control human affairs and destiny. On which one can we put our finger for
their false, fake, farce, foul, ferocity? Religions need collusion with political powers
to gain their own priestly power. Both always find others as bedfellows.
Object of religion and polics is same: Pursuit of power and pleasure

ki - ( in kanji; in Korean hangul).

*spiritism - a pagan belief that the living can and do communicate with the spirits of the departed,
and to the various practices by which such communication is attempted. It should be carefully
a

distinguished from *spiritualism and *spirituality.)

*science vs. religion

*science, scientism, evolution, evolutionism, Freudianism; creationism;

The conflict of Religion vs. Science is actually misguided by the both parties.
It is actually priestly powers of religions vs. political powers in secular domain;
at the core, it is religious vs. scientific ideas with power contestation between
priests vs. scientists as shown in the history since Renaissance. Religion (not
religions) and science are non-overlapping domains of human endeavor and,
as such, cannot be foe to each other. People invade with their ideas each
others space and should get corrected, not to in constant tension.
It is unfortunate to see debate religion vs. science is fomented simply because of
insufficient linguistic and literary understanding of the Scripture. Most of people
(scientific and religious scholars) have not studied the Scripture in its depth and height,
in its original languages, with enough to hold on their limited understanding with the
translated Bibles. To argue and debate, both sides are required to cover most fields of
human knowledge from A for astronomy and archeology to zoology, from philosophy
to politics, from history and literature, not mention languages and linguistics. Only
then they can come to the table to find common ground to stand, supported by the
pillars of logic, reasoning and rhetoric. Most of those labeled as scientists are not truly
scientists, but applied scientists (either by applying technology or by digesting and
propagating scientific knowledge). Even with the science scholars, they are by nature,
focused in their narrow field and narrow minded to be truly give an objective ideas
but usually fallen into a varying degree of scientism, a quasi-religion by itself. Like
any ideology such as socialism and communism, the main goal is the power to hold,
acquire and use to subjugate. It parallels confusion between (phenomenon of)
evolution and evolutionism (a doctrine of scientism with ultimate tenants of (1) the
total meaningless of the universe and our existence, and (2) human being as a product
of evolution from a lower biological form which they evade to elaborate on (?
Humanoids? Apes? Monkeys, etc.), and which eventually come into existence from
chemical reaction of organic substance. Any creation work begins information. In the
beginning (of creation) was information. Information cannot come from nowhere.
Even on the side of religion a similar trend that which goes against reasoning and
logic, and fail to learn from the other domain undisputable scientific principles. E.g.
Young Earth creationism this does not belong to Christianity, if we understand
Christianity as Christs teaching, not a teaching held by Christian religions and
churches. Yeshua (not Jesus) never mentioned how old the earth was! It is a
misguided midrash of O.T. by some creationist. In that way, it has become like a
religion on its own. The Genes of TaNaKh never says how old the earth was. It
declares Gods creation of the heavens and earth and begins the majestic narrative of
how the creation work began to culminate making of the groundling (i.e. human
being). There was no calendar which would allow us to count days from then on. We
simply are not provided with any information on what the beginning of humankind
was on the earth, and even when the earth came to be. The scientific logical fact of
nothing comes out of nothing in physical world is denied by evolutionists. No, as for
God, He did not create the universe from nothing. True He did not created from
anything already existing (- self-contradictory statement). It is by His fiat the
Elohims Logos as the agent of creation.

Reading material: William Adams (1850), The Elements of Christian Science

https://archive.org/details/elementsofchrist00adam (downloadable - poorly

scanned image)
www.unz.org/Pub/AdamsWilliam-1850 (online reading)
https://openlibrary.org/search?sort=new&author_key=OL2332771A (online
reading)

The Elements of Christian Science: A Treatise Upon Moral ... (google

online reading)
[not confused with a cult Christian Scientists]
Reading material: http://considerthegospel.org/evolution-fact-or-fable/
*evolutionism a religion [agenda-driven ideology] with a gospel of pseudo-science
Darwin, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation
of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (was first published in London by John
Murray on November 24, 1859 1st ed. The final 6th ed.1872) [How was the term
species defined? How did he tell from one species to another which appears closely
related related? Did he have any hint of genetic principles? Note the subtitle favored
races the idea of racial superiority which provided ideological foundation of
Nazism. In fact, Darwin is the Father of Nazism ARJ]
Religion and science are different domains of human endeavor science is and should
be about facts and explaining (away in plausible way); whereas religion is of value
and meaning. Both may straddle over same issues, but they are independent at the
essence. While observation, experimentation, and theorizing are at the core of science,
it has to admit the boundary or limit of its endeavor; e.g. (1) trying to prove some this
is absent and (2) imposing ideology outside the science on to others.
[Reading material: Paul Kurtz, Should Skeptical Inquiry Be Applied to Religion? In
www.csicop.org/si/show/special_issue_on_science_and_religion/ Vol. 23.4, July/Aug
1999. Skeptical inquirers can and should examine religious claims, though the case can be
made that CSICOP should not. [*inquiry fallacious inquiry with microscopic and myopic
eyes. Cf. The Astrologer who Fell into a Well The story of Thales falling into a well while
gazing at the stars was originally recorded in Plato's Theaetetus.]

www.christianheadlines.com/news/exposing-the-religion-of-scientism-11598780.html
Exposing the Religion of Scientism
www.christianpost.com/news/beware-of-blinding-nature-religion-scientism-93589/
scientism as religion
www.christianpost.com/news/c-s-lewis-foresaw-rise-of-scientism-as-religion-todaysays-scholar-at-apologetics-conference-128028/
www.the-american-interest.com/2011/08/03/christian-scientism/ (Christian scientism)

*religion, science; psychology; philosophy, metaphysics

Kkk3
Thomas Samuel Kuhn (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
scientism [cf. Scientology. Christian_Science ]
neurolinguistics psycholinguistics;
psychology applied psychology

hypnosisa; hypnotherapy; self-hypnosis autosuggestion; mind control

(brainwashing);
folk psychology
popular_psychology (pop psych) psychobabble ; human potential movement
New Age
self-help; Logotherapy; (a pseudoscience) neuro-linguistic programming
new religious movement new age movement (spiritualitism, a neologism - a
certain practice for ones spirituality. Not to be confused with spiritualism)

*faith, faiths, belief, creed, dogma, doctrine, cult, orthodox, heterodox

Ecumenical, evangelical, heretical,

*faith, *belief, religions; ideology, philosophy, metaphysics, worldview;
*believe, putting trust

Kkk2
Faith, Doubt, and Reason blind faith
Belief is to faith, unrelated to religion; non-belief is a worse form of a religion.
religions collapsing faith into belief
Dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus Outside the Church there is no salvation (St.
Cyprian of Carthage).
Religiosity pious belief (e.g. in Catholic Church).
FAITH Acrostic: Forsaking All. I trust Him; it is putting ones trust on
Him and entrust everything to Him, including ones very life and soul.
Related words teachings, doctrines, dogmas, creeds; agenda; ideologies;
philosophies; traditions (religious or ecclesiastical); theologies;
*Religion; religions
All religions are many-faced. There is no pure religion. All religions
are syncretic amalgamation of multifarious religions.
We in religion we are servants of religions; we of religion we are
a

on hypnosis: one should realize how mind-control is exerted (subtly or naturally without a training in
hypnosis) by the people in position and power politics, professions, priestly class. Cf. Power of
suggestion vs. persuasion.
http://youtu.be/gX-7oSmIkOc (Learn How To Hypnotise - The Approach) www.headhacking.com/
C.I.Q. Compliment (trivial but genuine, not serious), Introduction (who I am I myself would not
say 'I'm a hypnotist, since hynosis is not what I'm in), Question (yes in fact, life begins with Q and
with Q. Many put Q at the beginning of their contact come into other) and get Started (again it is not
performance of hypnosis, but, something for creation standing on common ground and sharing each
others space). http://youtu.be/NtxtfuhVh24 [Learn How To Hypnotise Suggestions]
http://youtu.be/Lxzg_f4tUcs [Odd One In - Hypnotist]
http://youtu.be/ZNTIc9ytaaM [Street Hypnosis - Hypno Survival - Anthony Jacquin - Head Hacking]

slaves of religions.
The word faith is often used in the sense of religion (as in faiths). It is often
erroneously equated with belief.
*idea a; ideology; philosophy; *worldview b
52F52F

53F53F

Ultimately mans fight against other man is ideological in every aspect of human
endeavor philosophical, political as well as religious governed by the principle of
Power and Pleasure at the top rung, with all the consequent killings and murderings
throughout human history, in conquering and oppression, with spilt blood running deep
as the horses bridles (Rev 14:20). Everything is ultimately religious, since everyone
believes a god of gods, the most pervasive one being ones own self, which has become
as what-God-is to them as Satan challenged and promised to Adam, showing the fruit
from the tree of Knowing Right and Wrong so that he can decide what is right and
wrong apart from the Creator.

*Theologies While theology is what it is, when it comes down to

theologies, among what we have is an array of strange beasts of religiouspolitical-ideological agendas (e.g. liberation theology, feminist theology, etc.);
understandably so because all human products, including theologies, dogmas, and
doctrines are human product.
cf. non-religious doctrines (e.g. scientific, philosophical, political, etc.
cf. religious doctrines not necessarily biblical or Scriptural. Orthodox
doctrines, heterodox or heretic doctrines, denominational or sectarian
doctrines.

Gospels prosperity gospel (health, wealth, prosperity, mircles);

possibility gospel; purpose-driven gospel;
Gospel has more than personal and spiritual, but social dimension in our
life. However Social Gospel Movement: [Cf. Fabian Socialism ]
www.gotquestions.org/social-gospel.html
[https://youtu.be/fLCO0_HNw_U MacArthur Destroys the "Social
Gospel"]
social-gospel-councils-churches-and-fabian-socialism http://tiny.cc/cxlb4x

Faith(s) usu. in plural, often used syn. with religions or religious faiths.
However, faith (singl.) is not same as religion or belief. There is no
such thing as faith in faith (? faith in the word faith).
Related expressions

oligopistos Mt 6:30; 17:10 v.l., etc. /of little faith; /> with little faith NWT;
/x: small faith; /xx: small in faith; /xx: little belief

ide (Fr.). A reading material: Arthur Lovejoy (1936), The Great Chain of Being History
of an Idea.
b
worldviews - www.sleepingbaby.net/jan/Essays/worldview.html (evolution theory as a worldview);
a

www.co-intelligence.org/EvolutionaryWorldview.html (evolutionary worldview)

www.evolutionarymanifesto.com/ www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=53
http://youtu.be/jDiF84ZU5EQ

tosautn pistin heurisk Mt 8:10 find great faith

prostithmi pistin Lk 17:5 increase faith
ech pistin s kokkon sinapes Mt 17:20; Lk 17:6 have faith as this much as
a mustard seed

apistia Mt 13:58; 17:10 v.l. lack of faith16; /x: unbelief KJV, ESV, NET,
etc. [belief with church dogmas, doctines, creeds, and teaching. *Unbelief is
a religious jargon, not belonging to the vocabulary of the Scripture.]
[??Danker p. 43 refusal to give credence to] Mt 13:58; 17:20; Mk
6:6; 9:24; 16:14; Rm 3:3; 4:20; 11:20, 23; 1Ti 1:13; Heb 3:12, 19;
apistos (1) without faith/trust; [not putting or unable to put trust]; /xx:
unbelieving Mt 17:17; Mk 9:24; Lk 9:41; Jn 20:27; 1Co 6:6; 2Co 6:14;
1Ti 5:8; /x: unfaithful; (2) faithless, without filelity/commitment, fickle
(Danker), unbelieving; Mt 17:17; Tit 1:15; Rev 21:8; (3) incredible,
farfetched Act 26:8;
apiste not to, or refuse to believe Mk 16:11, 16: Lk 24:11, 41; Act
28:24; 1Pt 2:7; be unfaithful Rm 3:3; 2Ti 2:13;
Cf. apeitheia (disobedience - /x: unbelief - DRB) Rm 11:30, 32; Eph
2:2; 5:6; Heb 4:6, 11; Col 3:6

believe God believe in God

believe someone vs. believe something
Cf. come to believe in God; believe in Elohim
The word *believe is in the very basic vocabulary of English. Like see,
know, hear, say, etc., it has a wide semantic field and used in different
ways with diverse nuance and word-picture. As is used in the Bible, it is
often misunderstood and found incorrectly phrased.
believe, believe in, trust, put or place trust in, have faith in, put faith
in all these make a sense only when the verb takes an object. If it is in
ellipsis as often the case, the readers have to be somehow clear about it, less
the act of believe becomes a nonsensical word). The object it takes may be
other than a person for believe (a thing, a fat, an idea, or a statement, etc.)
believe in me occurs a few times in N.T. (Note: ERV uses believe in
me indiscretimatingly in place of acknowelge/confess me)
Yeusha never says have faith in me (belief, creed, etc.!); it is always
believe me or, believe in me (that is, to come and put trust in me).
See Jn 4:11, 12
The English phrase have faith in me (on the lips of Jesus) only is
found in CEV 14x (Jn 6:36, 64; 7:38; 8:24, 45, 46; 10:38; 14:1, 11, 12,
29; 16:9; 20:29), as well as one place in NWT4 Mt 18:6 (cf. put faith
in me NWT3)

To believe someone is first of all to believe who he is (as he claims who he

is) and to believe his words. It does not mean believing that the person
exists! Believing someones existence is not believing someone, but
believing something (facts, ideas, truths, etc.). To believe in someone is to
put ones total trust on him and abide in him.
Related words: accept, receive listen to obey follow
Anyone may believe God a thief, a sinner, even demon does.
Relation to the Creator (1) Love, (2) respect (awe; honor), (3) trust
(surrender; entrust)
To trust, one first believes belief has to be connected to his life
Believe to take it as true or genuine. to believe God is to take God as a
true construct. Mostly it means what is called God is exists rather than a
non-existing or a make-believe.
Believe in putting ones trust in. In reference to God, it means to entrust all
(including ones own self).
Believe into Greek phrase - = come to believe in. In reference to God, it
points to live in His care, quickened by His Spirit. Nothing to do with
finding some beliefs in God becoming a member of a religion.
Believe in God does not mean one keeps (some) beliefs about God or
expecting Him to do something good for us.
Meaning of believe as shown in a Scriptural phrase, Abraham put faith in

YHWH Gen 15:6

It is not had faith in, believed in, or believed God, as we find in
various English Bibles. It is to believe what He declared and to put
trust on to Him and to remain steadfast in Him and stand firm with
Him. Believing Him is submitting to His will and obeying to His
Words. Believing Him is knowing what He says is true, and knowing
He is with you not hoping that He is or will be. Believing Him is
delighting in Him, regardless of the circumstances, riding above the tide
of life, not going with flow, nor swimming against the current.
Believing Him is a determined walk during which you continue to
empty yourself of yourself, so that He can fill you up according to His
purposes. It is calling out to Him for His will to be done and not your
own, with Amen, an affirmative answer of acceptance and surrender to
what He has said.
Word groups;
verbs:

put trust on (someone) ------------------believe in (someone); come to

believe in; /x: put/have faith in (faith as creed, beliefs, church teaching,
religion, etc.)
trust (someone)
believe (someone)
rely on (someone)
nouns:
trust belief faith --religious faith -- creed (cf. doctrines, dogma) faiths -religions.
(e.g. biblical faith, Christian faith)
(e.g.
Catholic faith, Protestant ~)

()
()

cf. conviction (ko. )

Not all *faith in NT is faith. i.e. the Greek noun pistis is not same as
faith (e.g. Mt 8:10 so-called <Centurions faith> - it is ones putting trust
on, not faith.
The word faith (noun) in the Scripture is a basically verbal noun, rather
than metaphysical or theological special jargon. It is ones act of putting
everything (including life and death) into trust on God Himself. The word
faith which has turned into an abstract concept and becomes to be used
synonymous with belief conviction, eventually creed, and even
religion. Something one can have or hold on.
The problem with English expression by faith:
In Hebrew (Heb 11:3ff) there is a series of the word pistei 18x. Most translates as
by faith (except one place v. 3 in KJV) [some paraphrase he had faith CEV,
ERV; faith led him to GW; it was faith that ~ GNB. by belief ISR, ABP.
[Cf. 4:2 t pistei; 10:38 ek pistes; Heb 11:7b kata pistin]

It has become a means for something. An example is seen in the expression

salvation by faith, as if faith itself becomes a means to achieve salvation.
Cf. the expression justified ~ by faith only (KJV) - Jam 2:24 dikaioutai ~
ouk ek pistes not on the basis of faith alone. [English syntax justified by
faith rather than something by faith] [Cf. sola scriptura a]
54F54F

On the contrary nowhere the Scripture does say or suggest faith saves a
a

The Five Solae of the Protestant Reformation: Sola scriptura, Sola fide, Sola gratia, Solus
Christus, Soli Deo gloria

person. Faith does not give salvation. In fact, it is faith that brings salvation;
salvation is in restored relation to God with life quickened by the Spirit.
Salvation (be saved) is not an event, but rather a continued process of
restoration of relation to sanctification and glorification a . The notion
salvation should not be confused with the salvation event by Mashiahs
death, nor with ones being born again. Faith is not a mantra for achieving
salvation, or spirituality, nor a mantra for prosperity (as used by the *cult of
Word of Faith).
Not to be confused with righteous on the ground of trusting God (>
justified by faith Rm 3:28)

pisteu in G-Jn (a list not exhaustive)

come to believe in
2:11 (come to trust in JNT); 12:36; 20:31
believe into the name of
1:12; 2:23; 3:18
believe into him
7:5, 48; 9:35, 36; 11:46, 48; 12:36, 37, 42, 44; 16:10, 30; 17:20
believe (dative)
2:20 (words); 8:31 (him);
believe (the light) through him
1:7
believe things, facts
1:50; 3:12;
get to believe (it)
11:15; 20:8;

pisteu eis *believe into:17

The expression pisteu eis eme come to believe in me is a typical Johannine
expression and reflects dynamic relationality, best rendered as come to
believe in. The preposition eis has dynamic sense, into the reality; joining
in fellowship come to me to put trust on me; not simply believe in like
pisteu en stative.
/come to believe in IRENT; /> put faith in - NWT; /x: believe in
NASB, HCSB, NIV trio, Cassirer, most; /x: trust in JNT (simple verb trust has different nuance as if dealing whom does
not lie); /believing [or trusting] in ALT; /x: have faith in BBE (a

www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/glorification.html

faith as if belief.)]
The expression come to me (erchomai pros eme) is followed by the one
who comes to believe in me (ho pisteun eis eme) in Jn 6:35. Cf. in 7:37 (let
come to me and drink). It is not believe me, neither simply believe in me.
On the other hand, Jn 12:44 is one instance which does not carry such sense
of coming to believe, but having already come and now putting trust in
Him.
pisteu eis to ononma believe into the name of ~ (Yeshua). come to
believe in the name of ~ (IRENT); It is not about having faith on the name
itself (that has to be correctly spelt and inscribed meticulously and prounced
repeatedly), as if it has magic power used as a mantra). Note that Yeshua
Himself was never shown in the Scripture uttered the divine name YHWH
and had pain to teach the sacred name to people or even His intimate
disciples, but was shown that He always addressed Him as Father. [Note only
in the quoted text of Psa 22:1 as He utters on the Cross Mt 27:46 (Eli,
Eli) // Mk 15:34 (Eloi, Eloi) we hear My Elohim in recition of the Psalm.
If the name YHWH is of supreme importance, this would be the one decisive
moment it would be heard, but not. To have the name revealed, revered and
honored in the life of believers has nothing to do with putting effort to
inscribe and utter the name as often as one wishes which is the other side of
blasphemy.
*Judaism; Yehudism
Hellenistic.
Rabbinic Judaism vs. Karaism (Karaite Judaism)
Cf. Sabbateans; cf. Hasidism;
Modern Judaism - Reformed Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Orthodox Judaism,
Ultra-Orthodox Judaism, and Chadasim;
Difference between Jewishness vs. Being Judaic.
*Judaism, *Judahism (< *Yehudism)
By his recombination of existing elements and his own creative additions, he permanently
replaced the religion of ancient Israel with a new one. This, because of its conceptual locus in
the southern kingdom, focusing on Jerusalem, is best called Judahism, and it followers
Judahists or Judahites. This is not a word trick. The new system of belief and practice has
to be distinguished both from what came before it (of which, note, we have no direct
knowledge, only light filtered through the writings of the Judahists). And, equally, it has to be
distinguished from its successor, the great invention of the second through fifth centuries of the
Common Era, Judaism whose follower we know as the Jews. The difference here is not
linguistic: all variants of Jews, Jewish, Judaism, Judahism, trace their origins to the
Hebrew word Yehudah, referring to the tribe of Judah. The difference is historical and one
of the primary rules of historical work is not to use one term for two distinct phenomena. The
religion of Judah, based on Temple sacrifice to Yahweh, up to the destruction of the Second

Temple in 70 CE , is distinct historically from its descendent, the post-Temple faith, usually
known as Rabbinic Judaism.
From Donald Akenson (1998), Surpassing Wonder The Invention of the Bible and the
Talmuds, (p. 28)

So-called *Replacement theology (aka supersessionism) unbiblical human doctrine.

*Zionism:
Zionism is an international religious-political movement for the return of the Jewish people to
Zion, the land of Israel, while exercising the right to retain authority of government over the
state of Israel, which was promised to them in the Hebrew Scriptures. The roots for Zionism lie
in Genesis Ch. 12 and 15.
the Zionist movement, begun in the late 1890s, found fulfillment in 1948 when Israel was
officially recognized as a state and granted sovereignty as a nation within Palestine by the
United Nations. This is when, technically, the political Zionist movement ended and the
ideology of Zionism began, and as such, has become a much-debated topic. Some would say
that Zionism has become a motivation for racism, or a reaction against anti-Semitism. Others
believe that Zionism as it currently exists is merely Jewish patriotism.
Associated with Jewish Zionism is Christian Zionism. Christian Zionism is simply Gentile
support of Jewish Zionism as based on the promises to Israel found in the Bible, passages such
as Jeremiah 32 and Ezekiel 34. Christian Zionists are primarily evangelical and give support in
any way possible to the Jewish state of Israel. The return of the Jews to the Promised Land is
the fulfillment of prophecy and is seen, especially by dispensationalists, as a sign that the world
has entered the End Times.

Written Torah; Oral Torah; Mishnah (c. 200 CE); Talmud

History of Christianity
Ref: E. de Pressens (1870, translated by Annie Harwood), The early years of
Christianity,The apostolic era.
https://archive.org/details/earlyyearsofchr00pres (downloadable)
*Christianity, the *Way; the Way of the Mashiah (Mashiahnity); Christianism

History of Christianity.
Anti-Semitism;
www.ftarchives.net/foote/crimes/contents.htm Crimes of Christianity Ch.
Rise of Papacy; Ch. IX. The Crusades.

Anti-Semitic reading of N.T.

G-Jn the word Jews as frequently appearing G-Jn is used in the

sense of Yehudim of ruling authority, not Yehudm people.

Mt 27:25 His blood be upon us and upon our children here one
of the most misunderstood, misinterpreted and misapplied passages in
the Bible through out the history and practice of Christian Churches.
( www.levitt.com/essays/bloodlibel.html ) [blood on someone; blood
on someones head Hebrew expression (e.g. Deu 19:10; Jos 2:19;
2Sam 3:2829; 1Kg 2:33; Jer 26:15; Ezk 18:13).] [our children here,
i.e. metonymic for people in Yersalem there with them. (Similar usage
in Mt 23:37 //Lk 23:28).]

Ethno-religious Christian anti-Semitic slur Christ killer Christ-killer);

Murderers of God, the lawless nation of the Jews is

A faith, a relgion, Christian religions (Christianism)

Note: the English word *Christian as a noun person. As adj. it is of
Chritians or of Christian things. It does not have a sense of of Christ.
[Compare the adjectivs natural for nature vis--vis of nature. Not all things
Christian are things related to Christ, nor Messiah. Christian Messiah is not
same as the Mashiah in the N.T., but a created one out from Church
traditions, teachings, practices, and power all of these are human; some
claim to be divine whatever the word divine signifiy.

Religion vs. Christianity:

Christianity is a religion, Is Christianity a religion? Christianity is not a
religion, Christianity as a religion, Christianity without religion, etc.

Christianity is not a religion https://philippians1v21.wordpress.com/whybelieve-in-jesus/why-christianity-is-not-a-religion/

www.ptm.org/cwr/info/interviewCWR.htm Christianity with the religion

www.dragonfly75.com/book/noreligion.html Christianity without religion

www.answering-christianity.com/christian_religion.htm Christianity IS a
religion

All of these statements (in fact, any kind of *statement) are by and large
incomplete without precise agreed-upon definition of the words christianity,
religion, and the religion. Most can readily acknowledge that Catholicism,
Protestanism, etc. is Christianity (or a Christian religion/faith). At most, what
can be said without reservation is Christianity is a religion not like others.
One thing is certain. Christianity, whatever it should mean, has become a
religion - religion by power, of power, and for power to be over people. [Power
of a religion or a church is unrelated to the creative Power of Elohim.]
As a religion, which is out of human endeaver, from the seed of the post-Easter
faith in Him, it has well established in 4th century CE, as a Constantine
Catholic Church (along with Trinitarian doctrine see a separate file on this),
which took over from the Hellenic Christianity, the latter was an offshoot of
Messianic Judaism (Apostolic Christianity) to which the disciples of Yeshua
belonged. Christianianity was NOT founded by Yeshua, nor by His twelve
Apostles or Paulos.
Christianity is a collection of different brands of a religion comprising hundreds of
denominations. A better term would be Christianism.
So-called Christianity is a religion of Christians; so-called Christians are people
with Christianity as their religion.
Cf. related jargons - Christ-centered authentic Christianity; Cosmic
Christianity; Mystic Christianity
Related terms and expressions:
*Christianism a neologism for Christianity as a religion or Christianitydervied relgion. The term is in line with other religions, such as Islamism,
Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. Most of time when one hears Christianity, it is
not what it is meant, but rather Christianism. [E.g. Catholicism,
Anglicanism, Methodism, Protestantism, Calvinism, Arianism,
Evangelicalism, Pentecostalism, etc.]

*Messianism (- with sense of Messianic movement);, *Christendom;

Mashiahnity; churchanity (dated 1837); Jesusism a (- not a Christianism);
Christomonism18; monism b; modalism; *Paulinismc;
40F40F

41F41F

[Ref: www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/06/christianity-by-the-numbers/ demographic pie charts.

Ref: www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2011/05/what-is-the-difference-between-andevangelical-and-a-fundamentalist/ liberalism fundamentalism and evangelicalism
of the Protestant Chruches.]
*Christianity, d usually designated as a religion e, is actually not a single religion, but
a collective term for Christian regions, sect, cults, or denonimations. Ever since the
rise of Constantine Catholic Church in the mid-4th century, it has become to a
hierchical power organization with regilious garb (pomp, pride, titles, and rituals) far
divergent from the teaching of the Mashiah and the movement by His followers. f The
Church teaching is a collection of various and varied products of humand mind in
human traditions and practices often contradictory, confusing, convoluted, and
incompatible of Christian religions, by the religions, from the religions, and for the
religions. As for a religion, the term Catholic Church religion is more accurate than
Catholicism which sounds like an idealogy (like Marxism, Scientism, Evolutionism,
etc.)
42F42F

43F43F

4F4F

A practical and realistic definition of Christianity a collective term for Christian

religions, churches, traditions and pratices with dogmas and doctrines as well as
Jesusism or Jesuism a neologism refers to philosophy and teaching of Jesus as a human, as
distinct from Paulism. However it has a nuance of worshiping Jesus as God (often Jesus =
Jehovah), a religion of Jesus, reflecting Christomonism, an ideology found among Christian
religions.
b
Monism: reduction of all processes, structures, concepts, etc., to a single governing
principle; the theoretical explanation of everything in terms of one principle.
c
Paulinism (1) Dying to ones self, participating the death of the Mashiah; (2) Receiving
righteousness before God as Gods grace through the faith in Yeshua the Mashiah;
(3).Fulfilling reghteousness before men through sanctificiton in keeping Gods commands
and Torah through Yeshua the Mashiah; (4) Israel vs. Gentiles; and the Renewed Covenant
in Yeshua the Mashiah vs. the former Abrahamic Covenant;
Reading material: Ref. http://www.hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/article/viewFile/557/456
Matthews anti-Paulinism: A neglected feature of Matthean studies
Ref. http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol07/paulinism_bruce.pdf F. F. Bruce, Some
Thoughts on Paul and Paulinism
d
Christianity as a religion which founded by Jesus Christ about 2000 years ago, a
religion of Christians. Its instution is called Church, though there is not a single unity.
Similar to christendom with different nuance and usage.
e
The phrase Christianity without the Religion (e.g. in www.ptm.org acronym CWR) may
be understood as Christianity apart from religion, that is, without having to do anything
with established ecclesial religions.
f
The teaching, taking life from the Mashiah, is embodied in in the life of His people,
collectively as the living Apostolic Biblical Community of Mashiah.
a

divisive and divided institutions.

The term Christianity as an inside word, however, is often used in the sense of the
teaching itself. Here the problem is that it fails to come clear to non-Christians as to
what is supposed to be meant. In other words, in the minds of non-Christians,
Christianity with its warts-and-all a gets mixed up with the genuine teaching of the
Mashiah b . The term *Mashiahnity c , a negologism, is found eminently suitable to
represent the Way of Mashiah with its teaching.
45F45F

46F46F

47F47F

Act 22:4 The Way [= 9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:14, 22] [i.e. the Way of the Lord (Act
18:25. Cf. the Way of Elohim- 18:26) = teaching of Mashiah (> Messiah) true
definition of Christianity (< Mashiahnity neologism).

*Christian, Meshiahan, Messianic, Messianist;

Etymologically speaking, the word Christian is derived from Act 11:26 .
(The word also appears Act 26:28; 1Pe 4:16.) However to call those in the
first contery as Christians those we have here is preposterous and
anachronistic. They were not Christians in the sense the English word
carries.

Jesus may be a Christian as some like to see, but the historical Yeshua
was not a Christian in any sense of the word. He did not found a Church.
The so-called Christanity was not in existence in the early part of the first
century CE. Its beginning should be when Constantine Catholic Church
emerged to ascend in power, surely not Apostolic Biblical Community of
Mashiah followers. [Cf. We can say Marx was a Marxist, and he cannot be
otherwise. He was the first Marxist.]

Judaism vs. Christianity the partings of the two ways:

After his death his followers, all of whom were Jews like Jesus himself,
constituted a Jewish movement, perhaps a sect, meeting and praying regularly in the
temple of
Jerusalem and interacting with other Jewish worshipers. (At least this is the story in
the opening
chapters of Acts.) And yet before very long the Jesus movement was no longer
Jewish; it became
warts and all euphemism of evilness and goodness shown in the history of Christianity as a
religion.
b
Mashiah Hebrew transliterate, not anglicized word messiah. Since the common English word
messiah is not exclusively Biblical term, it is unfit for a translation word of the Scripture, either
Hebrew or Greek word, to be suitable for the vocabulary for the People of Book.
a

Cf. the word Messianity is a new-age cult in Japan, unrelated to Christianity, nor to
Mashiah. Not clear how an English word of neologism got into Japanese setting. It is one
example of degenerate use of the word messiah unrelated to the Biblical word.

something different, a social phenomenon of its own The ways that two groups of people parted led to the development of (Constantine
Catholic) Christianity. It is not quite correct to label it as 'separation of Christianity
from Judaism'

Ref: Rabbi Moshe Reiss, THE PARTING OF THE WAY AND THE ROAD
NEVER TAKEN www.moshereiss.org/christianity/08_parting/08_parting.htm
Shanks and Vermes, Ed. (2013), PartingsHow Judaism & Christianity Became Two
Julie Galambush, Reluctant Parting: How the New Testament's Jewish Writers
Created a Christian Book
www.barnesandnoble.com/sample/read/9780060596361
Shaye J.D. Cohen, Ways that parted
James D.G. Dunn (2006), The Parting of the Ways: Between Christianity and
Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity
http://natzraya.com/Books%20on%20Judaism%20and%20the%20History%20
of%20the%20Jewish%20People/James_D._G._Dunn%20%20The_Partings_of_the_Ways_between_Christianity_and_Judaism%20%28
2006%29.pdf

Religion vs. Christianity (Mashiahnity); Gospel vs. Christianity:

The Gospel with the New Testament is not that which proiveds Christianity
as a religion of organized power structure or idealogical. The content of
theology from human mind is derived and metamorphosed from the teaching of
Mashiah Yeshua in the Gospels. E.g. the varied creationisms are human
opinions and there is no single verse to support them in the N.T. There are
human interpretations based on a few places in the TaNaKh (O.T.).

Churchianity (pejorative)

1789, Samuel Parr, (Ref. John Johnstone, editor, The works of Samuel Parr, ...: With
memoirs of his life and writings, and a selection from his correspondence, volume 1,
published 1828, page 341:
In October, 1789 (says Dr. Parr in the Sequel, p.99), when I preached for the
Charity Schools at Birmingham, I earnestly recommended to the audience two
admirable sermons which Dr. Priestley had written, &c. &c. / This commendation
gave great offence; the name of the arch-heritic was poison to the orthodox ears of
many of the congregation. One of them in the vestry, immediately after the
sermon, ventured even to expostulate with the preacher; and to represent to him
that the sermon recommended might he admirable and good Christian doctrine, but
that the author was an enemy to the Church, and therefore ought never to be named
within its sacred precincts. Parr heard him out, and then calmly replied, "Sir, you
are the best vindicator of Churchianity I ever knew."
1852, Edwin Paxton Hood, Lamps of the temple: shadows from the lights of the modern
pulpit, page 329:
Such religion is Churchianity; it is not Christianity. Christianity means the

religion where Christ is all; Churchianity, the religion where the Church is all
2002, Charles Jenkins, Keeping Sane in a Crazy World, page 84:
The Priest and Levite represent Churchly Movements, They represented
Churchianity that is powerless to lift suffering humanity. What is wrong with the
world today is that we have too much Churchianity and too little Christianity

Any practices of Christianity that are viewed as placing a larger emphasis on

the habits of church life or the institutional traditions of the church than on
theology and spiritual teachings; The quality of being too church-focused.
Churchanity characterized by religiosity, liturgical, ritual, tradition-and
doctrine-bounded power structure.
After death of Yeshua, yet before very long the Jesus movement was no longer Jewish; it
became something different, a social phenomenon of its own, sometimes called the separation
of Christianity from Judaism, usually called the parting of the ways
The parting of the ways is about people, societies, and institutions, not about disembodied
truth claims or the abstractions Judaism and Christianity (or rather, Christianism).
The parting of the ways involves people whom we call Jews and Christians, even if our
ancient sources do not always use these labels. Rabbinic texts, for example, never use the term
Judaism and never refer to the collectivity of Israel as Jews. Justin Martyrs Dialogue with
Trypho the Jew never uses the term Christianity.

There were no mixed communities of Jews and Christians, except of course

for Christian communities which numbered among their members Jews who
had converted to Christianity, and except for Jewish communities which
numbered among their members Christians who had converted to Judaism. But
absent conversion, the boundaries between the Jewish and the Christian
communities were clear enough and stable enough. As the century proceeded,
the boundary would become ever clearer and ever more stable.
[from Shaye Cohen] The ways that parted: Jews, Christians, and Jewish ... - DASH

The War of Images: An Artistic Approach to the Parting of the Ways

Neither Jew Nor Greek?: Constructing Early Christianity by Judith Lieu
Etymology
Christianity
c.1300, cristente, "Christians as a whole; state of being a Christian," from Old French
crestient "Christendom; spiritual authority; baptism" (Modern French chrtient),
from Church Latin christianitatem (nominative christianitas), noun of state from
christianus (see Christian). Gradually respelled to conform with Latin. Christendom
is the older word for it. Old English also had cristennes.
Christendom (- different nuance, connotation, and association from Christianity
Old English cristendom "Christianity, state of being a Christian," from cristen (see
Christian) + -dom, suffix of condition or quality. The native formation, crowded out
by Latinate Christianity except for sense "lands where Christianity is the dominant
religion" (late 14c.). Similar formations in Scandinavian languages.
Christianism)
1560s, "Christianity," from Christian + -ism. From c.2004 in reference to politicized
fundamentalist Christianity in the U.S. Related: Christianist.

*Denominations; Orthodoxy and heterodoxy; heresy; sects; cults

[words Gentile pagan heathen. Pagan gods in N.T. is of Hellenism, not

much of oriental religions.
Sociological and religios terms church, ecclesia, denomination, sect, *cult, religious
movement; faddism, schism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
[In The Future of Religion Secularization, Revival, and Cult formation (1985), the
sociologists Stark and Bainbridge comment in the beginning, all religion are
obscure, tiny, deviant cult movements.]
What is a cult?
(in different senses theological vs. sociological)
Any religion (sect, church) which promises comfort and provides ready-made answers
to all the lifes questions is a cult.
A *cult is found as any religion, denemonination, church, sect, or religious and
pseudoreligios movement which began with one man (or woman) who attracted
followers and may be a dominant personality (messiah type) holding all the
authority; may produces small hierchical group which keeps them anonymous; its core
message is about how to how to attain semething or some idea and about how to
do think, behave, act, talk in the prescribed way;
may often have its own Bible (translation); discrourage to read and listen only what
are allowed, if not outright prohibit (as did the Catholics once to keep the Bible on the
top in the list of Prohibition); certain ritual as the center of their belief system (such as
tongue-speaking for Pentecostals, Charismatics a, and other innocuous names, such
48F48F

http://charismatic-heresy.blogspot.com/2006/11/waking-dead.html on Chrismatic Renewal revives

several heresies:
Gnosticism - oclaims a secret knowledge; making its possessors the only true believers. Historically
the Church condemns Gnosticism, St Paul in his letter to Timothy called it "Profane novelties of
words and oppositions of knowledge. Cf. https://carm.org/does-the-gospel-of-thomas-belong-inthe-new-testament ;
Cf. Docetism
<<Docetism is a term used to refer to a theological perspective among some in the
early church who regarded the sufferings and the human aspects of Christ as
imaginary or apparent instead of being part of a real incarnation. The basic thesis of
such docetics was that if Christ suffered he was not divine, and if he was God he
could not suffer. The combination of the two natures, Son of David and Son of God,
affirmed by Paul in Rm 1:3 - 4 was apparently already under attack in the Johannine
community (see 1Jn 4:2; 2Jn 7). Docetic thinking became an integral part of the
perspectives of Gnostics, who viewed Jesus as the alien messenger from outside the
present evil world and one who was untouched by the evil creator. This alien Jesus
came to awaken Gnostics to their destiny outside the realm of creation. While the
framers of the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds were opposed to docetic teaching and
clearly assumed the two natures of Jesus, the drafters of the Definition of Chalcedon
(451 AD) made explicit the Christian teaching concerning Jesus Christ as "truly God
and truly man".>> http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/docetism.htm

as living truth fellowship); often has mantra to use invoke their God or gods.
Psychological elation, euphoria, ecstasy; Speech purported to be prophecies, which
borders on predicton game, rather than delivering the message the Scipture reveals;
psychological techniques hypnosis, mass hypnosis, frenzy exhibitionism with
negation of self; deviant behavior becomes acceptable (esp. sexual activity). People in
a cult does not see it as a cult, and behemently denies it and gets upset when
challenged; they lose freedom as any human being entitled as being created after
Gods image. Paradoxically they feel content in their bondage; as it does provide them
comfort. [Word thesaurus jargon, nonsense, gibberish, mantra, abracadabra,
charismatic babbling. charm. amulet]

Different religions (beliefs):

Christian Catholicism (Cf. Western Roman vs. Eastern Orthodox), Protestantism,
Puritanism, Pentecostalism, Methodism, etc. Cf. Christianity as a religion;
Christianisms; [Cf. Christendom]
Non-Christian Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Rabbinic Judaism (Hasidism vs.
Misnagdim); various native indigenous beliefs and taboo systems, New Age
Movement (NAV, new ageism) a, shamanism,
49F49F

Cf. *proselytism; *evangelicalism; *fundamentalism b ; heterodoxy; schism;

dispensationalism (not to be mixed up dispensation a technical religious jargon, e.g.
Old Testament dispensation); doctrinism; Legalism; Idol-worship; Idolatry; Iconworship; ecclesiolatry; paganism; religious syncretism; theocrasia (fusion of one god
with another. E.g. Christianism + Mithraism)
Pentocostal Charismatic cult. [Worshiping the Holy Ghost; tongue-speaking babbling]
Prosperity gospel cult e.g. Pure Gospel Church Korean cult = Full Gosple
Church with in mindset ( related also with fortune
Montanism - claims to operate under a "new outpouring of the Spirit" and that the Holy Spirit was
supplementing the revelation of Christ. The Montanists were condemned by Pope St. Zephyrinus.
(199-217)
Messalianism - originated in Mesopotamia in CE 360. The Messalians believed prayer was the only
way to possessing the Holy Spirit. They were condemned by various bishops and councils of the
Church.
Nominalism is a modern day theory claiming there are no absolutes, except senses and feelings. [This
philosophy led to the denial of several doctrines of the Church; including the divinity of Christ.]
Abby Day (2013), Believing in Belonging: Belief and Social Identity in the Modern World, Ch. 9
Undestanding Christian Nominalism: Rethinking Christian Identity. p. 174f.
http://jonathanmair.com/abby-days-believing-in-belonging-review/ )
a
New Age Movement ref. http://carm.org/new-age-what
b
fundamentalism ref. Harvey Cox (2009 ), The Future of Faith, [p. 141 The Pathos of
Fundamentalism - << Fundamentalists collapse faith into belief. They define
themselves by their unyielding insistence that faith consists in believing on certain
fundamentals But the fundamentalist obsession with correct beliefs often makes
faith, in its biblical sense, more elusive. It replaces faith as a primary life orientation with
a stalwart insistence on holding to certain prescribed doctrinal ideas, and this in turn often
promotes a kind of taut defensiveness and spiritual pride that are not in keeping the love
ethinc of [their] Jesus.>>]

brought down by a shaman); Five Blessings ( in a traditional oriental

tradition as well as other religious traditions; also Six Blessings , etc.).
Cf. Interpretatio graeca (Latin, "Greek translation or interpretation by means of Greek
[models]") a discourse or (a to and from discussion) in which ancient Greek religious
concepts and practices, deities and myths are used to interpret or attempt to understand the
mythology and religion of other cultures. It is thus a methodology that looks for equivalencies
and shared characteristics.

Cult of Christianity
a cult off Christianity; a Christian cult; Cf. Christianity as a cult.
www.apologeticsindex.org/2765-cult-of-christianity

Alan Gomes (1995), Unmasking The Cults,

Jan Karel van Baalen (1923), The Choas of Cults: Studies in Present Day Isms
H. Wayne House, Charts of Cults, Sects, and Religious Movements
Walter Martin, Kingdom of the Cults (1) edited by Ravi Zacharias with Jill and Kevin Rische vs.
(2) edited by Hank Hanegraaff and Gretchen Passantino

Believers, Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Pentecostals, Baptists Puritans,

Messianists, Calvinists, Fundamentalists, Evangelicals; Mormons; Jehovahs
Witnesses; Gentiles, pagans, heathen; heretics; Schismatic; asceticism; dissidents;
deists vs. theists; atheists; agonstics; ethno-linguistic people groups; religious
people groups;

*faith vs. belief

Faith is not belief. Beliefs are often held with fidelity, loyalty, trust, and it is
understandable that the term faith gets carelessly used where belief is the proper
word. But the carelessness is regrettable, and the resulting confusionhas caused too
much needless pain, loss, and even death. Faith is no more identical with belief
than loyalty is identical with opinion. (p. 16)
Belief (adopted from p. 18-20) it has a few common senses (1) as in which we
say "I believe that ... "- what is said is true or convincing, etc., and (2) in which we
say "I believe in (something or someone)." Here it is a question of trusting or
valuing the object, in a way that can probably be turned into "belief that"
propositions that will describe what the trusted or valued item can be counted on to
be or to do. The word may sometimes be used simply as an acknowledgment that
you are firmly committed or entrusted to something or someone without
necessarily being clear about what will result but under prodding, I guess that the
one using it thus will acknowledge that it should either be explicable by "belief
that" statements or replaced by a less misleading expression, such as "I heartily
approve of," or "I've taken up," or "I'm into."
Belief is, or should be, concerned with truth (and/or facts). Belief is a stance
that is not inevitable, a judgment that is not simply compelled by what is given.
Belief differs from knowledge, though both are ways of taking a stand on what is
true. Belief is not, however, a matter of choice or of feeling, though it is often
confused with both.
Religious belief. What guarantees the truth of these beliefs? . Beliefs differ in

some significant ways among varying Christian denominations, to say nothing of

the differences between Christian and non-Christian traditions. If beliefs are our
way of making contact with truths of the utmost importance, then we must be
concerned about discriminating true beliefs from false ones. It is possible to claim
that our beliefs happen all to be true, through God's mercy or our fidelity or
whatever, while many of theirs are false; but what such a claim says about us,
about them, and about God does not have an obvious ring of plausibility-and if it
is, however implausible, true, then there is every reason to subject our beliefs to
the kind of closer examination that will undoubtedly vindicate them, strengthen
our confidence, glorify God, and provide illumination for those who are in error.
And if, by chance, some false beliefs have managed to creep into our tradition,
then surely they should be discerned and corrected. To avoid applying tough
critical scrutiny to our beliefs, protecting them by taking refuge in a notion of faith
that makes them self-validating, is impious, disloyal, and potentially dangerous.
Beliefs must stand critical trial, precisely in the name of faith. The critical
examination of a belief may confirm it and overturn the beliefs that oppose it,
sometimes surprisingly,
[with some adjustment from John Meagher (1990), The Truing of

Christianity

*dogma; *creed; *beliefs;

[Cf. doctrine - fr. Lat. doctrina (teaching) > docere (teach); Cf. Gk. didaskalia
(teaching); didask (to teach)]
[Cf. dogma - fr. Gk. dogma (decree, resolution; opinion) > doke (think, decide)]
[Cf. creed fr. Latin credo (I believe)]

[Ref. Doctrine]
Doctrines The term doctrine is in distinction from its etymological meaning
teachings. All the doctrines are human doctrines (including anti-doctrines). They are
fundamentally product of human thoughts and minds; ostentatiously having come out
from the Bible. There is no doctrine which is from God or from the Scripture. They
are picked from the Bibles and interpreted to formulate (fallible) religious and church
doctrines. Thus, when two opposing doctrines are eventually found both to be
inaccurate or insufficient.
Much of doctrinal conflicts are colored by (ecclesial) power-struggle rather than
(scriptural) truth-seeking. What we call Biblical doctrines are our products of human
minds from the Scriptural truths, simply pronounced. The Scripture is not where we
find elaboration to form a doctrine; it simply states and pronounces the truth of it. We
should not need a doctrine to point to a truth. Notice, the Greek word for doctrine
(as in KJV) means simply teaching. Once truths are labeled as doctrines, its
character changes and becomes to serve a particular need in theology.

All doctrines are mans doctrines

doctrines of religions and ideologies.

The Scripture has only statements, no doctrines.

Man continually devises doctrines from the Bibles.
A plethora of religious doctrines Aside from secular doctrines (such as scientific,
political, etc.) would remain as man-made ones, being not genuinely to the truth claim
of the Scripture, as prerogatives of particular religion-sects, as long as they fail to
prove (without convoluted circular and self-serving arguments) to be clearly and
concisely in harmony with the tradition of Apostolic a Biblical Community, which had
become replaced by a religious and quasi-political entity of Constantine Catholic
Church tradition. Historically there have been traditions independent of this, a
Protestant tradition broken off from it, as well reactive traditions of diverse doctrines
and dogmas. All the doctrines are from human minds and thoughts. No doctrine
(however lofty it might be regarded) is a revealed one from God. [It is presumptuous
and blasphemous to claim that the Trinity Doctrine is a revelation, a revealed truth.]
50F50F

One of the characteristics of doctrines of human tradition as shown in the Church

history is that, as they are product of human minds, the longer (elaborate, extensive,
complicated and sophisticated) their statements with expounding and apologetics are,
the further they are away from the Scripture itself and fall into the arena of into
rhetoric and philosophical competition. They become tools in struggle for power
religious and religious-political, and pride and praise self-righteousness apart from
Gods. All and every doctrine which belong to mans spirit are to be put test to
determine whether they are in harmony with Gods truth. (Cf. 1Jn 4:1).
So-called Biblical doctrines are not doctrines of the Bible, nor doctrines about the
Bible, but are religious doctrines claimed to be found in the Bible, if not written down
verbatim. The term Scriptural doctrines itself is a poor one as if it is something of
doctrines to look for in the Scripture. What we have is teachings from the
Scripture, though the word doctrine itself is derived from the same Greek. Religious
doctrines serve religious powers (churches, denomination, sects) for indoctrinating
people in the religious system. The Scripture simply states and proclaims and reveals;
there to help to articulate the faith once delivered by the Apostles. They are there to
provide boundaries so as to prevent misleading by human thoughts and efforts, either
religious or secular. They by themselves are sufficient just as they are found in the
Scripture; they are understandable with human intelligence and reasoning, without
tomes (tombs?) of writing. They are in harmony with the Scripture in its totality. They
would come short, concise and clear unmixed with all the mumbo-jumbo of nonbiblical and, worse, unbiblical concepts.
As originally proclaimed by Yeshua and His disciples, the Way (the very teaching
which we call Christianity) is very much in term of its particular time and place. Thus,
the development of doctrines is due partly to the need to translate what

is expressed in terms of one cultural background into terms intelligible

to another; But it is partly due to another fact. Men vary not only in
their cultural backgrounds, but in the extent of their intellectual
development. The primitive mind thinks pictorially and symbolically; it
lacks the capacity to reflect on its own processes, and is a stranger to
Apostolic the word itself is a church jargon, associated with the non-biblical doctrine of apostolic
succession, esp. in Catholic tradition with Peter being their first Pope.
www.gotquestions.org/apostolic-succession.html
a

the niceties of logic and scientific method. [Quoting from One God in Trinity,
Ed. Toon and Spiceland (1980) (Ch. 7. Bernard Lonergan by Hugo Meynell, p. 96).]
However limited and inadequate they may be, the doctrines, including anti-doctrines,
are here with us, by us, and for us serving us at intellectual level for polemical,
apologetical, and evangelical needs. A doctrine is not something popped up once in a
while, but is in continuous development when they are put on the considerable time
span of our history to be challenged and refined. After all, doctrines are not
fundamentals but are derivatives which come out of reading the Bible, being affected
by eisegesis, presumptions, constrains, traditions and agenda. The fundamentals we
have to care for are that which are plainly proclaimed in the Scripture.
Examples: [Note that all these religious or church creeds as well as doctrines,
beliefs, and ideologies (isms) everything is a fertile product of human thought.
Whether they are in harmony with revelations and proclamations in the Scripture is
totally another matter, as argued by their fierce proponents or antagonists.]

The Athanasian Creed (Quicumque vult in Latin)

Nicene Creed www.ccel.org/creeds/nicene.creed.html
Apostles Creed

Statement of Faith

Pertaining to the people belonging to the Mashiah, it is a way of telling other

people what one believes of the truth revealed in the Scripture from the Most
High Elohim. Examples of various Christianisms and their organizations are
easily found on the web. It covers host of topics, including God, Jesus [sic],
Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Humanity, the Bible, Church, Kingdom reign of God,
and such concern as Salvation Justification Sanctfication Resurrection
Parousia of the Mashiah, the purpose of their organization, the Church
practices (rites, rituals, liturgy) and other themes. [One may have ones own
personal statement of faith more as a confession to others which include
some of his personal history and religious experience.]
Some important doctrinal elements are not stated, as if they desires them kept
under the rug this smacks of their being a cult. Some Christianisms, their
church traditions are more decisive than what the Scripture tells.

*kingdom; kingdom of God; *Gods Kingdom; Kingdom of Elohim (*kingdom

reign of Elohim);

[images of a political kingdom (/empire) - territory; king and subjects; power;

law and rule.]
Kingdom reign of Elohim (> Kingdom of God) = kingdom of God, not to
rule but to love (cf. of Gods law/words) with Gods shalom and justice.
This is the core message of Yeshuas Gospel, with the kingdom in His own
person. G-Jn has only 2x Jn 3:3, 5.
[Cf. theocracy: a system of human government in which priest group rules and
controls its subject in the name of God or a god with collusion of religious and
political powers in human history. World religious organizations and powers have
effectively replaced Gods Kingdom reign with their doctrinal and ecceliastical
control.]

[The Matthean equivalent is kingdom reign of the Heavens a Hebraic idiom.

Kingdom of Elohim and of the Hevenas two different expressions should not
be treated distinct from each other.]
Coming of Gods Kingdom entering Gods kingdom reign. Cf. heaven,
home, and hope.
Cf. Kingdom reign of the Son-of-man ; Kingdom reign of Mashiah
Mt 16:28 kingdom of Him ~~ of the Son-of-man [Cf. kingdom of Elohim in
//Mk 9:1 //Lk 9:27] [Cf. Mt 13:41 his kingdom ~ of the Son-of-man]
Lk 23:42 your kingdom (of Yeshua)
2Pe 1:11 the eternal Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Yeshua Mashiah.
Col 1:3 the Kingdom of His Son.
2Ti 4:1 of Yeshua the Mashiah ~~ His Kingdom reign.
Eph 5:5 the Kingdom of Mashiah and of Elohim.

in

of-the

of-God.

the

kingdom

Messiah

a=

*facts; *evidence; *proof; *premise; *truths (cf. the Truth)

Cf. www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-facts-and-evidence/ Note: facts can be disputed too.

www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-facts-and-truths/ Note: truths
that are momentary are just truths claimed, not the truth.

*doctrine; *teaching; *sermon

The word sermon does not appear in the Bible (The very common word
'sermon' does not appear in the Bible a. The Sermon on the Mount in G-Mt and
its parallel in G-Lk are collections of Yeshuas teachings, not sermons as
such; hence they are titled in IRENT as so-called Sermon. Peter's speech after
Shavuot (> Pentecost) in Acts 2:14-40 is labelled as a sermon, but it is rather
what is called a preaching.
51F51F

sermon [from Latin sermo discourse] as a church jargon is the essential

component of public worship service in the Protestant churches [contrasting to
Catholic Mass]. In actual practice, one can see it range from expositional
teaching of the Scripture to a selling of political and other agenda, and, more
often, entertainment shows with downright unbiblical group hypnosis. [Cf. the
word is also used pejoratively in secular language to refer to a lengthy or
tedious speech delivered with great passion, by any person, to an uninterested
audience.] Cf. sermonette
Reading material: Are Sermons Too Few or Too Many?
from www.reclaimingthemind.org
doctrine (Gk. for teaching) is now theological jargon and in that sense it is
not a biblical word. (e.g. Jn 7:16 My teaching is not my doctrine)
*apologetics [defense of ones faith 1Pe 3:15; Jud 3]; from Greek, apologia,
meaning "a reasoned defense". Not to be confused with making apologies.
*mission; *career, *job (*vocation, occupation, trade, work, labor, skill);

http://youtu.be/BjCVq97JIw0 http://youtu.be/H82CqOIEiKs *calling

*logic; logical; *reason; /x: reasonable; reasoning; intelligible, truth

Everything and every way we think and say should be upon firm foundation of
logic and reason - pertains to faith, not just science. It is not enough to be
reasonable.
It is to be in harmony with truth. It is not enough to be harmonious,in
balance or going with the flow

The word sermon appearing as a mistranslationin a few old English Bibles:

(Bishops) mistranslation of 'words' Jer 1:1; 25:1, 2; 36:27, 28, 32; 45:1; 51:60;
(JUB) Ecc 12:13; (the word not in the Heb. text)
(NET) Lk 6:17 (in a title not in the text)
(WNT) Act 14:9 (replacing speak); 1Co 14:26 (replacing teaching);

For our life to be meaningful, it needs intellect. One, however, does not have to
be intellectual. To have intelligence does not mean one to belong to
intelligentsia (from Latin intellegentia).
Reading material: Deist John Toland Was Right! Even Religion Must Be Intelligible
The problem of the verb IS.

[See the file in the Collection The Nefarious IS]

In all writings/speech is is a problematic. It is not at all comparable to a
mathematical notion , nor it is same as = (equal sign). It should be understood as
(pointing to something) or (being described by).
E.g. Someone A is a father does not say A = father, but A is as a father. E.g. The
stamente God is a person remains incomplete without a qualifier or modifier for the
word person. However, the statement God is as a person is semantically complete.
God is as a person to us; we come to God as a person not as a thing or an abstruct
notion. All because of limitation of communication by means of our imperfect
language, which is hardly logical.
The proble is not only with the word IS, but the other [religious] words or terms: e.g.
Jesus is the Christa Who is Jesus, the name that does not appear in the Scripture?
Which sort of Jesus? What does Christ mean? What is the sense of this statement? In
fact, it behooves us to treat every statement out of human thought as a suspect when is
is claimed to be true. Especially with religious and ecclesiastical jargon, concepts,
ideas, words, and terms.

Jesus is the Christ, a typical English sentence in westernized Christian language, is almost
tautological and non-sensical. What does it mean? How far is it from the expression Yeshua is as the
anointed one by Elohim anointed to be a king, a prophet, and a kohen (priest)?
a

*Being vs. *doing;

Relational basis of being and doing: Such words like righteousness love
faith prayer salvation sanctification justification, do not represent abstract
concepts, nor they as things to have/acquire/pursue, but reflect relationship.
Doing is only a corollary; becoming is only a consequence. [Cf. ontology]
[Cf. Gk words for the participle being: (1) n; (2) huaprchn
*form

(1) schema eternal appeaance (whether or not it corresponds exactly to the

inner reality;
(2) morphe (Phi 2:6) the outer form which gives precise expression to the inner
reality.

*model (vs. reality); typology

*triad, triune, tri-unity, trinity, unity, oneness [of God]

Cf. 1Jn 5:16-17

*reformation; Protestant Reformation; *Five Solas; Restorationism (Christian

primitivism)
The Five Solas, the five pillars of Reformation, are five Latin phrases (or
slogans) that emerged from the Protestant Reformation intended to summarize
the Reformers' basic theological principles in contrast to certain teachings of
the Roman Catholic Church of the day. "Sola" is Latin meaning "alone" or
"only" and the corresponding phrases are:
Sola Fide, by faith alone for Gods taking us righteous to His name.
(justification) (Rm)
Sola Gratia, saved by grace alone, not by merits. (Eph 2:7 grace and faith)
Sola Scriptura, by Scripture alone for the authority overriding traditions of
human organizations, religions, and theologies. (2Pe 2:20; Rm 15:4; 2Tm 2:16)
[does not mean to read the Bible of ones choice (my Bible) and read the
Bible alone to read apart from other people. The Scripture as the whole
(not some books or some verses of pick-choose-mix), not the
interpretation personal (alone private) of a person or a group, is
authorative and leads to the ultimate authority, God Himself. All
intepretations and doctrines/dogmas are products out of mortal human
minds which cannot be outside sin nature in pursuit of ones own power
and pleasure, instead of Gods glory and honor.

Solus Christus, we come to Most High Elohim through Mashiah Yeshua

alone, because He is who He is. (Col 1:15; 1Tm 1:5; 1Jn 1:1; Heb 7:25; Rm
8:34; Acts 4:12; Heb 7:23; Jn 1:1; Jn 14:6)
Soli Deo Gloria, we live for the glory of God alone, in life of Spirits
sanctification (1Co 10:31)
The popular delineation of these five solas is not a Reformation idea but a
modern one. That is to say, if the Reformers were told to list their core
doctrines they might as readily have spoken about salvation by the Holy Spirit
[sic] alone in the church alone (Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology 23.1
[2005]: 119). From two solas 1554, three solas, and five solas in mid 20th
century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_solae

*Confessions; *creeds; Church Councils

Robbers Council
http://bookofconcord.org/

*spirit; *ghost; apparition

Elohim is spirit Jn 4:24; [/x: God is a spirit KJV]

a spirit Act 23:8
a apparition Mt 14:26; Mk 6:49; [-NWT, Cass, DRB; /x: a ghost ASV,
NET, most; /a spirit KJV]
ghost (as a visible disembodied soul of a dead person) unbiblical
words.

The word spirit (in English) covers also mind mental attitude thinking.
Likewise, Gk pneuma, which overlaps its semantic field with what is translated
as soul. [Cf. 2Tm 1:7 a spirit of shrinking back in fear (deilia cowardice) and
of power and love ~

*man, human, human being

Gen 1:26a
Then God said,
Let us make humankinda in our image,
after our likeness.
Gen 1:27
Elohim created the humankind in His own image,
in the image of Elohim He created it;
male and female He created them.

*Divine person vs. divine beging vs. deitiy vs. divinity (divineness);
*person; *Person

[Word study: person, human person, non-human person, figue, portrait, image.
Cf. Latin persona (actor as in a drama).]
[The word person in English various meaings, senses, usages, and
definitions. The term person by some may not be same as person by other,
depeding on various purposes of discussion/statement. E.g. as a legal entity, it
covers much more than a human person/being, e.g. corporation. In law, man
and person are not same. Any human being is man. A person is man who is
considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to
which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/person
www.newadvent.org/cathen/11726a.htm - as a theological term. Especially
used in the non-biblical Trinitarian belief and doctrine, it provides
undecipherable gobbledygook, as the word is used totally different sense
without succeeding to remove confusion. Even a statement is made saying that
Jesus is a human being. He is a divine person, but not a human person!! - the
statement which cannot make any sense. The original sense of Latin and Greek
terms does not show up in the English translation word person. [Cf. persona,
hypostasis, hypostatic union, personality, personhood, (two) natures of Jesus,
etc. Cf. Korean ) Cf. divinity meets humanity in Yeshua; not
Jesus is not a human person, the person Jesus Christ is fully God and fully
man??!! Divinity meets humanity through *Incarnation of the Logos as
Immanuel; humanity meets divinity in the Ascension of the Resurrected
Yeshua the Mashiah.]
a

/humankind Everet Fox (1987), In the Beginning: A New English Rendition of the
Book of Genesis Translated with Commentary and Notes;
/man most; - a problematic word to use as a translation word since its dominant
meaning is a male. Cf. gender neutrality issue.
/groudling Mary Phil Korsak (1993), At the Start...Genesis Made New;

Related words: Lat. persona; role, character, essence, nature; *personality (psychological term; personal style, character, bent, etc. Belongs to a same level of
word category as spirituality); *personhood (the being of a person; or being as
person), person-ness (not personable-ness); personification, anthropomorphism;
divine person vs. divine being; human being vs. human person. Regrettably, most of
writings on the subject related to religion (not psychology), the term personality is
haphazardly used instead of personhood. Note that the word is usually capitalized in
the Trinitarian jargon (for what purpose?). It should be understood as a translation
word for the Latin and as such it is never stressed that it does not have same meaning
as the common English word person [ e.g. human person divine person. Does
divine person refers to a certain human being or a spirit being god-like one?]. If the
jargon Person is not understood to connote role, it falls into logical and linguistic
quandary. Elohim does come to us as a person, but He is supra-personal and does not
belong to the category of beings or persons, beyond things concepts ideas.

[See EE 19 for a ref. on human being vs. human person regarding Jesus
Christ.]
[See Walk through the Scripture, 2 - Names, Persons, and People on God
Trinity]
In common English usage *person denotes an individual human being. It is derived
from Lat. persona (actors mask, character in a play) which became to be used to refer
to a human being. However, the word is in common usage of English words and to use
in as specialized technical word for their theology only results in its tri-theistic
metamorphosis. In a common theological definition for personhood a person is said to
possess attributes (of will, intellect, uniqueness of individuality) as well as actions.
[However, without considering identification of the reality this argument does not go
personification, a very common literary device. Such is involved with the debate on
personhood of the Spirit. The Spirit (the holy Spirit) is the Spirit of God, not a being,
an entity, or a person separate from God. See Jn 16:13 for a common Trinitarian
misunderstanding of grammatical gender as evidence of personhood. There is no exact
word in Hebrew corresponding to person as there is none in Greek.] [To say person
we should be able to locate in space and place as well as within time, a dimension to
which the realm of spirit does not belong.]
personal vs. of person: Most of time we see the adjectival form personal is used
where the usual context requires of person. It is misleading as it carries a word
picture of personable or personal to me, etc. a
5F5F

Adjective problem e.g. Personal vs. Of person. In addition to a host of issues on the
word and term person itself, its adjectival form in English personal has the same problem
of other adjectival words where the noun and its counterpart do not share same nuance and
sense. E.g. the word beauty has an adjectival form beautiful, but the latter does not have
anything connected with the concept of beauty. In other words, English does not have a
separate form with the meaning concerning with beauty or of beauty. Cf. The natural
law is not quite same meaning as the law of nature.
A quite similar case is for the word spirit. There is no English word which has meaning of
concerned with spirit or of spirit. On the other hand the adjective spiritual has a sense
a

The problem occurs this word is used as a special theological term to designate the
mode of being of God in reference to the divine Triune (the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Ghost Mt 28:19b KJV). Its theological use is from the Latin word, which
became to be used a translation of the Greek concepts. The effect produced by such
theological tradition (in line of Trinitarianism) is an image of Godhead, contrary to
the Scriptural truth. Some proposes the word capitalized Person as a special term to
use to articulate with it differentiated from a (human) person. Such a term Person is
purely contorted artificial theological construct (as if a short-hand) and does not help
human mind comprehend and actually mislead by portraying as a single figure with
three heads or three faces (Gk. trikephalos) for a tritheistic three-person God-head.
The confounding problem is the meaning of the word person in English, which has
nothing to do with the term as the Trinitarian theological construct a, which ultimately
changed the Trinitarian idea (as a reaction to the Arian heresy of Christ being a
creature) to be guilty of being de facto tritheism. The Creator YHWH Elohim is not
a person, nor a God. [Hence His name is a person-name for the humans can see
Him just as He has revealed to them; it is not a personal name.] On the other hand,
Yeshua was a person, human as well as divine [as He was equal to His father (Jn 5:18)
and all the fullness of Elohim dwelt in Him (Col 1:19; Eph 3:19).] [See a separate
discussion in Appendix: On Trinity.] [A detailed discussion on the statement God is a
person is found in Appendix: IS GOD A PERSON?.]
56F56F

*Divine person vs. divine beging vs. deitiy vs. divinity (divineness);

different from of spirit. Hence, in IRENT translation, the word spirital of a neologism is
used.
E.g. music of beauty = beautiful music cf. beauty of music musical beauty.
John J. ODonnell, The Mystery of the Triune God (1989), Ch. VI. The Concept of Person in
Trinitarian Theology, pp. 100-111.
a

*Personification
Personification is a common figure-of-speech literary device to represent a thing or
abstraction as a person. In most cases, it is easy to recognize as a literary device. An
example is love in 1Co 13:4ff. No one would mistake from such expression (e.g.
love endures) that love is meant here as a person!
However, the issue of the personhood of the Holy Spirit [sic] is a real source of
controversies and contentions (all unnecessary) doctrinally speaking. See under
*holy Spirit in BW #3 for further detail. [Again, not to confuse the word person
with the term person of Trinitarian theological construct see above.]
One of the great cause of the problems in the line of the Trinitarian doctrine is a
literalistic interpretation of the Bible of the translated words and terms. Even the word
person (often capitalized as Person) is a stumbling block for their mind-set. God is
NOT a person. He is a supra-person being (being byond the semantic realm of
person). If this term in the doctrinal statement is literally understood as its original
Latin word persona, there would not be confusion and misconception, since it mean
mask or role, not a person in modern English usage. The doctrine should move
from Trinity (unity of three Gods), but Tri-unity (unity of the triune) creative works
of love is by Elohim YHWH through Yeshua His Son in the power of holy Spirit to
reach the humanity the power radiates out jus as the sun shines [Mt 5:45] with no
discrimination or directionality to bing out its energy for the benefict of His created
world. That includes all the blessings from Him, such as salvation and torah
(teaching/guidance/instruction) among others. Only human beings were given a
existential freedom to accept or to reject Elohim and His gift.
[Note: Grammatical gender should not be used to prove personhood of something. E.g.
Jn 16:13-15 parakltos (masc.) (16:7 = 14:16); here in this verse it is equated with
Spirit (neut.). However, grammatical gender cannot dictate how its gender should be,
and it cannot prove the *holy Spirit to be a person or a God. All translations renders as
he 3rd person masc. singular pronoun. The side effect is to prop up a non-biblical
doctrine of the holy Spirit as a person, the third Person of the Trinity God, God the
Holy Spirit. If the Spirit has any sort of gender, it would be thematically feminine. (Cf.
personification of wisdom in the book of Proverbs of O.T. Prov 31:10-31. Cf. spirit
of wisdom - Exo 28:3; Eph 1:17 Gk. sophia fem.)
*Anthropomorphism (cf. literary personification)
Anthropomorphism is the representation of objects (especially of a God-being)
attributing human characteristics, forms, attributes, faculties, or behavior to nonhuman entities, such as a god, animal, object, or abstraction.

God is not like a man (Num 23:19), but, for instruction of the many, he is like
a man. Philo [quoted in David Clines, Yahweh and the God of the Christian
Theology, Theology Sep 1980 83 (p. 325)]

Anthropomorphic languages about God is closely related to literary device of

personification in which God, the supra-personal being, is being presented as a
personal being.

Name vs. Title

*Name vs. title

Many are written with such a title as Many names of God Many names of
Jesus [sic]. These names are not names, but titles, epithets, alias, descriptors,
even false names). Mone than one name is not a name. One name suffices.
Name a word to designate a person, place, or tangible or intangible object. In
the Scripture it is persons name that concercerns us. Heb. sem; Gk. onoma a
57F57F

Q: What is name? (rather than what is a name? b)

Q: What does it mean by name (should not be confused with titles or
callingnames).
Q: What is in a name?
Q: Does a name tell something about the person carrying it?
Q: Does or how does a name influence a person's character? c.
58F58F

59F59F

[Related terms: label, epithet; title, calling name; symbol, designator, identifier;
pointer. Many synonyms and related words. d]
60F60F

See WB#3 for idiomatic phrases, such as in (someones) name into the name
of [based] upon the name of e.g. associtade with verbs, such as baptize,
pray etc.
The title e signifies what the person is (as a term to denote persons role,
mask, or function with which to relate with others). With descriptive
61F61F

NAME (Heb. sem; Gk. onoma) - The designation of a person or place. Names carry more value and
importance in biblical than in modern usage. Not only may a name identify, but it frequently expresses
the essential nature of its bearer; to know the name is to know the person (cf. Psa 9: 10 [MT 11]).
Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (1987)
b
what is a name - www.jimwegryn.com/Names/What%20is%20a%20name.htm
c
persons name analysis (as in kabalarian style a common practice in the oriental society.
d
Synonyms and related words for name:
nomen, moniker, appellation, epithet, personal name, cognomen, nickname, byname, sobriquet,
agnomen; last name, surname, family name birth name, first name, forename, Christian name, given
name, maiden name, married name; anthroponym, autonym, patronym, matronym, hypocorism, pet
name, pseudonym, noms de guerre, alias, code name, cover, pen name, stage name, nom de plume,
brand, trade name; signature, demonyn, handle, sign, mark, econym, icon, symbol, badge, tag, place
name, toponym, label, title, classification, designation, rubric, eponym, common name; genus,
denomination, class, species, type; anonym.
e
title One may carry several titles. E.g. the titles which are carried by Yeshua are many and
some of them are same as the titles for Elohim Himself. Here these titles should not be confused as

expressive content, it is of referent function only. Often used as a calling

name, a term used in anthropology and linguistics as the name by which a
person is normally identified in addressing or conversation.
The name of a person, on the other hand, is not same as title, but it is who the
person is. Thus, the name is not simply a word, but IS the very person. It is of
identity and essential reality. It is by way of the name as well as the face that a
person presents ones soul in its existence (the whole being of self) to others.
Names are essential and called upon for identification a (to tell who one is
referred to). However, most commonly, the word name is used not substitute
of the name spelt, written and inscribed, but as what it stands for and what it
carries with (as to authority and reality of the person). The central role that
names play in biblical narratives and histories (as often in literature) cannot be
overemphasized. The meaning of a person has its own significance (especially
in Hebrew names). English word name has a very broad usage and extended
meanings Hebrew word shem may carry various senses a persons character,
fame/refutation, glory, and memorial. The name for a person is a totally
different concept from names used to designate things or ideas. The name of a
person is not confused with titles, a number of which can be attached to a
person. All the names of human persons are given by someone else. Many
names of God (or rather God-being) are given by humans and are not
personal proper names but labels, descriptors, or epithets, and sometimes titles
(calling-names). b
62F62F

63F63F

In Judaic practice, the expression the Name (HaShem) is for designation of

God and used in place of His personal name. In the Scripture, as throughout the
Semitic world, a name carries significance beyond that of its meaning or its use
as a title.20
What could be the most important word or words in the Scripture (aside from
proper names)? Would it be love, life, light, spirit, faith, grace,
law, justice, judgent, salvation, creation? All of these are essential.
However, the most fundamental word on which all these are woven together is
name. This is the single most important thematic word in the whole Scripture.
Without the name nothing can come out of the Scripture. The divine personname (> personal name) is not only for referencing, representation and
identification but more importantly for revelation of who He is. Without Gods
name revealed no truth can be true. [Such name itself cannot be something to
name, thus erroneous conclusion that the two (YHWH and Yeshua) are the same and identical
person, a linguistic absurdity and sophistry, throwing the title Son of God completely out of their
mind.
a
identification is not same as identity.
b

E.g. God, Gott (German), theos (Greek), (Ko. Catholic) = (Tanzh - Chinese; Lord of

Heaven; cf. ); (kami, - Japanese), Allah (Islam), Brahman (Hinduism) all are
titles.

be worshiped.] a So prevalent and fervent among the People of the Book, all
the dissensions and divisions, dogmatism, doctrinarism, as well as sectarianism,
heresies, and political contentions can in fact be traced from their ignorance on
the revealed name and from their sheer ignoring the significance of the name
with only lip service on the name as shown in their religious tradition. It is not
difficult to see that ultimately they find themselves disconnected from the very
root of all Hebraic root of their Bible and their faith. b
64F64F

65F65F

Nothing is important for a person other than the name belongs to him. To
honor someone is to keep the name honored. Honoring Gods name c is the
single guideline we have for the life of every soul as made in the image of
Elohim. The first stone-tablet of the Ten Commandments (Exo 20:1-11; //Deu
5:4-15) is the beginning of all the teaching, instruction, and guidance (=
*Torah in its basic sense) and lies in one theme Honor His name as He
himself has revealed. This exactly corresponds to the first in the Lords Prayer
(Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2 in the sense of Our Heavenly Father Your name shall be
honored rather than You name should be made special, sacred, sanctified, or
hallowed, if we ever understand whatever these English phrases might mean
in modern and archaic usage. This is exactly When martyrs die it is to keep
Gods name honored, not so much to keep his faith, as if faith is something
precious and valuable. When one follows the commands, it is done in the very
name to keep the name honored and with the authority granted from Him.
Gods name is not what we pray. d
6F6F

67F67F

To honor the name is far beyond having concern of how it should be spelt and
of how it should be properly pronounced. It is not about how to keep it safely
from uttering it in a manner unworthy to the name (taking up in vain). Not to
keep the name honored means to be meticulous in keep uttering and putting
down on the writing on every occasion, everywhere and on every place. Both
cannot escape to be seen as affront to His name.

or used as a mantra to invoke to tap power from. Cf. so-called Sacred Name Movement.

We all are in urgent need to get back and keep coming back, not just back to the Bible,
but, through the Bibles, back to the Scripture itself. It should not be read as something
written in Church language, but in the original language to the original audience. A danger
still lurks for us to be carried away and read it the way we want, not to hear what the
Scripture says. [Tony Evans, http://youtu.be/HmfFW0gPuyE (Jesus Through the Bible)]
b

On honoring Gods name: In the Scripture things are good or not (i.e. worthy or not) only so
simply by whether Gods name is honored or dishonored. (Cf. Mt 6:9 //Lk 11:2; Cf. Exo 20:7.)
See elsewhere here for good things vs. *unworthy things.
c

Praying the names of God is a title of a book. Probably misnamed (or rather title). We do not
pray Gods name; we pray to Elohim whose name is YHWH.
d

The name is a pointer to what the name stands for, that is, the identity and
reality signified by the name. To know experientially the revealed Name is
the beginning of faith in the One whom the revealed name points to. a
68F68F

If we take a common example of father-son relation, father (to his son) is not a name,
but a title. His name = the person Father. That he is the father is far more than that he
has a name to be identified with, but he comes as father in such special relation.
Would anyone call ones own father by his name as he thinks to honor him by doing
that whenever, everywhere, to everyone?
The name when put on ones lips or in letter is to refer to the reality behind, but not to
call out or apply to whatever one can think of. The same position holds as well for
attempt to use Gods personal name as a translation word in the Bible vis--vis His
titles, Lord or God.

The expression God has many names b which is used by biblical scholars and
writers actually borders on blasphemy, unless only when the word God is
meant for a God of ones own creation. The God of the Scripture (Elohim) has
only one name, the name which He himself revealed, that is, YHWH.
69F69F

*Passion
[ the Passion (capitalized; usually with the definite article); a special religious
jargon for suffering and death of Yeshua]; [Fr. Latin pati (to suffer; to endure)
same as for patient, patience. Not related to a common English word passion
with something to do with emotion feeling desire which is from Latin
passio, related to Gk. pathos.]
*blasphemy
Blasphemy against Elohim and His spirit, dishonoring His name not only by
(abusive) speech, but also by action dishonoring the name of Elohim out of
ones mind from thoughts out to expression and attitude into ones action,
behavior and conduct. [It is shown in their entertaining shows on puppet (?
pulpit) stages in mass mania, peddling of Gods words, degraded behavior,
cleaning out others wallets collecting in the name of their Gods.]

to know the name is frighteningly important in our life where one can only exist to other
engaging in dynamic interaction. In any human society it is the beginning of a relationship in which
even love shows its existence. [E.g. to go by on a first name basis in the Western culture is
sourly missing in the oriental culture.]
b
God has many names Google search shows almost a half million hits. There are quite a
number of books written on the theme. What is seen in a book by John Hicks (1982), God has many
names, is the God (=Elohim), mistaken having many names, is to be replaced by a nameless God
[s.v.] of religious pluralism.
a

Blasphemy against the holy Spirit

Mt 12:31
12:31
In view of this [v. 30], I must say to yo,
all sin and blasphemy [people commit and utter]
shall come to be forgiven of men;
but whosoever blasphemes against the Spirit [+], [v. 24, 31]
they shall not be forgiven.
12:32
Yes, whosoever utters a word against me, the Son-of-man,
shall come to be forgiven;
but whosoever speaks against the very holy Spirit,
shall not come to be forgiven,
neither in this present world-order,
nor in the one coming.
[+] 12:31, 32 against the very holy Spirit [+ by rejecting Gods testimony
the Spirit gives on the Son-of-man] [as to who He is (Jn 15:26) and plans of God.]
[The holy Spirit is none other than the very God acting/creating in power, not a
separate being, Force, or person. Blasphemy against the holy Spirit is
blasphemy against God Himself who reaches out and exerts in power to carry out
His will. The holy Spirit, the Power of God, and the Love of God are not separable
concepts and are to be seen as different aspects of Gods will.
//Mk 3:28-30
3:28
Yes! I say to yo,
all things will be forgiven to the sons of mortal men
whatever sins they commit whatsoever blasphemies they utter;
3:29
But whosoever blasphemes against the very holy Spirit [+],
[+ refusing their sins to be convicted]

has no receiving of forgiveness forever,

but, is accountable to an eternal judgment.
//Lk 12:10.
12:10

And everyone who is to speak a word

against the Son-of-man [+ dishonoring him],
shall come to be forgiven for it:
but the one who blasphemes against the holy Spirit
[+ refusing their sins to be convicted]

shall not come to be forgiven for it.

[not come to be forgiven vs. not be forgiven; Cf. unforgivable sin biblical
jargon.]
Not able to receive forgiveness God is giving. Gods forgiveness is unconditional
and uninterrupted ever since Adams fall, but it is on their part that makes

impossible to receive forgiveness God has already given. There is no such thing as
ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS, for those belonging to the corporate body of
the Mashiah (Mashiahn Community) were and are already forgiven from the work
of the Mashiah on the Cross. They ALREADY possess forgiveness.

cf. Heb 6:4-8; 10:26-29

*Unforgivable sin /unpardonable sin; /eternal sin; [see also * forgiveness]
unforgivableness is in refusing to turn their heart (> repent) and accept Gods
mercy (forgiveness) and refusing the testimony of the holy Spirit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_sin

Copied: From commentaries on Mt 12:31: Needs editing and condensing:

(1) Not be forgiven: Because it refuses to be forgiven (2) attacking on the son
of man when manifestly wielding the power of the Spirit an attack upon the
Spirit Himself CCHS]
[One comes out and takes a stand against H.S.; something decisive about
what and how one does. ]
[When one resist the working of the Spirit of God when He speaks to, there is
no forgiveness because one is rejecting salvation made real to him by the
H.S. McGee]
[the unpardonable sin is the deliberate refusal to acknowledge Gods power
in Christ. It indicates deliberate and irreversible hardness of heart.
Whosoever rejects the prompting of the Holy Spirit removes himself or
herself from the only force that can lead him or her to repentance and
restoration to God. LASB]
[The sin against H.S., by virtue of its seriousness, is not merely a particular
act; rather to blaspheme the spirit reflects an attitude that is decidedly against
God and his nature (cf. vv. 34, 35). The harsh term blasphemy connotes a
deliberate and godless rejection of the saving power and grace of God. The
Pharisees were well on their way towards having this attitude as is indicated
by their assertion that Yeshua had joined forces with the devil. The reason
the sin against the HS will not be forgiven is not because god is unwilling or
unable to forgive; instead, those who persist in this godless attitude
stubbornly refuse to repent. They do not want to receive forgiveness and
prefer to continue in their slander of Gods servant. Mk 3:29, 30 gives an
additional thought, for it can be translated, but whosoever shall blaspheme
against the HS has no forgiveness forever but is guilty of an eternal sin.
Because they kept saying, He has an unclean spirit. The Pharisees who
called the HS in Yeshua an unclean spirit were rejecting the Spirits witness

to Yeshua as Messiah and Savior. Thus, they were rejecting the only
salvation and forgiveness god has provided. (see Jn 16:8) CBL Matthew, p.
245]

good news (gospel);

[*Gospel, *Good News;]
euaggelioz bring good news; katanggel bring and announce (1Co 9:14); keruss
proclaim- Concordance list:
[Cf. The Gospel has nothing to do with good news of prosperity, power, peace,
paradise on earth in a new world. The joyful tyding is proclaimed to the oppressed
people for the reign of God to challenge those powers in statu quo political, religious,
and ideological.]

E.g. Lk 8:1 both verbs.

proclaiming the Kingdom reign of God to bring its good news \krussn kai
euaggelizomenos tn basileian tou qeou; [the phrase the Kingdom ~ is transposed to
clarify the syntax. Cf. preach is an intransitive verb in English. See the same phrase in
9:2 proclaiming the Kingdom reign of God]; /proclaiming and announcing the good
news of- ESV, ARJ; /preaching and proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God
most; /xx: preaching and spreading ISV; /proclaiming and announcing good news
ABP; /sending out the good-news proclaiming ~ - ARJ; /xx: preaching and shewing
the glad tidings KJV; /

Greek verb euaggelioz bring good news (to people) [from which the
English word evangelize is derived] [basic idea is bring it to people. All
other translation words such as announce, declare, publish, etc. are secondary
and often distorts the meaning.] (Lk 1:19; 2:10; 3:18; 4:18, 43; 7:22; 8:1;
9:6; 16:16; 20:1; Act 8:4, 12, 35; 10:36; 11:20; 13:32; 14:7; Rm 1:15;
15:20; 1Co 1:17; 9:16, 18; 2Co 11:7; Gal 1:8; Eph 3:8; 1Pt 1:23; 1Th
3:6; Rev 10:7; 14:6; Gal 1:8)
Lk 1:19 /bring ESV, ASV; /announce (something as good news? Cf. nuance
of announce coming over public address system or broadcasting); />
proclaim (- that it is really good news?); /> declare NWT ( - as if a
document or legal edict?); />> give BBE; /show Bishops; /x: tell GNB,
CEV ( for what??); /x: preach (- preach Gospel?? or preach someone on
something related to Gospel??); /x: publish (- a NWT jargon - as if a
publication??);
/good news; glad tidings; the gospel; the Gospel; the good news

Danker p. 152.
euaggelioz [eu, aggelioz (w 'announce'; 'bring/announce good news', such as a
military victory] [basic sense is bring good news to (people). /announce the glad
tidings Darby; /x: declare the good news - NWT; /preach the gospel KJV+; /x:
proclaim the gospel NET, LITV, MKJV, LEB, Cass, etc.; /x: show the good news;
/x: tell the good news ISV, CEV; /x: tell the Good News ERV; /x: spread the good
news] [IRENT consistently renders as bring good news, with a few exception as
announce good news (e.g. Act 5:42, 14:15).] [Cf. see below *proclaim* (e.g.
proclaim the Kingdom reign of Elohim) with the verb kerusso (proclaim, herald).]
-1. 'pass on information that spells good tidings to the recipient', bring/announce good
news Lk 1:19; 2:10; 1Th 3:6; Rv 10:7; 14:6. A transition is readily made to
-2. 'spread good tidings of God's beneficial concern'
(a) publish good news/tidings, of proclamation by John the Baptist Lk 3:18; by Jesus
4:18, 43; 7:22; 8:1; 9:6; 20:1; by unspecified parties 16:16.
(b) specifically of proclamation w. focus on God's saving action, explicit or implicit, in
connection w. Jesus: publish the good news, publish the gospel Ac 8:4 (eu. ton logon),
12, 35; 10:36; 11:20; 13:32; Rm 1:15; 2Co 11:7; Gal 1:8; Eph 3:8; 1Pt 1:12; abs. Lk
9:6; Ac 14:7; Rm 15:20; 1Co 1:17; 9:16, 18.
euaggelion [eu, aggel; 'reward for good tidings'] in NT only in the specific sense
'God's good news to humans', good news
(a) as content of proclamation by Jesus Mt 4:23; 9:35; Mk 1:14f.
(b) as content of apostolic proclamation, with focus on God's action in connection with
Jesus Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9 (cp. Mt 24:14; 26:13); Ac 15:7; 20:24; Ro 1:1 and
oft. in Paul's writings; 1 Pt 4:17; Rv 14:6.
euaggelists 'one who publishes/proclaims God's good news', evangelist Ac 21 :8; Eph
4:11; 2Ti 4:5.

* My gospel - according to my gospel (Pauline letters Rm 2:16; 16:25; 2Ti 2:8) -/the good
news I preach NWT; /the Good News I preach GNB; [The gospel whatever sense it is in
is hardly can be the Pauline Gospel of a Pauline religion Gospel of Paul, about him, from
him, but the very Gospel of Yeshua the Mashiah which Paul took on to proclaim to the
Gentiles. /according to the Gospel that which I received and am proclaiming about the Lord
Yeshua Mashiah.]

*ethical vs. *moral,

*proclaim, *preach,

Greek verb kruss proclaim herald); />> preach KJV; /x: publish NWT
jargon;

Gk. krugma (kerygma). [Cf. Kerygmatic vs. confessional vs. catechical]

IRENT has it proclaim in majority. Only in a few places as preach when the
sense is to prick ones conscience with words, in ethical, moral, religious
manner. Cf. proclaim things vs. preach on/about things to somone English
verb is usu. intransitive.

Examples showing inconsistency: proclaim; preach; publish (in NWT); (the word
preach and preacher are religious and church jargons. The expression preach
the Gospel is archaic and non-sensical.)
in KJV 2x (Lk 12:3; Rev 5:2); 141x; 7x Rm 10:14, 15; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11; 2Pe
2:5;
in ASV 24x, 109x, 7x Act 17:18; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11;
in NWT 7x, 72x; 11x 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11; 2Pe 2:5;
in NET 94x; 67x; 0x 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11;
in NIV 37x, 116x, 0x 2Pe 2:5
in ESV 72x, 80x, 0x Act 17:18; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11;
in NASB 49x, 107x, 0x Rm 10:14; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11; 2Pe 2:5;
in Diagl 27x; 28x; 36x; none;

[Danker p. 200 make a public announcement, in the matter of herald, proclaim

a. mostly about the reign of God and associated themes, including repentance,
faith, the importance of Jesus (Christ) or his mission Mt 3:1; 4:17; 24:14; Mk
1:42 382 45; 6:12; Lk 3:3; 4:18f; 8:1; 12:3; Act 10:37; 20:15; Rm 10:8, 146;
1Co 1:23; 15:1f; 2Co 1:19; 11:4; Gal 2:2; Phi 1:15; Col 1:23; 1th 2:9; 1Ti
3:16; 2Ti 4:2 b. Moses and his message featured as content Act 15:21; cp. Rm
2:21 c. as celestial call for someone to carry out a task Rev 5:2 d. of Jesus
declaration to imprisoned spirits 1Pt 3:19.)
The Gospels Life of the Mashiah and Life to live in Him.
Pauline Epistles Life being lived in the Mashiah in the world.

*apocalypse

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Apoc_Def.htm
In popular terminology today, an "apocalypse" is a catastrophic event (e.g., nuclear
holocaust).
In biblical terminology, an "apocalypse" is not an event, but a "revelation" that is
recorded in written form:
it is a piece of crisis literature that "reveals" truths about the past, present, and/or
future in highly symbolic terms;
the revelation often comes in dreams or visions, and usually needs to be
interpreted with the help of an angel;
it is usually intended to provide hope and encouragement for people in the midst of
severe trials and tribulations.
Cf. 1: "The Apocalypse " is an alternate name (used especially by Protestants) for the
"Book of Revelation" in the NT.
Cf. 2: "The Little Apocalypse" or "The Apocalyptic Discourse" are names sometimes
given to G-Mark 13 (and parallel passages in Matt 24 and Luke 21), containing the
teachings of Jesus about the future of Jerusalem and the end of the world.
Related terminology: apocalyptic, apocalyitcism, eschatology /eschatological;
prophecy/prophetic; Revelation; Day of the LORD; Jugdment Day; Parousia; unbibilical
Rapturue; Tribulation; Dispensationalism; Harmagedon;
Millennium/millennial/millennia/millennialism/millenialist;

Not every Apocalypse is purely eschatological (they may also interpret past or
present events, not just the future).
Not all Eschatology is apocalyptic (some look forward to a future that is peaceful,
not violent).

*Bible vs. Scripture vs. Word of God; *book, scroll; *Scriptures, *Torah,
torah, Commandments; New Testament, Old Testament, Hebrew
Scripture,
RENT is the fruit of an attempt for a new English translation of Greek New Testament,
which is undertaken with linguistic and literary approach, quite different from others which
are essentially for their particular religious and ecclesial needs with theological and
doctrinal bias. A translation is often a result of doctrinal position; such translation in turn
lead them reinforce their doctrines. Not just to come up with a translation useful for those
who read it, but to ask them be challenged not only about the translations and the text, but
about everything conceptually and practically tied to the Bible. The Bible has become a
canonical book of religion by the people of the book religion of liturgy, rules, rituals, and
rites, as well as relics and icons. In modern mindset, it is tapped as a book of application.
Translation works of the Bible have reflected the spirit of modernism and religion-ism.
This has to return to the book of life, light, and love.

[See also in WB #2]

Use of [h] graph (writing) in Pauline Epistles [syn. with gramma 2Ti 3:14 ta
hiera grammata]
singular (most renders as Scripture) [IRENT renders as the Scripture passage]
(the particular scripture passage); Rm 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; 11:2; Gal 3:8, 22; 4:30;
1Ti 5:18;
(every scripture passage); 2Ti 3:16 (every Scripture passage, into which Godbreathed life in, is indeed ~) a much discussed text for the issue of biblical
inspiration and inerrancy. [Cf. Biblicism See WB #2]
plural (most renders as Scriptures) [IRENT renders not as Scriptures, but as Scripture,
a collective noun in English, in the sense of the whole Scripture]
(in holy Scripture); Rm 1:2;
(comfort of the Scripture); Rm 15:4;
(by the prophetic Scripture); Rm 16:26;
(according to the Scripture); 1Co 15:3; 1Co 15:4;
IRENT rendering is consistent throughout the N.T. (/through all the N.T.; /x: all NT
different nuance).
The word Scripture is capitalized, as most do, since it in all occurrences refers to
Gods, holy and sacred, not secular writings or of other religions.

On Words and Phrases

[A list of rundown suitable for a quick glance is here to be completed in

suitable order, thematic vs. alphabetic.]
*word problem

Semantics; problem of meaning and definition; word vs. term; [boundaries of

related words are often blurred; in the given context it may be in place of other.
E.g. <his recent visit to our nation touched not only our nations soul but
also the worlds...>; e.g. spirit vs mind Spirit of St Louis; e.g. a spirit vs. a
ghost vs. a (disembodied) soul; etc.]
The single word at the core of the Scripture is God, which has its own God
problem not about who, but about what is meant when we say God, which is
a pagan loan word used for translating Gk. theos and Heb. Elohim. Different
languages and societies come up with their own one (sometimes more than one
word and occasionally in competition because of different sense and
significance as well as word history).
*words; *phrase; *clause; *sentence

The basic unit of communication to be dealt with language is a phrase.

Phrase is to word as molecule is to atom. As all chemical reaction is with
molecules, so is all language communication is with phrases. In IRENT work
the word phrase is used is in the sense of as a grammatical term a sequence of
two or more words arranged in a grammatical construction and acting as a
unit in a sentence strongly corresponding to its sense as a rhetorical term a
word or group of spoken words that the mind focuses on momentarily as a
meaningful unit and is preceded and followed by pauses.
Phrase vs. clause - Grammatically defined Phrase a group of related words which does not contain both a subject
and a predicate.
Clause a group of related that contains a subject-verb combination.
Every statement must contain at least one clause. The subject may be
either a single word or a group of words; so are the verbal phrase.
[The term phrase used for IRENT work is not in its grammatical sense (which
is in contrast to another term clause. Here the concept of phrase is to be taken
as the basic element of the translated text formatting with phrase-based format
being reflected in the line breaks.
Superficially, this practice of formatting is in contrast to right-margin justified
paragraph format (usually with right-margin justified). Any group of words is
treated as a phrase when it carries a smallest unit of meaning and serves as a
smallest unit of a breath group. 21

*word, *Logos, sayings, utterance, voice, sound

logos word some renders as utterance in 1Co 1:5; 12:8; 2Co 8:7; Eph 6:19;
[Col 4:3 idiom phrase anoig thuran tou logou open a door for the word to
go out;
phtheggomai speak out, speak, make utterance Act 4:18; 2Pe 2:16;
phn voice, sound Act 24:21; /utterance NWT3; /thing that I cried out
NWT4, ERV, GNB; /voice /statement EMTV
stoma mouth figurative use in Lk 21:15 (/mouth most; /utterance
WNT; /words GW; /ability to speak ISV)
genitive problem; genitive issue

Both in Gk and English, the genitive case (possessive case) carries diverse
meaning and sense. E.g. subjective vs. objective genitive.
Love of God God loves? Loves God? Love from God; Love belongs to God
(divine love).
We say, God loves you. So? What God is, which God? What does it mean to
love? What does it mean God loves?
Mystery of God = Gods mystery
Mystery of the God = mystery, that is, the God [common appositive use of
genitive]
Mt 5:14; Jn 8:12; 9:5light to the world > light of the world; Cf. Act 13:37;
Isa 49:6 a light to the nations (> gentiles)
Jn 1:4 light of men
deceptions of the saints (1) being deceived or (2) deceiving??
nature of nature vs. natural: e.g. The natural law should properly be
called the law of the nature (nature law). Natural tendency is not tendency
of nature (or natures tendency)
Beauty of beauty vs. beautiful
Music of music vs. musical; e.g. beauty of music /x: = musical beauty;

noun and adjective pairs

Noun and its derivative adjective semantically often a different level.

E.g. derivative adjectives from nouns, such as nature natural; beauty beautiful;
history historical; person personal; music musical. These are usually not same
as of or concerning nature, beauty, person, music, etc.

pronoun problems; pronoun plague

Reading the text of the Bible, the readers inadvertently let the pronouns include
themselves (for interpretation or application).
Problem of singular vs. plural second person pronouns you (cf. thou in archaic)
We what is it exactly refer to? Which group of people? Certainly not the
readers of the Bibles.
Occasionally the referent for the first person singular pronoun (I, my, mine) is
not easy to find, same as for the third person singular masculine (he, his, him)
esp. in the quoted texts.
E.g. Mt 22:43-45
v. 43 He [Yeshua] said to them [the Pharisees],
"How is it then that David, in spirit (/x: Spirit), calls him Lord, saying,
v. 44 "'The LORD [< YHWH] said to my [whose?] Lord [< Master],
"Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet"'? [a song sung by
Levites? Or from the lips of David himself]
v. 45 If then David calls him [whom?] Lord, how is he [who? My lord?] his son
[Davids]?"

When the singular masculine third pronouns occur more than once in a sentence
or paragraph, it is difficult to figure out what each refers among several different
persons (incl. God), some of which may be in ellipsis in Gk. and the referent
may not be easy to locate within the immediate text. [e.g. 1Jn 5:10, 16, etc.]
possessive pronoun problem

Problem of usage of English possessive pronouns (mine, yours, his, hers, its,
theirs):
a follower of me (i.e. my follower; one who follows me) vs. a follower
of mine (e.g. a follower of my idea or plan, etc.)
E.g. Mt 26:13 //Mk 14:9 /xx: for a memorial of her (KJV); /x: in memory
of her (ESV); /x: will remember her ERV; /will remember what she has
done CEV!!; /
double possessive pronoun problems:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_possessive#Double_genitive idioms Why 'a friend of mine' is not 'my friend's friend ... Why do you say "friend of
mine" instead of "friend of me"?

E.g. a friend of mine; one of my friends; my friend; a friend of a friend of

mine.
[of + object pronoun e.g. a friend of me in the sense of the friend
belonging to me?]. [Cf. an idiom a friend of a friend]

[who is remembering whom and of what]

(eis tn emn anamnsin Lk 22:19; //1Co 11:24, 25); /in remembering
me; /> in remembrance of me most (? as in memorial); /xxx: for the
commemoration of me DRB;
(eis mnmosunon auts Mt 26:13; //Mar 14:9); [See EE in Mt 26:13]
/remembering her (deed); /xxx: for a memorial of her KJV, ASV;
/xxx: as a memorial to her EMTV; /in remembrance of her most; /x:
in memory of her ESV, NET, GNB, LEB; /xx: for her memory
DRB; /will remember her GNB; /(omit) CEV;
Proof text; text read for application and for doctrinal positons what sounds
like a biblical statement, but actually with no biblical support.

[E.g. Following Peters confession that he was the anointed one (> Christ),
someone writes: we are all anointed too, since all of us are spirit. The
problems: who are we? What is anointed? What is spirit? What does it
mean to say we (human beings) are spirit? p.78 Louis Charles (2008), Jesus
Religion.]

On statements, arguments, claims, assertion

Logic; rhetoric; literary device; linguistic semantics, discourse analysis
[See the article The Nebulous I.]
An example of A is ~:
A is same as ~
A is equal as ~
A is identical ~
A is as ~
statements (arguments, rhetoric, narrative, factual) - everyone does not stand alone by
itself, since it has to sit within the text context and to speak in the speech setting of
the author.
Can a statement logically stand alone by itself with any disclaimer, premises, is in
ellipsis in the text?
I believe God - what is God? not 'god'? which god? a god? the God? text context
Is it 'I', is it 'believe', is it God, which is in focus or prominence? speech setting;
How is 'God' different from 'god'?

Vocabulary: Words and Phrases

*sympathy vs. *empathy;

www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201505/empathy-vs-sympathy
http://operationmeditation.com/discover/sympathy-vs-empathy-vs-compassion/
https://youtu.be/1Evwgu369Jw
*pity; *compassion; *suffering; distress; sorrow; empathy (Germ. Einfuehlung
feeling into).
Mnemonic - e for walking in others shoes (experiencing); *sympathy s for
feeling sorry for others hurt
*witness (person); *testimony;

pseudomarture Mt 19:18; Mk 10:19; 14:56, 57; Lk 18:20;

pseudomarturia Mt 15:19; false testimony (witness)
[seek false testimony Mt 26:59 - how they would seek false ones?
Cf. // Mk 14:55]
pseudomartus (false witness) Mt 26:60 false-witnesses
martus (a witness) Mt 26:65 (pl.)

*pure; *purity; *purification; *spiritual poverty?

(of a person) (pure, purity) Mt 5:8; 2Co 6:6; Jas 3:17; 1Ti 1:5; 3:9; 4:12; 5:2, 22; 2Ti 2:22;
1Pe 1:22; 2Pe 3:1; 1Jn 3:3;
purification Jn 2:6; 3:25 (Judaic custom physical aspect; ritual washing); Heb
1:3;
Purity is what God wants to see on His people, not righteousness which is what Elohim grants
and which is attempted in Judaism by keeping the Mosaic law.
Cf. Concept of purity, impurity, and purification in Judaism; Mikvah (ritual immersion pool)
www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3424502542/purification-purification-judaism.html
www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/1542/jewish/On-the-Essence-of-RitualImpurity.htm
www.jerusalemperspective.com/2646/
www.stephanielandsem.com/2013/10/what-was-ritual-purity-in-first-century-judaism/

*pain, hurt, suffering; hardship; trial; persecution; tribulation; affliction; torture,

torment, plague; pest, Han

Ref: Andrew Sung Park (1993), The Wounded Heart of God: The Asian
Concept of Han and the Christian Doctrine of Sin

*image, *icon, *portrait; (carved) idol; stature;

Image of God?
*arguments;
The art of arguing is the art of living. We argue because we must, because life demands it,
because, at last, life itself is but an argument Gerry Spence (1995), How to argue and Win
Every Time.

Everything we say is our opinion and arguments

*spiritual (spirital; of spirit), spiritism, spirituality, spiritualitism; shamanism;

[word study on spirit see also in WB #3] the word as in common English vs.
the word used in the specific text. E.g. spirit of the community; spirit of the
modern world, Spirit of St. Louis, artistic spirit. The sense and usage overlap with
the word soul mind]. The word spirit in the Bible as a translation word for Gk.
pneuma, etc.
[spiritualism practice and ideas of something to do with spirit and spirituality.]
*tolerance;

[www.crosswalk.com/video/shouldnt-christianity-tolerant-peoples-beliefs.html ]
respectful others embracing of ideologies
engagement vs. accommodation; concession, compromise, adulterate; bigotry;
People of tolerantism are proven to be those who are most intolerant of
intolerance especially in religions.
Im willing to tolerate anything - except those who are not tolerant of me.
C-words confusion, contradiction, and conflict and compromise

- all the religious, political, philosophical, ideological is brought out by

words which are consciously or unconsciously subject to misuse,
misunderstand, miscommunicate, and manipulate.
It is the words that has shaped what we human are. All the words are from
human minds. Such difference from the word of God!
Problem words soul, spirit (religious jargon), body, flesh (biblical jargon)]

The meaning, sense, usage of the words soul and spirit are not same as
when they appear as the translation words in the Bibles which they become
religious jargon. [Cf. The book title Soul of a New Machine (by Tracy Kidder
1982); the name of the monoplane The Spirit of St. Louis (flown solo by the
pilot Lindbergh 1927); a spirit of the Olympic game, spirit of our generation
of truth-perverting. all have nothing to do with a spirit being dismembered
soul, etc.]
happiness, blessing, luck, fortune, comfort

*future fate, destiny, and fortune (shamanism)

*Protection

Psa 91:1-9 QQ to find a decent English translation with King James English.
*study; *teach; *learn; *search; re-search;

The goal of teaching is not in teaching but in helping others learn.

*student; *pupil; *disciple - Gk mathts [Heb. talmid (pl. talmidim) same
root with Talmud.]
*Teacher, master (cf. lord), Rabbi,
[Problem of teacher in Korean word (with a honorific ending).
When it is used as a vocative, it is in common usage simply a polite addressing,
similar to Mr. in English, though it can be used appropriately to ones
teacher. Cf. Prof. .]
*incarnate; *incarnation; reincarnation

[See Walk through the Scripture #3]

*imitate
follow the example (CEV!) mimts ginomai
be imitators of me 1Co 4:16; 11:1 ESV, etc. (cf. followers of me KJV)
be imitators of God Eph 5:1
imitate their faith Heb 13:
no imitate evil but imitate good 3Jn 1:11
imitate evil but
Cf. Thomas Kempis, Imitation of Christ (Latin: De Imitatione Christi) (1418-27) a Catholic
devotional book (text in http://sacred-texts.com/chr/ioc/index.htm ) .... imitate is Life and
character
imitate nuance of mimicking, non-genuine in quality (e.g. in imitation leather)

model, example, conform

*freedom;

freedom; liberty; freedom of choice

free will; Gods sovereignty
An essay need to edit
John 8:34 tells us, Whosoever does the [work of] sin is a slave of sin. The man from earth
unknowingly had picked for himself the harshest masterSatan, the ruler of this world (John 12:31;
14:30; 16:11). This whole world is in bondage to Satan and his way of life that brings pain, violence
and sorrow.
Like many today, this man thought he was free because he lived his life without anyone telling him
what to do. Thats exactly what his master wanted him to think! He didnt know that the way of man
is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his own steps (Jeremiah 10:23).
So, the man from earth was the slave all along. But thats only part of the answer.
Two masters
We can only be slaves of sin or slaves of righteousness (Romans 6:18, 20). Because no one can
serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one
and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon (Matthew 6:24).
We read in 1 Corinthians 7:22 that whoever is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lords
freedman. Likewise, he who is called while free is Christs slave. When we come to the knowledge
of Gods truth, repent and are baptized, we are set free from the bondage and penalty of sin (which is
death) and willingly serve a loving master who bought us with His own blood.
As our creator, God knows whats best for us. His commandments are not burdensome (1 John 5:3).
They are instructions for how to live life as God designed it to be lived.
However, most are sadly like the man from earth. They are obliviously enslaved by sin, for which
the penalty is death (Romans 6:23).
So, back to our questionwho was the slave? The droid or the man? The answer is both! We cant
change the fact were slaves; but we can choose who well serveour Creator (like the droid) or the
devil (like the man).
http://members.cogwa.org/young-adult-blog/an-interview-with-a-slave/

freedom and enslavement (Cf. self-enslavement; victimization)

How does God's sovereignty work together with free will?
Cf. TULIP (of Calvinism)
*fate; *destiny; destination; *predestination; fortune, luck; bad and evil

What does the Bible say about fate / destiny?

bad and evil [See below * Satan Devil]
Norman L. Geisler (2011), If God, Why Evil? A New Way to Think About the
Question
[If no evil, why then God?. God created man; man created evil. Evil
should be understood as something internal, not external to a human being.
God did not create evil; God provides explanation of evil. - ARJ]
Rabbi Harold Kushner (2004), When Bad Things Happen to Good People
http://mindpowerindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MP024_Bad-ThingsGood-People.pdf

www.aish.com/sp/ph/why_harold_kushner_is_wrong.html
*information; disinformation; misinformation
*power and pleasure; *pursuit of power and pleasure

power gives pleasure; pleasure seeks power; - related to praise position

possession
Power to have control over oneself and over others. Power to rob from others.
Kingdom of Pleasure (Hedonism)
Homo sapiens: Homo potestas et hedonicus70F7Fa etc.

Homo ludens

Homo economicus
Homo religiosus (c/o Will Herbeg, Protestant-Catholic-Jew)
Homo politicus
Homo socius
Homo potestas et Homo hedonicus b [Quote: Power is the ultimate
71F71F

aphrodisiac. Henry A. Kissinger]

Ref: List of alternative names for the human species - Wikipedia ...
Ref: www.bookrags.com/research/homo-religiosus-eorl-06/
HOMO RELIGIOSUS. When the Swedish botanist Linnaeus developed
his system of biological classification in the eighteenth century, the
Enlightenment's ideal of rationality strongly governed views of humanity.
As a result, Linnaeus designated the human species Homo sapiens. Soon,
however, the Romantic movement and the incipient human sciences
accentuated other dimensions of humanity than the rational. In time, new
terms were coined on the Linnaean model to designate humanity in various
distinctive aspects: homo ludens (G. F. Creuzer and, later, Johan Huizinga),
homo faber (Henri Bergson), homo viator (Gabriel-Honor Marcel), and
others. Perhaps the nineteenth century's growing awareness of the
universality of religion, especially in the realm of the "primitives" (as they
were then known), made it inevitable that a phrase would emerge to
express that aspect of humanity that the Enlightenment's ideal had so
opposed: homo...

Basic principle of living beings in the created *world.

a

Ref. David P. Barash (2012), Homo Mysterious: Evolutionary Puzzles of Human Nature
Ref. in Foundations Of Hedonistic Orientation/Choice Theory Alexander J Ovsich (2014)
www.webmedcentral.com/wmcpdf/Article_WMC004562.pdf )
b

Human pleasure incl. pride and sensuality

Human power against powerlessness, limitedness, insecurity and vulnerability; for
protection, preservation as well as for controlling others. Both pleasure and power to
shield oneself from meaninglessness and purposelessness of life.
Power which the created beings are deficient has to come from others. To take power
from others requires power (to control) that is, power feeds power, and power
corrupts.
On the part of human beings, it is human beings of power and pleasure. On the part
of God, it is power and pleasure of God. Fundamentally and essentially different as
Gods power is unlimited and inexhaustible. Power is there for God as something to
give and give, but never take. An analogy may be made with our sun giving off its
light and radiating out energy, but never there in need of taking. To give power is as it
were a pleasure for God; He delights in the created beings receiving His power. This is
where the essence of Gods love is giving of power free and unlimited for the
created being to receive it its total freedom God granted (i.e. made in the image of
God).

*pigeonholing; pick and choose; proof text;

to hammer; to nail down; explain away; plausible

*law; law of nature;

Law of Nature - natural law is a misnomer.

Quotation from Nancy Cartwright (1983), How the Laws of Physics Lie, p. 22
[Italics not in the original. Note: the word lie in the title is a pun to be in a
specified state vs. to tell untruth]
p.1
Philosophers distinguish phenomenological from theoretical laws.
Phenomenological laws are about appearances; theoretical ones are about the reality
behind the appearances. The distinction is rooted in epistemology.
Phenomenological laws are about things which we can at least in principle observe
directly, whereas theoretical laws can be known only by indirect inference.
Normally for philosophers phenomenological and theoretical mark the
distinction between the observable and the unobservable.
Physicists also use the terms theoretical and phenomenological. But their
usage makes a different distinction. Physicists contrast phenomenological with
fundamental. For example, a Dictionary of Physics says, A phenomenological
theory relates observed phenomena by postulating certain equations but does not
enquire too deeply into their fundamental significance.
The dictionary mentions observed phenomena. But do not be misled. These
phenomenological equations are not about direct observables that contrast with the
theoretical entities of the philosopher.
p. 21
There are at least two kinds of laws of nature: laws of association and causal

laws. Laws of association are the familiar laws with which philosophers usually
deal. These laws tell how often two qualities or quantities are co-associated. They
may be either deterministic the association is universal or probabilistic. The
equations of physics are a good example: whenever the force on a classical particle
of mass m is f the acceleration is f/m. Laws of association may be time indexed, as
in the probabilistic laws of Mendelian genetics, but, apart from the asymmetries
imposed by time indexing, these laws are causally neutral. They tell how often two
qualities co-occur; but they provide no account of what makes things happen.
Causal laws, by contrast, have the word 'cause' -- or some causal surrogate -right in them. for an example from physics, force causes change in motion: to
quote Einstein and Infeld, 'The action of an external force changes the velocity ...
such a force either increases or decreases the velocity according to whether it acts
in the direction of motion or in the opposite direction.'
Causal principles cannot be reduced to laws of association; but they cannot
be done away with.

*politics; *democracy; *government

Every government is a parliament of whores. The trouble is, in a democracy,

the whores are us. P. J. O'Rourke
My Political Problem is Me http://pastordaveonline.org/2012/04/23/thepower-and-failure-of-humor-a-review-of-parliament-of-whores-by-p-j-orourke/
*victimization

*slavery; *addiction; obsessive-compulsive disorder [OCD]

addiction-driven (not purpose-driven) addition pursuit pleasure and

power for oneself.
Emotional, mental, psychological and spiritual slavery as well as sociopolitical.
slavery, bondage; freedom liberty, emancipation; subordination, oppression,
enslavement; abolition; leaders, chiefs, commanders; instructors, teachers,
assistants, guides;
Heb. ebed; Gk. doulos slave vs. servant, cf. bond-servant
Heb. ezer (Gen 2:28) help-made > helper (subordinate, equal or
superordinate helper?)
Gk. kephal 1Co 11:3 what sense is head? standing over head or leading
ahead of?

*sexuality

Sexuality and equality

Equality now refers to a state of mutual indifference between the sexes,
achieved through a willed ignorance of all of the natural differences that turn
a man and a woman toward each other, writes Margaret Harper McCarthy, a
professor at the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and
Family. But to be more precise, it is a state of indifference to the womans
difference.
Is there another way to be equal that doesnt set us apart from each other
sterile and alone but brings us into greater and more fruitful unity, that
isnt built, in other words, on the annihilation of the feminine difference?
she adds. The tragic irony for our society so bent on equality at the expense
of Christianity is that it is only Christianity, together with its precursor, that
can hold together both the equality of the sexes and the goodness and
positivity of sexual difference, particularly the feminine difference.
From Gender equity or suppression? (LOsservatore Romano, p. 19)

http://youtu.be/wSF82AwSDiU
The great porn experiment | Gary Wilson | TEDxGlasgow
[on pornography; arousal addiction]
[very worthy to read. Just like any other form of addiction, be it physiological
(drug, drink, nicotine, marihuana) or social (gambling), no one is immune to it,
as advent of internet. It's relevant to all in our postmodern society as human
beings are driven to power and pleasure - be it religion, politics, ideology, and
knowledge. This is about 'arousal addiction', pornography in particular. I saw a
news Colorado state is celebrating opening up of Pot Shop - what is illegal
federal level is now legal. Since whatever involved is money-laundering, they
deal with only cash. IRS has to make a rule how to tax the illegal income, like
levying tax on prostitute income.] [It is just a few example of 'perversion' perversion of truth - right and wrong are not differentiated; illegal (i.e.
immigrants) is no longer illegal. Legal is not much different from illegal in our
great new state ushering in full force in this God-forsaking country.]

Gender confusion -

Thailand to have 'third gender' in new constitution

www.usj.edu.lb/uploadmanager/read/Justin&LindseyHolcombRidOfMyDisgra
ce.pdf
*reward; reward and *punishment; *wage; repay; pay back; recompense,
respond, return, render, *prize, cf. requisite

punishment disciple torture guidance education

opsonion wage, pay Rm 6:23

brabeion prize Phi 3:14
misthos reward, payment, wage Mt 5:12. Mt 6:1-8 reward from the
Father (what reward?)

verbs reward, render, respond, return, recompense (n., v.), repay

apodidmi render Mt 16:27
[cf. reward/treasure heavenly vs. in (the) heaven(s)]
*eternal, *everlasting, *forever and ever
ain noun age eon [ eis ton aina Jn 12:34; forever; for ever (KJV); without end (BBE); /x:
to the age LITV, YLT] [eis tou ainas tn ainn Php 4:20; Heb 1:8; (forever and ever)] [Cf. t
basilei tn ainn to the King of the age (the eternal King)]
ainios adj. everlasting (KJV) of indefinite duration; vs. eternal beyond temporal
dimension, which is usually the case most of time [Cf. before eternal times 2Ti 1:9] when used
with such expressions life, fire, dwelling, sin, punishment, destruction (2Th 1:19), God, dominion,
redemption, weight of glory, house (home), purpose, comfort, power, etc. (culled from ESV N.T.) In
no place it ever means unending. Hence the KJV rendering everlasting is a relic of the past,
though it still sounds poetic.
aidios adj. Rm 1:20 (h adidios autou dunamis kai theiots)

*punishment (*punish)
Mt 25:46 (into eternal cut-off ~ into eternal life eis kolasin ainion vs. eis zn ainion)
the only occurrence of the phrase eternal cut-off (/>> eternal punishment; /xx: everlasting
punishment KJV). Attention should be given not only to kolasis but also to ainios for the
proper understanding of their meaning and usage within the Biblical text.
[Ref. www.forananswer.org/Matthew/Mt25_46.htm ]
kolasis how punishment is meted out is not in the word itself. It should not be confused with
or mixed up with *torture a [basinos]. This sort of unfortunate word association is
127F127F

A definition of torture - The U.N. convention defines torture as "any act by which severe pain or
suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person" to obtain information, to
punish or coerce and is inflicted with the "consent or acquiescence" of a public official.

subconsciously working in the minds of those who follow a common unbiblical idea as in hell
fire preaching along with pagan soul immortality as well as those who are against such
traditional view of hell (which itself is not in the Scritpure). [Some translate it (by reading
into the word) as cutting off. This is (1) an example par excellence of diachronic
etymological fallacy and (2) reflects how the text is read from their exegetical and doctrinal
approach, rather than linguist and literary approach, thus ignoring how English word works. As
a translation word within the text what supposedly simple English works against clarity and
accuracy what does it mean by cutting off? Cutting off of what? There is no clue to the
readers of what it means (is it a persons relation to God that is being cut-off?). It does not
improve over the traditional rendering punishment at all.
[Cf. two examples of the expression in N.T. are for cutting off branches and cutting off the
foreskin]
kolaz [Danker, p. 204 < with a part lopped off> punish Act 4:21 (/x: lop off KIT); 1Pe
2:20 v.l.; 2Pe 2:9] (by God)]
[Cf. kathaire prune (as of tree) Jn 15:2] [Cf. kathariz <purify ceremonially> cleanse]
[Cf. Lk 23:22 paideu - give a lesson; give a teaching is often translated as punish, here it
means flogging from Pilate to be inflicted on Yeshua in the context.]
timria [Danker p. 353. < reciprocity for wrongdoing> punishment Heb 10:29;
timre [Danker, < on alert for sake of honor, hence assoc. w. vengeance> exact
reciprocity for wrongdoing punish Act 22:5; 26:11]
Cf. lop off - ekkla Rm 11:19 (cf. ekkopt Rm 11:24);

Rx: flog vs. scourge (as noun and verb). Lat. "flagrum" or "flagellum" the
Roman whip for punishment.
www.frugalsites.net/jesus/scourging.htm
After scourging [Mt 27:26; //Mk 15:15; //Jn 19:1; (Cf. Lk 23:16, 22)], his physical
condition would be nay impossible to set out on the road to Golgotha and to undergo the
crucifixion. A crucifixion is not just of execution to death, but with prolonged torture.]

Rx: Google search: punishment and discipline

The word punishment should not be taken lightly in conjunction with a church
jargon eternal punishment in Mt 25:46 kolasin aionion (mistranslated as
everlasting punishment in KJV). Hell-preaching theology compounds this
phrase by mixing and confusing with other biblical words and phrases, such as
Lake of Fire (Rev 20:10); tormented with fire (Rev 14:10); eternal fire (Mt
25:41); etenal judgment (Heb 6:2); eternal destruction (2Th 1:19);
resurrection of judgment (Jn 5:29); gehenna (Mt 5:22; 25:30; Mk 9:44-48).
Punishment clearly implies awareness; however, any awareness ends with death.
[The translation word eternal itself is barely acceptable, as it tends to carry a
sense of time duration which is unending. It is also true for eternal life which is
much improved than everlasting life (KJV).]
www.un.org/documents/ga/res/39/a39r046.htm Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984) (commonly known as the United Nations
Convention against Torture) Part I Article I.

www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternalPunishmentNotTrueToGreek.html
For a taste of the word which entails various tortures, see Michel Faucalt (1995)
Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison
http://monoskop.org/images/4/43/Foucault_Michel_Discipline_and_Punish_The
_Birth_of_the_Prison_1977_1995.pdf
https://zulfahmed.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/disciplineandpunish.pdf
[crucifixion (- bibilical and technical term); amende honorable (in Britain and
France history; vs. ] [For various Chinese practices http://blog.donga.com/sjdhksk/archives/10453 ]
www.frugalsites.net/jesus/crucifixion.htm
[Note: history of crucifixion
- www.thenazareneway.com/details_history_of_crucifixion.htm
www.bible-history.com/biblestudy/crucifixion.html
Persia and Alexander
Crucifixion probably originated with ancient Persians. There is evidence, that captured pirates
were crucified in the port of Athens in the 7th century BC. Alexander the Great introduced the
practice throughout his empire. He once crucified a general who disagreed with his campaign
plans.
Roman Empire
Romans adopted the custom from Carthage and used it for slaves, rebels, and especially
despised enemies and criminals. Condemned Roman citizens were usually exempt from
crucifixion except for high crimes against the state, such as treason. The Romans used it during
the Spartacus rebellion, during the Roman Civil War, and the destruction of Jerusalem.
Crucifixion was considered an ignominious way to die.
A common prelude was scourging, which would cause the victim to lose a large amount of
blood, and approach a state of shock. The prisoner then usually had to carry the horizontal beam
(patibulum in Latin) to the place of execution, not necessarily the whole cross. Crucifixion was
typically carried out by specialized teams, consisting of a commanding centurion and four
soldiers. When it was done in an established place of execution, the vertical beam (stipes) was
sometimes permanently embedded in the ground. The victim was usually stripped naked. The
"nails" were tapered iron spikes approximately 5 to 7 in (13 to 18 cm) long with a square shaft
3/8 in (1 cm) across.
The Romans often broke the prisoner's legs to hasten death. Burial afterwards was not usually
permitted. In some cases, the nails were gathered afterwards and used as healing amulets.
Emperor Constantine abolished crucifixion in the Roman Empire, when Christianity became the
state religion.

*day; *night; *week;

[See details for calendar issue in the Supplement WB #4 Time, Place and
Numbers.]

In the Scripture the word day (yom Heb; hmera Gk) refers to that which
begins at sunrise (either for daytime period or calendar date). Likewise that
which begins at sunset is called night, never day. E.g. Mk 4:27 katheud kai
egeirtai, nukta kai hmeran (sleeps and rises up; night and day < As he
sleeps during night and rises up next day) Jewish reckoning of a day (calendar
date) to start at sunset is unnatural and unscriptural and contrary to common
sense and logic.
Week is a lunar week, not a solar (Gregorian week); the numbered days of
the lunar week does not correspond to the nameb days of the solar week.
Seventh day in the Scripture is not same as Saturday; these are unrelated,
though occasionally they may coincide.

*partiality; *favoritism; *discrimination

Rm 2:11 /x: show favor to someone

*gift; *charisma

charisma [Greek as well as Gk loanword in English as a church jargon]; Cf.

grace
Derived words from this often come as pejorative - charismatic (adj);
charismatics a church jargon; E.g. Mogens Mller, the Jesus of history,
not as a mythic figure but as a charismatic interpreter of the will of God. [in
Pauline Epistles] [from www.biblicalarchaeology.org/reviews/is-this-notthe-carpenter ] What does it mean by charismatic in religious jargon?
Gift a thing or a doing; favor. Can a person be a gift? Vs. presence of a
person with us. E.g. Jesus was the greatest gift?
Church jargons charism, charismatic, charismatics for glossalists (tonguespeakers) as in various Pentecostal sects.
[Art is a gift curious, troublesome and awful - Harry Belafonte]
*merciful, compassionate, forgiving, have pity

oiktirmon Lk 6:36; Jam 5:11 compassionate, pitying, > merciful

eleemon Mt 5:7
hileos 1Tm 1:2; Heb 8:12 /merciful
hilaskomai Lk 18:13 forgiving in mercy> merciful; [NET fn The prayer is
a humble call for forgiveness. The term for mercy (, hilaskomai)
is associated with the concept of a request for atonement (BDAG 473-74
s.v. 1; Ps 51:1, 3; 25:11; 34:6, 18).]

eusplagchnos Eph 4:32

polusplagchnos Jam 5:11
chrestos Eph 4:32

eleos Mt 9:13 mercy

*grace

[Acrostic: GRACE
"Gods Riches At Christs Expense " - Lew Phelps quoted in Personal Update New
Journal of Koinoia House (Jan 2008 p.14)

"God's Radical And Complete Embrace" (David Burchett)

[<< grace (gratia), which he did not see like the medieval notion of gratia
infusa, the infusion of some qualities by means of the sacraments, but as divine
favour, the goodwill of God towards us. Justification consists of the
forgiveness and the remission of sins and is the outcome of the acceptance of
the Gospel by faith.>> from Corneliu C. Simu The Development Of The
Doctrine of Justification in the Theology of Philip Melanchthon: A Brief
Historical Survey www.emanuel.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/P-1.2-2003-Corneliu-C.Simut-The-Development-of-the-Doctrine-of-Justification.pdf ]

From Danker
charis
- 1. 'a disposition marked by inclination to generosity',
freq. unmotivated by worth of the recipient, gener. in the context of divine
beneficence favor Lk 1:30; 2:40, 52; Jn 1:16; Ac 2:47; 4:33; 11:23; 13:43 (as
exhibited in deed vs. 41); 15:11, 40; 18:27; Rm 1:7; 3:24; 4:4; 5:21; 6:14; 11:5;
12:6; 1Co 16:23; 2Co 8:1; Hb 10:29; Jam 4:6; 1Pe 4:10. Freq. w. focus on a kind
and generous message marked by favor, grace Lk 4:22; Jn 1:14; Act 14:3; 20:32;
Col 4:6.
- 2. 'a benefit conferred freely as expression of good will', favor, grace,
beneficence, blessing Act 24:27; 1Co 16:3; 2Co 1:15; in contrast to unedifying
expression Eph 4:29.
W focus on special endowment as divine gift of empowerment or personal
enrichment Act 6:8; 7:10; 1Co 15:10; 2Co 1:12; 9:8; 2Pt 3:18; of God's gift of
apostleship Ro 1:5; 12:3; 15:15; 2Co 12:9; Gal 2:9; Eph 3:2; 4:7; Phi 1:7.
- 3. 'response to display of generosity', expression of requital, thanks Rm 6:17;
7:25; 1Co 10:30; 15:57; Col 3:16. The compressed use in Lk 6:32-34 indicates that
the reciprocity cited is not one that merits the status of favor with expectation of
congratulation; contrast 1Pt 2:19f, where ch.as expression of approval is in order.
charisma
'that which results from the activity of generosity', in NT always in connection
with divine generosity bestowed on believers, divine gift
- a. in general Rm 1:11; 5:15f; 6:23; 11:29.
- b. in ref. to corporate welfare Rm 12:6; 1Co 1:7; 7:7; 12:4, 9, 28, 30f; 2Co
1:11; 1Ti 4:14; 2Ti 1:6; 1Pt 4:10.
charito
'cause to be recipient of a favor', show kindness/favor to Eph 1:6; kecharitmenh
favored one Lk 1:28.

Cf. charin acc. of charis; functioning as prep. w. gen.

- a. accounting for an observation
in view of, because of Lk 7:47; 1Jn 3:12. In Eph 3:1, 14 Paul makes a
connection, that's why, with a preceding observation (in vs. 1 with delayed
resolution expressed in vs. 8) and at the same time has in mind an objective
that would fall under
- b. indicating an objective in the interest of, so as to secure/bring about Gal
3:19; 1Ti 5:14; Tit 1:5, 11; Jd 16.

charis grace (undeserved favor from God)

charisma divine gift

drea gift w. focus on liberality Jn 4:10; Ac 8:20; Rm 5:15; 2Co 9:15; Eph
4:7; Hb 6:4.
drma gift Rm 5:16; Jam 1:17.
dron gift
- a. in general Mt 2:11; Rv 11:10 (of gift exchange).
- b.sacrificial donation/offering Mt 5:23; 8:4; Mk 7:11; Lk 21:4 (the widow
cast her gift, ta dra, onto the others previously put into the offering chest);
Hb 5:1.
- c. divine gift Eph 2:8.

dreomai give Mk 15:45; perh. with a nuance of formality present, bestow 2Pt
1:3, 4.

drean adv. 1 'being freely given/without charge', freely = the positive

aspect for nothing Mt 10:8; Rm 3:24; 2Co 11:7; 2Th 3:8; Rv 21:6; 22:17. 2.
being without purpose, in vain = the neg. aspect for nothing Gal 2:21. 3.
being underserved, without cause Jn 15:25

Grace giving freely what we dont deserve.

Mercy not giving what we deserve.
Love (Cf. human love)

Grace when we are under Gods grace, that does not mean we can sin
all we desire. But we are washed now; sanctified and made alive by and
in truth in the name of Yeshua! Our relationship with the Father has
changed. Rm 7:4 6. deliverance from the Torah is about
atonement for sin It has been taken care of by the scrafice of Yeshua
on the Cross. All we have to do is to receive this by the revlation that
coms from, by and through truth. 1Jn 1:5 Elohim is Light in Him
there is no darkness at all.
The Gospel of the Kingdom
The Gospel of the Cross
The Gosple of the Grace

[Contra to the infamous archaic unbiblical TULIP of Calvinism tradition

and mindset http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canons_of_Dort ], PROOF, an
acronym that summarizes five key facets of God's amazing grace, reminds
us of five different ways in which we experience the grace of God at work
in our lives
Before time began, God mapped out
Planned
Grace
the plan of salvation from first to last.
P
God planned to adopt chosen (>
vs. Limited
particular) people as His own children;
Atonement
Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for
these people's sins and as a substitute
who satisfied God's righteous
requirements in their place.
(Jn 10:11-18; Eph 1:4-12).
Everyone is born spiritually dead. Left
Resurrection
to ourselves, we will never choose
R
Grace
God's way. God enables people to
respond freely to His grace by giving
vs. Total
them spiritual life through the power
Depravity
of Christ 's resurrection.
(Jn 5:21; Eph 2:1- 7).
O

Outrageous
Grace
vs.
Unconditional
Election

Overcoming
Grace
vs. Irresistible
Grace

Forever Grace
vs. Perseverance
of the Saints

God chose people to be saved on the

basis of His own sovereign will. He
didn 't base His choiee to give us grace
on anyt hing that we did or might do.
(Jn 15:16; Eph 2:8- 9)
God works in the lives of His chosen
people to transform O their rebellion
into surrender so that they freely
repent and recognize Christ as the
risen King.
(Jn 6:44, 65; Eph 2:4- 10).
God seals his people with his holy
Spirit so that they are preserved and
persevere in faith until the final
restoration of God's kingdom on the
earth.
(Jn 10:27-29; Eph 1: 13-14; 4:30).

Source:
Daniel Montgomery and Timothy Paul Jones (2014), PROOF: Finding
Freedom through the Intoxicating Joy of Irresistible Grace

TULIP Is So 20th Century: PROOF Is New Framework for Canons of Dort

at www.koinoniablog.net/
Note: Perseverance of the saints (what does it mean by persevere? persevere
what, in what, and for what and how? Cf. Eph Ch. 1), unconditional or
condition eternal security of the believer?, "Once saved, always saved"?
https://ebible.com/questions/2327-what-is-perseverance-of-the-saints-and-is-itbiblical
- forgiveness of sins and salvation are accomplished facts on the Cross.
Receiving it does not depend on what a person would do, but on how one
claims it by putting the trust on the Savior. It is an event but only together with
a process of sanctification by the power of Gods Spirit (Eph 1:13-14; Phi 1:6)
in ones on-going personal relationship to Elohim through the Mashiah. (Act
5:32 obedience; Rm 8:28-39; Jn 10:27-30; 6:37-47; 5:24; Jud 24).
*life history vs. *genealogy,
(Gk. genesis; Heb. toledth) in the phrase biblos geneses in Mt 1:1 is mistaken by
most Bible translations and expositors as generations, hence the idea of book of
genealogy [/x: the book of the generation KJV].
It is same word as in Gen 2:4, in which it also does not mean generations but
history to read as the history of the heavens and the earth (as in CJB, AMT,
NWT). (a history NWT); /x: the story MSG, NIrV; /x: the account NET,
NASB, NIV duo, NLT; /x: the generations KJV, ESV trio; /x: origin Lattimore.
As translation word for Mt 1:1 history may give a wrong connotation of
something out of historical records or historical study, hence life-story (
) as rendered in IRENT.
With his Gospel work, he tells it is to be a written-down life history of Yeshua
Messiah which was to be read aloud. It is just that the family lineage of Yosef is
listed from the verse 2 on from Abraham. All the four Gospel books begin with
such a title, introduction, or prologue. When it is read as a genealogy record as
most English Bibles translate, the literary and theological intent of the Evangelist is
completely missed
*history as a scientific disciple, or an aggregate of past events; a record/narrative
of past events; etc. Cf. historiography.

*hand

at the right hand of ~ (Elohim) (ek dexin); /x: on the right hand
of KJV; [Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; 16:19; Lk 22:69; Act 7:55, 56; 2Co
6:7; Heb 1:3]
Cf. (throw the net) to the right side (of a ship) (eis ta dexia) Jn

21:6 /x: on the right side - most

Cf. (crucified) at the right side (eis ek dexin) Mt 27:28

*witnesses

Isa 43:12
0B

I have declared, and deliv

and there was no foreign
for this reason you are my

*yoke

zugos
yoke
Lk 14:19; yokes for oxen;
all others in figurative sense
Act 15:10; places a yoke on the neck of the disciples
Gal 5:1 held in a yoke of slavery [- Law-adherent Cf. Judaizing; legalism]
1Ti 6:1; be under a yoke as slaves
Mt 11:29, 30; Take up [together with me] upon yo the yoke I have put on
myself My load (x: burden) is light.
take the yoke I have on myself > put on my yoke upon you
[It is not a yoke which Yeshua would use on them, as a driver of beasts
of burden, as if it is a comfortably fitting one He finds.]
Cf. suzug (a yoked-fellow Phi 4:3 one who is yoked together with me).
heterozugeo unequally yoke with 2Co_6:14;

*Light; light;

Problem of homonymic light as noun vs. adjective. E.g. ambiguity in

1Jn 1:5 God is light; IRENT has it God is the Light
IRENT capitalized when used in a figurative sense cf. Darkness.

sunlight
lights; luminaries;

*Law; law; *Torah; *Commandments; *commands; orders, instructions;

www.2001translation.com/Laws.html
www.preparingforeternity.com/mosevs10.htm
The word law in the Bible is not same as law in English usage and is used in
different sense. Gk. nomos needs to be differently translated a principle, a rule, a law,
a law system. All the laws (related to religion, esp.) is laws of men. Gods Law (Torah)
as shown in Ten Commandments is different from the Mosaic Law System.

cf. lawless, lawlessness, not-keeping laws; living away from laws of God,
unlawful, illegal. [sin is from lovelessness]
Principles are the basis for God's laws they are the reasons behind His
laws. .... Whereas principles are general guidelines, His laws are the dividing
lines,
Self-righteous religion - guilty of turning the principles into and churning out
laws - laws of men, of church, of religions. All the religious laws of men's law.
Rm 6:14 - not under Law - that is, 'under the system of laws of men' - legalism,
life based on 'keeping laws'?
law vs. law system, rules, laws, regulations: God's law (torah/teaching/guide) as
is shown in Ten Words (Commandments), which is not same as Mosaic Law
(system).
command, decree, laws, regulations; commandments; the Law of God ; "Law of
the kingdom"?
obey the law, keep the law, know the law, follow the rules.
Biblical laws - laws found in the Bible

Gk. nomos;
(1) Torah = [Gods] guiding, instruction, and teaching; Strongs #H8451


; (e.g. walk in the Torah of YHWH Psa 119:1b /x: in the law of
the LORD). (Cf. #6680 to command tsavah; Cf. #H2706 choq statute,
ordinance; #6490 piqqud precept). Torah is gift of Elohim (Jn 1:17; 1Co
9:8). It is the central concept a in the Judaism and its foundation.
[Fathers Word Torah (with His commandments) does not mean law,
ordinances, precepts or statues. It is Fathers loving instructions and
teachings to children.] b
Its extended meanings are the Pentateuch (first five books), the entire TaNaKh
(Hebrew Scripture; Old Testament), and the whole body of Judaic law c and
teachings.
(2) The Law = Pentateuch = Five Books of Mosheh. (as in the English
translation phrase the Law and the Prophets d < the Torah and the
Nebiim) this is what presents Torah in broad sense. [Received by
Mosheh on the Mount Sinai.] e
(3) In the sense of law, the Law of Mosheh (Mosaic Law) (Lk 2:22;
24:44; Jn 7:19, 23; Act 13:39; 15:5; 28:23; 1Co 9:9; Heb 10:28); Law of
the Mashiah (Gal 6:2); law of Adonai (Lk 2:24); the Law of Elohim
(Rm 8:7); law of commandments (Eph 2:15); law of commandment
concerning physical descent (Heb 7:16); law of freedom (Jam 1:25;
2:12); law of righteousness (Rm 9:31); life-giving law of the Spirit (Rm
8:2); Gods law (Rm 7:22, 25); the law belongs to the Judaic people (>
Yehudim) (Act 25:8); [Laws, commands, and regulations - it is given by
Mosheh.
(4) principle rule. law (/principle) of works (Rm 3:27).
72F72F

73F73F

74F74F

75F75F

76F76F

Related Words: Gk. exesti

[Danker p. 133. lit. it is out/open, hence it is
allowable/permitted/right Mt 12:2; 14:4; 22:17; Jn 5:10; Act 8:37 v.l.;
16:21; 21:37; 1Co 6:12; 10:23. The ptc. exon w. or without estin = exesti
Mt 12:4; Act 2:29; 2Co 12:4]
1Co 6:12 /permissible HCSB, NIV, ISV, AUV; /permissible (allowable
Torah as the central concept: Cf. God is not a concept but the ultimate reality in Judaism.
Thoughts on Torah - halakha: http://youtu.be/6kWk6MYwyZM
c
Cf. halakha: a set of religious obligations and civil laws in Judaism
d
The usual phrase the Law and the Prophets is rendered as the Torah and the Nebiim in
IRENT.
e
Cf. mitzvot (mitzvah singl.) In its primary meaning the Hebrew word refers to precepts
and commandments as commanded by God. The word is used in Judaism to refer to 613
commandments (as recorded in Talmud Makkot 23b). In its secondary meaning it refers to a
moral deed performed as a religious duty. As such, the term mitzvah has also come to
express an act of human kindness. The tertiary meaning of mitzvah also refers to the
fulfillment of a mitzvah.
a

and lawful) AMP; /x: permitted ISR, NIrV, MRC,

(JSS); /> allowable TCNT, WNT, Rhm; /x: allowed CLV, GW, GNB,
ERV, NLT, (KRV); /xxx: lawful KJV++, ASV, NET, ESV trio,
NASB, ALT, NWT, HNV, Diagl, Mft; / (KKJV); /xx: I have the
right to do anything, you say TNIV; /xx: We can do anything we want to
CEV; /xx: I may do anything I please GSNT; /xx: As a Christian I may
do anything PNT; /xx: Cf. Just because something is technically legal
doesn't mean that it's spiritually appropriate. MSG (- baloney); /xxx: All
(food) is lawful to me Etheridge; /xx: Every thing is in my power
Murdock; /licent Vulgate; /xx: All things are under my power of choice
to be doing Wuest; /
Gk. entol; (noun): command; commandment.
(v.) entellomai (command, order, charge) (Mt 15:4; Jn 8:5; 10:18, etc.)
Cf. prostass (to order, enjoin, direct; prescribe, appoint; > to command) (Mt 8:4
etc.)
Cf. keleu (to command, order, tell to do) (Mt 14:9, 19, etc.)

[Related words:
diatagma; decree Heb 11:23; Gk.
dogma Lk 2:2; Col 2:14.]
paradosis - tradition [the tradition of the Elders (~ presbuteros) Mt 15:2; Mk 7:3,
5]

As a translation word for entol; commandment is too specific to get

automatically associated with Ten Commandments, while command is too
non-specific and requires to be clarify, e.g. as Gods command, etc.
E.g. Lk 23:56b in obedience to the Ten Words of Elohim Gk. kata tn
entoln; /as the (of Mosheh) commanded; /
E.g. Jn 13:34 (new) command /command JNT, NIV trio, ISR, CEV,
ERV, Mft, GSNT, MSG, /commandment YLT;

Ten Commandments (Heb. aseret hadevarim Ten Words)

Commandment of Christ = Law (torah) of the Mashiah Gal 6:2

A command by Yeshua is only one. Be a follower of me.

- follow Him picking up ones own cross to deny ones own self, which is
lording over and becomes ones Master.

There is not much command to do things from His lips. Only this be a
person who . Not love your neighbor, but rather be you loving your
neighbor, that is, you are to become a person who loves the neighbor. Not
thank, pray, but be a person thanking in everything, a person praying
unceasingly.
[For some examples for rendering *imperatives: See EE here.22]

*canon of the New Testament

Antilegomena
refers to written texts whose authenticity or value is disputed. These were
widely read in the Early Church and included the Hebrews, James, Jude, 2
Peter, 2 and 3 John, and the Apocalypse of John which are in the final list
of the N.T. canon, as well as those not made into the canon.
[Note: From his faulty and theologically-biased understanding of the
Scripture, Luther had a negative view on the four books (Hebrews, James,
Jude, and the Revelation). These were put at the end of his original
translation 1522. Jacob Lucius published in 1596 a Bible at Hamburg
which labeled Luther's four as "Apocrypha".
www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_canon ]
https://bible.org/seriespage/7-bible-holy-canon-scripture
Canonicity of the New Testament
Factors Leading to the Recognition of the New Testament Canon
What were the factors that led to the recognition of a New Testament canon as
we have it today? For almost twenty years after the ascension of Christ none of
the books of the New Testament were even written and about sixty-five years
elapsed before the last New Testament book was written. James was undoubtedly
the first, being written between 45-50 CE, and Revelation was most surely the
last, being written about 90 CE. But several things began to happen that
promoted the formation of the New Testament canon. Enns summarizes these:
(1) Spurious writings as well as attacks on genuine writings were a factor.
Marcion, for example, rejected the Old Testament and New Testament
writings apart from the Pauline letters (he altered Lukes gospel to suit his
doctrine).
(2) The content of the New Testament writings testified to their
authenticity and they naturally were collected, being recognized as
canonical.

(3) Apostolic writings were used in public worship, hence, it was necessary
to determine which of those writings were canonical.
(4) Ultimately, the edict by Emperor Diocletian in CE 303, demanding that
all sacred books be burned, resulted in the New Testament collection.
The Process of Recognition of the New Testament Canon
(1) In the Apostolic Era.
Since the books were inspired when they were written, they were already
canonical and possessed authority as being a part of Gods Word. The
responsibility of the church was simply to attest to the fact of their inspiration.
This process began immediately with the writers recognizing that their own
writings were the Word of God (Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 4:15). But they also
recognized that other writings of the New Testament were Scripture and on a par
with the Old Testament. In 1 Timothy 5:18 Paul quoted Deuteronomy 25:4 and
Luke 10:7 and referred to both passages as Scripture. Peter likewise attested to
Pauls writings as Scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16. Furthermore, the New Testament
epistles were being read and circulated among the churches as authoritative
revelation from God (cf. Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27).
(2) In the Post-Apostolic Era.
Clement of Rome (c. CE 95) mentioned at least eight New Testament books in a
letter; Ignatius of Antioch (c. CE 115) also acknowledged about seven books;
Polycarp, a disciple of John, (c. CE 108), acknowledged fifteen letters. That is
not to say these men did not recognize more letters as canonical, but these are
ones they mentioned in their correspondence. Later Irenaeus wrote (c. CE 185),
acknowledging twenty-one books. Hippolytus (CE 170-235) recognized twentytwo books. The problematic books at this time were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter,
and 2 and 3 John.
Even more important was the witness of the Muratorian Canon (CE 170), which
was a compilation of books recognized as canonical at that early date by the
church. The Muratorian Canon included all the New Testament books except
Hebrews, James, and 3John.
In the fourth century there was also prominent recognition of a New Testament
canon. When Athanasius wrote in CE 367 he cited the twenty-seven books of the
New Testament as being the only true books. In CE 363 the Council of Laodicea
stated that only the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New
Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (CE 393)
recognized the twenty-seven books, and the Council of Carthage (CE 397)
affirmed that only those canonical books were to be read in the churches.70
Ryrie has an important note in connection with Martin Luthers opinion of the
epistle of James.
Sometimes it is claimed that Martin Luther rejected the Book of James as being
canonical. This is not so. Heres what he wrote in his preface to the New
Testament in which he ascribes to the several books of the New Testament
different degrees of doctrinal value. St. Johns Gospel and his first Epistle, St.
Pauls Epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and St.

Peters Epistlethese are the books which show to thee Christ, and teach
everything that is necessary and blessed for thee to know, even if you were never
to see or hear any other book of doctrine. Therefore, St. James Epistle is a
perfect straw-epistle compared with them, for it has in it nothing of an evangelic
kind. Thus Luther was comparing (in his opinion) doctrinal value, not canonical
validity.

www.compellingtruth.org/canon-Bible.html
The process for recognizing and collecting the books of the New
Testament began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early
on, some of the New Testament books were recognized as inspired. Paul
considered Luke's writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament
(1Ti 5:18; see also Deu 25:4 and Lk 10:7). Peter referred to Paul's writings
as Scripture (2Pe 3:15-16).
Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (CE 95).
Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (CE 115). Polycarp,
a disciple of John the apostle, acknowledged 15 books (CE 108). Later,
Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (CE 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books
(CE 170-235).
The first "canon" was the Muratorian Canon, compiled in CE 170, which
included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and
3John. The Council of Laodicea (CE 363) concluded that only the Old
Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New
Testament were to be read in the churches. The Councils of Hippo (CE
393) and Carthage (CE 397) reaffirmed the same 27 books as
authoritative.

www.catholic.com/quickquestions/was-the-canon-of-scripture-determinedbefore-the-church-councils-that-decided-it
The Muratorian Fragment (so-called because it represents only a
portion of the actual second-century document discovered in 1740 by
Lodovico Antonio Muratori), is the oldest extant listing of New
Testament-era books revered by early Christians. It was written
sometime between 155 and 200. Patristic scholars believe the
unknown author originally wrote the list in Greek (since the Latin is
very poor), but the oldest copy available is an eighth-century Latin
manuscript.
Although the Muratorian Fragment is important in studying how the
early Church developed the New Testament canon, it doesn't give
exactly the same list of books that was later adopted as canonical at the
councils of Hippo and Carthage. The Muratorian Fragment is just that:

a fragment of a larger list of books which were considered canonical or

quasi-canonical during the second century.
The Fragment itself provides us with a good, though incomplete idea
of this early canon. Virtually the entire New Testament canon as we
know it is represented: the Gospels of Luke and John (preceded by
what seems to be an allusion to the Gospel of Mark), Acts, 1 & 2
Corinthians, Galatians, Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1
& 2 Thessalonians, Philemon, Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy, Jude, two letters
of John (since the fragment simply says "the two ascribed to John," we
don't know which two of his three letters are meant), and Revelation.
The unknown author adds other non-canonical books to this line- up:
the so-called Pauline Epistles to the Laodiceans and to the
Alexandrians (about which the Fragment's author expresses his
conviction that they were not authored by Paul), the Wisdom Written
by the Friends of Solomon in His Honor, the Apocalypse of Peter, the
Shepherd (written by Hermas). The Fragment's list is cut short
abruptly with a final, enigmatic phrase which may indicate that the
author had gone on to include still other non-inspired writings: "Those
also who wrote the new book of psalms for Marcion, together with
Basilides, the founder of the Asian Cataphrygians." .Although the
Muratorian Fragment lists most of the New Testament books, it's
missing a few (e.g. Matthew, James, 3 John), and it adds several works
which are not inspired. These facts demonstrate that, although the
Fragment came close, it did not represent the actual canon of inspired
Scripture. Further, there is no internal evidence in the document that it
sought to represent any kind of official canon that was regarded by the
Church as binding.
In the first four centuries of the Church many books, such as the seven
letters of Ignatius, the Letter of Clement [the fourth pope] to the
Corinthians, the Didache, and The Shepherd were revered by many
Christians as inspired but were later shown to be non-inspired.
It was not until the Councils of Hippo and Carthage that the Catholic
Church defined which books did and which didnt make it into the
New Testament. Probably the council fathers studied the (complete)
Muratorian Fragment and other documents, including, of course, the
books in question themselves, but it was not until these councils that
the Church officially settled the issue.
The plain fact of the matter is that the canon of the Bible was not
settled in the first years of the Church. It was settled only after
repeated (and perhaps heated) discussions, and the final listing was
determined by Catholic bishops.

*Catholicism

Encyclicals
Reading material The Popes Against Modern Errors: 16 Papal Documents
www.u.arizona.edu/~aversa/modernism/
www.catholic.com/quickquestions/can-the-church-change-its-doctrines
No, the Church cannot change its doctrines no matter how badly some theologians
may want it to or how loudly they claim it can. The doctrines of the Catholic Church
are the deposit of faith revealed by Jesus Christ, taught by the apostles, and handed
down in their entirety by the apostles to their successors. Since revealed truth cannot
change, and since the deposit of faith is comprised of revealed truth, expressed in
Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the deposit of faith cannot change. Satanic message
*covenant vs. *testament; *new covenant; the New Testament

[Testament for OT and NT - an archaic translation word for covenant. The

term Old Testament is retained as a commonly accepted technical term when
it refers to the Hebrew Scripture (of Judaism). The TaNaKh Hebrew Scripture
is the Books of Old Covernant in the sense of the former covenant in contrast
to the New Covenant.]
[new vs. *renewed; neos vs. kain; palaios old; heteros different; allos
another. The New Covenant is not neos but kain; not replacement but
refreshed; not fixed up but renewed. It is the new in Yeshua the Mashiah (Lk
22:20); it is a renewed covenant of YHWH to Israel Jer 31:31-34.][Cf.
Ref. www.tms.edu/m/tmsj10q.pdf ]
Covenant old, new, renewed, former/first
old covenant - 2Co_3:14;
better covenant Heb 7:22;
first one (covenant) Heb 8:7; 9:1, 18
first one ~~ grown old - Heb 8:13 [/x: become obsolete; out of date; etc.]
new covenant - 2Co 3:6; Heb 9:1, 4, 15; 12:24
renewed covenant Heb 8:8
(as) new (one) - Heb 8:13;
first covenant Heb 9:15,

eternal covenant Heb 13:20;

covenant agreement btw two party; in the Scripture it is always enacted

unilaterally by God in behalf of people.

Cf. Covenants in O.T. www.gotquestions.org/Bible-covenants.html

The Adamic Covenant (Gen 3:16-19) with Edenic Covenant

(Gen 1:26-30; 2:16-17)
The Noahic Covenant (Gen 9:8-17)
The Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7:8-16).
The Abrahamic Covenant (cf. Act 3:25; 7:8; Gal 3:16-18)
The Mosaic Covenant (aka Sinai Covenant) (Exo 19-24; Deu
11);
cf. a New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34)

The new of the New Testament and of the New Covenant means new in
Yeshua the Mashiah. It is not another one replacing old one (Mosaic
Covenant), but the renewed one (Cf. Jer 31:31ff; Heb 8:8).
[the words covenant and blood (of Yeshuah) Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk
22:20; 1Co 11:25; Heb 10:29; 12:24; 13:20.
(Covenant and blood in OT setting - Heb 9:18, 20)

a covenant previously ratified by God Gal 3:17

the new covenant (2Co 3:6) vs. the old covenant (2Co 3:14)
the first covenant vs. second one Heb 8:7;
the blood of the covenant (of Yeshua) Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24;
the new covenant in my blood (of Yeshua) Lk 22:20; 1Co
11:25;
the ark of the covenant (of God) Rev 11:29.

contract legally binding arrangement between two or more parties

(Gal 3:15)
testament (1) will (in legal sense); (2) covenant archaic; the
English as extra-biblical word lives on in the name of the books
Old and New Testaments.
Cf. As the translation word agreement is not enough to give to be
the special sense the word covenant has.
Cf. treaty e.g. in Dan 9:27 the prince(ruler) making it with
many.]
A biblical word covenant ( berith Heb; /diathk Gk) is similar
to a human contract but with significant difference: Whereas a human
contract is a bilateral one to be effected upon mutual agreement, a
biblical covenant is, on the other hand, though being between two
parties, completely unilateral with God Himself initiating and with no
counter-amendments on the part of man. It was given as a Gods gracegift to His own elect people to have His will (desire, intent, and purpose)

carried out. Agreement itself does not constitute a covenant. The divine
covenant then is not just of binding terms, but also of promises and
pledges. To translate it as agreement (in CEV, ERV, AUV, and GSNT)
and promise (in GW) shows the translators lack of scholarly
sophistication in the name of easy to read and understand the Gods
Word. KJV and others translated this as testament which is obsolete
and archaic for its original sense of covenant and now used to mean a
will of formal declaration in conjunction with a persons death, and
chiefly used in phrase last will and testament.
The word testament comes come from Latin testamentum, the word by
which the Latin ecclesiastical writers translated the Greek diathk. It is
not used in English in this sense other than in the particular phrase New
Testament (abbr. N.T., or NT) (Gk. , H Kain
Diathk; Heb. Brit Chadashah /Brit Hadasha cf. Jer 31:31). The term
*New Testament; does not appear in the Bible. It is a technical term to
designate the whole of 27 books of the canonical collection and should
not be confused with the Renewed Covenant (so-called New
Covenant, a biblical jargon). The term Old Testament does not belong
to the Bible; the expression H Palaia Diathk is found for the first time
in Melito of Sardis, towards 170 CE.
The New Testament is not same as the Gospel or the Kingdom
Message. A technical term for the collection of books for the New
Covenant or rather the Renewed Covenant. a
7F7F

The Old Testament is a collective technical term for the whole 39 books
of Christian canonical books b. It connotes the translation of the text from
the original language. Hence, TaNaKh c is a more appropriate term to use
when we refer to it especially we are talking about the New Testament, as
N.T. itself does not make any reference to the the term Old Testament
per se.
78F78F

79F79F

[Quote from Sabbath in Christ]

A covenant is simply an agreement or promise between two parties. One
party is the suzerain, or ruling party. The other is the vassal, or ruled party.
The Christian New Testament is a somewhat misleading expression linguistically and
rhetorically. New Testament itself is called so by Christians and in their core of life. E.g. in
Feld and Avraham (2008), Jewish Secrets hidden in the New Testament, p. xv.
b
Cf. Deuterocanonical books regarded as canonical in Roman Catholic and Eastern
Orthodox tradition.
a

Cf. TaNaKh (or Hebrew Bible) vs. OT: TaNaKh (/TaNaKh) was written primarily in Hebrew (a
few short passages in Aramaic). Major differences from Old Testament are (1) the foundational texts,
(2) the total number of biblical books, (3) the arrangement of the categories (divisions) of books, (4)
the categorization of some books, and (5) the titles of some of the books are different. http://catholicresources.org/Bible/Heb-Xn-Bibles.htm

The suzerain-God in the case with Israel -- was the one who dictated the
terms of the covenant. Usually these terms were written out in duplicate so
each party to the covenant had an identical copy much the way a bank
contract is made today. The covenant documents contained the promise
made by the suzerain to the ruled party and the requirements, or obligations,
of the ruled party to the suzerain. The covenant documents contained an
outline of what would happen if the ruled party did not abide by the
covenant obligations: blessings if they kept the covenant; and cursings if
they did not. Each covenant had a sign which was arbitrarily assigned by
the suzerain and placed in the very center of the covenant document and
was unique to that covenant agreement. The ruled party was to keep or
display the sign of the covenant as a symbol of their obedience to the
covenant stipulations. Failure to do so would be considered by the suzerain
a sign of rebellion and called for drastic consequences.
We see, then, that there are five main parts of each covenant:
(1) the promise from the suzerain to the ruled party,
(2) the requirements of the ruled party to the suzerain and
(3) the sign of the covenant.
(4) A list of the blessings that would occur if they were obedient to the
covenant and
(5) a list of the cursings that would come upon them for disobedience to
the covenant stipulations.
All of these were detailed in two identical covenant documents; one for the
suzerain and one for the ruled party.
*Renewed Covenant in Messiah > *New Covenant
Brit Chadasha in Hebrew Jer 31:31.
H Kaine Diathk in Greek Lk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6; Heb 8:8; 9:15; 12:24;
[Cf. Heb 8:13]

The meaning of the New Covenant can become clear only from out of the Torah
of TaNaKh (not as Old Testament), not from within the New Testament itself.
The Gospels themselves do not belong to the N.T. Dispensation, which was
ushered only after the coming of Gods spirit poured on during the Shavuot (again,
not Christian Pentecost) in Acts Ch. 2.
[For the meaning of the words (renewed; covenant) and Scriptural basis of
understanding the Covenannt. See Appendix On Covenant.]

*Shabbat vs. Lords Day:

Mosaic Covenant details on keeping Shabbat (> *Sabbath) in Ten

Commandments and how Israel should keep it, though the Shabbat keeping itself
is based on Gods creation order, therefore applying to the whole of humanity. It is
God-given rest for celebrating Gods creation on the seventh day of the lunar
week, which is not same as Saturday.
On the other hand, the Lords Day (a church jargon) is the day of celebration of
Lords Resurrection. In Constantine Catholic Church tradition, it is on Sunday, the
first day of the Gregorian solar week. [Cf. Didache Sec. 14 on the Lords own
day ; Cf. Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, Ch. IX The day of the
preparation, then, comprises the passion; the Sabbath embraces the burial the
Lord's Day contains the resurrection.]
It is unrelated to Rev 1:10 the Lords day and Day of Judgment in 2Pe 3:10
LORDs Day; 2Pe 3:12 Day of Elohim
Thus Shabbat and Lords day are two different days. [This point is unrelated to the
issue of whether or not one should keep Shabbat; or whether Sunday is to be
considered to be Sabbath of Christians.]

*Culture

Related words: world culture ethics Christedom Christianity Church

Religion
Niebuhr's typology five types of Christian cultural engagement: "Christ
Against Culture"; "The Christ of Culture"; "Christ Above Culture": "Christ and
Culture in Paradox"; and "Christ Transforming Culture."
Ref:
http://forchristandculture.com/2011/07/21/theology-culture-part-1introduction/
http://forchristandculture.com/2011/08/19/theology-culture-2-paradigms/
H. Richard Neibuhr (1951), Christ and Culture
http://regenerationayk.wordpress.com/2008/01/17/christ-and-culture-byrichard-niebuhr-book-summary/
Craig Carter (2006), Rethinking Christ and Culture - A Post-Christendom
Perspective
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/may/29.68.html?paging=off
Carlson (2012), Christ and Culture, Revisited
www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/octoberweb-only/14221.0.html?paging=off

*paradigm shift; philosophy of science

www.academia.edu/10303182/The_Origin_of_the_Byzantine_Text_New_Pers
pectives_in_a_Deadlocked_Debate quoted from p. 58.

4.1. KUHNS THEORY OF PARADIGM SHIFTS

Kuhn defined paradigms as universally recognized scientific achievements that
for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners.
This paradigm shapes the basis of normal science, which means that subsequent
research is (and ought to be) based upon that commonly received paradigm. A
paradigm is usually sufficiently open-ended to leave all sorts of problems to be
solved. When more and more results come to light that are contradictory to the
paradigm, a scientific revolution can get started. In this period, the old paradigm is
rejected, and a new paradigm (or paradigms) is (are) proposed [=paradigm shift],
until there is enough consensus to accept a new paradigm as a basis for further
research. It speaks for itself that such a revolution is always accompanied by
controversies. It is important to note that the new paradigm is incompatible with
the older one. Although Kuhns use of paradigms is somewhat cloudy, it will
provide a useful instrument for our analysis.

Cf. Hegelian dialectics thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.

*useless ; worthless; unworthy;

Afraid to face useless death in your life? Dont live useless life.
*all; *every; *many; *any; *whole

Gk. pas; holos; all, every, (the) whole, all sorts of, every kinds of
(Mt 10:1 of disease, infirmity - - /every sorts of NWT; /every kind of; /all
kinds of; /x: all manner of - ASV);
Cf. total; sum; cf. parts
many vs. the many:
Mt 20:28; to give His life for many
Mt 26:28; blood which is shed for many for the remission of sins
the many vs. all: Is the many used to mean precisely as many, but not all?
Esp. in the followings: [Note: These verses do not concern about resurrection or
universal/general resurrectin, but justification (righteousness and Life eternal).
[Cf. universalism doctrine.]
Rm 5:12, 18; all men (eis pas anthrpous)
Rm 5:15, the many (hoi polloi) be dead ~~grace abounded to many
Rm 5:19 the many were made sinners/righteous

<<Leupold argues at some length that many means as a matter of fact in this
passage all.
While in some cases all may also be many; but in some cases many is not all.
From Walvrood (1971), Dainel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. p. 289>>

*alliteration

Alliteration is Awesome Xidnaf

Alliteration with E - *e-words: eductation, entertainment, economy, ecology,
energy are the balls Satan playing in its hands.
P-words Power of the people, by the people and for the people has turned
into Populace of the power, by the power and for the power
false, farce, fake, fraud, etc.
How Shameful are all Shameless!
[Heaven, Hope, Home vs. Heaven and Hell] h-alliteration
Christ, Cross, Church of Western Christianity

*economy; *wealth vs. *capital; *capitalism; market-driven; *labor;

redistribution; economic freedom;

economic inequality capitalism

Chartier and Johnson (edit, 2011 ), Markets Not Capitalism - Individualist

Anarchism against Bosses. (1st ch.)

Ayn Rand (1967), Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (laissez-faire

capitalism)
[Was Ayn Rand Right? Capitalism and Greed
www.equip.org/PDF/JAF1324.pdf ]

Thomas Piketty (2013), Capital in the Twenty-First Century

(2014. Trans. by Arthur Goldhammer)
http://youtu.be/7TLtXfZth5w
( www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674430006 for
introduction, online)
(www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2014/05/01/six-ways-thomas-pikettyscapital-isnt-holding-up-to-scrutiny/
www.newrepublic.com/article/117429/capital-twenty-first-centurythomas-piketty-reviewed )

*mammon; (wealth; *riches); *rich vs. poor ones

mammon (Mt 6:24 //Lk 16:13 personified;) Also Lk 16:9, 11] [transliterate of Aramaic
word (wealth or riches). [Hebrew money, wealth as in Hebrew Mishna Nashim Ktuvot 3:2
corresponding to Exo 21:22. In Aramaic other than mammon was used for money. Hamp,
Language of Jesus pp.64-65.]/> wealth; /worldy wealth Webb; [different nuance btw

money bank account bottom line wealth worldly weath prosperity]; /x: money-god;

[ARJ what wealth represents - From: Aramaic: riches, money, wealth; material
possession.] [mammon representing what we all pursue for pleasure and power. The sense is
much more than that is suggested by English word wealth or even money Cf. wealth as an
essential for human activity and by itself does not have anything evil.] [It became to represent a
deity legend mediaeval or before. - Milton, Peter Lombard
www.newadvent.org/cathen/09580b.htm : ]
[Masters and Means: Everything which everyone has and sees in the world and in their mind,
all is either masters or means to them; or comes as masters or means. E.g. money, family,
government, organization, ideologies, ideas, religions, professions, jobs, possessions,
happiness, enlightment, wisdom, etc. If they are means, as they should be, they are for Gods
glory, to use and to take care of. As to people, to love.]
[mammon which belongs to the world system is the great rival of God for the devotion and
service from men. All must choose between the road of self-assertion that leads to the temple
of mammon and the road of self-sacrifice that leads to the temple of God. the Pharisses
did tent, with ample justification from the O.T., to rgard prosperity, or at least their own
prosperity, as the reward of godliness. Caird p. 188.]
Note: in N.T. *rich is uses as to persons of socio-economically well-to-do and wealthy class.
Only a few places in other senses figuratively: rich in faith Jam 2:5; rich toward God (< in
Gods sight) - Lk 12:21; Cf. 1Ti 6:18 ploute to be rich to be abundant]
*poor Cf. the poor ones of God Mt 5:3; see in Appendix and foonote material G-Mt the
problem of traditional translation and interpretion the poor in the spirit, disregarding //Lk 6:20 which
does not have this phrase t pneumati. Also Lk 4:18; 7:22];

*burden; *load

Mt 11:30 the load to carry along with me; /xx: my burden most, Danker!
Gal 6:2 load (baros) a weight that has to be carried
Gal 6:5 burdens (phortion) a weight that is to be borne; can be relieved or
transferred. [It is as I prove and bear my own burden that I am best able to
help bear someone elses burden, and the more I do the former (bearing
my own burden?), the more I will desire to do the latter (helping bear
others burdens?). John Lynn.]

*collusion; go with the flow

compromise and colloborate, keep eyes blind to others; sin of omission; sin of
indifference; ignoring the reality (cf. ignoring vs. ignorance).
misunderstand something ( - labeling tone); vs. lacking (full) understanding;

*hope

1Co 13:13- faith, hope and love

Among all the words in the Bible hope is wimpiest?
How is it different from our wishes, things we hope for (every day), etc.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow - Albert Einstein
Cherish your past, dream your tomorrow, but live your today
keep vs. observe vs. celebrate (festival/shabbat);

Easter, Christmas, (Halloween) non-bibilical jargon of Constantine Catholic

Churchianity tradition.

*sacred; *holy; set-apart, consecrated, undefiled *pious; *devout; saints; [see

] *divine; sacrosanct;

*Holy: When God created, over what He created He declared good. Over the
groundlings (human beings) created after His own image, He declared very
good. However, there is always the wholly otherness of God. Otherwise, God
would not be God. *Holiness is in Gods being different from the creation, in
character and in essence. However, holiness is not an essence, but being holy in
that His being different and separate from His work of creation. It is simply an
adjective, a descriptive term. It is that things belonging to God is set apart from
things of non-God, or things from God. The Spirit of God is holy since it is
from God, is the holy Spirit.
Divine as pertaining to God-being is intrinsic to God. Syn. with belonging to
God.
[See *saints in Walk through the Scripture #2 Names, Persons, and People]

consecrated ones Cassirer, IRENT; /> saints most [now church catholic
jargon]
(sing.) 1Pe 1:15; Act 7:33; Rm 11:16 (< set-apart); Mt 7:6 (< sacred)
Rm 7:12 law is holy; 1Co 3:17 Mishkan is holy
(pl.) Heb 1:16; 1Co 7:14; Rev 15:4; - most renders as holy but unfit. The
English word holy is now a church jargn with sense of morally pure]

*divine; *divinity, divineness, *deity, divine being, God/god; god-being; godhead;

what God is (/x: what God was NET Jn 1:1c).
divine the meaning, sense, usages of the term. Word phrases d. nature, d.
essence; d. power, d. person, d. things, d. objects, d. ideas.
Cf. divine person does not necessarily mean to be non-human.
Cf. problem of Jesus being a divine person, at the expense of being a human
person in Trinitarian thought.
Others Covered in WB#3
*heaven and earth;

[s. below for * paradise]

A biblical jargon. In N.T. (Mt 24:35; //Mk 13:32; //Lk 21:33; Mt 5:18) the phrase is
the heavens and the earth, except one place in Mt 28:18 authority given to me
in heaven and on earth(with the heavens has nothing to do with sky unlike in
Gen 1:1 where sky is a correct sense in the creation narration)
Concordance of the phrase heaven + earth: [Note: heaven and hell is a very
common pseudo-religious merism, not just of Christiarisms. The heaven and
hell belief is a very common un-biblical belief found among various
Christianisms, which include Messianic Jews. Heaven and hell teaching as a
human teaching par excellence. Heaven or hell in the Bibile is NOT a place
people may visit (as in near-death experiences) or may go and end up in there
after death. Hell is taken out of KJV translation word for something which
has nothing to do with hell, under-ground goal, (guarded by demons?),
torment torture place, etc. [See for the unbiblical hell-fire preaching and
theology.]
Mt 5:18; 11:25; 24:35; Mk 13:31; Lk 10:21; 16:17; 21:33 the heavens and the earth
Act 17:24 (Lord of) of heaven and earth
Eph 3:15 in heaven and on earth
Rev 21:1 a new heaven and a new earth the former heaven and the former earth
2Pe 3:13 new heavens and a new earth
A new heaven and a new earth of the Renewed Covenant;
The former (old) heaven and the former earth of the Old Covenant;
Cf. Heb 8:13
In OT heaven and earth
Exo_20:11; Exo_31:17; Deu_4:26; Deu_30:19; Deu_31:28; 2Sa_18:9; 2Ki_19:15; 2Ch_2:12;
Ezr_5:11;
Psa_69:34; Psa_115:15; Psa_121:2; Psa_124:8; Psa_134:3; Psa_146:6; Isa_37:16; Jer_23:24;
Jer_33:25;

the heaven and the earth Gen 1:1

the heavens and the earth
Gen_14:19; Gen_14:22; Joe_3:16;
New heavens and a new earth Isa_65:17; 2Pe_3:13;
The new heavens and the new earth Isa_66:22

Heaven in the Scripture is not a place to go; nor a place for some people go
after death it is a religious jargon rooted in deistic pagan thinking. Often
confused with paradise or nirvana of Buddhism.
The heavens in G-Mt (other than the Kingdom of the Heavens)
Mt 3:16 the heavens were opened
Mt 5:12 reward is great in the heavens
Mt 5:45; 6:1, 9; 7:11, 21; 10:32, 33; 16:17 Father who is in the heavens
Mt 16:19 thing loosed in the heavens
Mt 24:29 the powers of the heavens
Mt 24:31 one extremity of the heavens
Mt 24:36 the angels of the heavens
the Kingdom of the Heavens (x 31 verses) only in G-Mt
3:2; 4:17; 5:3; 5:10, 19, 20; 7:21; 8:11; 10:7; 11:11, 12; 13:11, 2, 31, 33, 44, 45 47, 52;
16:19; 18:1, 3, 4, 23; 19:12, 14, 23; 20:1; 22:2; 23:13; 25:1;

Arthrous singular:
Mt 11:23 exalted to the heavn;
Mt 12:5 Lord of the heaven;
Mt 21:25 from heaven or from men;
Mt 22:30 angels ~ in heaven
Mt 23:22 swear by the heaven
Mt 24:29 fall from the heaven
Mt 24:30 clouds of the heaven
Unarthrous singular in very few places
Mt 6:10 in heaven ~ upon the earth;
Mt 6:20; 19:21 treasure in heaven in the sense of heavenly;
Mt 6:26; 8:20 birds of heaven in the sense of in the sky;
Mt 28:2 descend from heaven

In Gospels:
Plural heavens (x49 in G-Mt); x5 in G-Mk and x4 inG-Lk
(Cf. singular heaven x30 in G-Mt; x13 in G-Mk; x29 in G-Lk)
Mk 1:10, 11; 11:25; 12:25; 13:25;
Lk 10:20; 12:33; 18:22; 21:26;

[Cf. the heaven is always in singular in Revelation the heaven ~ the earth
and the earth ~ the heaven:
the earth and the heaven fled away Rev 20:11;
in the heaven and on the earth Rev 5:3, 13;
out of the heaven to the earth Rev 9:1; 13:13;
created the heaven ~ and the earth Rev 10:6; 14:7;
the earth and the heaven fled away Rev 20:11;
a new heaven and a new earth Rev 21:2.
the former heaven and the former earth Rev 21:2.]

*paradise;

In LXX the translators appropriately used the term paradise (paradeisos) for
Hebrew gan H1588 with reference to the garden in Eden (Gen 2:8ff). a After
the account in Genesis, Scripture texts that tell about paradise refer to (1) the
garden of Eden itself, or (2) the earth as a whole when it will be transformed in
the future to a condition like that of Eden, or (3) flourishing spiritual conditions
among Gods servants on earth, or (4) provisions in heaven that remind one of
Eden. [needs to verify]
91F91F

In GNT the paradise occurs three times - Lk 23:43 (will be in the

paradise[/> paradise; /Paradise]); Rev 2:7 (in the midst of the paradise of my
Elohim); 2Co 12:4 (into a paradise; Cf. third heaven in v. 2);. In particular
the text in G-Lk is often misunderstood to fit ones own unbibilical doctrinal
and theological presupposition and preconception.
[Common misconception - it is a place next to hell in Hades; it is a place in
heaven; it is a heaven, etc. all for a place one may go after death. Cf.
heaven and earth as a place concept where people end up after death. Note
there is no spatial or locative idea in the spiritual realm what is relevant and
meaningful is not a place or a location, but state, condition, and relation. When
a believer in Mashiah dies, it is not a place somewhere to end up, but to come
into the presence of Him, face-to-face not looking for some sort of
[Also used in LXX to translate Hebrew pardes H6508. Neh 2:8 forest; Ecc 2:5; SoS 4:13
orchard]
a

accumulated reward in store, or do living better life as we would, but looking

for live in communion with people.]
Church jargon - the abode of righteous souls after death in connection with
unscriptural pagan idea of soul immortality. Scripturally it may be also used
figuratively as a sort of spiritual paradise.
Outside its biblical usage, it denotes any place of blss, delight and peace (with
pleasure). Syn. Nirvana (in Buddhism among Eastern religions it is the
ultimate goal of the spiritual path without connected to idea of immortality),
Shangri-La (a fictional valley in the 1933 novel Lost Horizon by James Hilton).
www.shalomalyisrael.org/files/Pardes.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardes_%28Jewish_exegesis%29
P [Peshat] literal, simple BREADTH
R [Remez] parable, allegory LENGTH
D [Derash] seek, search DEPTH
S [Sod] inner, mystical HEIGHT
- Jewish exegesis on acronym
*Paradise in Lk 23:43 and punctuation problem

Paradise and other related expressions in N.T.:

Lk 16:22
2Co 12:1-5
Rev 2:7
Rev 22:2
Rev 21:2
Jn 14:2
Acts 2:31
Cf. Eph 4:8

the bosom of Abraham (See below for details on it).

the third heaven
Tree of Life in paradise
along both sides of the river, there was the tree of life
New Jerusalem
Yeshua preparing a place for us in it.
Hades
He ascended to the highest place (ISV)

Cf. Concepts and ideas often confusingly mixed up Gk. Hades (Sheol in
Heb.); Paradise; Heaven; a place to go after death; hell (church jargon),
etc. Common religious jargon go to heaven is in the sense of paradise.
QQ: How does Paradise mesh into the fact and faith of Resurrection?

Dismembered soul into Paradise?

How do we put Paradise together with resurrection? What does it mean if we
say Jesus is to be in Paradise after death?

The text in its original word-phrase order:

23:43 [Gk. word order]

Amen to you Im saying today with me youll be in the Paradise.

[IRENT - How to read the text with phrase-breaks to bring out its sense
without introducing un-biblical imagery:
Yes, to you Im saying
today
[construed to say in Hebrew idiom; same nuance as I tell
you now]
[that] a with me [in the figurative sense as God with us (Immanuel).]
92F92F

you shall be in the Paradise

[+ when I shall reign as King].

The preceding v. 42 when Yeshua comes in His kingdom (= Himself reigns

as King) tells that to be in the Paradise cannot be on that very day but in
the future. When He died on the Cross on that day His Kingdom was yet to
come (Lk 11:2; 19:11; 1Co 11:26; 1Th 4:13-17; 1Co 15:23, 49-52) as He
was waiting for Resurrection power of Elohim.
Copied from EE:
23:43 Yes! Im saying to you today that with me ~~ [+ when I shall reign as King]
[amen soi leg smeron met emou es en t paradeis]
that with me [The word that is found in several translations];
/Yes I say ~~ - ARJ; /I say to thee to-day with me that thou shall be Burkitt (fr.
Syriac); /(comma) That this day thou Murdock (a Syriac version has that after the

phrase with me); [Im telling you the truth today an Hebrew idiom] [Corresponding to
v. 42b.][ Most English translations follows the WH text with a comma placed before the
word. Only a few, such as NWT, Rhm, CLV, Diaglott and ISR, do read with a break after
the word today. To keep the word today construed to say anaphorically so that
unbiblical kataphorical reading of most English translations is avoided, IRENT has inserted
an EM dash and added a word that placed before with me. Thus, Yeshuas statement was
a giving of assurance to the repentant criminal that in the Kingdom to come he shall be
found himself in the Paradise in resurrection Life. [The expression to be in the Paradise
does not mean to go to Paradise.] It is not about a proof text for the fastidious unbiblical
doctrine on after-death, involving such things as soul-immortality (of Greek religion) and
two partitions of Hades (into Paradise and Hell), etc. with de facto negation of resurrection.]
in the paradise [cf. 2Co 12:4; Rev 2:7. Also in LXX as translation of the word
garden as in Gen 2: & 3:.] [= Bosom of Abraham (Lk 16:22) Alford]; /the Garden of
Eden Burkitt (trans. of an Aramaic verion); /in paradise most; /in Paradise ASV,
BBE, LITV; /

I say to you (< Im saying; Im telling) 136x in the Gosples only in Yeshuas voice:
[I say to YOU (pl. leg humin 122x); I say to you (singl. leg soi 14x) (Mt 5:26; 16:18;
26:34; Mk 5:41; 14:30; Lk 7:14, 47; 12:59; 23:43; Jn 3:3, 5, 11; 3:38; 21:18.)]

Cf. F. Crawford Burkit (1904), EVANG ELION DA-M EPHARRESHE (parallel with Syriac): I say
to thee to-day that with me thou shalt be in the Garden of Eden. with a footnote on with me: that
{before 'with')] C Aa 266; before 'to-day' ; S Ab 266: Cf. He swore to him with me... A 437.
a

today the day Yeshua died and entombed and two rebels died and thrown down to the
valley of Hinnom (cf. GeHinnom GeHenna). To be in the paradise cannot be on the
same day.

Compare with a typical English translation -Weymouth

I tell you in solemn truth, replied Jesus,
that this very day
you shall be with me in Paradise.
Again, the following reading which gives an erroneous picture should be
avoided:
Truly I tell you that
[I shall be] in Paradise today,
[and] you shall be [also] there with me.

[to be in the Paradise is not to go to the Paradise]

(See below for Alfords commentary for this line of non-sensical
interpretation, as well as an article to refute it.)
Ref. Graeser et al, Is There Death After Life? (2004 5th Ed.
www.CESonline.org) p. 91.
www.truthortradition.com/articles/what-was-jesus-really-saying-to-the-malefactorin-luke-2343

Luke 23:39-43 (Paradise today)

Luke 23:42 and 43 is often used to teach that the penitent malefactor who
believed in Jesus immediately went to heaven when he died (even though
the verse in question reads paradise). However, the phrase in v. 43, I tell
you the truth today, was a common Hebrew idiom used to emphasize the
solemnity and importance of an occasion or moment (compare Deu 4:26, 39,
40; 5:1; 6:6; 7:11, Jos 23:14). Recognizing this idiom and properly
punctuating the verse with the comma after the word today, we see that
Jesus meaning is clearly future, to be fulfilled when he comes again and
establishes his kingdom on earth.
Thus the verse should read as follows:<Jesus answered him, I tell you the
truth today, you will be with me in paradise.>
Also, the word paradise is preceded by the article the and therefore refers
biblically to the place of beauty on earth described in Genesis 2, lost in

Genesis 3, that will be restored by the Lord Jesus Christ when he returns to
earth (see Rev 22:1-3). (For more information on paradise, see the note on
Ecc 2:5, page 908; and Appendix 173 in The Companion Bible, edited by
E.W. Bullinger.)
Not only did the penitent malefactor not go to paradise that day (unless
one believes pagan soul-immortality with a dismembered spirit/soul
wandering around after death), neither did Jesus Christ. As stated earlier,
he died and spent the next three days and three nights in the tomb (grave),
while both criminals were thrown down to GeHinnom.
See the Appendix in this file for various fanciful commentaries on the verse.
Lk 16:22 bosom of Abraham
Lk 16:22 the bosom [position by the side] of Abraham [only once here in N.T.]

Gk. kolpos (bosom, lap): (bosoms in v. 23) Abrahams side (NIV, ESV),
next to Abraham (CEV), with Abraham (NLT), and the arms of Abraham
(NCV).
[i.e. in very close relationship with. E.g. Jn 13:23; 21:20 (of Yeshua during a meal
reclining on the couch); Jn 1:18 (the Son in the bosom of the Father)]
Cf. Mt 23:6 (places of honor in the banquet).
Cf. Mt 8:11 "many will come from both east and west and will take their places in the
[Mashiahn] banquet alongside with Abraham and Yitzchak and Yaakob, in the
Kingdom of the Heavens:"

Ref: www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/362-abraham-s-bosom
[JFB: the bosom of Abraham: This is a phrase taken from the practice of reclining at
meals, where the head of one lay on the bosom of another, and the phrase, therefore,
denotes intimacy and friendship. See the notes at Mt 23:6. Also Jn 13:23; 21:20. The
Jews had no doubt that Abraham was in paradise. To say that Lazarus was in his
bosom was, therefore, the same as to say that he was admitted to heaven and made
happy there. The Jews, moreover, boasted very much of being the friends of Abraham
and of being his descendants, Mt 3:9. To be his friend was, in their view, the highest
honor and happiness. Our Saviour, therefore, showed them that this and afflicted man
might be raised to the highest happiness, while the rich, who prided themselves on
their being descended from Abraham, might be cast away and lost forever.]

the bosom of Abraham

= called Paradise by the Jews Alford; [position of great honor (his side; close to)]
the bosom, the place of honor at the feast, - BDAG, SourceNT fn; /
QQ The following needs to be verified and substantiated:

An expression in the oral traditions of the Jewish Rabbi's for the state of bliss after death.
Ancient rabbinical writings generally divide Sheol into two sections - the pleasant section,
called 'Abraham's bosom' by the ancient rabbis, is the place of the righteous souls; while the
rest of Sheol is the place for LIMITED retribution for the deeds done on the earth. According
to the ancient rabbis, Sheol is only a temporary keeping place of the souls, until the time of
resurrection, and 'Abraham's bosom' was NEVER confused with heaven, and the place of
retribution in Sheol was very different from today's concept of hell. This is the afterlife picture
of the ancient Rabbinical Judaism, as well as that of the New Testament and the early century
Christianity (with the Hebrew word 'Sheol' translated into the Greek word 'Hades').
www.skepticfiles.org/atheist/sheolxin.htm in the Jewish Talmud for Heaven McArthur
www.mark-shea.com/dake.html Abraham's bosom" is also an expression of the Talmud for
the state of bliss after death. In reality, the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man it is not
"about" prayer to the dead, but about the refusal of Jesus' contemporaries to listen to their own
Law and consciences. The point of the parable is not "prayer to the dead is futile" but "hard
hearts will not be impressed even by the greatest miracle." That said, the parabolic nature of the
text should not distract us from the fact that it does reflect some real aspects of Jewish tradition
belief in the communion of saints begins to emerge in Jewish writings (2Macc 7; 12:38-45;
15:11-16)."Abraham's bosom" is a metaphor for "heaven". The term is used by Josephus
(Discourse concerning Hades), and can also be found in the Talmud (Kiddushin 72b).
www.torah.org/qanda/seequanda.php?id=899

*preach vs. proclaim

preach the Gospel (1Co 9:16, 18) a KJV style jargon; /< proclaim the
gospel LEB, LITV; /proclaim good news YLT; /declare the good new NWT; /bring the Good News ISV; /announce ABP; /spread- GW; / tell
ERV; vs. preach the good news; /preach the Good News WNT; /preach
gospel NET; /
Cf. preach on people for adominition etc.
*prophesize, *prophet

prophet, prophesy, prophesize is not about predicting of future events but

preaching on to people for their thoughts and acts, to deliver Gods
prouncement. prophets in the Scripture corresponds preachers in church
jargon (not pastors who gives out sermons.)
*world; cosmos; universe; system of things; world order; aeon;

ain - /world order; /age (problem with word picture the length of life span rather than
a distinct perio of history, etc.); /x: world, /*aeon; /?: system of things (NWT x27
problematic because it might easily to bring word association with concrete things of
object, material, etc. instead of all the phenomena.); [Danker p. 12 (1) ages ago Lk 1:70;
Jn 9:32; eternity Jn 6:51, 58; Jn 2:17. Pl. Lk 1:33; Rm 1:25; forevermore Gal 1:5; - (2) a
segment of exnteded time age (present) Mt 13:22; Lk 16:8; Rm 12:2 ; (future) Mk 10:30;
Lk 20:35; Heb 6:5 (3) the world as spatial entity world 1Ti 1:7; Heb 1:2 (4) Aean

Eph 2:2; perh. Col 1:26; Eph :3:9]

kosmos, world, universe [Danker p. 206 (1) adornment -1Pt 3:3. (2) the entire cosmic
order including the earth universe, world Mt 25:34; Jn 17:5, 24; Act 17:24; Rm 1:20; 1Co
8:4; Eph 1:4; 2:2; 1Pt 1:20; Rev 13:8; 17:8. (3) planet earth as microcom world Mt 4:8;
Mk 14:9, etc. (4) inhabitants of the earth, world a. humans in general Mt 5:14; 13:38,
18:7; Jn 1:29; 3:16,, 17bc, etc. b. a segment of humankind, freq. viewed as outsiders
relative to another segment Jn 7:4, 7; 12:31, etc.

World (in existential sense, not physical and metaphysical, of the created beings in the
bilogial and things of physical domani) refers to cultural milieu and political systems.
Metonymically, (1) humanity in such a world (which is often oppressed by political powers
and swept away (going with the flow) of culture which has divorced from the Creator (e.g.
Jn 3:16), and (2) scheme, system, and spirit of fashion, culture, and ideas as well as
religions (e.g. 1Jn 2:15)
The endless End of the World The Bible nowhere says the world will end; but it will
remain for aeons. The End of the World is used often religious jargon. Many confuse the
Parousia (coming and being present) of the Son-of-man with their pagan idea of the end of
the world, with fantasy and confabulation. They love to read the former heaven and the
former earth with catastrophic destruction of the literal physical world of the planet Earth
and heaven and then unbelievable replenished with a new heaven and a new planet!!
sunteleia - consummation, completion not end;
ain - eons, ages not world.
an end of the ~ (sunteleia tou ainos Mt 13:39) ,
in the end of the ~ (en t sunteleia tou ainos Mt 13:49),
until the end of the ~ (hes ts sunteleia tou ainos Mt 28:49)
at the end of the ~ (epi sunteleia tn ainn Heb 9:26) (+kosmos world)

Cf. 1Co 7:31 this world (kosmos) in the present form is passing away.
Cf. 1Pe 4:7 the end of all things is at hand ,
Cf. Mt 24:14 the end will come [+ with the Fall of Yerusalem for the former
dispensation] [Gk. telos end, goal, final point]

NWT x 27: system of things. Cf. world 150 verses found, 185 matches
Mt_12:32; 13:22, 39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20; Mk 4:19; 10:30; Lk_16:8; 18:30; 20:34,
35; Rm_12:2; 1Co_1:20; 2:6 (x2); 2:8; 3:18; 2Co_4:4; Gal_1:4; Eph_1:21; 2:2;
1Ti_6:17; 2Ti_4:10; Tit_2:12; Heb_6:5;

World
168 verses found, 203 matches NET;
203 verses found, 242 matches - KJV
191 verses found, 228 matches ASV
166 verses found, 202 matches - LITV

Jn 3:16 Elohim loved [people in] the world /x: people of the world (=
those belonging to the world culture and system of things)
eis tous aina /forevermore - /forever; /x: for ever (KJV); / eis tous ainas tn ainn - /forever and ever; /x: fore ever (KJV) Gal 1:5;
Phi 4:20; Heb 13:21; 1Pe 5:11; 2Pe 3:18; Rev 1:6; 4:9, 10; 5:13; 7:12; 10:6;

11:15; 15:7; 19:3; 20:10; 22:5

eis ainas ainn Rev 14:11;
tou ainos tn ainn - for ever and ever Eph 3:21;
aaa
Used frequently with life(44x) variously as life eternal, eternal
life, life everlasting, everlasting life:
Mat 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Luk 10:25; 18:18, 30;
Jn 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2, 3;
Act 13:46, 48; Rom 2:7; 5:21; 6:22, 23;
Gal 6:8; 1Ti 1:16; 6:12, 19;
Tit 1:2; 3:7; 1Jn 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jud_1:21;

Other phrases:
7. tin olethron ainion (pay eternal ~) 2Th 1:9. [olethros destruction, ruin,
disaster 1Co 5:5 (of flesh); 1Th 5:3; 1Ti 6:9 (eis olethron kai apleian)]
8. eis kolasin ainion (into eternal ~) Mt 25:46 [kolasis punishment 1Jn
4:18]
9. puros ainiou (~ fire) Jud 7
10. the eternal kingdom 2Pe 1:11
11. ~ paraklsis (consolation 2Th 2:16
12. Covenant Heb13:20; chain Jud 1:16; gospel Rev 14:6; (weight of) glory
2Co 4:17; 2Th 2:10; 1Pe 5:10; judgment Heb 6:2; salvation Heb 5:9;
deliverance Heb 9:23; spirit Heb 9:14; inheritance Heb 9:15

*circumcision; Heb. *brit-milah

Gk. peritomn; peritom

Brit-milah A circumcision-rite in Judaic practice performed on a boy at age
8 day. IRENT renders Greek expression with this Hebrew word.
As ut serves as one of the few ethnic boundary markers for Israelites (along
with shabbat keeping on 7th day of the lunar week).
To translate simply as circumcise and circumcision is problematic since
the English word is a term for a minor surgical procedure, which gives a
totally different word picture and association. IRENT tries to make it clear
with circumcision-rite give or recive circumcision-rite. Often it is used in
Pauline rhetoric in his Epistles metonymically for peole of circumcison vs.
uncircumcision [Rm 2:25, 26, 27, 28, 29; 3:1; 4:10, 11; 12; 1Co 7:18, 19;
Gal 5:6, 11; 6:15; Eph 2:11; Phi 3:3; Col 2:11; 3:11; Tit 1:10].

*memory, *remember, memorial

Remember, recall, remembrance,

Forget, forgettable,
We forget that we have forgotten. The (walking) dead do not know they are
dead. We often dont remember who we really are. Do we know who we
really are? Do we know where we are?
Amnesia
https://youtu.be/ipD_G7U2FcM (Clive Wearing Living Without Memory) TV
documentary Equinox: Prisoner of Consciousness (1986). Directed by
Jonathan Miller.
https://youtu.be/LX8xJAmL0GI (The Man With The 7 Second Memory ITV1)
(a follow up. 2005) DeborahWearing (2005), Forever Today A memoir of
love and amnesia
*Dark side of reality; Dark side of soul

adj. evil, bad, wicked; immoral, unethical, unlawful

[ evil things/thoughts/acts/people; an evil ~ ]

noun evil (with no article) evilness (in contrast to goodness)

As with any word or term which we come across in the Bible, we do need
study from the start with what the word means in English (usage), including
etymology and equivalent words in different languages, before we can go
further in questions, such as where is evil from? If God, why evil? If no
evil, why Satan, or even God? Is it from outside as if from Satan (devil made
me do it)? Or is to from inside out of our human reality? Why evil has to be
projected out and be ascribed to exteral force, power, or spirt, or even a certain
kind of being (e.g. demon)?
evil
*Love (agape); love

[Concept a state of relation or an act. Sharing ones own space to have spaces
expand in creating work. Not related to Attraction Affection Admiration
Attachment (cf. addiction), such as in male-female relation. Gods love is for
creation and care with mercy and justice.] (A- alliteration)
Gk. agap (n.) agapa (v).
This is a book-length topic. The word love (noun) is difficult word to define.
The word in Scripture as a translation word is different from the word used in
English commonly, which has a diverse range of meanings. Their semantic fields

do not overlap. Even in unadulterated sense, love in the realm of human is a pale

shadow of it. God Love and human love belongs to different dimension/levels;
the latter may reflect a shadow of Gods Love to point back the source. a
80F80F

In IRENT, the word is capitalized as Love for that which has its origin in Elohm;
love uncapitalized is used as the noun for human love and as the verb.
A working definition a will unto action to give power to the other and to open
ones space for invitation to share life and for works of creation. [Yeshua put
aside His power, but to give it to man] [Not empowerment.] When ones
(personal) space opens up, paradoxically the space does not become shrinking,
but it widens and enlarges to more capacity for love. A principle of life; [My
personal comment on www.koinoniablog.net "The Most Excellent Way": Ajith
Fernando Exegetes Paul's Love Passage in 1 Cor. 13:1-14 ]

The Love (capitalized) is unidirectional; like a stream it runs from high to low
and it flows over any blockage in the way, not return flowing back to the source.
The foremost commandment is in (1) Mt 22:37; //Mk 12:30 upon a
question brought on about greatest commandments, and (2) //Lk 10:27
upon a question about eternal life. You shall love YHWH your Elohim with
all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your
strength (with the phrases in italics quoted from Deu 6:5).
The often-heard phrase Love your God itself is not in the Bible. b What
does it mean to love God? What does it mean to love God? Does God
expect, need or demand it in return since God is love? (Cf. Elohim is
Love 1Jn 4:8, 16)
81F81F

Love coming from God is to be received it simply nudges us to respond

(resonate in spirit) to let it flow through to others, not to hinder or hold. A
gift one receives free and freely; and with the hand kept open it is let flow
out toward others so that the hand can filled continually. Thats why to love
God is impossible without the second one, You shall love your neighbor as
your very self (Mt 22:39 //Mk 12:31; Lk 10:27b quoting from Lev
19:18). It should be correctly read as your very self is loved by God. Most
mistakes the text as if it is saying you love yourself c.
82F82F

http://atpreston.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/speaking-the-truth-in-l-o-v-e/
(Speaking the Truth in L.O.V.E.) Acronym L.O.V.E. (Listen; Observe; View; Encourage)
b
to love God; to love your God It is not God of a generic expression, but Elohim. Exo 20:7 I
am YHWH your Elohim. You shall have no other gods. You shall not take the name of YHWH your
Elohim in a manner unworthy for it. (1) YHWHs Renewed Covenant in Yeshua the Mashiah
inscribed on ones heart mind and thought; (2) YHWHs Torah (Commandments) to keep; (3)
YHWHs name be honored in our life.
c

The popular word *self-love, a pop psychology mantra, which is totally foreign to the Scripture.
Neither is the catch phrase God loves you, so do I as someone is fond of to tell from the pulpit. How
can we love others as God loves them!? the way and to the degree? One may use the word love for

No Love can come out of human heart. The love on human level which is by
nature bi-directional a is a pale shadow of Gods Love. It can be described by
alliteration attraction, affection, attachment, addiction for acceptance.
Though Love opens ones self to receive it when returned, the Love that
expects return is not love which the Scripture portrays. To love requiring to
be loved back in return is conditional. Gods love is unconditional selfyielding and self-opening Love b.
Only when one receives Love from God, one is able to love others. (See also
Mt 7:12 Golden Rule c). Thus, the Ten Commandments applicable to ones
action against others do equally apply to ones self to be responsible.
83F83F

84F84F

85F85F

It is more than concept or ideal, or something to do with what a person feels.

Its not affection or that sort. Its more than attitude or action itself. Its not
opposite of *hate neither d. What Paul wrote in 1Co 13: is not about hymn of
love (or, an ode to love). It does not give a definition, but a picture of a person in
their life filled with Gods Love. It is for a polemic indictment to the Corinthian
believers who were infected with pagan religions (shamanism, spiritism,
spiritualism e.g. tongue-babbling and prophey-pedders and charisma-freaks).
86F86F

The opposite of human love is not hate, but self-love. But what is opposite to
divine Love is our existential indifference to human predicament, atrocity, and
perversion (of truth). A real example of it opposite: I have nothing to do with the
other person, I dont care about you, going through with motion, be
tolerant e, just do it f, go with flow, etc. [See sins of omission a]. Is it possible
87F87F

8F8F

89F89F

non-person things in the sense of treat nicely not drive to hard take care of. This is not love which
is something in person relation. Doing that to others is not love itself, though it would flow from love.
Doing that to oneself is not something called love oneself in the biblical sense of love. [The
opposite of love is self-love, not hate.]
a

one-way love (Ko. ) does not function as love.

self-yielding [opening up and sharing ones personal (psychological) space.] [> self-giving; not
self-sacrificing. The expression sacrificial love (of God) has a wrong connotation of a religious
concept of sacrifice.
c
So-called Golden Rule [The basis of this (Mt 7:12) is as important as what is said the phrase
since that is the case at the beginning which refers to the preceding paragraph. As a corollary do
not expect others do for you before you would do to others first.] This is a positive form of a common
saying in various religions. Its negative form is called Silver rule, that is, do not do to others what
others dont want to be done to them. See Mt 19:19b - Ten Commandments applicable to ones action
against others do equally apply to ones self.
d
love and hate are concepts on a different level, not necessarily mutually exclusive. Cf. common
expression love and hate, also love against hate (Karl Menninger, 1959).
e
tolerance in a medical parlance is opposite of hypersensitivity, such as allergy. It may be even
devastating to the body when they fail to recognize something as foreign so that it can reject. An
example is AIDS caused by virus by which the important defense mechanism of immunity of the bay
becomes powerless.
b

just do it No, to live, we should not just do it.

to hate if there is no love at all? Not to love is not allowing other to come into
ones living and psychological space to share on a common ground. Love goes
out to find common ground and to be on life of creation to enjoy in Gods grace,
coming across things of unexpected hidden beauty.
Gods Love is the foundation of the whole of Gods Word in the Scripture. The
word Love (Gk. agap) in the Bible is one the major themes of Johannine writings.
Love is not what Gods essence is. (It may be said God is where the essence of Love is.)
It is not an abstract noun of noble virtue, but a verbal noun action in power of spirit as
He relates and radiates for creation, care, and consummation.
Like the sun shines to all His love is indiscrimate, not conditional. [Mt 5:45; Cf. Jn 3:16]
God simply loves keep on loving. Thats what and how He does what He wills.
However, not all are willing to receive His love. Instead, they rather put a shield to cover
from sunlight, and resort to their pity self-love.
[In G-Jn the word Love appears mostly as a verb for the first time in Jn 3:16. (God
loves, and His Love was shown through the Life of His Son.) Less frequently appears as
a noun (as Love for God in Jn 5:48 and as Yeshuas Love in Jn 15:9, 10, 13; Gods
Love of His Son in Jn 17:26)] [Cf. A modern heresy telling that Love is the essence of
God, the phrase reading as Love is God.][Cf. Sin is there when Gods Love is refused;
no response to; and to be blind to it 1Jn 3:4]

Listening is where Love is, not talking to. Love requires discernment to see
whether the other is in listening status. One is not possible to talk to the other
unless ready. Life in Love begins in finding and building common grounds to
share life through interaction and conflict-resolution.
*Gk. file is the synonym of agapa. They are contrasted to each other in the
dialogue btw Yeshua and Kefa (> Peter) in Jn 21:15-17. Greek synonyms should
not be rendered in a single English word or expression; different shades and
senses should not be obscured.

*Space, *personal space, and Love:

Ones personal (psychological) space is Gods gift to human endowed with
freedom. It is sacrosanct. Even God cannot invade (after all, He is much
bigger). In that space resides the image of ones own self now as acting like
a God since Adam took the idea offered by the Serpent. In fact, that image is
made after Satan. The Devil exerts its own power to this spirit in man. Unless
one dies with the Mashiah so that He is the One who lives in us, we remain
enslaved in sin separation, alienation, isolation, and independence from the
a

Cf. Dennis Ford (1990), Sins of Omission: A Primer on Moral Indifference.

very God what has created us.

Love is in opening up of ones own space, which let the space expand, so that
there is room for others space come in, at the same time, making oneself
vulnerable. To love is to live in Gods grace to share each others space, to
give and to give power, and to care and create and to let create. It is with
contact, being connected, finding common ground, communicating, and
creating creating life to share and have delight together (> joie de vivre, but
together).

space physical
space soulical, psychological
space spirital (not spiritual) space under the power spirit

Related word:
phile affectionate love on the human level
Mt 10:37; 1Co 16:22; Tit 3:15; Rev 3:19
Jn 5 5:20; 11:3, 36; 16:27; 20:2; 21:15-17
Mt 6:5; 26:48; Jn 12:25; Rev 22:15
Mt 26:48; Mk 14:44; Lk 22:47
In G-Jn,
the word love appears mostly as a verb (agapa), for the first time in 3:16.
God loves, here, His Love was shown through the Life of His Son.
Less frequently is as a noun Love (agap). E.g. as Love for God in Jn 5:48
and as Yeshuas Love in Jn 15:9, 10, 13; Gods Love of His Son in 17:26.
The word is one of the major themes of Johannine writings. E.g. 1Jn 4:8, 16
Elohim (the God) is Love, where Gk. ho theos (the God) is not God of generic
notion. The (divine) Love is the essence of Elohim. It is not an abstract noun of
noble virtue, but a verbal noun - action in power of spirit as He relates and
radiates for creation, care, and consummation.
Love the world:
world - Gk. kosmos (ordered system); cf. ain (period of time; age)

in that way Elohim has loved the world (Jn 3:16) [the world = created
world, esp. humanity]
Love not the world 1Jn 2:15 [here world is mentonymic for the spiritual,
religious, political, philosophical system with all of man's powers, purposes,
pursuits, pleasures, practices, and places where God is not wanted, under control of

the spirit which is against God].

*Love

There are quite a few words for which common translation fails to bring
out its true sense and picture as in the Scripture. One example is love this is usually confused with something of human experience, which is
something one receives at start, and which is only a pale shadow of it.
Love in the Scripture (/x: charity in KJV) has nothing much common with
the same word as used in everyday English, which often connotes feeling
associated with pleasure and even sex. It is the source of creative power;
what Love does is to create, which anyone involved work of creation in
daily life, whether they are artists or not, would understand intuitively and
naturally. In IRENT the word is expanded in a few places. E.g. 1Co 13:1,
2, 3, 4 a, also Eph 4:15 Love from God]
90F90F

God is love. Or, rather, Elohim (= the God = YHWH) is Love. That is,
God is of love; not love is God. If we love God, it is because He loved us
first (1Jn 4:19). At the core, love is toward truth and goodness, and is
something (- hard to define) between two persons. Originated from God,
powerful is love but it can be blocked easy (darkness), just as the light
can be blocked from the Sun, the source of all the energy on Earth. Love
on the part of God is a verbal noun. Its action, not an abstract concept of
some noble virtue. Everything God does is love; God does everything in
love. Everything from God springs from Gods love. Its how human beings
respond to that determines how we are going to experience. Note: KJV
(like DRB, Bishops, Geneva (Gk. agap is rendered by Vulgate mostly as
dilectio, but caritas outside the Gospels and Acts. Wycliffe and the
Rheims version regularly rendered the Vulgate by love, caritas by
charity. Also in KJV and DRB, but not in Geneva or Bishops). However
the word charity has different sense, nuance, and usage in modern
English.
Gods Love (1) creation work; (2) care of creation; (3) blessing; (4) mercy; (5)
justice and vengeance (= Love of justice expressed).

So-called love chapter (1Co 13) is not about love Paul was writing as a hymn for love or an
ode for love; it is the very love from Elohim, which the Corinthians lacked when they were in
pagan mindset addicted with charisma (gifts) of the Spirit proud and self-praising (Ch. 12.
& Ch. 14). Most readers of the Bibles do not have clear idea of what Gods love is, distinct from
love in their vocabulary.]
a

Love not to be confused of love in English language which is something between

each other of human beings. Divine Love in the Scripture is something we cannot
bring to others; it is only possible when we receive it from God and let it overflow to
others. The central point of the Good News of the Kingdom reign of God, which
Yeshua brought, is that Yeshua Himself was the manifestation of this Love freely
given when we dont deserve since we have lost the very image of God in which we
are created. It is self-giving Love. Human love, however, will exhaust itself when it is
possible to be truly self-giving. Only God can, as His love inexhaustible from out of
Father and Son in dynamic relation, the power of which is emanates, processes, and
radiates in the holy Spirit.
1Jn 4:19 it is because God Himself first loved us, \ ;
[+ because Elohim is love; on His own free initiative; to show us His divine love and, from this
fountain to shower down the true self-giving love once beyond our capability, but now a real
possibility.] [To love others is only possible since we are loved it is flowing out through us.]
[its not just about precedence (as if first He did and next we did), its about the source of our
capability of such love.][Note the different btw He first loved us and He loved us first. The latter,
which is a wrong translation suggests a logic that loved us first; then we now (ought to) love Him a
subtle conditional demand from Gods side. The former has a sense of Him taking own initiative and we
respond to such love.] [Some may or may not capitalize he/He.] [Refers to Gods love in Jn 3:16. Cf.
Gods love for His people Deu 4:37; 7:7-8; 10:15; 33:3] [He first loved us, thus our love for Him is a
response to His love for us. Our love for Him is basically receving fully and keep receivng by letting it
overflow from out of our hand to others as rain we catch with our hands overflows out naturally flows
out to others, it can not be something out of duty.]

loving self? *self love; *self-love

[love; self-love; self-worth; self-esteem; selfism]

[self-love is unbiblical idea; a result of Love being idolized, spiritualized,

and ritualized. There are an untold number of youtubes on how to love yourself.
http://youtu.be/ELkK2G0wd9o All are in line with prosperity gospel peddled by
mega-churches. They all seems mixed up with self-care, self-respect, and self-esteem,
etc.] [Cf. Erlic Fromm (1990), Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of
Ethics. < the capacity to loe others is conjunctive with the capacity ot love
humanity on ones own person. This self-love in the form of self-acceptance is healthy,
while egocentricism is pathological. > in Song, The Wounded Heart of God (infra.,
p. 105).]
]

as your self [is being loved by God] [Mt 19:19; 22:39; //Mk 12:31;
//Lk 10:27]
as [God loves] your self
as your self [is being loved by God]
as your self [is all being loved by God you and your neighbors]
as your self [as being loved by God]

(/> is loved by God; /> God loves you) is being loved by God is the
reason, basis, and norm for us to love others. [Neighbor as God sees yourself
worthy] [See who is a neighbor to me? Good Samaritans parable]
[/x~ neighbor, as you love yourself.] [Cf. Eph 5:30 wife [as being worthy] as
himself]; [QQ: How come the first set of the Ten Commendment is skipped in
all three Synoptic Gospels?] [(your neighor) as yourself Gk. hs seauton;
Heb. kmuk][ love your neighbor as yourself Mt 19:19; 22:39; Mk 12:31, 33;
Lk 10:27; Rm 13:9; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8 - all quoting Lev 19:18] [cf (love aliens,
foreigners, ) as yourself Lev 19:34; Eph 5:33 hs eauton (love your wife) as
yourself; ] [Comparison by hs is how, not what as the object of the verb
love. See Eph 5:28 love his wife [as precious] as his own body]
[Usually misread as love them as you love yourself as some
translations/paraphrases render it.]; [2Tim 3:2 lists lover of self (filautos)
along with loving-money (filarguros) and (v. 3) unloving (astorgos) no
love for goodness afilargos, and (v.4) pleasure-loving filhdonos. In contrast
Mt 7:12; 2Tim 3:3 God-loving (filotheos)] [? If loving (file) self is such,
would loving (agapa) be different and honorable?] [Loving-Christ rather
than loving-self 2Co 5:14-15; Eph 1:3-4; Rm 8:33; 2Co 5:19-20; 1Co 6:19];
[Cf. Rm 13:10; Gal 5:14; cf. 2Ti 3:2]] [Only when one receives Love from
God, one is not only able to love others, but also able to be loved by others. it
becomes possible only one comes to death of one self, participating death of
the Mashiah.]
[It should be correctly read as love your neighbor as yourself, rather than
as you love yourself. Problem of love oneself preserving and sancitying
with due regard to the dignity of our own being welfare and care of soul and
body (modified for Henrys)] [Thou shall love thyself as such is no where in
the Bible and cannot be a command. Love of God (from/by God) enables us
to love Him; and enable us to care for our soul and body; and enables us to
love others. Cf. Golden Rule Mt 7:12. Gods Love ought to be found in our
Love of others consists of forgiving thanking rejoicing together finding
common ground sharing life drink up together Gods message of Love.
The written command love others as yourself in the Mosaic Law as such
properly belongs to the Old Covenant; in the Renewed Covenant, the command
of our Lord is the very voice of Him: love as I have loved you.] [Literary
logical absurdity if the text is read as love your neighbor as you love yourself
as little as you love yourself or as much as? The degree you love yourself
cannot be a basis on which you are to love your neighbor. Cf. Mt 5:48
unbounded love as Father so loves; also Mt 7:9-12.] [Love of Elohim in
creation and care is Justice + Mercy] [Cf. related expression grace
(unmerited gift)]
[Cf. divine impassibility www.gotquestions.org/impassibility-of-God.html A God who does not suffer is not the biblical God (Elohim is Love 1Jn 4:8).]
[anthropomophism, literary license http://hubpages.com/literature/What-isPoetic-License-Definition-and-Examples ]

[Repeat: Problem of self-love (1) it cannot be something to provide a fount

for the Love of others. Cf. husband and wife becoming in one flesh-and-blood
in marriage to love ones spouse is to love the self because of this oneness?
Cf. the Golden Rule Mt 7:12. (2) Without relationship with God throughout
life, ones innate self-centeredness makes one give little thought to loving
others as a way of life, Without God, life becomes all about the self
worshipping Self. The world established by and built upon selfish human
nature, continues to feed its self-absorbed inclinations and desires. diverging
from the opinion of John W. Ritenbaugh Ephesians 5:28-33 from The Christian
Fight (Part Two) ] [If self-love, how would the text say is it as much as
you love your self, or in the same way as you love it? Or even as little as
you love yourself, if you dont love it more than a smidgen? How it can ever
serve as a basis of loving others?]
[Cf. the meaning of neighbors - fellow countrymen in OT with a wider
connotation given by Yeshua] [In the Mosaic economy, it was someone who
belongs to our part of society or neighborhood as in the Mosaic Law (Mt 5:33
You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy).] [It was not our modern
abstract fellow human being.]
[cf. Phi 2:3 regard others worthier than yourselves. To love is (a) see in others
perfectibility (b) regard worthy (c) give power]
[Problem of love oneself vs. selfishness. Problem of love oneself vs.
feeling good about oneself in the modern psychological therapeutic
movements][/x: (= nothing more than ;
love is only btw two persons ). Problem in Korean: = vs.
(etymologically same) here is used metonymic.]
/as [beingworthy as] yourself ARJ; /as [God sees] yourself [being worthy] ARJ (i.e.
self-worth - oneself being worthy as God sees. Not self-esteem, a verbal
noun esteeming oneself as seen by others.); /[as being worthy] as yourself
ARJ; /> [treated] as yourself ARJ;/

1 /as yourself most, PNT, Barclay, TNT; / 2 /x: as for yourself BBE; /x: as thou
dost thyself. TCNT; /x: as [you do] yourself AMP; /x: as you do yourself GSNT,
Wuest, MSG (Mt 19:19); / 3 /xx: as you love yourself NIrV, GW, GNB, CEV, ERV, MSG
(Mt 22:39), AUV, GSNT, Cass; /xx: the same way that you love yourself AUV;
/as thyself KJV+, /xx: as thou dost thyself - TCNT; /x: ~ like yourself; /thy fellow
man as much as thyself WNT; /(shall love with a divine and self-sacrificial love your)
neighbor in the same manner as yourself Wuest; /xx: the same way you love yourself
NTPE; //

4 /ko. x: ; - KRV (- also Lev 19:18, but not 19:34); / KKJV;

Jn 15:13
meizona tauts agapn oudeis echei,
hina tis tn psuchn autou th huper tn pdiln autou.
No one has love greater than this
[as I do] to lay down ones own self. - IRENT
psuch not life (, )
greater ; /x: greatest
one; /anyone; /x: a man; /> someone; /
/someone should surrender his soul (- NWT3; /life NWT-2013)
/a man lay down his life KJV; /
/one lays down his life NET; /x: one dies willingly NETfn; /xx: gives up
his life BBE; /one should lay down his life Darby; /a man bestowe his
life- Bishops; /any man bestoweth his life for Geneva; /a man lay down his
life ASV; /
/xx: The greatest way to show love for friends is to die for them CEV; /
/xx: The greatest love people can show is to die for their friends ERV;
/xx: The greatest love you can have for your friends is to give your life for
them GNB;
*hate; hatred, abhor, abominate, loathe, dislike, disdain, excrate

Gk. miseo - commonly translate as to hate. Occasionally, the context tells that
it is in the sense of love less. E.g. Mt 5:43; Lk 6:27 (ones adversary or
opponent); Lk 14:6 (of ones family members); 1Jn 4:20 (of ones fellow
brother); Rm 9:13 (of Esau).

*wrath; *fury; *anger; rage; vengeance

[indignation, rage, fury];

thumos; org; orgiz;

aganakteo displeased aganakteo - Mt 26:8]
cf. paroxusmos - outburst?
wrath archaism?
Check Prob 15:1 rage and anger (-NWT); vs. wrath and anger NIV)
God of wrath, not of love? God's wrath is God's love of justice and His
reaction to human evil. twitter@ounbbl
Rm 2:8 anger and wrath (thumos anger + org wrath; {/mss wrath and anger};
/wrath and anger NWT, NET; /x: wrath and indignation ASV; /indignation and wrath

KJV+; /wrath and fury ESV, ISV; /anger and fury GNB (- render org as anger and
thumos as fury, furious); /anger and indignation Cass (- renders org as anger)

Anger easily devours; like fire it ignites. It is essential for a human being. Without it,
one is brain-dead, coward, or android. Fails to flare up confronting evil
unrighteousness, injustice, and dishonoring Gods name, God will surely bring down
His wrath.
Prv 29:11
A fool gives full vent to his anger,
but a wise holds it in check.
Eph 4:26
orgizesthe kai m hamartanete
/Be angry and most; /When you are angry ERV; /If you become angry
GNB;
[from Psa 4:4 LXX] [Cf. (4:5 MT) tremble and do not sin HalleluYah
Scriptures] [tremble for what confronting evil angry?]
orgizesthe command or condition
ho hlias m epiduet epi t parorgism humn;
(anger; angry state of mind)

*delight; be pleased; have/take pleasure in; be pleased with

eudoke
Mk 1:12 [My Son, the eloved,] in whom I take delight >> be pleased with;
/xxx: approve - NWT
2Th 2:12 have/take pleasure in unrighteousness

*sin; *sins; *transgression; *forgiveness of sins;

[Ref. E.P Sanders (1991), Paul (pp. 35-38)

Sin what is denifition of sin? Or of a sin (sins)? Where is the English word from?
As a biblical word, it is that which provokes Gods wrath wrath of God who is life,
ligh, and love.
Cf. Etymology of it as missing a mark (as to perfection as if perfection is the goal
of life). A sense of missing a mark is not in the word sin in the N.T. [related to
salvation by works?]. Cf. Rm 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the
glory of Elohim. Coming short of the glory is not the sin; it is the consequence of
sin - not achieving glory but coming to the presence of Gods glory.
Sin can be sin as to something against others and things, but only if it is something
to provoke Gods wrath.
though it covers a related field of wrong-doings, faults, stumbles, etc. [Cf. In
Aramaic, the word covers also debt (Cf. Mt 6:12 debts //Lk 11:4 sins)

Cf. IRENT renders the verb hamartan (to sin) do a grave wrong in the three
places, e.g.
does not do a grave wrong if marry (1Co_7:28, 36);
doing a grave wrong to the fellow brethren (1Co 8:12).
Cf. (the) sin is . (1Jn 3:4) does the definite article for particularization or for
abstractization? (Cf. Mt 6:13 with an adjective the evil the evil one/thing? Or
evil/evilness?). QQ: a study on the (definite) article in Gk sense and nuance in
between the and that in English. E.g. the very one; the aforementioned one,
etc.
Related words
flesh (referring to the state of humanity when it opposes God)
death law
Metonymic use of sin (not sins) (Esp. in Pauline Epistle to the Romans
Ref. Watchman Nee)
Sin nature
Sin power
Sin guilt
Sin sacrifice (2Co 5:21 as sin sacrifice analogical A is as B, not A =
B same with the Lamb of Elohim Jn 1:29 as the Lamb of Elohim)
Sin phrases in Romans: (sin in metonymic use; personified) Sin enetered into
the world (5:1); sin reigned in death (5:21); sin may reign in ones mortal
body (6:12); sin may reign dominion over one (6:14); sin wrought in me all
kndis of covnentess (7:8); it revived (7:9); also 7:11, 13). Sin as power may be
served (6:16-18), and thus it enslaves (6:20)
Transgression
Isa 53:8 fur the transgressions of my people [the gentile nations] they [the
Yehudim] were striken.
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the
transgression of the law. [KJV inaccurately rendered.] [transgression of the
law is a sin, but not sin.]
Doctrine of sin a western mindset for right vs. wrong; my rights. Cf. doctrine
of original sin (after St. Augustine)
vs. concept of Han a (experience of pain by the victims of sin), conscious and
unconscious.
Ref. Andrew Sung Park (1993), The Wounded Heart of God The Asian Concept of Han and the
Christian Doctrine of Sin. (Introduction pp. 9-14.) << Sin is the volitional act of sinners
(oppressors); *han is the [experienced] pain of the victim of [human] sin [and evil] >> cf. minjung
a

sin, shame, (dishonor), guilt; wound, grief, trauma; brokenness; healing of wound
[reality of sin and evil Non-Christian worldviews seek to locate the origin of sin
and evil somewhere within the created order; even so in Christianism Satan, Devil,
demons. Cf. devil made me do it. True, but this devil is the Alter Ego of the self.
The very source of sin is my self (soul) and the initial step is in denial of sin.][Cf.
Janus. Cf. double mindedness; Cf. multiple personality]

( people; Gk. laos) = people of Han. Cf. minjung theology (cf. liberation theology).
https://youtu.be/dXN3h0TIXts (after 7:00 timemarker)

sin, a sin (act), the sin; doctrine of original sin;

From p. 227 Crisp (2009), A reader in Contemporary Philosophical Theology
Adams primal sin, which began the corruption of human nature;
The original sin, which is morally vitiated condition passed down from
Adam to his progeny; - (? Sin nature) unbiblical.
and original guilt, which is the guilt associated with this condition.
Problem with original sin vs. dictrine of original sin:
Adams Primal Sin defined as Adams disobedience by listening to his alter
ego to go opposite to Gods way.
vs. Original sin doctrinal elaboration St. Augustine on sin of humanity
unbiblical Calvins Total Deprivation of man (where does Gods grace come
in?) and predestination (only some are destined to be saved??). It negates Godgiven human freedom.

Sin, sins (e.g. transgression of commandments and the Gods law),

Sinful having sin nature or having committed sins? [Cf. wicked, evil, bad,
crooked]
Sinless having not committed sins or having no sin nature?
Righteous before God is not about sinlessness. E.g. Lk 1:6 (Zekharyah and
Elisheba). [Cf. Torah-based religion often mistakes righteousness equal
sinlessness.]
Righteous before man.
Righteousness from God justification

Most fail to distinguish sin from a sin (sins).

(Sin continues as part of the punishment and the ground for it)
U (sin; the sin) one state of broken relation to God.
C (sinning) - act
(sin; a sin; sins) a thought or act which breaks or hampers relation to God (in
ones action/thought). [Most hideous ones are that which are done in the name
of God (of their image). [In NT a few places the sense is not sin as such, but
rather a grave wrong done to others. Rendering it as sin(s) and to commit a
sin in such cases is misleading E.g. Mt 18:21; //Lk 17:3, 4; 1Co 7:28, 36; cf.
Eph 4:26.] rebellion, disobedience, blasphemy dishonoring, transgression of
the torah (Gods Word = commandments), deserting (from Gods people), etc.

lawlessness (h anomia).

sinner; outcast sinners. A sinner sins not by sinning a sin but from being
a sinner.

sins (plural)
Mk 2:5, 7 [of breaking Gods Torah] [concept of sins in Judaic society needs to be
explained and specified for the modern readers.]; /sins [against Gods Law]. Cf. sins
against the heaven Lk 15:18); cf. sins against God. [Note, Law is not same as
Torah.]
Mt 1:21 [As used in a concrete sense in Judaism and O.T, the word sins refers to
what is done contrary to Gods will (such as revealed in the Law of Mosheh), primarily
those by the people, rather than by an individual.
Cf. Transgression of the Law is a sin but not the sin is the transgression of the law
(1Jn 3:4 - KJV)
Cf. seven deadly sins (or seven cardinal sins) - Pride Envy Gluttony Lust Anger Greed
(Avarice or Covetousness) Sloth
Cf. mortal sin unforgivable sin; greater sin (Jn 19:11); blasphemy against the holy
Spirit (Mt 12:32 //Mk 3:29 //Lk 12:10); [sin] guilt remains (Jn 9:41)

sin (singular); As an abstract notion, it is (1) any act/attitude resulting in

disruption/breakage of ones relation to God, and (2) the condition/state of separation and
alienation (with sin guilt) which one finds true as a consequence of act from not
listening to God into dishonoring His name. The true fellowship with the Father and with
His Son Yeshua the Mashiah (1Jn 1:3; cf. Ps 27:8; cf. Jn 17:24) is broken. Even in the
sense of (1), it is not to be picture as an act or event, but rather an activity, a process
stretching from the cause to the effect with the self turned to darkness. Not a point of
time act or a static state but an active movement of one soul with turning and moving
away from Light, Life, Love and Learning. To commit a sin is not necessarily to commit
a thing; sins of omission a, moral indifference, or avoid involvement. Cf. Jam 4:7).
93F93F

It addition to *sin guilt b, it is used metonymically also as sin reality, sin power, sin
nature (esp. in the Pauline Epistle to the Romans e.g. Rm 3:9; 7:14 under the power of
sin > under sin), and even as sin offering (sacrifice) 2Co 5:21 (//Isa 53:10). (Isa
Man is not a sinner because he sins; he sins because he is a sinner. (Rm 3:23 ever since
humanity made a decision to acquire power to the knowledge to enable him what he
wants to decide what is right and wrong independent of the Creator.(Gen 2:17; Gen
3:4-5) The result of Adam and Eves action was death broken relation to God leading
to death in spirit. Adams earthly life itself is a hellish life, that is, without receiving
life-giving spirit and love. It is not about waiting to go to hell until after death. [Our
sins are not what is removed, but sin guilt. We do not become sinless when we repent, or
are saved, or are baptized, etc. but are forgiven of sins standing btw God and us, and are
taken to be worthy to His name (righteous).]
94F94F

*Adams Fall Fall of humanity from Gods presence is the result of mans exercising
a

Cf. Dennis Ford (1990), Sins of Omission: A Primer on Moral Indifference.

Sin guilt as in washed our sins; covered our sins (cf. mercy-seat) [to forgive sins is not to
expose but to cover over so as not to bring shame. Cf. covering up];
b

his freedom as given to him when they were made after Gods image.
Cf. conviction of sin a Biblical jargon. [Not bring up guilty conscience or shame over
sins as related to a person. Jn 16:8 not convict the world of sin, but expose and confront
for the matter of sin, unrighteousness, and judgment.]

sin sinners sinning

Gk hamartia means at bottom a failure of aim, a missing of the mark and appears
to have fewer connotations, religious or secular than the English word sin, as a
religious jargon.
A sin may be a wrong or an error, but the reverse is not true. We cannot say a
wrong is a sin. Thus it is frivolous to render the Greek word as wrong in
wholesale fashion as Reynold Price (1996) did in his Three Gospels which
includes his translation of G-Mk and G-Jn in addition to his own Gospel (story).
[See below *to sin, how IRENT judiciously renders it (noun and verb) as other
than sin.]
to sin (verb) (1) against the rules; (2) against the names (shame; dishonoring);
(3) harming others and the creation doing grave wrongs;
e.g. have sinned against the Heaven and before you (Lk 15:18) much more
than doing things wrong or breaking the law, etc., but bringing dishonor to the
name of Elohim and bringing shame to ones father.
Sin and death;
[cf. death vs. Death]
die to sin Rm 6:10 apothnsk
be dead to sin Rm 6:11 nekrous einai
be done away as to sins 1Pe 2:24 apoginomai NT hapax;
the wages of sin is Death Rm 6:23 , [spiritual
Death eternal, not biological death]

*sinful sinfulness be sinful vs. be in sin

Humanity or human nature is not sin an illogical statement.
sinful human nature is an ambiguous expression to raise questions such as is
there human nature not sinful?, or was it once not sinful? the only clear
statement is human nature is in sin (that is, under the power of reality of sin).
We are sinners. We are in sin, rather than we are sinful. Our action, however
good or evil it is, is sinful when it does not honor the name of God.

Related terms guilt; guilty feeling;

1. [People are not born sinners; they are born and become sinners. [It is
necessary to have clear definition of sin and sinner.] More than Adams primal
sin as the typology, it is unbiblical to invoke a doctrine of original sin to blame
Adam for human sins.]
2. It is sin (not sins) that is the issue, not original sin. A person human being
When he sins it proves he is a sinner, rather than he is a sinner because he
sins; he sins because he is a sinner.
There is no such thing as predestination of who to be saved or not.
www.gospeltruth.net/menbornsinners/mbs07.htm Are Men Born Sinners?
www.evangelicaloutreach.org/original_sin.htm Original Sin (Total Depravity) is FALSE
https://youtu.be/DYBcwSKVBTw
The expression born sinners (a religious jargon, e.g. born again) is not found in the Bible:
Misreading of (1) Rm 5:12 ; and
(2) Psa 51:5 In sin did my mother conceived is used for unbiblical proof-texting of the doctrine
of the original sin - ignoring Psa 119:73; 139:13; 100:3.

*self-love and sin

- see *self-love
Self-love as essence of sin self-righeousness in pursuit of power and
pleasure. Self-pride, self-esteem, and self-pleasure. [It is opposite of self-care
and self-respect.]
Where self-love is, sin is; where sin is, self-love. Without self-love, no sin can
be there.
Evil manifests in self-love. [Cf. Rm 1:29-32]
Where does self-love from? From ones alter ego, god. [Gen 3:4 you
shall be like God]
Cf. Lev 19:18 [Mt 19:19b; 22:39] [Mk 12:31, 33; Lk 10:27b; Gal 5:14; Rm 13:10; cf. 2Ti
3:2; Jam 2:8] [not loving self.]

*to sin;

The word to sin as such is mostly used in the sense of sin against God.
However, a few places in NT its sense in different context is to do a grave
wrong. E.g. Lk 17:3, 4; //Mt 18:15, 21. Also 1Co 7:28; 8:12.

hamartan to distance away from God; to miss a mark (refuse Gods

love; no response to; and to be blind to it); fall short of what God wants;
fall into sin;
to sin (as against God) do sin commit sin 1Jn 2:1; 3:4, 6, 9
do grave wrongs 1Co 7:28, 36; 8:12; Mt 18:15, 21; //Lk 17:3, 4;
hamartian poiew (1Pe 2:22) live out sin; be sinning live and do as a
sinner); /x: practice sin - NWT
m hamartan 1Jn 2:1; forsake sin > do not sin
ergazomai hamartia (commit a sin) e.g. Jam 2:9;
hamartan hamartia (to sin a sin) e.g. 1Jn 5:16;

*repent; *repentance

Gk. metanoe and metanoia usually translated as repent and repentance, which is
a religious jargon. [Cf. /x: be repentant NWT 1984]. Howere these very common
words are with different sense, nuance and usage than the Gk words.
It is not about feel remorse, regret, or restore/repair. /x: Ko. ( = regret
+ correction). Note: among the Four Gosples, these word does not appear in G-Jn.
[Note: etymologically close to English word conversion, which, however, has a
very different nuance, sense, and usage. It is comparable to Korean word, ];
political, religious, and ideological connotation makes it unsuitable for a translation
word for the biblical word.Cf. /x: change ones mind different sense and usage; Cf.
flip-flop; cf. different mind;]
IRENT renders as turn ones heart to Gods way with forgiveness God changes
ones heart. The noun form may be rendered as turning ones heart to Gods way;
the word repentance is retained as a technical term outside the Gospels.
Mt 3:2; Mt 4:17; Act 20:31;

The Greek verb is intransitive, not transitive: E.g. it is not we repent our sins, but
we repent for the sake of forgiveness of our sins. E.g. the basic sense is turning
ones heart (to Gods way); repentance from deeds (Heb 6:1); unrepentant heart
(Rm 2:5); not repent ones self (> oneself. Cf. reflexive vs. emphatic pronouns
ending with -self, -selves.)
Cf. epi-streph
Act 14:15 turn away from these worthless things to the living God;
Act 15:19 turn to Elohim;
Cf. Act 26:20 turn ones heart and turn to Elohim
Mt 3:2 turn your heart [cf. The word sins does not appear along with to repent, as if turing
away from ones sins or repenting sins. Cf. confessing sins v.6.]; /repent most; /get turned
around and be repenting - ARJ;
/> change your thinking ARJ (- too abstract); /Get yo all turned around and be repenting
ARJ; /get repented; /> repent most; /be repenting ALT; /repent of your sins and turn to

God NLT; /turn from your sins to God JNT; /x: turn away from your sins NIrV, GNB; /x:
Let your hearts be turned from sin- BBE; /change your hearts and lives ERV; /change your
hearts SENT; /Turn to God and change the way you think and act, - GW; /turn back to God
CEV; /Repent (think differently; change your mind, regretting your sins and changing your
conduct), - AMP; /You must repent [i.e., change your hearts and lives], - AUV; /xx: Change your
life. MSG; /xx: Reform YLT; /Be having a change of mind which issues in regret and a
change of conduct Wuest; /

Cf. [Does God reprent?] 1Sm 15:11 /It grieves me that I have set up Saul to be king
WEB, KJ2k, Jublee 2k; /> I regret that I have made Saul king, (most); /xx: It repenteth me
tha I have sent up Saul to be king KJV, ASV;

*forgiveness of sins

Related words and phrases for Forgiveness vs. salvation

sin used also metonymic for penalty from guilt of sin; power of sin;
sin nature; sin sacrifice;
* atonementa (a metaphoric word); ransom (a metaphoric word; not
buying off from someone devil?); blood sacrifice;
* expiation; *propitiation; mercy-seat of the Ark of Covenant (Exo 25:1722) [see under a seprated heading]
redemption, reconciliation;
forgivness; forgiving a sinner you are forgiven of sin vs. your sin is
forgiven
put away sins (2Sa 12:13); scapegoat b; cover over sins (Rm 4:7)
95F95F

Yeshua and our sins:

1Co 15:3 He died for (huper) our sins [Cf. Rm 5:8 Mashiah died for us; 2Co 5:15
he died for all; 1Th 5:10 he died for us]
Gal 1:4 He gave himself for (huper) our sins
1Jn 2:2; 4:10 He is the propitiation for (peri) our sins
1Pe 3:18; He died {/suffered} to deal with sins (peri) />> for sins most;
[Cf. 1Pe 2:24; He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree; Rev 1:5; freed us from
our sins by his blood]

Cf. 1Jn 2:2; 4:10 Yes, He, in His own person, is as atonement for our sins [to be taken away] not
for our sins only, but also for the sins of the whole world.] [not He is for atonement, but as
atonement] [/expiation; /propitiation KJV; /mercy-seat (Heb. kphrth)]
b
scapegoat KJV translation word for Heb. Azazel which occurs in regulation pertaining to the Day
of Atonement [4x in the Scripture, Lev 16:8, 10 (2x), 26]. Some entertain an unbiblical fanciful
conjecture that it might mean a (desert) demon (e.g. demon Azazel CEV Lev 16:8). The prob.
meaning is from ez (H5975 goat as Lev 16:5) + azol (go away) = a goat to be sent away is in line
with the ritual practice narrated in the text. Pallel to the expression put away sins (2Sam 12:13).
a

1Co 15:3 died for our sins \(christos apethanen) huper tn hamartin hmn [this phrase
died over our sins occurs only once here in NT; Cf. gave Himself over our sins huper tn
hamartin hmn in Gal 1:4.]
/over our sins ARJ; /for atonement of our sins ARJ 9- interpretative jargon); /x: because
of our sins ARJ; /> to deal with ARJ; />> for our sins PNT, Cass ( - what is the nuance of
for here?); /x: on behalf of our sins ALT, Diagl; />> to take away (our sins) GW;
/(underwent) death for our sins - BBE; /x: ( for benefit of); /x: ( -
caused by because of); / ; /[to take them away to forgive us and to save us from

penalty of sins and bring out of the power of sin] [?: in full payment for our sins upon the cross
from Christ Died For Our Sins]
1Pe 3:18 (died {/suffered}) to deal with sins peri hamartin (epathen suffered) (concerning
sins to deal with sins), where a concept of judicial picture such as atone ransom paying for
is lacking.] ; /> for sins most; /x: for sin - YLT; /x: for our sins NLT, Aramaic, GW, DRB; /
[cf. a different phrasing in Jn 10:11 the good shepherd does lay down His soul in behalf of the
sheep ( )] [hUPER hHMWN over/for us Rm 5:8];

- only God Himself can forgive sins, which are against God (and Gods law).
- Gods forgiveness is not something conditional (e.g. He forgives when one pays for the
guilt, or when one asks for forgiveness). Instead, God is a forgiving God, that is, He is the
One who is forgiving from the beginning to the last, ever since Adams fall. That He
forgives is the person is taking in His forgiveness get forgiven, not be forgiven.
*Unforgivable sin see *blasphemy against the holy Spirit
Mk 2:5 Who can forgive sins except God alone [Here, the soferim (= teachers of
Torah in Lk. Lk also includes Pharisees) said, knowingly or unknowingly, a profoundly
true statement smack on the target. The remark raised directly the issue of the nature of
Yeshuas ministry and His divinity. No mere mortal man can forgive sin (not just debts
wrongdoings as in Mt 6:12, 16) which affects the very relation of human beings to God.]
cf. forgiving (or, letting go of) debts (Mt 6:12) Aramaic word means sins, debts.

cf. Isa 43:25 your sins I will not remember remember in the sense of bring it
out. Cf. forget vs. forgive
A false unbiblical doctrine of conditional forgiveness finds it support from misreading of
1Jn 1:9 as if we confess (as in most translations do incorrectly) instead of when we
confess. (Cf. http://wp.me/pNzdT-2aI)
Gods forgiveness has already forgiven at Adams fall; it is for the repentant to receive
through Mashiah Yeshua. In a sense, it IS conditional, however, not dependent on
whether God would forgive or not; neither whether we do this or that (e.g. you review all
of your sins, etc.), but dependent on whether we receive or not Gods grace.

*forgive; *forgiveness; to judge; to condemn; to love

[forgive sins (i.e. against God) remove guilt; cover over wound (Han);
sins are taken away (2Sam 12:13); Cf. scape goat a AzazelLev 16:6-10]

problem, judge, forgive, condemn, love:

Different kinds of a problem - (1) Houston, we have a problem; mathematical
problem,
(2) presonal/interpersonal problems.
The elements of the problem involving personal and interpersonal right and
wrong - (a) problem itself (clear or undefined); (b) root of the problem; (c)
persons/parties involved; (d) proper solvers and (d) aftermath.
a problem of problem solving is that the very problem to be solved is getting
superimposed on the persons whom the solution is for. The problem is
attacked on; and the person is just as well attacked on. (It's like arrowshooting of an apple without concern about the head on which it is placed.)
Solution is possible only on the principle of love (Mt 18:22; Lk 17:4):
(1) the problem is to be confronted, defined, focused, and judged;
(2) the person is to be protected and restored with the root exposed;
(3) the person who did wrong is to be led to repent or to come to the One who
can solve (for those outside the community of believers). It is those who do not
repent that is the very ones who get themselves condemned.
(4) the approach is needs tact, kindness, acceptance, and honesty. Ones face has
to be kept and restored. The solution should be not just fixing but personal
maturity and interpersonal bonding.

Proper washing of clothes involves not just washing, with eyes to achieve the goal
to restore and to preserve to put back it to use (i.e. know the purpose of what one
has to do); washed well, but got ruined. The surgery was successful but the patient
died. Fixing the problem itself is not the solution; its only a part of it and there the
party may go remaining as a problem source.

scape-goat (i.e. escaping goat). [Lev 16:26 /goat to go to Azazel ESV; /goat of departure YLT; /goat
for the scapegoat KJV; /goat as the scapegoat NASB] in contrast to goat for sin offering v. 27.
Hartman Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd Rev. Ed. 1954-57 (A translation by
Woordenboek, 1969) Azazel is mentioned in correction with the ritual for the Day of Atonement
(Lev 16:8, 10, 26) as the name of a certain evil spirit in the desert (Cf. Isa 13:32; 34:14; Mt 12:43).
The harm which he was thought capable of inflicting on the people was to be averted by ending out to
him in the desert a goat on which all the sins of the people were symbolically laid (Lev 16:20 ff). The
age of origin of this strange custom remain obscure, and even the meaning of the name is unknown.
Vg. following LXX, worngy translated wrongly the phrase goat for Azazel as caper emmissarius;
hence the term emissary goat (Douay V.) and the term scape-goat (i.e. escaping goat) in AV.
a

Consequences of not forgiving enslavement in anger, feeling hurt, bitterness,

complaints, paradoxical enjoyment of unhappiness, living off all the negative
energy; capacity of love is simply being lost with cutting of being connected with
other person and also with God. Getting devoid of rest soulical and spiritual.
Experience of constriction rather than expansion; path to destruction rather than
creation, of death rather than life. (cf. Mt 18:23-35 Parable of the Unforgiving
Servant)
Our forgiveness is all about solving problems of personal or interpersonal wrongs vs. rights. Not
about the powers or those in powers.
While it is the problem which needs to solve, it is the person which needs to save ( love). To
forgive, one has to willing to confront the reality/problem, not condone; forgiveness is not approval,
getting away, denial/ignoring of the reality/problem, taking light of, or covering-up, being blind to
our blindness to see things as they are.
To a question Is there anything we cannot/should not forgive? the answer may come easy if we
differentiate forgiving a person vs. forgiving something (sin, wrongs, harms, hurts, etc.) and our
basis of forgiving is Moreover, the basis of our forgiving is love (as received from God).]
[To forgive anyone, they have to be properly judged with what they have done has to be discerned
through the eyes of the Lord. To forgive is then the other route than to condemn. To judge them and
then they become get condemned is in the hands of the Lord. Thou shall not condemn, curse,
grudge, cf. Mt 7:1 Judge not as erroneously rendered in KJV, etc.
Mt 18:35 if you I mean, each one of you dont forgive ones brother from your very heart
[ean m unless is too conditional for the act of forgiving. Same in Mt 6:15]; /unless each
you forgive ~ - JNT (- note: plural nouns and pronouns put into singular); /unless each one of
you forgives your brothers from your hearts Cass; /x: if each of you does not forgive his
brother from your heart NASB, HCSB (x: ~ from his heart); /

[Cf. Mt 6:12, 14-15]

[Joseph Tkach www.wcg.org/av/SpOL/spol166.htm

But the truth is, we find it far easier to forgive ourselves for just about anything than to
forgive the same mistakes in others. [along with blaming and excusing ARJ]
Jesus highlights this all too human tendency in Matthew 18:33-35:
It might be easy to assume from this statement that God forgives us on the basis of our
forgiveness of others, a simple transaction if we forgive others then God will forgive us. But
that would be a false assumption. God forgives us on the basis of Jesus perfect sacrifice in our
behalf and in our place, and on no other basis.
In such statements, Jesus is not prescribing a new form of legalism; he is describing the nature of
hearts that trust in him. For example, when we trust in Christ, we no longer have anything to hide
from him. That isnt because we are suddenly sinless. Its because we trust him to love us
unconditionally and to forgive our sins, sins that we are no longer afraid to show him.
Because we trust Christ, we can commit our fears and anxieties to him, which frees us from the
need to get even or get back at others. In other words, we know that others, like us, are measured
by Christs love and grace, and that takes the starch out of our natural tendency to condemn
others.
Whether its in traffic, at the courthouse or around the dinner table, were no longer slaves to our
raw impulses to condemn otherswe are free to forgive others as God, for Christs sake, forgave

us.
Matthew 18:35 is a condemnation only to those who dont trust Christtheir selfish measuring
rod is the only standard they know and the only one they understand. But for those who trust
the Redeemer, there is only one measurethe ever-unfolding height and depth of the love of
Christ.
NT Wright Evil and the Justice of God, p. 159: the faculty we have for receiving
forgiveness and the faculty we have for granting forgiveness are one and the same If we
open the one, we shall open the other. God is not being arbitrary. (forgiveness:) it
releases not only the person who I s being forgiven but the person who is doing the forgiving.
(ARJ process and effect are reciprocal not conditional. Mt 6:12; 14-15)

*propitiation vs. expiation; mercy-seat; *atonement; reconciliation; restoration;

salvation;

appeasement (placation) of Gods wrath (i.e. divine judgment. cf. anger,

hatred); ransom; atonement; removing guilt; cover over (defects; /x: cover up);
forgiveness; [Cf. substitutianry atonement; placation; appeasement]
[A highly technical word propitiation (Rm 3:25; 1Jn 2:2; 4:10) is rendered as
sin-offering for atonement in IRENT.]
Heb. kofer ransom or propitiatory gift.
[Ref. www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2092-atonement ]
1Tm 2:6 Himself as a ransom (antilutron) [Cf. lutron (Mt 20:28; //Mk 10:45). Cf.
lupt 1Pe 1:18; apolutrsis Eph 1:7] (in His body and soul)
[Linguistic and theological significance of atonement ransom buy off. cost
Himself in rescuing from the power of evil and sin. from the power and punishment
of vice, from the slavery and misery of sinners Schleusner, quoted in Clarkes
commentary; /x: from the captivity of Satan Gills commentary]
[The word ransom should not be read in a literal sense (just as in case of the term
incarnate), but metaphoric ( salvation in broad sense). Ref. John Hicks (2005, 2nd
Ed), The Metaphor of God Incarnate, (Ch. 11. Atonement by the Blood of Jesus? pp.
112-126)]

Rm 3:25
ARJ: It is this very Mashiah whom Elohim had put forward into a public view,
so that by [virtue of His sacrificial death on the Cross,]
shedding Hisx own blood
He should become a means of propitiary covering
[efficacious] through {the} faith:
a mercy-seat of atonement [1Jn 2:2; 4:10]; [for deliverance from our sins,
satisfying Gods wrath 1:18] [Depending on the meaning taken for this word, the
translations take a different rendering of the entire sentence of v. 25a. Highly
specialized words propitiation and expiation are diffuclt to convery its sense to the
readers.] [This seems referring to effecting remission of sins (AFESIS) in contrast to
passing-over (PARESIS) in v. 25b]; /a means of propitiary covering ARJ; /a

means of expiation Danker; /propitiation sacrifice ARJ; /a sign of his mercy

BBE; /a sacrifice of atonement NIV duo; NRSV; /a sacrifice to pay for sins
NIrV; /the means by which peoples sins are forgiven GNB; /x: thatwhichsatisfies [His wrath] TransLine; /a mercy seat [or, propitiation] ALT; /a mercy
seat (accessible through) NET; /propitiation (by his blood, to be received
through) ESV; /propitiation (in His blood through faith) NASB;

a mercy-seat of atonement [Depending on the meaning taken for this word, the
translations take a different rendering of the entire sentence of v. 25a] [This seems
referring to effecting remission of sins (AFESIS) in contrast to passing-over
(PARESIS) in v. 25b];
[For English word study propitiation expiation mercy seat with OED, see
Appendix 1Jn 2:2; 4:10 propitiation; mercy-seat] [See a separate file !!06Rm fn mss
(ch 3.25)]
[TransLine fn: Or, that which propitiates; the means-of-satisfaction; the satisfyingsacrifice, the effect of which is to satisfy Gods wrath and obtain His mercy (its focus
is on God). Some think it means that which expiates, covers, cleanses our sin, the
effect of which is to remove our sin and guilt (its focus in on our sin). Propitiation is
the removal or satisfaction of wrath. State from the human perspective, it is the means
of gaining His mercy. Jesus is the sacrifice that removes or satisfies the wrath against
sin (1:18) that Paul has just proven is upon all flesh (1:18-3:20). As a result, God is
merciful (the related word in Heb 8:12). Elsewhere only as mercy seat in Heb 9:5,
the place where the propitiation was made. Related to satisfaction in 1Jn 2:2, and
make-an-offering-for-satisfaction in Heb 2:17. We could never satisfy Gods wrath
against sin. He set forth His own Son as the satisfaction for His own wrath for the
reason stated at the end of v. 26.]

Propitiation for our sins 1Jn 4:10; 2:2. [Heb. 2:17 make propitiation] [To be
merciful Lk 18:13; mercy-seat Rm 3:25; Heb 9:5]
Salvation on the part of God is with expiation (ex- out of or from. to remove guilt
away in order for us be on the way to righteousness) toward propitiation (pro
toward, for; addressing enmity to be removed as divine justice and holiness are
addressed to > appeased) with the shed blood of Yeshua the Mashiah on the Cross as
the Pesach lamb at the appointed time (kata kairon) of God in the day of Pesach.]

Atonement with blood in O.T. it is literal blood of sacrified animals to be

sprinkled at altar area. In N.T. it is blood of His renewed covenant which is
symbolic of His self-giving death.
Blood of Jesus His self-giving death (in Gods self-giving love) (self-laying
down) a rather than self-sacrificing death self-sacrificial death a rather
legalistic (of sacrificial system of OT) and judicial term. His blood and death is not
the agent of salvation/forgiveness; it is God Himself. God is not who so to speak
sacrifices himself on the altar. [Cf. Heb 9:13, 19; 10:4; blood of animals. Cf. Lev
17:10-11 etc. it is about injunction against blood (e.g. 17:12-14) (; not that only blood is
used for atonement. Atonement by means of blood (of animal sacrife) is for specific sins.]

Rm 3:25; = sin-offering for atonement (> propitiation) with his own blood
(Yeshua as Mashiah)
Heb 9:14; 10:19; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14 = blood of Yeshua [redemption through ~]
Cf. 1Co 10:16 communion in blood of Messiah

Heb 9:14 blood of Yeshua purging conscience.

Heb 9:22 according to the Law almost everything is purified by blood, and there is
no remission of sins (/x: sins are forgiven only if blood is poured out GNB)
[Cf. the relevant text Lev 17:10-11 only says that blood (of scarified animals) is used
to obtain atonement, not that blood is the only means for obtaining atonement.] [Three
aspects of karbanot (Hebrew word for sacrifices, offerings) giving, substituting, and
bring a person closer to God its primary purpose is not forgiveness of sins
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/qorbanot.html
[Blood of a sacrificed animal, as an antetype for blood of Jesus by in the Pauline
midrash of OT practice. Cf. Christian phrases - power in the blood of Jesus Christ,
washed by the blood of Jesus Christ, etc.)]
[Cf. death atones sins: (in Judaic midrash - Sifre, Num. 112 etc.)

Reconciliation (katallag) 2Co 5:19 (a ministry of reconciliation).

From *salvation from to salvation to (experience of) deliverance from a
clear and present danger; - (how and why and for what of salvation).
delivered from the wrath to come on us 1Th 1:10
in the danger of the judgment Cf. Mt 5:22
give account of it in the day of judgment Mt 12:36
Ref:
www.ligonier.org/blog/two-important-words-good-friday-expiation-andpropitiation/
www.studylight.org/dictionaries/hbd/view.cgi?number=T1978
mercy seat: [mercyseat KJV. The English word is a translation of the
Hebrew kapporeth (in the Masoretic text) and its Greek hilasterion (in the
Septuagint) by William Tyndale influenced by the German word Gnadenstuhl
as in the Luther Bible, literally meaning seat of grace.] [Heb. kapporeth in the
Masoretic text; Gk hilasterion in LXX.
www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Parashah/Summaries/Terumah/Kappor
et/kapporet.html]
Danker p. 175
hilaskomai 1 cause to be kindly disposed . Lk 18:13; 2 exiate Hb 2:17
hilasmos expiation, of Jesus who serves as Gods means to overcome a
brokenrelationship btw God and sinner 1Jn 2:2; 4:10.
hilasthrion - 1. means of expiation, of Jesus as remover of sin, whicd disrutes or
obtruts relationship btw God and sinner Rm 3:25. 2 place of expiation, as the
context makes clear in Hb 9:5.

Rm 3:25 a means of atonement [1Jn 2:2; 4:10]; [satisfying Gods wrath 1:18 for
deliverance from our sins] [Depending on the meaning taken for this word, the
translations take a different rendering of the entire sentence of v. 25a] [This seems
referring to effecting remission of sins (AFESIS) in contrast to passing-over

(PARESIS) in v. 25b]; /a means of expiation Danker; /propitiation sacrifice ARJ;

/the sign of his mercy BBE; /a sacrifice of atonement NIV duo; NRSV; /a
sacrifice to pay for sins NIrV; /the means by which peoples sins are forgiven GNB;
/x: the throne of mercy where God's approval is given GW; /x: our sacrifice CEV;
/gave Jesus as a way to forgive peoples sins ERV; /thatwhich-satisfies [His wrath]
TransLine; /a mercy seat [or, propitiation] ALT; /the mercy seat (accessible
through) NET; /propitiation (by his blood, to be received through) ESV;
/propitiation (in His blood through faith) NASB; /a mercy-seat (ALT, YLT), Diagl,
Halmy; /a Mercy-seat WNT; /the mercy seat - NET; /a propitiation HCSB; /an
offering for propitiation - NWT; /an expiation RSV; /> a sacrifice of atonement
NRSV, NIV duo; /x: an atonement ISR; /an atoning sacrifice HNV; /the kapparah
for sin JNT; /a Propitiatory shelter CLV; /as a sacrifice to pay for sins NIrV;
/the sacrifice for sin NLT; /the sign of his mercy - BBE; /a means of reconciliation
TCNT; /a place where atonement by the Messiah's blood could occur ISV2; / a
mercy seat and propitiation AMP; / the means of propitiation WNT; /a propitiary
sacrifice Noyes; /the atoning sacrifice [for our sins] - AUV; /(dying) as a sacrifice
of reconciliation GSNT; /(baloney) MSG; /to be a propitiation, - KJV; /a
propitiation NKJV, ASV; /a propitiatory sacrifice REC; /a propitiatory covering
Rhm; /x: a reconciliation Geneva; /propitiationem Vulg; / KKJV; /
KRV; /x: an expiatory satisfaction Wuest; /as the means of propitiation, (a
propitiation accomplished by the shedding of his blood) PNT;

[TransLine fn: Rm 3:25 Or, that which propitiates; the means-of-satisfaction; the
satisfying-sacrifice, the effect of which is to satisfy Gods wrath and obtain His
mercy (its focus is on God). Some think it means that which expiates, covers,
cleanses our sin, the effect of which is to remove our sin and guilt (its focus in on our
sin). Propitiation is the removal or satisfaction of wrath. State from the human
perspective, it is the means of gaining His mercy. Jesus is the sacrifice that removes or
satisfies the wrath against sin (1:18) that Paul has just proven is upon all flesh (1:183:20). As a result, God is merciful (the related word in Heb 8:12). Elsewhere only as
mercy seat in Heb 9:5, the place where the propitiation was made. Related to
satisfaction in 1Jn 2:2, and make-an-offering-for-satisfaction in Heb 2:17. We
could never satisfy Gods wrath against sin. He set forth His own Son as the
satisfaction for His own wrath for the reason stated at the end of v. 26.]

/propitiation ALT, ESV, HCSB, Noyes, NKJV, LITV, MKJV

/atonement and propition AMP; /atonement NET, HNV, ISR, NIV duo, PNT;
/expitiation- RSV, Murdock; /an expatiation - Etheridge; /make reconciliation for KJV+; /a sacrifie of atonement NRSV; /propitiatory sacrifice NWT; /a kapparah
JNT; /a propitiatory shelter CLV; /to expiate Diagl, Mft, (TCNT); /x: could
pay (for) NIrV; /x: offerings BBE; /a sacrifice that could take away NLT; /a
means of purifying [Lev 16:30] for peoples sins [i.e., make atonement for them]
AUV; /x: make peace with God GW; /so that the peoples sins would be forgiven
GNB; /sacrife himself for forgiveness of CEV; /bring forgiveness for ERV;
/atone for ISV, WNT /to forgive GSNT; /to get rid of MSG (-baloney); /the
making of propitiation Rhm; /that sacrifice Wuest; /so as to make-an-offering-

Heb 2:17;

for satisfaction TransLine (fn.

Or, make propitiation, pritiate, satify. That

is, to make a sacrificial offering to satify Gods wrth againt sin, to gain
His mercy. He offered Himself, 7:27; 9:26. Gods response to this is to
be merciful, the related word in 8:12. Elsewhere only as be merciful
in Lk 18:13. Some think it means to expiate on which see Rm 3:25.)]

[Heb 9:5 /mercy-seat TransLine (Fn. or, theplace of propitiation

where the blood of the sacrifice was offered to satisfy the justice of God.
It was on top of the ark. Used of the place and the offering. Same word
as in Exo 25: 17, 21-22; Lev 16: 14- 16. On this word, see "that which
satisfies" in Rm 3:25)]

/[the] propitiation ALT; /the propitiation ESV, NASB, HCSB, NASB,

HCSB, Mft, MRC, Etheridge, Murdock, KJV++, ASV; /a propitiation Diagl,
Rotherham, Noyes; /the propitiatory shertor CLV; /propitiatio - Vulg; /the
expiation RSV; /an expiatory satisfaction Wuest; /the atoning sacrifice NET,
HNV, NRSV, NIV duo, TCNT, ISV; /an atoning sacrifice GSNT,WNT; /the
sacrifice that atones NLT; /an atoning offering ISR; /x: the offering BBE ;
/atonement Bishops; /personal atonement PNT; /the reconciliation Geneva; /to
pay for NIrV; /x: the payment GW; /the means by which ours sins are forgiven
GNB; /the sacrifice that takes away CEV; /the way our sins are taken away ERV;
/the propitiation (the atoning sacrifice), - AMP; /a covering over [or atonement]

1Jn 2:2;

for our sins [See Heb 2:17; Dan 9:24; IIChr 29:24], - AUV; / KKJV;
/ KRV; /

/a propitiation YLT, Wesley; /x: the propitiation

Whiston; /an atonement ACV; /as a propitiatory sacrifice -NWT; /[as] a
propitiation [or, appeasing sacrifice] ALT; /as a sacrifice to take away NLT; /as
the atoning sacrifice NIV duo, GSNT,WEB; 2 (x: purpose) /x: to be the atoning
sacrifice NET, NRSV; /to be the expiation for RSV; /to be a propitiation DRB,
Darby; /to be the propitiation ESV, HCSB; /x: that he might be the means of
expiating our sins Cass; /to be the kapparah JNT; /to be an atoning offering
ISR; /to be the way that God takes away our sins ERV!; /to be an offering for
BBE; /to give his life to pay for NIrV; /to be a reconciliation Geneva; /to be the

1Jn 4:10; 1 (appositional):

agreement Bishops; /to be a covering over [i.e., atonement, 2:2] AUV; /2-a
be the propitiation NASB, KJV++, ASV;

/to

Etymologically means thing for propitiation, with Hesychius writing that a

synonym of hilasterion was thing for catharsis, while the Vulgate translates it
as propitiatorium.
Gk hilasterion translated as propitiation. Also in LXX for Heb. kphrth, translated as
mercy seat by William Tyndale of the German term Gnadenstuhl, from the same
narrative position in the Luther Bible; Gnadenstuhl literally means seat of grace, in
the sense of location of grace. /atonement-seat Apostolic Interlinear]
It was on the top of the ark of the testimony (Ark of Covenant) in the Holy of Holy
Place of the Mishkan) (Exo 25:21-22). The kerubim (> cherubim) spread out their
wings above, overshadowing it with their wings; with their faces one to another;
toward the mercy seat were the faces of the kerubim. (Exo 37:9). God told Moshe He
will appear in the cloud of incense over the mercy seat. Blood of the animals of sin
offering [Heb. hatat] to be sprinkled in front of it (Lev 16:2, 14-15).]

*Atonement, *ransom, *redemption; *redeem; redeemer a path to salvation,

not a means or technique.
http://reslight.net/?p=242
A common unbiblical premise: <<No man, nor any created being, could possibly
pay the price to atone for sin that only God can pay for mans sin. What is called
infinite sin, would require an infinite price that only God Himself could give for
sin.>>
God did not give himself as a ransom, an offsetting price, for sin, but it was the
man Christ Jesus who gave himself.
God, in his wisdom, condemned all of Adams offspring in one man, so that only
one righteous man would be needed to pay the price for sin. That one man was not
God, but was the man Christ Jesus.
The Bible NOWHERE says that God had to sacrifice Himself to Himself for human sin. In
the Bible, a human sacrifice is an abomination to God. Death of Yeshua was not the sacrifice
of human body as God would demand, but it was his life offered as scrifice being what was
acceptable to take away sin. God accepts sacrifice, but does not sacrifice Himself to Himself.
The one who died on the Cross was the human Yeshua (as the Mashiah), not God, not God
the Son. With death his body was given; his humanity died as his soul died; his spirit
returned to His God. Resurrection is His self, that is, his soul in a spirit body to ascend to
His Father. The resurrection in the Scripture is resurrection in a spirital body, not bodily
resurrection (Cf. resurretion of body in Apostles Creed) Gk - ; Latin carnis resurrectionem

A literal reading of the word ransom

(www.biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/ransom.html
http://helpmewithbiblestudy.org/2JesusChrist/AtonementRansomRedemption.aspx )
as buying off someone from someone will lead to even a strange unbiblical idea on
to whom ransom is paid: paying the satan - the Fathers (Irenaeus, Origen).
Gk. lutron; antilutron; agoraz; exagoraz; apolutrosis; Heb. pidhyon, kopher;

*salvation vs *deliverance rescue; *saved be saved; *redeemed

*atonement, *propitiation, *expiation, adoption as sons; redemption; sinoffering for atonement;

Unbibiblical questions: Will God save all or only some? (related to the unbiblical
*Universalism). [Cf. 1Tm 2:4]
1. God does not save by Himself, but (through His agent? anthropomorphism?)
2. God has them saved.
3. All does not mean everyone e.g. 1Ti 2:4 [saved from the Adamic curse upon his
disobedience at the Garden of Edeam. Unrelated to a persons getting forgiveness.] (Cf.
Rm 11:26 all Israel shall be saved [from their spiritual blindess]).
4. Salvation is gift; it has to be received to be saved.
5. What does it mean to save to be saved?

6. To be Saved from what (Gods curse expulsion from Garden of Eden); to be saved to
what (back to favorable opportunities of Knowledge, that God wills and on account of this
He has appointed the Mediator between God and man, the man Mishah Yeshua, who
hgave himself a ransom for all (- inclusive; all and everyone of them), to be testified in
due time. (Rusell, vide infra. pp. 469-470) His ransom proves to be efficatious for those
received salvation, free gift of faith.
[Ref. Russell (1916), Studies in the Scripture (Vol. 5. The Atonment Between God and
Man, p. 466).]

With the concept salvation, a theological and religious jargon, the question is to what we are
being saved and from what. (Words: saved, delivered, rescued, redeemed) (from sins, sin guilt,
harm, (power of) evil, (hands of) enemies, darkness, etc.) (from misfortunes or bad luck or
doom - Shamanism)

Sometimes being saved refers to being saved alive from physical death (See Gen
12:12; 50:20; Exo. 1:22; Deu 20:4; Ezk 13:18; Mt 8:25; 14:30).
Others refer to being saved from physical enemies and out of slavery (see Jud 6:14;
1Sam 4:3; 2Kgs 16:7; 19:19; Psa 59:2; Lk 1:74).
Still others refer to salvation concerning God's protection of the nation of Israel as in
Exo 14:30: Thus the Lord saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians.
Other scriptures refer to God's special promises to Israel to save them from sickness
and disease (See Psa 103:3; 42:11; 67:2; Deu 28:1-14; Mk 16:16-18.)
Rescue from the [power of] evil (Mt 6:13)
Redemption (Rm 3:24; 1Co 1:30; Eph 1:7, 14; 4:30; Col 1:14; Heb 9:12, 15)
Redemption of our bodies (Rm 8:23)
Redeemed from the curse incurred on as condenmned in the the law (Gal 3:13)

The doctrine of salvation is the heart of Christian gospel. It is at the same time one of the most
confused and complicated doctrines in the church. Atonement theories, justification,
redemption, and the meaning of salvation are all interconnected with this doctrine.
What is salvation? In the Old Testament, salvation is described as "safety" (yesha) and "peace"
(shalom). The term salvation in the Greek (soteiria) means "deliverance" from enemies in the
New Testament, and "health" in an extra-biblical sense.2 In Latin, salvation (salus) means
"soundness," "health," and "welfare."3 The English term salvation was derived from the Latin.
Traditionally, the church has perceived salvation from three basic perspectives, corresponding to
the three major branches of Christianity: Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and
Protestantism.
For the early Greek church, salvation meant freedom from death and error. For the Roman
Catholic Church, salvation denotes freedom from guilt and its outcomes in this and the next life
(in purgatory and hell).
In classical Protestantism, salvation signifies freedom from the law and its anxiety-producing
and condemning power.4 These definitions focus on the freedom from the power of sin, guilt,
and death. In all of them we see that the meaning of salvation has been defined from the
perspective of sinners.

Ref. Andrew Sung Park (2009), Triune Atonement: Christ's Healing for Sinners,
Victims, and the Whole Creation
https://youtu.be/dXN3h0TIXts An Interview with Andrew Sung Park
Ref. www.theopedia.com/atonement-of-christ
Theories of atonement:

Historical theories Ransom, recapitulation, satisfaction, penal-substitution, moralexample, government;

Modern theories declaratory, guaranty, vicarious repentance, Christus Victor (or
Dramatic), accident, martyr.

I am saved from what to what (status)?

Elohim saves us; we are saved by grace and in faith.
I am saved. Then? What happens? What does it mean to be saved?
the cult of Salvation (in Korea), as the cult of Word of Faith (in USA)
str (savior) and stria (salvation) in Gospels:

salvation/deliverance/rescue (7x) Lk 1:69, 71, 77; 2:30; 3:6; 19:9; Jn

4:22.
savior (3x) Lk 1:47; 2:11; Jn 4:42

cf. a ransom lutron Mk 10:45; [cf. redemption > Latin redemptio (buy back)]
[Ps 18:2 H6403 HED #6647 verb to be delivered escape; + H3468 HED
#3589 (salvation; deliverance) from verb yashua HED #3588]
Cf. Lk 1:71 deliverance (stria) out of our enemies; 1:74 be rescued
(hruomai) out of the hand of our enemies
[See also *Gospel]
[salvation as a religious and church jargon (? spiritual overtone). Often the
word salvation is used without anything to do with its biblical setting. 124F124Fa
From a linguistical-literary viewpoint salvation is not salvation, i.e. salvation
in someones vocalubary is not salvation in someone elses. Only when it is
defined internally from within the Bible, it makes sense. Not just the word
salvation but every single word or term (beginning with god) stands clear
and unambiguous and is suitable in our communication only if we have
agreed upon definitions. Otherwise all we have is an exercise of babel tower in
theological arguments.]
If we define salvation as being forgiven and accepted by God because of Jesus
death on the cross, then it becomes a tautology that Christianity alone knows and is
able to preach the source of salvation. But if we define salvation as an actual human
change, a gradual transformation from natural self-centeredness (with all the human
evils that flow from this) to a radically new orientation centered in God and
manifested in the fruit of the Spirit, then it seems clear that salvation is taking
place within all the world religionsand taking place, so far as we can tell, to more
the word salvation is even used in nonchalant manner e.g. But few have taken the time to study
out when the HIGH DAY beginning the Feast of Unleavened Bread is? Many assume it is the 15th, but
salvation doesnt come by assumption. from
http://yahuyahweh.org/eaoy/pdf/Passover_Day_A_High_Sabbath.pdf
a

or less the same extent. On this view, which is not based on theological theory but
on the observable realities of human life, salvation is not a juridical transaction
inscribed in heaven, nor is it a future hope beyond this life (although it is this too),
but it is a spiritual, moral, and political change that can begin now and whose
present possibility is grounded in the structure of reality. John Hick A Pluralist
View, Four Views on Salvation in a Pluralistic World, ed. Dennis L. Okholm and
Timothy R. Phillips (Grand 1996), 35-36.
[quoted in www.blts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/MKS-I-Am.pdf ]

Cf. restoration, recovery to be recovered to be in a status (normal or

original) in relation to Elohim.
Cf. deliverance, release; rescue with political overtone; E.g. deliverance of
Israel, the Gentiles, etc.; rescue from physical harm or danger;
Cf. liberation; consummation; freedom;
synergism [Arminianism] vs. monergism, [Calvinism]; vs. Christian Universalism
[universalism itself is a vague term.]
Reading material: Arminianism FAQ 1 (Everything You Always Wanted to Know) (Roger
Olson) evangelical synergism rather than Arminianism since it did not begin with a Dutch
theologian Jacob Arminius (d. 1609).
Salvation comes to all and for all; not 'salvation of all', as God reaches out to redeem and save
all people into Elohim Himself. [2Co 5:18-19]

Does Bible say salvation is free?

Is it free because we dont have to pay for it? No, it is because it has been given to humanity
already when Adam and Eve fell. It is only that we have to receive from Him in the Life of
Mashiah Yeshua. [Jn 3:16].
Once saved, always saved. What does it mean I am saved? Have made through something
safe? Once you are pulled out of a pit, is there all there is, as a sheep is sought after and
brought back to the shepherd Himself? Then, no more going astray anymore? [Lk 15:4] Even
if we are made into androids it would be even impossible. Unless we have a God in our own
image (as Adam did). Unless one dies right after being saved. Then whats use of being saved.
A sinner repents at his death bed whats meaning of any salvation if he gets one?
Is the Gospel of Jesus about salvation of you and people? What is it that He says Good news
of Kingdom? Is it something like where you go and are to be put under authority of theocratic
power organization [aka Church]? A Paradise after death?
redemption ? a concept higher than salvation.

Salvation, a typical church language, is not just a resuce but also a restoration operation. To
understand salvation, we need to know what the problem was, what God did about it, and how
we respond to it. We need to understand humanity vs. God; sin, evil, life, death,
justice, eternal life, Kingdom reign of Elohim.

be saved saved from what and saved to what and saved for what. become saved [an event
at a point of time] is not an end, goal or purpose (of Gods creation and care); it is a beginning
of being saved (to last from beginning to consummation).
Cf. In the contex of healing Lk 7:50 sz (save, rescue) is rendered as be made whole. Cf.
Gk. iomai (heal, cure).

It is not a one-time event, even concerned with an individual. It is from the beginning of the
humanity at Creation all through down to the Consummation with Gods care of what He has
created. It covers people, nations, world, and the whole creation to be put into the condition
God has intended. Often it is used in a narrow sense (as in biblical jargons born again
sinners prayer.)
Three stages in which how salvation is effected:
(1) Justification upon repentance to change ones mindset turned away from the
worldly self-centeredness to God-centered, each person gets saved as is declared
righteous before God, not based on the works of morality or religion, but by
coming to Him to place trust on Him only - on what He has promised as revealed
in the Scripture.
(2) Sanctification ones spirit is quickened by Gods spirit to be brought to Life a,
Light, Love with Learning from above and Leading others learn.
(3) Glorification taking the promised inheritance of Kingdom reign for the
precious rewards He has provided for the faithful not those who say believers
but who ARE believers in Him.
125F125F

Is salvation by faith or salvation by faith plus works?

Many thinks this is perhaps the most important question in all of Christian

theology. This question is the cause of the Reformation, the split between the
Protestant churches and Catholic Church. [https://ebible.com/questions/308-issalvation-by-faith-alone-or-by-faith-plus-works/ ]
The truth is, it all depends on what is meant by the term salvation.
Contentious arguments and debates are mostly from not tackling this first step
clearly. Also they fail to see righteousness to be seen in different sense
righteousness before God and righteousness before men, even though the core
concept of being righteous is to be worthy [to honor the name of Most High
Elohim.]

life b (soul being of life - psuch; cf. living - bios; Life zo as in Life
eternal):
126F126F

In the daily life of Mashiah-followers, it is a process of steps each day we die in Him and
a

Note the capitalized Life means the word has a different sense than in ordinary usage. E.g. Life is for
translating Gk z, not psuch (which are ususally rendered as soul or life) or bios (Lk 8:14; 1Ti
2:2; 2Ti 2:4; 1Pt 4:3 v.l., etc. other meaning livelihood, means of living Mk 12:44; Lk 8:43;
15:12, 30; 21:4; cp. 1J 3:17). Same for Light.
b
1Ti 2:1 life (Gk bios also 2Ti 2:4) not Life (z). [Cf. psuch]

each day we shall live because of Him. Without picking up ones cross to participate the death
of Mashiah, there is no Life eternal with us. Only then, our thirst is quenched by water of life
(Jn 4:14) and living water will flow out of us. (Jn 7:38). Simply there is no room for such
expression, once saved, always saved.
Did Yeshua the Mashiah come to "save" people during His ministry on earth? But He did not!
Rather, Yeshua through His atoning deathmade it possible for those whom the Father
"calls" to be reconciled to God after His death and resurrection.
Near the end of His life in the human flesh, Yeshua told His disciples, "I will pray the Father,
and He will give you another Helper to be called to your side to may abide with you forever"
(Jn 14:16). Even His disciples did not yet have the indwelling presence and power of the holy
Spirit. They were not yet restored! As Yeshua told Peter, "Once you are restored, strengthen
your fellow brethren." (Lk 22:32). And, speaking of Yeshuas lifetime, John was inspired to
write, "the [promised] spirit was not yet given, because Yeshua was not yet glorified" (Jn
7:39).
So, in a technical sense, no one was "converted" during Jesus' human ministry. No one
received the promised holy spirit until the Day of Pentecost after Yeshuas death and
resurrection (Act 2). And, surprising to some, Yeshua did not even try to convert the
multitudes during His ministry. He was not "trying" to save all humanity back then anymore
than God is trying to save all humanity now!
Does His death (suffering and crucifixion) save people? No, not quite. It is His death on the
Pesach as Pesach Lamb, that has brought YHWH Elohims salvation plan into reality
breaking into the history of entire humanity, not just of Israel.

*deliverance

http://home.clara.net/arlev/passover.htm#7
By seeing in the word sacrifice the implication that an animal is meant (Deu
16:2 speaks of the Pesach sacrifice being from the flock or the herd) many
commentators have been prompted to interpret 1Co 5:7 as referring to the
Pesach lamb. But this is too narrow a view for Christ is not only the fulfilment
of the lamb, but also of the entire festival. -???
Pesach, then, deals with deliverance and not just a deliverance from sin.
When we look at the cross of Christ we see deliverance being secured in
various differing situations that mankind can find himself bound in. In the
cross, then, we see:
1. Deliverance from sin - Rm 6:6-7, 18, Col 1:14, 1Pe 2:24
2. Deliverance from Satan - Lk 4:18, Col 1:13, 2:15
3. Deliverance from the flesh - Rm 6:6; 7:24-25, Gal 2:20
4. Deliverance from death - Heb 2:14-15
5. Deliverance from the demands of Law - Rm 8:2, Gal 5:1
6. Deliverance from the coming wrath of God - 1Th 1:10
7. Deliverance from all accusation of guilt - Act 13:39 (where the RSVs
freed is the translation of the normal Greek word for justified - that is,
considered not guilty)

But this list is by no means exhaustive for, with everything that holds individuals
bound in slavery, theres deliverance in the cross - whether depression, anxiety,
worry, fear and so on.
For each and every taskmaster thats set up over a disciples life and that refuses to
let them be free to serve God, the solution is to be found in the work of Jesus on the
cross through the fulfilment of the festival of Pesach.

In many places in the Bible salvation (as in KJV) is better rendered as

deliverance e.g. 1Pe 1:15; 2Pe 3:15. Be that it may as both concept overlaps
(context-dependent), salvation (as a theological term) is not something to do
with a so-called once saved, always saved. It is being acted in the Gods will
from the Creation to the Consummation. God has put the humanity in His
salvation from the beginning, even at the Adams Fall. Salvation affects the
whole created world, not just at the level of an individual person or a group of
people. Most confuses it with the epochal salvation event of the Mashiah
death and, in turn, with personal repentance into restored relationship to God.
Salvation of the whole created world the whole creation is on groaning (Rm
8:22). Even as a person level each of us is also groaning for salvation in the
hope of glory, that is, the Mashiah (Col 1:27).
Yeshua as Salvation of YHWH23: [See in WB #3 *Savior as a title Yeshua
the Mashiah]

Mt 1:21 Yeshua he will save his people from their sins

Jn 4:22 through [the line of] the tribe of Yudah comes the very
salvation [for all people] [from the Father] (IRENT)
Lk 19:9 salvation comes to this house (Zacchaeus)
2Tm 1:10;Tit 1:4, 3:6 our Savior, Mashiah Yeshua
[Cf. 1Tm 1:1; 2:3; Tit 1:3, 2:10; 3:4; Jud 1:25 God as our Savior]

Titus 2:11-12
2:11
Indeed, the grace of Elohim has manifested [+ in the person of Mashiah
Yeshua], [3:4]
the very grace which brings salvation to all people [to receive]
2:12
teaching us [who have accepted Gods grace]
to live self-disciplined, righteously and godly life
in the midst of this present age,
renouncing all the ungodliness and worldly desires,
This verse should not be read as a proof text as used by Universalism.

It is Elohim who saves a person. The Bible does not save them. Religion does
not. Faith does not. Baptism does not. Belonging to a religion or church does
not. Sadly, millions and billions of humanity put their faith in religion

believe in religion.

*judgment; *condemnation; *punishment

krin judge, be judgmental (Mt 7:1)
katadiakaz (e.g. Lk 6:37; Mt 12:7); /xcondemn most [Problem with English word condemnation
condemn as used as a biblical jargon with different sense from common Engish usage.]
krima judgment
katakrima pronouncedment of judgment (verdict, sentence) - only in Rm 5:16, 18; 8:1.

*righteous vs. just, upright, *righteousness (vs. justice); justify; *justification;

*atonement
righteous; righteousness Righteous before whom [before God vs. before men]; in
what sense [in right relation to be counted worthy for the names sake]; and how so
to be implicit/explicit in the context.] [Not simply right (in opposition to wrong).]
The concept of righteousness (other than used as synonymous of being just bringing in
justice) is foremost a relational term. It is not about to be right (in opposition to
wrong), but to be right proper relation to others. Not an abstract thing called
righteousness thought of possessed by a person.
Rm 10:8 [ Deu 30:14] Righteousness in OT is a rather judicial and legalistic term; it is
something one can achieve by keeping the commandments and the statues of YHWH
Elohim. It fundamentally contrasts the righteousness in NT, which is relational term; it is
something one receives from the grace of Elohim on whom one places faith through
Yeshua the Mashiah (e.g. justification by faith in Pauline Epistles). The same word is
used almost in diametrically opposite way. E.g. Righteousness in the text of Gospels are
righteousness as was used OT from ones deeds vs. from gift of grace. In the legalism
which characterizes Judaism and OT (as hinted in G-Mt), it is about sins and
righteousness by man, where as in NT era (after the Gospel period) it is about sin and
righteousness from God along with ironically legasitic elaboration of original sin (e.g.
idea of total depravity of man which can be solved by means of another religion replacing
Judaism and even Paulinism. Note that Yeshua on His part was not sent but the lost sheep
of the House of Israel - Mt 15:24)
[Ref: www.hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/article/viewFile/557/456 HTS 58(2) 2002 767 Matthews
anti-Paulinism: A neglected feature of Matthean studies] Cf. so-called Jesusism,
Christianism, Paulinism, Christianity (which is not one religion, but collection of them
Christianisms);

Rm 5:1
having been taken as righteous [and as worthy to Gods name] /> being justified most,

Cass; /been-taken-as-worthy AJK (- worthy in relation the other (-God); /> been-made-right
with God NCV; /x: have Gods approval GW; /been-made-acceptable CEV; /x: since it is by
faith that we are justified PNT; /

[cf. into righteousness Rm 10:10]

[in our life] [being righteous (before God) is not a theological statement but a reflection of
existential experience]

on the ground of faith \ek pistes ( -cf. by hUPO an agent, instrument) [as one put total trust
on who God is works are its outflow]; /through faith BBE; /x: by faith Cass, KJV+, most;
/on the basis of; /because of JNT; /through faith SourceNT, many; /x: as a result of
NWT, (WNT) [as one put total trust in who God is]; /xx: on the principle of ~ Darby; /xx:
because of our faith ERV; [faith = same in v. 2; referring to believers faith in Yeshua/God; not

about faithfulness of Yeshua/God which is His obedience to God (Rm 5:19). Cf. obedience in
fath (Rm 1:5)]

The meaning of righteous and righteousness in the Scripture is often explained

and defined by justification (a theological jargon), almost like putting a cart before
the horse. It is usually taken in judiciary sense of being right with someone (right
with God as not gone wrong or done wrong) or of the idea of justice to be meted
out. The basic sense of the word which should emerge from reading of the whole of
New Testament is, not simply to be right (relationiship to God), but to be worthy to
His name. The word worthy is not in the sense of valuable or useful. In the
Scripture it is mostly used in the sense of righteous before God (Lk 1:6). It is not
about good (vs. bad), right (vs. wrong), upright (moral, honorable, honest), or just (fair,
moral). Rather, it is to be worthy for the name of God. In a few places it is more
focused on being righteous before men (Mt 23:28; Lk 16:15) in reference to ones
keeping of Torah (e.g. Mt 1:19; 5:45; 9:13; Mk 2:27; 6:20; Lk 2:5; 5:32; 10:29; 23:50)
This point is not to be missed to avoid confusion and contradiction, especially in the
reading the Epistle of Yaakob (Jam 2:21, 24, 25). The phrase does not mean it is a
different kind of righteousness, nor it means to appear/show righteous before men, as
if it is from mans standard or mans approval). It means people coming as righteous
to be proved on the part of people; coming to stand up righteous. Apparent
contradiction in the Pauline vs. Yaakob Epistles does not get solved by taking Pauline
idea of righteousness before God (with faith) and Yaakobs idea of righteousness
before men (with works). It is same righteousness, Gods righteousness, Gods taking
a person as righteous with righteousness not something of abstract concept or quality
which God holds and which man gets or achieves, but simply how God takes people
for His names sake to be worthy to His own name. [See *works vs. faith; law vs.
grace]

The word righteousness is not to be confused with the word justification. The
two words justify a and justification b are in the Bible translations such as
KJV which is taken from Latin Vulgate translation. The Scripture simply do
96F96F

97F97F

The meaning of justify outside theological parlance show or prove to be right. (cf. ? nuance of
excuse or explain away).
a

Justification as a theological jargon an act of Gods free grace, wherein he pardoneth all
our sin, and accepteth us as righteous in His sight, only for the righteousness of Christ
imputed to us, and received by faith alone. Westminster Shorter Catechism, 33. (Cf. Deu
25:1; Job 32:2; Pro 17:15; 1 Ki 8:32; Mt 12:37; Lk 7:29; Rm 5:16; 8:33-34)
quoted from John Murray on Justification and Ordo Salutis
b

not have meaning of such deep theological jargon and as such should be
avoided in the English Bible translations. It is about God taking a person as
righteous. Two expressions, one is taken as righteous and one is righteous,
are related but different. So-called justification is what Paul explains of how
one is to be taken as righteous by God to be worthy before God. [Note: to
understand and translate it as declare righteous is much in judicial tone,
which itself is not justified - in the correct sense of the word justify in English
vocabulary, not as theological jargon.]
Yeshua the Mashiah, who became for us wisdom from God, and indeed,
righteousness, sanctification and redemption. 1Co 1:30
dikaios righteous; (Danker p. 97) upright, *just; [QQ What does it mean by
righteous? Morally, ethically, legally? God is righteous in what sense
righteous? - ARJ]
righteous
= its basic sense is be worthy, i.e. worthy to the name. In the Scripture it is
be worthy to Gods name. [Is it same as well keeping Torah (O.T. and
Gospels)? or torah-keeping is consequence of being righteous?]
Used in contrast between two:
righteous before God (esp. in Pauline Epistles) vs.
righteous before men (Jam 2:21, 24, 25) [cf. self-righteous = full of
pride.]
dikaio heautous Lk 10:29; 16:15; /justify oneself - most; /prove oneself
righteous NWT; /x: declare himself righteous ISR (< get declared); /x:
put one in the right BBE; /xx: show that the way he was living was right
ERV; /xx: make an excuse for oneself Mft; /acquit oneself of reproach
AMP; /x: justify his actions NLT; /x: justify his question GSNT; /
Cf. take one as righteous; > declare righteous, vindicate; be made
righteous, be proven righteous; justify (theological jargon from Latin
iustificare (do justice) used in Vulgate, but nothing to do with the Biblical
sense).

be taken as righteous /> be declared righteous >> be justified (biblical

jargon);

/prove to be righteous (Gal 2:6; 5:4);

(God) justifies ~ takes someone as righteous IRENT; (Gal 3:8; Rm 3:30)
[problem of English word justify and justification with meaning different
from biblical usage. E.g. get excused or vindicate.] [Gal 3:8 - /justifies KJV++, most, PNT, /consider ~ righteous JNT; /declare ~ righteous NWT,
ISR, NLT, /make ~ right with himself NIrV; /x: make ~ right ERV; /x:
give righteousness BBE; /give his approval to GW; /pronounce righteous TCNT; /x: accept CEV; /put right with himself GNB; /justify (declare
righteous, put in right standing with Himself) AMP; /consider right with him
AUV; /accept as upright GSNT; /accept as righteous Noyes!; /x: set
things right with MSG; /declare to be free from guilt WNT;
[Cf. reckon into righteousness Gal 3:6]
dikaisis (Danker p. 98 vindication Rm 4:25; 5:18) [justification most]
dikaima precept, requirement; decree
(Rm 1:32) /righteous decree (of God) NWT, NET, NIV duo; /x: righteous
judgment ALT; /x: judgment KJV; /ordinance NASB; /decree ESV
trio; /just sentence HCSB; /just statue CLV; /x: command NIrV; /
dikaiosun Danker p. 97 - uprightness, righteousness, justice
Mt 6:33 the Kingdom and the righteousness of God
2Co 6:14 righteousness and lawlessness - most, NKJV; /x: ~ wickedness
NLT; /x: ~unrighteousness KJV+; /~ iniquity Mft, HNV, Murdock; /xx:
good and bad ERV; /x: right and wrong GW, MSG; /x: good ~ evil CEV;
/uprightness ~ iniquity GSNT, ASV; /x: goodness and evil PNT;
dik justice; punishment
*just English word is ambiguous. E.g. Noah was a righteous man, guiltless
(tamm H8549) (Gen 6:9) /a righteous man, blameless ESV; /a righteous
man, and perfect ASV; /a man righteous and whole-hearted JPS; /a
righteous man, without defect LEB; /a righteous man, had been perfected
among LITV; /a godly man; he was blameless NET;
/a just man, and perfect Bishps; /a just man, perfect Darby; a just and
perfect man DRB; /a just man and perfect KJV; /a just and upright man
Geneva; /[just a man?] /had Gods approval and was a man of integrity
GW;
Fixed phrases:

righteous Father Jn 17:25 (the only occurrence of righteous in G-Jn)

righteous and unrighteous ones Mt 5:15; Act 24:15
the righteous ones vs. outcast sinners Mk 2:17
righteous before God Lk 1:6
Gods righteousness \dikaiosun theou (Rm 1:17ff; 3:5, 21, 22) /xx:
Gods justice SENT; /xx: Gods right way 4aNG; /
1. [Gods (anarthrous) before God /x: /x: from God; /xx: in
possession by God]
2. [righteousness (anarthrous) - state of being righteous before
God][not God is (a) just (person), nor God is righteous; not Gods
attribute or essence, something God has.]
3. [righteous - right standing before God in right relation to God
seen as worthy]
righteousness from Elohim \dikaiosun tou theou (Rm 10:3 the
(aforementioned) righteousness of Elohim] (cf. justification)

justification [Gods taking us as righteous]

1) blood - Rm 5:9
2) grace - Heb 4:12-16
3) faith - Rm 3:28
4) works - Jm 2:18-26
5) condemned by my own words - Rm 3:1-4.
Alister E. McGrath (2005), Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of
Justification [3rd Edition]
Doctrine of Justification:
Catholic doctrine of justification
From Protestants position http://carm.org/roman-catholic-view-justification.]
Catholic theology that denies justification by faith alone and requires human effort
in addition to God's grace to be saved.

From Catholic position - www.ewtn.com/library/answers/justif.htm

The definition of justification quoting from the fourth chapter of the Council of
Trent's Decree On Justificationis (1545-1564): "[A] translation from that state in
which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the
adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Savior."
That it is a translation of a state of unrighteousness to a state of righteousness. The
basis for the state of unrighteousness is our unity with Adam; the basis for the state
of grace or righteousness into which we enter is our unity with the second Adam.
On this point both Catholics and Protestants agree.24

*works vs. faith; *Law vs. Gospel; Law vs. Grace;

Ref.: A Biblical Arch. Society article by Ronald Hendel The Law in the
Gospel Bible Review, Apr. 1998, 20, 52 The law is an essential precondition
for the gospel: When Jesus and Paul speak, they speak in the language of law
Halakhah (Essene Halakhah letter from Qumran MMT (Some Precepts on
Torah) - even from before 1st c.); Mishnah (ca 200 CE); Talmud (ca 600 CE)
Cf. Martin Luthers distinction between law and gospel.
works the sense is usually clear in the context, often used in fixed phrases. If the word
occurs by itself, the context has to be supplied e.g. Rm 3:27; 4:2, 6;
in several different contexts:
(1) works of law (Rm; Gal)
(2) works of righteousness
(3) works of darkness, etc.
Eph 2:9 what we do [to earn ~] (ergon, works - i.e. works of our own
righteousness (Tit 3:5) by keeping religious rules and requirements.]
[Rm 3:20 justification not by works Eph 2:9 salvation not the result of works];
[work on the basis of obligation and requirement to meet laws demands of religions,
that is, works of our own righteousness cf. v. 10. Also Rm 4:5; Tit 3:5 (works of
righteousness). The same word is in context diametrically opposite to Jam 2:14 works
that which flows out of Love. Work being performed as requirement in obedience with
law Rm 3:20; vs. work flowing out from result of Love in faith.);
/works; /x: earning the love of God - PNT; /x: actions JNT, ISV; /> anything youve
done GW, (NIrV); /something you have earned CEV; /our own efforts GNB; />
obedience to Law TCNT; /It has not been earned GSNT; /your own [good] deeds
[See Tit 3:5] AUV; /merit WNT; /what you have done Mft; /x: the good things
we have done NLT; /what we have done to merit AJR; /[the fulfillment of Laws
demands ] AMPexp; /

*vessel; *cup
/> cup; /> mug; /xxx: chalice (- Catholic jargon); /x: glass;

vessel of salvation Mt 26:27;

vessel of suffering Mt 20:22, 23];
vessel of divine wrath Mt 26:39 [+ for justice the earth is to receive]; Rev
14:10. Also Ps 57:8; Isa 51:17]; /> cup; /xx: cup of suffering NIrV, GW, GNB;
[Here, Yeshuas suffering does not refer to his crucifixion not about fearing of
coming suffering through the Cross; He came for this purpose He knew well.]
Cf. Jn 18:11 drink the cup my Father has given me? [?? NET sn = cup of suffering as
in the Synoptics Mt 26:39; //Mk 14:36; //Lk 22:42]
Cf. Ps 16:5 YHWH is my inheritance and my cup
of blessing and salvation - (Ps. 23:5; 116:13); with wrath and horror (Isa 51:17; Ezk
23:33) of divine judgment and Gods wrath.

Metaphor of what? trial, hardship, suffering, agony, physical torture, (cf. Psa
69:1-3; Lam 1:13), offense, reproach, persecution, self-denial, forsaking,
aloneness, ignoble death, etc.? of divine punishment/wrath (cf. Rm 1:18; Rev
14, 15, 16)?

*suffering; *tribulation; *affliction; *persecution

Words: suffering vs. affliction Col 1:24 (afflictions of the Mashiah vs. Pauls
sufferings)
Words: disease, sickness, illness, hardship, trials,

tribulation refers to persecution (including that which the believers will go

through) no such thing as rapture before tribulation, which has confused it
with with Gods wrath (Rev 11). [Check Greek concordance study]
(Yeshua to) *suffer Mt 16:21; //Mk 8:31; //Lk 9:22 does not refer to the
crucifixion itself. His suffering is not his crucifixion itself, [as graphically
depicted in the Mel Gibsons movie, The Passion of the Christ (2004)]. The
cup (< vessel) be removed [in His Gethsemane prayer] is not the cup of
suffering as wrongly translated in GNB (Mt 26:42; //Mk 14:36; //Lk 22:42). It
is the vessel of Gods wrath [+ for justice the earth is to receive], which
Yeshuah has to take upon Himself.
Apostoles Creed passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus
suffered under Ponitius Pilate, was crucified, died,
Here suffering is an inaccurate term to use. Sentenced to death and
executed under Pilate, not suffered. His Suffering in the Passion Week
was from the representative of all the humanity, viz. the Sanderin
authority of Yehudim and the occupying Roman power. Suffering does
not equate with pain and afflicition on the Cross.

sharing in the suffering of Christ (Rm 8:17; Phi 3:10); the Passion (> Latin
patere suffer not emotion, an intense, driving, or overmastering feeling or
conviction; something one love to do passionate); Gk. pathema > pasch
www.middletownbiblechurch.org/salvatio/passion.htm
what sense of suffering Brutality of horrible and terrible pain; torments, affliction;
anguish on the exection stake; the crucifixion itself? Or pointing to suffering execution
to death?
The Passion of the Christ:
www.textweek.com/response/passion_movie.htm
Reading material:
https://mycontemplations.wordpress.com/2009/05/05/how-unique-was-the-suffering-ofjesus/
http://ancientworldinfilm.s3.amazonaws.com/The%20Passion.pdf
Zeb Garber (2006), Mel Gibsons Passion The Film, the Controversy, and its
Implications esp. Ch. 12 Crucifixion in Rabbinic Context: Juridical or Theological? by
Jacob Neusner.
www.ptm.org/04PT/MarApr/weekChangedWorld.pdf Review of the movie The Passion
of Christ

www.ptm.org/05PT/MarApr/aboutThePassion.pdf
Cover Story - Plain Truth Ministries
Jerry Griffin
Each of the four Gospel accounts use only a few verses to describe the
punishment Jesus received. In a single verse, Matthew, Mark and John mention,
almost in passing, that Pilate had Jesus scourged before sending him off to be
crucified (Mt 27:26, Mk 15:15, Jn 19:1). The extent or severity of this scourging
is not given, and Luke omits this detail altogether. In regard to the crucifixion,
all four Gospels, in the greatest economy of words, simply say, they crucified
him (Mt 27:35, Mk 15:24, Lk 23:33, Jn 19:18). For the original audience who
read these words, no more needed to be said. The ancient world understood the
brutality of this form of execution, and no doubt Jesus experienced [suffered?
ARJ] a cruel and painful death. But the biblical writers do not dwell on those
aspects. It is the theological significance of that death, not its excruciating
physical details, that gets their attention.
In Gibsons traditionalist Catholic theology, one can obtain meritorious favor in the eyes
of God by identifying with the sufferings of Christ. Historically, therefore, Catholic
theology has had a tendency to fixate on Christs sufferings just compare Catholic
artwork to Protestant and the emphasis is apparent. This fixation was especially prevalent
during the Middle Ages when the notion of suffering was taken to ascetic extremes and
the salvation of the soul was equated with the torture of the body. [fn: Whether
salvation comes from ones efforts to gain extra merits imparted by Christ and the saints
or whether it is solely by faith in the imputed righteousness of Christ was a key issue of
the Reformation, separating Protestantism from Catholicism.]

*tempt, *temptation *test; put to test; *trial

vt. To test, to put to test, to examine/check whether good or bad, right or wrong, true
or false, strong or weak, etc., assess, evaluate, appraise, judge, examine to what
purpose? be refined be challenged.
vi. To undergo trials of hardship/suffering
n. tests, testings, provingout, cf. temptations (vs. seduction, inducement, entice,
entrapment; cf. lure, allure, bati), vs. triasl of hardship (vs. judicial trial), tryout

(experiment, test out).

Mt 4:1 peiraz to put someone on test; to bring onself put to test test with
trials of hardship; to challenge; to prove trustworthiness, put someone on test
(with desires; with bad things) Jam 1:12-16); 1Co 7:5; 1Co 10:9b.
[Cf. Mt 4:7; 1Co 10:9a test out; provoke ekpeiraz]
Cf. trial
Related English words: hardship (trial of hardship), *suffering, persecution,
oppression, *affliction, *tribulation.
temptation trial testing
IRENT renders the Greek noun peirasmos in the sense of test/trial to bring
attention to its basic and proper sense to fit to the context, not following most of
English bibles. Important examples are
(1) In the well-known pericope of the so-called <Temptation of Jesus>a in Mt
4:1; //Mk 1:13; //Lk 4:2; //Lk 4:13. Satan comes to bring a challenge to Yeshua,
put Yeshua to test to prove who He is. It has nothing to do with temptation (an
inducement to sin as such), but to put to test to face a chellenge ad to prove who
He was.
(2) As a noun in the *Lords Prayer Mt 6:13 (//Lk 11:4), most English Bibles
keeps it as temptation, the sense of which the text itself does not carry.
(3) Jam 1:12 Blessed is the one who endures under trials of hardship
(hupomen peirasmon also in Jam 1:2-3;) it is not endure temptation!
(KJV, NKJV, ASV, NET, NRSV). Cf. trial(s) ESV, RSV, NASB, HCSB,
NWT, NIV, WNT, etc. In v. 13 it is used in the sense of putting someone on test
with bad things and with ones own desires.

Only few places in NT, the word temptation fits properly in the
context. e.g. 1Ti 6:9 empipt eis peirrasmon (fall into temptation).
The well known phrase not temptation (seduction or entrapment). It is his bringing himself
to be tested of his obedience to Gods word, as Gods son. It is not the only Jeusus
temptation there are many (but not in the sense of seduction or inducement, but testing and
challenging. See Jeffery Gibson (1995), The Temptations of Jesus in Early Christianity.
a

As an English word temptation is an action of tempting or fact of being tempted,

esp. to evil; enticement, allurement, attraction. (After OED)25. In many places in the
N.T. translation, however, not only KJV but other modern versions, the word
tempt/temptation is often used in obsolete or archaic sense, such as (1) The action
or process of testing or proving; trial, test, and (2) a severe or painful trial or
experience; an affliction, a trial.

The verb peiraz (noun peirasmos) is rendered in IRENT properly as

put to a test (trial) in the sense of having it proved. Only one place
in NT the word tempt fits in the context: 1Th 3:5 the tempter might
have tempted you. Of course the idea of getting tempted is a part of
being tested. Gal 6:1 and Jam 3:14 do not have to carry such sense.
See below how Dankers Lexicon treats it without due attention to the
current English usage of tempt and temptation. [Cf. The word ho
peirazn here in 1Th 3:5 is also in Mt 4:3, where IRENT put into a verbal
phrase this one came to put Yeshua to test.]
Trial(s) trials of hardship (i.e., trials of tribulation/persecution)
differentiate from a different sense of judicial trials.

to

Danker p. 277
peirasmos 1. a means to determine quality or performance, test, trial 1Pt
4:12; Heb 3:8; (trial in non-legal sense - ARJ)
2. exposure to possibility of wrongdoing temptation 1Ti 6:9;
temptation Mt 6:13 //Lk 11:4; Mk 14:38; Lk 4:13; 22:28; Act 20:19; 1Co 10:13;
Gal 4:14; Jam 1:2, 12; 2Pt 2:9; Rv 3:10; [all these are examples that should have
been under 1. - ARJ]
peiraz 1 make an effort to do something in the face of uncertainty about the
outcome, try, attempt Act 9:26; 16:7; 24:6
2. make trial of the quality or state of someones character or claims a. of
inducing a damaging statement or action test Mt 16:1; 22:18, 35; Mk 10:2; Jn 6:6;
1Co 10:13; 2Co 13:5; Hb 2:18; 11:17; Rev 2:2 b. of inducement to sin tempt
Mt 4:1, 3; //Mk 1:13; //Lk 4:2; Gal 6:1; 1Th 3:5; Jam 1:13, 14; Rev 2:10 3
act in a manner that amounts to defiance of anothers resources for retribution,
test tempt Act 5:9; 15:10; 1Co 10:9; Heb 3:9;

[Only 1Th 3:5 fits for the sense of tempt, possible Gal 6:1 and Jam
1:14. Of course the idea of getting tempted is a part of being tested
ARJ]
Cf. dokimaz evaluate, discern, appraise, inspect, examine, test (of
quality), determine Lk_12:56; 14:19; 1Co 11:28; 2Co 8:8; 13:5; Gal 6:4; Eph
5:10; 1Th 2:4b; 5:21; 1Ti 3:10; 1Pt 1:7; Rm 1:28; 2:18; Phi 1:10 (approve); Rm
12:2; 14:22; Co 3:13; 16:3; 2Co 8:2; 1Th 2:4a.

Jam 1:12 proven through testing (dokimos genomai); /[cf.

overcome/be victorious/conquer (NIKAW) Rev 2:7ff; 21:7]

Note on Jam 4:7

"Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you."
/x: temptation to entice into sin
Being tested or undergoing trial not from being tempted, but from being
challenged, etc. with persecution, opposition, oppression thlibmenoi,
excommunication, denouncing, imprisonment, chained (lost freedom),
stoning/killing, torture tumpaniz; mocking empaignos; trials of scourging
peiran masitgn; macairas apethanon, maltreated - kakoucoumenoi / e.g.
Heb 11:35 -37;
Jm13 13, 14 (be undergoing trial /tempted HCSB);
Heb 11:38 [peiran lamb
an undergo suffering; experiencing (trial)]

Other related expressions:

/proskopt stumble - Jn 11:9; Rm 14:20

/skandaliz -Cause (someone) to stumble; /make stumble; /x: cause to
sin NET (also in Danker. sin is by interpretation, not in the meaning
of the word); /xx: causes to lose faith GNB, CEV; / Mt 5:29, 30; 11:6;
13:21, 57; 15:12; 17:27; 18:6, 8, 9; 24:10; 26:31,33; Mk 4:17; 6:3;
9:42, 43, 47; 14:27, 29; Lk 7:23; 17:2;
/ptai (stumble) Rm 11:11; 14:20, 21; Jam 3:2 (x,)
/proskomma n. stumbling-block; Rm 9:32, 33; 14:20; 1Pe 2:8; 1Co
8:9;
/proskop 2Co 6:3
/skandalon stumbling-block > stumbling block; hindrance, /x: offense;
/x: snare NET (Rm 11:9); /x: obstacle NET (Rm 14:13); Mt 16:23;
18:7; Lk 17:1; Rm 9:32; 11:9; 14:3; 1Co 1:23; 1Pe 2:8; 1Jn 2:10; Rev
2:14;
/paraptma (violation, trespass) Mt 6:14; Mk 11:25; Rm 4:25, 11:12
(often in the Pauline letters (/x: stumbling- Etheridge).
Mt 18:6 causes to stumble (skandaliz); /put a stumbling block before - NRSV; /causes
to stumble- NASB, ISR, TNIV!; /cause to fall into sin NLT; />> causes to sin NET, ESV,
CEV, ERV, ISV, NIrV, NIV, NKJV; /> leads astray PNT; /> causes to be led astray
AUV! (i.e. to lose faith in me); /causes to stumble and sin AMP; /is a hindrance to Mft;
/x: occasion to fall of WNT; /xx: is a cause of trouble BBE; /xx: offend KJV+; /x:
causes the downfall of HCSB; /x: stumbles NWT, Murdock; /xx: ensnares JNT; /x:
afford scandal to Whiston; /x: put a snare in the way of TCNT; /x: provides an
occasion for sinning to Cass; />> (than to) do anything to cause (one of these little ones
who believe in me) to sin Barclay; /xxx: causes ~ to lose faith GW, GNB; /

[Problem of word collocation: /x: (causes ~) believe in me to sin NET, ESV duo; /~ believes
in me to stumble ALT; cf. causes to stumble who believe in me.] [Who is alluded to

whosoever put a stumbling block with similar phrase in //Mk 9:42. Cf. //Lk 17:1 as a
singular.] [It is far more than commiting a sin those in power (priestly, scholary) with
various titles, such as rabbi leader father teacher Mt 23:8-10 had better remind
themselves about a mill-stone accompanying their position.]

Temptations of Jesus the Wilderness Temptation is a well known one.

[Note: English word temptation is a misleading term (to bring a wrong sense of
seduction, enticement, or entrapping).]
The list below is adapted on Jeffrey Gibson (1995), The Temptations of Jesus in Early
Christianity. pp. 21-22]
1. 'Temptation' in the wilderness (Mk 1:9-13 with Yohanans immersion of Yeshua). (Mt
4:1-11). (Lk 4:1-13).
2. experience of being 'tempted' when confronted with a demand for a 'sign from heaven'
(Mk 8:1-13). (Mt 12:38-39 //Lk 11:16, 29-32). (Mt 16:1-2a, 4).
3. Experience of being 'tempted' at Caesarea Philippi (Mk 8:27-33). (Mt 16:13-23).
4. Being 'tempted' when asked about the legitimacy of divorce (Mk 10.1 -12) (Mt 19:112).
5. Being 'tempted' when asked about the legitimacy of paying taxes to the Roman
Emperor (Mk 12:13-17) (Mt 22:15-22; Lk 20:20-26). Egerton Papyrus (Fragment 2
recto).
6. Being 'tempted' when confronted with the question of the 'greatest commandment' (Mt
22:34-40; Mk 12:28-34)).
7. experience of being 'tempted' when confronted with a question on the requirements of
inheriting eternal life (Lk 10:25-26)
8. 'Temptation' in Gethsemane (Mk 14:32-42). (Lk 22:40-46). (Mt 26:36-46).
9. Testimony that his ministry was conducted in the face of 'temptations' (Lk 22:28).
10. Being 'tempted' when confronted with the question on stoning a woman caught in the
act of adultery (Jn 7:53-8.11).

*anger; hate; *cold; *wrath

thesaurus Flare, heat, bitterness, brewing, burning;

Worried, uneasy, restless, turmoil, throe; pain, pang; hurt; agony;
excruciation; distress; struggle; suffering; affliction, torment, torture
Cold, dark, damp, light out
*excommunicate; shun; ostracize; dictatorship; authoritarianism

*fulfill

The time is fulfilled

The prophecies /Scriptures are fulfilled
The law is fulfilled (Fulfillment of the Law by Yeshua abolishment
of the law? No longer Torah is to keep? Torah is replaced by God the Son?
What law? What Torah? etc.)

*addiction
(edited after Ashley Gutherie). addiction is a model as a way of describing a set of
phenomena, and it has been a really useful model for certain kinds of things, for
example, alcoholism and heroin addiction. It is not something to be labelled as
disease. Physiological characteristics associated with addiction to a substance are not
really the crux of what is going on with someone who is experiencing a difficulty with
abusing or overusing it. A universal definition of addiction is that people have
cravings for substances when their blood levels of the substance drop, and they have a
difficulty in discontinuing the habit of use. Cf. habit; habit-forming (addictive)
substance, Cf. psychological addiction; interpersonal codependence; obessive
compulsive disorder; object relation theory.

*attitude; behavior, conduct

Ones attitude and action activity, behavior, conduct.

What one does thinks, speaks, feels, communicates what, when, why, how,
whom, where
at the last trumpet
[Last Shofar blowing in highly symbolic language 1Co 15:52; 1Th 4:16] Pauline
expression at the last trumpet (/x: last trump - KJV), not on the earthly realm, is most likely
the Revelations seventh shofar blowing (Rev 10:7; 11:15). Cf. Preterism.]

*hope

One of most nebulous words in the Bible what is hope? On what and for
what? More than hopefully? Hoping for forgiveness and blessings from God?
Hope that one would not lose salvation (1Pe 1:4), if not once saved, always
saved? Hope something to do with Gods promises (Heb 6:17)? Hope for the

great reward in heaven (Mt 5:11, 12)? Hope of Gods kingdom to come? Hope
for going to heaven when I die?
1Co 13:13 faith, hope, love
Heb 6:18 the hope set before us. (v. 19) this hope we have as an anchor
for the soul, both sure and firm, . a
98F98F

A reading material on the word hope:

www.discerningtheworld.com/2013/05/15/lost-your-salvation-is-it-possible-understanding-hebrews-6-part-1/
WE HAVE THIS HOPE (Heb 6: 19)
The hope that is spoken of in the above verse is not this worldly kind of hope. This hope is not uncertain. It is
CERTAIN, it is not something that has no foundation. It is founded on the promise and oath of God. (Heb
6:18). When someone makes an oath, he swears by someone greater than himself that he would undertake to
do the thing he has promised one hundred percent (Heb 6:16-18).
An example is when a person swears an oath by the name of his sovereign king or queen. The name of his
king or queen becomes the guarantee that he would keep his promise one hundred percent. A truly obedient
and subservient citizen will never dishonour his king or queen by not keeping his promise. The dignity of the
name of his king or queen will be at stake should he fail to keep his promise.
That was the basis on which Moses pleaded with God not to destroy His people when they made and
worshipped a golden calf. In Exodus 32 verses 12 and 13 Moses says, If You destroy your people, the
Egyptians will ridicule and make a mockery of Your Holy Name. They will say that you were unable to bring
them into the Promised Land and instead slew them in the desert.
Your Holy name will be at risk if You do not keep your promise You made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In
Gen 22:16 we see that God swore by Himself, since He had no greater by whom to swear. God cannot swear
by someone greater than Himself because there is no one greater than He. He is the sovereign, eternal and
majestic God Who is above and greater than anyone or anything. It is in His Name, the One Who cannot lie,
that we have received the promise (hope) with an oath.
God made doubly sure that we do not flinch or waver in our hope by two unchangeable things [His promise
and His oath], in which it is impossible for God ever to prove false or deceive us, we who have fled [to Him]
for refuge might have mighty indwelling strength and strong encouragement to grasp and hold fast the hope
appointed for us and set before us (Heb 6:18).
As if this double assurance is not enough, God confirms His promise and oath by anchoring our hope in our
High Priest, Jesus Christ Who is seated in the Holiest of Holies in heaven (Heb 6:19). Whenever a large ship
moors in a harbour, the captain orders the anchor to be let down so as to prevent the strongest winds from
sweeping the ship into the sea. This is the message that verse 19 of chapter 6 wants to convey to us.
Our hope is not anchored in the world where every gust of wind (persecution, suffering, hardship, doctrinal
errors etc.) can sweep us away into despondency, faintheartedness or unbelief. Our hope is anchored in the
most secure, most powerful, most magnanimous (noble), most wonderful, most lofty place in the entire
universe, i.e. the Holiest of Holies in heaven where our High Priest is seated at the right hand of God.
WE HAVE A BETTER AND LASTING POSSESSION IN HEAVEN (Heb10: 4)
Someone once said that God allows persecution with the purpose of enlarging your bank account in heaven.
This seems to be a good observation, especially when Jesus words in Mt 5:11, 12 is taken into account,
Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and say all kinds of evil things against you
falsely on My account. Be glad and supremely joyful, for your reward in heaven is great (strong and
intense) . . .
As was said earlier, the Jewish Christians endured persecution at the hands of the Judaizers and some of them
lost their possessions through plundering and confiscations. Instead of sympathizing with them, as we all tend
to do, the writer encourages them with a burst of joyful exhortation, you have a better and lasting possession
in heaven. Take careful note that he does not say you shall have; He says you (already) have at this very
moment a better and lasting possession in heaven. This reminds me of Peters words in 1Pe 1:4 6. Where
are our hearts? Are they set upon things here on earth and our belongings, or are they set upon things in
heaven? As long as our hearts are set upon earthly possessions, we will never be able to endure persecution.
Only when our eyes are fixed on our High Priest where we have a better and lasting possession in heaven,
will we be able to endure trials, persecutions and sufferings with exceeding gladness.

*born again; *be saved

born again born again Christian - A common biblical jargon from KJB
translation as again of Greek word anthen from above in Jn 3:3, 7. [Heb.
malemelah Gen 7:20] The sense of again and the expression born again is
probably due to conflation with v. 4 get into the mothers womb for a second
time deuteron. [Cf. Other rendering - afresh anew.] The text of Jn 3:3-8
refers to the new life in spirit, not about born again with conversion (be
saved)26.
Cf. Gal 4:9 palin anthen again anew, again from the beginning
(over again) [Gk. for again is palin, not anthen from the
beginning/start]
Cf. 1Pe 1:3, 24 anagennasthai regenerate
Cf. Tit 3:5 dia loutrou paliggenesias kai anakainsews pneumatos
hagios washing of regeneration and renewal in holy spirit'
Cf. Jn 8:44; Eph 3:17 ap archs from the start
Cf. 1Co 5:5 hina to pneuma sth spirit be kept saved intact (not about
salvation).
*judgment; righteousness vs. justice
Isaiah 56:1 judgment (KJV)/justice ~~ justice/righteousness ~~ righteousness,
Isaiah 28:17 judgment (KJV)/justice ~~ justice/righteousness.
cf. right ruling being fair
The phrase be saved is a typical biblical jargon. Would it be better to use be
delivered and be resued, (e.g. Lk 1:69 keras strias; 1:71 stria ex
echthrn)

*Be alert; Watch (out); be (/stay) awake; be watchful; Be on guard;

*inherit; *inheritance; heirs

Greek verb klronome translating it as inherit by most English Bibles
does not fit the context, since (in no instance the word is used in the sense of
to obtain from someone after their death
Danker p. 203 1. be a heir in legal sense, inherit Gal 4:30. 2. be
recipient of a share (in), with focus on experience of divine conferral of

promised benefits, the dominant sense in NT acquire, obtain, inherit Mt

5:5; 19:29; Mk 10:17; 1Co 6:9f; Hb 1:4; 12:17; Rv 21:7
Rev 21:9
/inherit most, PNT, Wuest; /receive a share of; /receive JNT, NIrV, GNB,
ERV; /obtain for his inheritance Cass; /enjoy allotment CLV; /give
HNV, EMTV; /be given CEV; / have heritage ESV duo; /have for ones
heritage BBE; /enter into possession of TCNT; /possess GSNT, DRB;
/obtain Mft; /be the heritage of him WNT; / KKJV, JSS;
/ KRV;
/obtain a share Cass;
~ land - Mt_5:5;
~ life eternal - Mt_19:29; Mk_10:17; Lk_10:25; 18:18;
~ kingdom - Mt_25:34; 1Co_6:9, 10;15:50; Gal_5:21;
~ salvation - Heb_1:14;
~ promises - Heb_6:12;
~ blessing - Heb_12:17; 1Pe_3:9;
~ (these things) - Rev_21:7; (referent unclear)
~ (property?) Gal_4:30;

inheritance
klronomia 1. a share in what is passed on by a testator Mt_21:38;
//Mk_12:7; //Lk_20:14; Lk_12:13;
2. participation in a share, inheritance w. focus on divine conferral of the
promised benefits(s) Ac 20:32; Gal 3:18; Eph 1:14, 18; 5:5; Col 3:34; Hb
9:15; 1Pt 1:4;
3. 1+2 Act 7:5; 13:33 v.l.; Hb 11:8 in the sense possession.

Act_7:5; 13:19; 20:32; 26:18; Gal_3:18; Eph_1:14, 18; Col_1:12;

3:24; Heb_9:15; 11:8; 1Pe_1:4;
~ in the kingdom of Mashiah and God Eph_5:5
heirs Rm 8:17 etc.

*GeHinnom; *Gehenna; vs. *hell; problems of religious doctrine of hell vs.

universalism
5:22 shall be accountable for it [to be thrown down] to GeHinnom of the ~ fire (= have to
answer; i.e. worthy of; fit to. Should not be read literally for this common figurative expression
of unworthiness, not imagined torment of immortal soul after death in hell-fire preaching
doctrine.); 1 (GeHenna, GeHinnom, ): /> incurs the penalty of burning in the fire of Gei-Hinnom
JNT; /will be liable to the fiery Gehenna NWT; /~ the Hinnom valley ~~ - ARJ; /will be
thrown into the buring Garbage Pit Gehenna SourceNT; />~ for [to escape] ARJ; shall be
guilty enough to be thrown into Gey-Hinnom MRC; /x: is himself heading straight for the fire
of destruction.- PNT; /shall be liable to answer for it in the fiery Pit. TCNT; / 2 (/xx: hell fire):
/xx: are on the brink of hellfire MSG; /> will be answerable for this to the extent of being
consigned to the fire of hell Cass (-mouthful); /shall be in danger of hell fire KJV++; /will be
in danger of the hell of the fire ALT; /will be sent to fiery hell NET; /will be liable to the
hell of fire ESV trio; /will be subject to hellfire HCSB; /shall be liable to be thrown into the
fire of Hell. LITV, MKJV (~ hell); / /shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell NASB;
GeHinnom of the [trash burning] fire /the Hinnom valley of ~ - ARJ; /xx: the hell of the
fire - ALT; /xx: the hell of fire ESV trio, ASV, Cass; /xx: hellfire HCSB; /xx: hell fire
KJV++; /the fire of Gei-Hinnom- JNT!; /
GeHinnom [5:29, 30; 10:28; 18:9] /x: hell most; /Hinnom valley ARJ; /Gehenna
NWT, Rhm, Mft, WNT, Whiston, MRC, Diagl, ISR, AMP exp; CLV; / Ge-Hinnom HNV;
/Gei-Hinnom JNT, MRC; /gihano - Etheridge; /> destruction PNT; /pit TCNT;
/Garbage Pit Gehenna SourceNT;

/[Gk. Geenna, in Syonptic Gospels and James, transliterate from Heb. ge hinnom (valley of
Hinnom) Aramaic gehenna; Eng. Gehenna ; /[The valley running SW to SE Yerusalem to join
Kidron valley.] [Has much symbolism and symbolically used in O.T. [Cp. Mt 10:28 who
can destroy both the body and the soul in Gehenna] [cf. symbolic of Lake of Fire Rev
19:20; 20:10, 14; 21:8] [www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1999/april26/9t5098.html ) [Used in
figurative sense. In this clause, the sense would be answerable to get oneself thrown into
liable to destruction in fiery Hinnom valley - ARJ] [cp. 10:28 the One who can destroy both
the body and the soul in Gehenna]
[See Appendix Mt 5:22 Hinnom valley hell for word study and its usage] [See SupplementGlossary-Place for Gehenna valleys of Yerusalem; see also Supplement-Glossary-General
for hell and related expressions.]
the Hinnom valley of the fire; [( ) . Also in
18:9; //Mk 9:47 (v.l.) ( ~).]; /the fiery Gehenna NWT; /the fiery

gehenna Rhm; /the fire of Gehenna ISR, Mft; /the Gehenna of the fire Diagl; /the
Gehenna of fire WNT; /the gehenna of the fire - YLT; /the fire of Gei-Hinnom JNT;
/the hell (Gehenna) of fire AMP; /the hell of the fire EBTV; /the hell of fire MKJV,
Wuest; /the Hell of fire LTIV; /fiery hell NET; /the fiery hell NASB; /a fierly hell
AUV; /the fiery Pit TCNT; /the fiery pit - GSNT; /the fire of hell ESV trio, NIV trio,
GNB, BBE, ERV; /the fires of hell CEV, NLT; /hellfire HCSB, GW; /hell fire ISV,
NKJV; /hell-fire KJV+; /the everlasting fire PNT; /godless in a furnace of eternal fire
MSG; /the hell [Gr., gehenna] of the fire [or, the fiery hell]. ALT;

accountable to or thrown into the firely valley of Hinnom [Notice there is not a non-biblical
expression of go to hell; it is the person himself is the agent (get [thrown] into) as well as
the patient in semantic-syntactic jargon by sending himself into such condition; for him to face
and to have to answer (condemnation would be brought on himself by himself by conscious
choice.)

Accountable to this plain figurative expression is often ignored in hell fire preaching, distorting
into throwing into the everlasting unquenchable fire everlastingly roasting the immortal soul after
death.
Mt 5:21 (shall be) accountable for this before (= will have to answer against
accusation/charge; antithetical expression - not commensurate to the charges) [\deserves Mt 26:66;
1Co 11:27.] [QQ: the verb form sense of future or present, or God will have it?]; /> will be.
ESTAI (future tense) / shall be IRENT, HNV, ISR, AMP, KJV, NKJV, WNT, Webster, Wesley,
Whiston; /are NLT; /will be most others;/ will be (except the second one is) NIV trio; /Ko.
~ /?: (for the last one in v. 22)] (see 5:22 EE vide infra to escape the fiery
GeHinnom):
Needs editing on this /[enochos BDAG p. 338] 1 /accountable to - NWT; /subject to ~
answerable to NIV Duo; /liable to NRSV, Diagl, ISR, ESV trio, CLV, TCNT; /liable to answer
TCNT; /will answer for it in GW; /shall be answerable to x2 + shall be liable to WNT;
/liable to Diagl, ISR; /x: liable to and unable to escape AMP; /shall be culpable of Geneva;
/ 2 /x: will be in danger of KJV, ALT, HNV, Diagl, ISR, BBE; /x: shall be in danger of - KVJ++,
NKJV, HNV, , ASV; 3 /will be subject to HCSB, AUV, ISV; /shall be subject to HCSB,
ISV,Wuest, AUV; /are subject to ~~ are in danger of being brought before NLT; 1 /xx: will
be judged ~ must stand trial in NIrV; /cf. x: subject to ~ brought before~ JNT; /be brought
GNB; /be judged by ERV; /guilty before NASB; /will have to answer to GSNT; /will have
to stand trial + will be taken to court + will be in danger of CEV; /x: liable to and unable to
escape the punishment imposed by AMP (- mouthful); /will be sentenced by ~ must come
before - Mft (- first clause translocated to the last); /xx: is guilty of murder + might find
yourself hauled into court+ are on the brink of hellfire MSG; / (- baloney); /x: must stand (his
trial) PNT; /x: will have to his trial in Barclay; /xxx: obnoxcious to (judgment + the council +
to hell-fire) Murdock; /xx: culpable of judgement + worthy to be punished by the Councill +
worthy o be punished with hellfire Geneva; / [In this clause, the sense would be answerable to

get oneself thrown into liable to destruction in fiery Hinnom valley - ARJ] [cp. 10:28 who can
destroy both the body and the soul in Gehenna]
/will have to answer to (x2) + will have to answer for it in GSNT; /x: will be subjected to + will
brought before + will be sent to NET; /are subject to + in danger of being brought before +
are in danger of NLT;; /shall be guilty before (x2) + shall be guilty enough to go into NASB;
/will be accountable to (x2) + will be liabe to NWT; /will be subject to + will be brought
before + incurs the penaly of buring JNT; /will be judged + must stand trial in Sanhedrin + will
be in danger of the fire in hell NIrV; /will be judged + will be judged by + will be in danger of
ERV; /will be subject to + is answerable to (x2) NIV duo; /will answer for it GW; /will be
brought to (trial) + will be in dager of going to GNB; /shall be liable to and unable to escape
AMP; /will be sentenced by God (this is placed at the end) +must come before + must go to
Mft; / /will be answerable for this Cass;

[Cf. The term universalism should be abandoned when ultimate reconciliation in

Christ is in mind since the word is tied to the cult of Universlasts (Cf. Unitarianunversalists). A non-biblical concept of unversalism (as is connected to the
variously named Universalist Churches) is utilized by Church tradition under the
Greek and Latin medieval influence into an elaborate fanciful hell doctrine from an
inaccurate and misleading translation word with anachronism and paganism.]
Edited on the table: Bradley Jersak (2009), Her Gates Will Never Be Shut (p. 14)
Biblical Terms Associated with Hell and Judgment
(yellow painted Words traditionally translated "hell" in English)

Occurrences of Hebrew and Greek words

relating to divine judgment
Sheol (grave, pit, unseen)
Gen 37:35; 42:38; 44:29, 31; Num 16:30, 33;
Deut 32:22; 1Sam 2:6; 2Sam 22:6; 1Kg 2:6, 9; Job 7:9; 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 16; 21:13;
24:19; 26:6; Ps 6:5; 9:17; 16:10; 18:5; 30:3; 31:17;49:14, 14, 15; 55:15; 86:13; 88:3;
89:48; 116:3; 139:8; 141:7; Prov 1:12; 5:5; 7:27; 9:18; 15:11, 24; 23:14; 27:20; 30:16;
Eccl 9:10; Song Sol 8:6; Isa 5:14; 14:9, 15; 28:15, 18; 57:9; Ezk 31:16, 17; 31:17;
32:21, 27; Hos 13: 14, 14; Amo 9:2; Jon 2:2; Hab 2:5.
Hades (grave, pit, unseen)
Mt 11:23; 16:18; Lk 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27, 31; 1Co 15:55; Rev 1:18; 6:8; 20:13, 14
Tehom (deep, depths)
Gen 1:2; 7: 11; 8:2; 49:25; Exod 15:5, 8; Deu 8:7; 33: 13; Job 28:14; 38:16, 30; 41:32;
Ps 33:7; 36:6; 42:7; 71:20; 77:16; 78:1 5; 104:6; 106:9; 107:26; 135:6; 148:7; Prov 3:20;
8:24, 27; Isa 51:10, 63:13; Ezk 26:19; 31:4; 31: 15; Amo 7:4; Jon 2:5; Hab 3:10.
Abussos (Abyss, bottomless pit)
Lk 8:31; Rm 10:7; Rev 9:1, 2, 11; 11:7; 17:8; 20:1, 3.
GeHinnom (Valley of Hinnom)
Josh 15:8; 18:16; 2Kgs 23:10; 2Chr 28:3; 33:6; Neh 11:30; Jer 7:31, 32; 19:2, 19:6;
32:35.
Topheth (a place in the Valley of Hinnom)
Job 17:6; 2Kgs 23:10; Jer 7:31, 32; 19:6, 11, 12, 13, 14;
Isa 30:33.
Gehenna (the Valley of Hinnom)
Mt 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5; Jas 3:6.
Lake of fire /fire / brimstone (sulfur)
Gen 19:24; Deu 29:23; Job 18:15; Ps 11:6; Isa 30:33; 34:9; Ezk 38:22;
Luke 17:29; Rev 19:17, 18; 19:20; 20:10; 21 :8.
Tartarus
2 Pet 2:4.

[Ref. supra, p. 35]

About the English word *hell:

[Cf. problem of Christian tradition and belief with hell fire preaching. Cf.
unbiblical idea of heaven and hell where people go to after death. Cf.
heaven and home.]
Hell is a common English word, very useful and convenient one indeed. It is
now mainly a religious or church jargon, associated with *hellfire and
hellfire preaching; hellfire doctrine still holds a prominent position in
various Christianisms with Gods endless punishment and everlasting
torture.
[A sample dictionary entry:
1. a nether wor1d in which the dead continue to exist;
2. realm of the devil In which the damned suffer everlasting
punishment;
3. a place or state of torment or destruction all unbiblical meaning.]
[www.mercifultruth.com/the-real-hell.html gives how related words are
differently translated among the Bibles.] [Myriads of articles and books
on the topic related to hell can be found!]
Etymologically the English word hell may be related to hole (as in the
ground to make it hidden related to Gk. Hades). It is shown in many
colorful phrases of everyday English, such as the hell with! what the hell!,
to hell, Go to hell, hellish, hellwards, raise hell, for the hell of it, be
hell on, all hell broke loose, get the hell out of, give someone hell, a hell
of a ~, like hell play hell hell to pay. hellhole (a place of extreme misery
or squalor); hell-bent (stubbornly determined).
The word by itself, however, is a decent useful word aptly to describe a
certain human condition in which one is find its life not only in darkness,
but also turned away from light. In most cases, people would not know the
truth, even outright deny it nonchalantly or scornfully. This is far from is
hell doctrine, as refined with hellfire preaching in the last several hundred
years. [Check for discussions on eternal life vs. life after death issue of soul
immortality, problem of evil, justice and punishment.] Hell cannot be
used a place some are to go after death, in contrast to heaven for some to
go after death all unscriptural ideas. [http://youtu.be/rZC6tbgpsl4
Rethinking Life After Death (NT Wright) just one out of millions written
on the subject! I would need nine lives of me to read and watch and digest
them all ;-< like all other important topics pertaining to our life.]
The word is used to translate several disparate Greek words by English
translations in KJV tradition and gives rise to unscriptural ideas associated
with it and one of many common biblical and church jargons. See below
how it appears in English translations from which wrong ideas tied to the
distorted teaching in the Bible have been fermented.
hell in English as an idea/construct viable unrelated with unscriptural
biblical hell-preaching and aside from what appears in certain Bible

translation. Many equates hell = eternal fire by picking up two disparate

biblical, but not-scriptural, words put together to come up with an elaborate
human doctrine of hell and of hellfire. They are literally hellbent on it! It has
nothing to do with Christianity [see *Mashiahnity], but everything to do
with Churchianity and Christianisms.
I dont believe hell as such, but love to use the word hell. One thing is clear
that we should not say to others Go to hell! or You will go to hell even if we
use the word the way they might understand with their own religiosity or
doctrine. As a non-Scriptural word, it is useful to bring a message. The fact
is, someone does NOT go to hell (as a hellfire preacher may love to say), but
some ARE in hell. Then they ARE guaranteed that they will be in hell in
whatever form of afterlife they may believe in. No, they dont have to go to
hell, but they choose or rather they are themselves chosen to go.
Reading material:
http://escapetoreality.org/2014/08/01/conversations-about-hell/

*GeHinnom (Geh-Hinnom) the Hebrew word for the name of the valley
south of Yerusalem running W to E to meet Kidron valley. Historically it was
used as garbage dump site to be burned up with sulfur. Practice of child
sacrifice in this area was recorded. (2Kg 16:3; 23:10; 2Chr 28:3; 33:6; Jer
32:35)- [worship of Moloch - the idol of Moloch was there and was of brass,

adorned with a royal crown, having the head of a calf, and his arms extended
as if to embrace anyone. The idolaters offered children to him by heating the
statue within by a great fire, and when it was burning hot they put the children
into his arms who were consumed by the heat; and, in order that the cries of
the children might not be heard, they made a great noise about the idol with
drums and other instruments. These drums were called "toph" and hence the
common name of the place was Tophet (Jer 7:31-32)]
Gk transliterate Geenna appears 12 times in N.T. (Mt 5:22, 29, 30;
10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Lk 12:5; Jas 3:6).
Most English Bibles translate it as hell, incl. DRB.
Others translate it as Gei-Hinnom JNT; /Gey-Hinnom MRC; /Gehenna
NWT, Mft, CLV, ISR, WEB; /gehenna Diagl, Whiston, Rhm, Vulgate,
YLT, (JSS); /Gehinnom - HNV; /x: Pit TCNT; /pit of hell MSG; /Hell
LITV; /Garbage Pit Gehenna SourceNT; [Cf. Korean translations borrowed
the word (underground dungeon) of Buddhism and native
Chinese mythology. Cf. ().]
Some English Bibles forgo the word hell completely JNT, TCNT, WNT,
Etheridge, Whiston, Rhm, MRC, WEB, YLT, ISR, SourceNT, Mft, GSNT
(except Jas 3:6); Vulgate Latin gehennae.

[PNT has it as rubbish-heap or destruction. However, it has hell in 4 places

as a typical non-religious English idiom nothing to do with hell shown in other
English Bibles Act 8:20; Jas 2:18; 3:2; 2Pe 2:3.]

The common English word hell has also been used confusingly to
translate other Greek words of different meaning and sense such as
(1) Hades (Mt 16:18; Lk 16:23, etc.),
(2) zofos tou skotous 2Pe 2:17 (cf. seirais zophou); Jud 1:13
(utter darkness), and
(3) tartaro 2Pe 2:4 (hold up in the deep abyss) (rendered as
cast into hell).
A nickname hell Bible or hell-preachers Bible may be apt for them.
Some even uses it in O.T. translation.
Common alternative is to render it as Gehenna when they want to
stay away from non-Scriptural word hell of pagan origin. IRENT
renders it as Geh-Hinnom in oder to reflect the Hebrew word and to
stay farther away from the word automatic fixed association with
hellfire preaching a legacy of Anglicized and Americanized Bible
translation.

G-Mt 7x - thrown into GeHinnom Mt 5:29, 30; accountable for the

GeHinnom of the fire Mt 5:22; 18:9; destruction in GeHinnom Mt

10:28; son of GeHinnom Mt 23:15; the judgment of the GeHinnom
Mt 23:33.

G-Mk 3x - thrown into the GeHinnom, into the fire that cannot be put out
Mk 9:43; into the GeHinnom Mk 9:45; into GeHinnom Mk 9:47
G-Lk 1x - thrown into the GeHinnom Lk 12:5.
Jam 1x - by the GeHinnom Jam 3:6

/gehenna - Vulgate; / Heb. Geh-Hinnom, or Geh-benHinnom,

[Not to be confused with: sheol (Hebrew) hades (Gk); inferno (Latin as in
Dantes Divine Comedy) Mt 16:18.
[It means being burned up. Not torture, torment. Figurative for eternal
death, not everlasting living in death.] [cf. Jn 5:29; Rev 20:15]

[Without anything grounded on the Scripture, Catholics entertains their

doctrine of purgatory, the place where the dead in general (including the
majority of Catholics) pass immediately after death, a place of purgation from sin,
a place of penances, sorrows, woes, anguish indeed, but not hopeless. The
period of confinement there may be centuries or millennia, according to the
deserts of the individual and the alleviations granted. Catholics will not need
to remain as long in there as will the Protestants and heathen. Few will to go
to heaven (- those called saints). Dantes Inferno, the first part of his 14th-

century epic poem Divine Comedy, graphically describes the tortures in

purgatory. This popular imagery itself is rooted from pagan primitive
religions of men (incl. Buddhism, Taoism, etc.) and the view of hell in
English speaking people owes much to this, with the religion (as in hell fire
preaching).]

The word Gehenna (fr. Geh-Hinnom) in all cases in N.T. is used figuratively carrying
a symbolic sense. [Hence, IRENT takes it as an idiom by transliterate to avoid to
suggest as the Hinnom Valley itself, south of Yerusalem] Translating it as hell
brings a quite alien notion into the Scripture and over several hundred years engraved
as the so-called doctrine of hell, which gave rise also to various reactive
universalistic ideas both ideas being equally misdirected, nave and full of fancy
conjectures. These antithetical religious doctrines have to undergo thorough
examination and scrutiny to articulate the truth to confront the problem of evil in
conjunction with the ideas on afterlife, in order to reach a Scriptural understanding
in harmony with the whole Scripture and would not sidetrack the Gospel of Gods
Kingdom in Yeshua the Mashiah itself.
Most of such doctrine of hell with so-called hellfire preaching for last four hundred
years is hodge-podge work of mixture of pseudo-biblical imagery and non-biblical
ideas.
However useful and necessary may the doctrine be, it would be pointless, unless one
cleans up linguistically and scripturally, since hell itself is a non-biblical word
which was imported into the Scripture and take out it amplified to suit ones own
doctrine. If one wants use the word, it needs a precise definition, so that people can
check it to see whether the teaching offered is totally based on the Scripture or based
on hodgepodge of philosophy, religions, and psychology. For several hundred years
the Western style Christian religions have produced man-made plethora of doctrines
and gospels, which is now steadily moving into the final everything-goes Full
Gospel of Perversion, where right and wrong are reversed products of humanity,
which has its God-given image defaced and hidden. Along the same line revisionist
faces are shown up, such as Universalism.
The word hell itself is a very useful vocabulary, for which everyone may come up
with ones own idea of the hellish condition of humanity we are witnessing in our
life into post-modern age. Accepting its English usage as it is current as a secular
expression unrelated to religions and Christianity, the word without capitalization
carries several meanings such as [Ref. http://wordweb.info/ ]
1. Any place of pain and turmoil
2. A cause of difficulty and suffering
3. Violent and excited activity
4. Noisy and unrestrained mischief
Use of the word hell: Being assure of that the word hell is not in the Scripture and
not in the Bibles (except hell-preachers Bible KJV is most hellish translation,
having the word x 23x in NT and even in OT 31x), we can use it freely without
compunction to express precisely and concisely what the word (whatever it means)
can convery. [Cf. there is a euphemistic alteration for it as in a common idiomatic

expression what the heck!.]

The word comes often paired with heaven, as in the common non-biblical phrase
heaven and hell, the word heaven is not easy to grasp since its not with human
beings, especially when it is seen as a place-related term. On the other hand, hell is
something with us and it is to grasp its sense. A person who lives in the past is in
hell. a Living in hell is what we have to face, rather than going to hell after death. A
person, who lives in darkness and faces darkness, does not forward to the source of
light and does not step into light, is in hell. A person does not know to what, why,
and to whom we are to be existentially grateful is in hell; who complaints, blames,
excuses, etc. etc. Obviously those are the ones who craves love from others, but,
have no listeing ears and refuse to accept love and do not know what love is.
9F9F

Ref: Where Are the Dead? (offers no nonsense Scriptural and linguistic scrutiny on
the subjection of hell) www.bibletoday.com/booklets/ward_text.htm
Ref: for so-called hellfire preaching
http://wesleygospel.com/2011/12/27/books-for-hell-fire-preachers/
Ref: If anyone ever has time to spare, are fond of digging out something like
everlasting torture, angry god, etc., and wants to taste of what kind of work
produced by Jonathan Edwards (d. 1758), known as fire and brimstone hellfire
preacher, check this site www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards [It would be interesting to find
what he said about God who is love one of the core theme of the whole
Scripture.]
Condensing 2,000+ pages of his works to manageable 141 pages is a book by
Strachan and Sweeney (2003), Jonathan Edwards on Heaven & Hell (The Essential
Edwards Collection) [book review - www.unlockingthebible.org/jonathan-edwardsbook-on-heaven-hell/ ]. [Not same as another book with a same title by John
Gerstner (2003), Jonathan Edwards on Heaven and Hell.]
Mt 5:22; 18:9; Mk 9:47 v.l. hell of fire (KJV etc.); fire regarded as existing in hell.
Used metonymically as a place of eternal fire [s. Mt 25:41] envisaged as punishment
for the damned. Unscriptural idea, some takes it as a biblical idea since the
expression is found along with the word hell itself in some English Bibles (in
tradition of KJB) misunderstanding of Scriptural idiom and usage of related words
such as GeHenna.
1 (xx: hell): /fiery hell NET, NASB; /hell fire KJV, NKJV, ASV, Bishops,
Geneva, DRB, ISV; /hellfire HCSB, Noyes, GW, MSG; /hell-fire WNT, hell
of the fire ALT; /hell of fire ESV trio, BBE, Wuest; /fire in hell NIrV; /fire
of hell Cass, NIV duo, GNB, ERV, AUV, MKJV; /fire of Hell LITV; /fires of
hell NLT; /hell (Gehenna) of fire AMP; /
2 (GeHenna): /fiery Gehenna NWT; /fire of Gei-Hinnom JNT; /fire of
Gehinnom HNV; /fire of Gehenna ISR, Mft, WEB; /Gehenna of fire CLV;
/Gehenna of Fire - WNT; /Gehenna of the fire Diagl; /Gehenna of the fire
a

A person who only lives in the future is not much different from the one living in present in hell, as
the future will soon become the past. A person who looks back longingly is in hell (Cf. the story of
Lots wife in Gen 19:16).[Heaven and hell is not a notion belonging to the future. Unless you are in
heaven, youll not go to heaven after death; you dont have to go to hell; hell is where you are now.]

YLT; /x: Gey-Hinnom MRC; /gehennae ignis Vulg!;

3 (others): /fiery pit GSNT; /fiery Pit TNCT; /fire of destruction PNT (cf.
rubbish hip for Gehanna)
Cf. Jas 3:6 being set on fire by the Geh-Hinnom (phlogiz hupo ts geenns);
/inflammata a gehenna Vulg;
Cf. Mt 18:18; 25:41 eternal fire;
Cf. Mk 9:43, 45, (46, 48); Lk 3:17; Jud 1:7; unquenchable fire
Cf. Rev 19:20; 20:10, 14, 15; (21:8) lake of fire
hellfire preaching is a religious jargon, pejorative outside and even within
religions. It has become associated with hellfire preachers of the 18th and 19th
centuries in Europe and America. The epitome of their image is Johnathan Edward
(of Puritan religion), whose well-known sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry
God depicted the realities of hell vividly with conflation of imagery from Dantes
epic poem (ca 1308 CE), Divine Comedy (with Inferno the first of three canticas).
Even mixed with ideas of Law and Righteousness, and emphasis on Gods mercy for
salvation, what it is spoken is impossible to be heard by the non-believers and the
believers would have not much need for its message, except for justifying their
attitude of condemnation of non-believers.
Related English words: preaching hell; condemnation, damnation, denunciation,
excommunication, anathema; doom, downfall, destruction, ruin, ruination,
annihilation, perdition.
The idea of hell as non-Scriptural English word has its usefulness in every day
English language. The problem with it, however, is that people think it is what a
Biblical word represents. Also people think it is a place one goes after death, the
other being heaven (again non-biblical notion). Taken the word to denote ones
state here and now it simply tells that one is in hell when disconnected and alienated
from Elohim, the Creator God.
Reading material: Rob Bell (2011), Love Wins - A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the
Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/files/2011/03/LoveWinsRevi
ew.pdf
Rob Bell's Bridge Too Far | Christianity Today
Critical Review of Rob Bell's Love Wins | Evidence Unseen

http://youtu.be/iQvqpO78IXA Rob Bell and Hell (William Lane Craig) (from

trandition hell doctrine)

Mark Gally (2011), God Wins: Heaven, Hell, and Why the Good News Is Better
than Love Wins

the Apostles Creed www.creeds.net/ancient/apostles.htm

The earliest written version of the creed is perhaps the Interrogatory Creed of

Hippolytus (ca. CE 215). The current form is first found in the writings of Caesarius
of Arles (d 542).
descend into hell (traditional English);
descended to the dead (modern English trans.

descendit ad inferna - Latin.

Greek.
il est descendu aux enfers French

Did Jesus go to hell between His death and resurrection?

The Greek wording in the Apostles' Creed is , ("katelthonta eis ta
kattata"), and in Latin descendit ad inferos. The Greek ("the lowest") and the Latin
inferos ("those below") may also be translated as "underworld", "netherworld", or as "abode of the
dead". Thus, sometimes this phrase is translated as "descended to the dead."
/x: he descended into hell. English translation by English Language Liturgical Consultation
(since 1969):
/He descended to the dead. Catholic translation:
The first use of the English harrowing in this context is in homilies of Aelfric, ca. 1000. Harrow
is a by-form of harry, a military term meaning to "make predatory raids or incursions"[2]. The
term Harrowing of Hell refers not merely to the idea that Christ descended into Hell, as in the
Creed, but to the rich tradition that developed later, asserting that he triumphed over inferos,
releasing Hell's captives, particularly Adam and Eve, and the righteous men and women of Old
Testament times.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXC8DWkw4hg
Physics from Hell
GeHinnom; Geh-Hinnom; Gehenna; Hinnom Valley (x12) Mt 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28;
18:9; 23:15; 23:33; Mk 9:43; 45;:47; Lk 12:5; Jam 3:6

G-Mt x7 - into Geh-Hinnom Mt 5:29, 30; to the Geh-Hinnom of the

fire Mt 5:22; 18:9; in Geh-Hinnom Mt 10:28; son of Geh-Hinnom

Mt 23:15; the judgment of the Geh-Hinnom Mt 23:33.
G-Mk x3 - into the Geh-Hinnom, into the fire that cannot be put out Mk
9:43; into the Geh-Hinnom Mk 9:45; into Geh-Hinnom Mk 9:47
G-Lk x1 - into the Geh-Hinnom Lk 12:5.

Jam x1 - by the Geh-Hinnom Jam 3:6

/ Gk. Gehenna; /Gehenna TransLine, NWT, CLV, ISR98, Mft, VW, WNT,

Whiston, NAB, Vulgate; / - JSS; /Gehinnom HNV; /Gei-Hinnom

JNT; /gehenna Rotherham, (Vulgate); /gihano Etheridge; /
/Garbage Pit Gehenna SourceNT; /x: hell KJV & most others, incl. Cass,
Wuest, JB, NIV trio; / (cf. Hades inferno in Vulgate)
[For word study and its usage see Supplement-Glossary-Place for Gehenna
Valleys of Jerusalem; see also Supplement-Glossary-General for hell and
related expressions.] /=Eng. Gehenna; \Gk. Geenna transliterate from Aramaic
gehenna (www.christianitytoday.com/ct/1999/april26/9t5098.html ) (Heb. ge
hinnom valley of (ben-)Hinnom)
[Used in figurative sense. In this clause, the sense would be answerable to get
oneself thrown into liable to destruction in fiery Hinnom valley - ARJ]
[cp. Mt 10:28 who can destroy both the body and the soul in Gehenna
[Cp. symbolic of Lake of Fire Rev 19:20; 20:10, 14; 21:8]
KJV renders all Hades ( inferno in Vulg.) as hell: in Mt 11:23; 16:18; Lk
10:15; 16:23; Act 2:27, 31; Rev 1:18; 6:8 for Hades; 2Pe_2:4 for tartarus
(inferno in Vulg) ;
Cf. HCSB hellfire Mt 5:22; 18:9
NIV erred once rendering Hades as hell in Lk 16:23.
[Gk. Geenna, in Syonptic Gospels and James, transliterate from
Heb. ge hinnom (valley of Hinnom); Eng. Gehenna [The valley running SW to
SE Jerusalem to join Kidron valley. Jer 32:35). Used for trash burning See
Supplement-Glossary-Place for Valleys of Jerusalem Gehenna Valley of
Hinnom] Has much symbolism and symbolically used in O.T.]

wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=31.771120&lon=35.230279&z=15&m=b&show=/23952200/
Temple-Mount
[SourceNT Fn on Mt 5:22
The words Gehenna, Hades and Tartarus, three very different places in the
Greek, are usually all just called Hell in most Bible versions (KJV, etc. including
modern ones). Gehenna was a real actual place on earth. It was used for the Jerusalem
rubbish dump, and was a valley just outside the city on the south running west to east.
Smoke went up from it all times as the rubbish was burning continually (with sulfur
added into). It was full of maggots, and the bodies of the worst criminals were thrown
there. Josiah used it for burning of offal. It used to be the site of child sacrifice to
Molech. (purple font words are added by AJR)
[QQ Needs OT ref: here][Needs the article in BAR on Gehenna, Tophet, etc.]

Clarkes commentary A particular place in this valley was called Tophet,

from tophet, the fire stove, which was used to be the site of child
sacrifice to a pagan god Molech [2Ki 23:10; 2Ch 28:3; Jer 7:31; Jer 32:35;
(to Baal) Jer 19:5-6]. In the intertestamental period, it came to be used
symbolically as the place of divine punishment (cf. 1 En. 27:2, 90:26; 4 Ezra
7:36).
the Jews, in our Saviors time, used the word, the place of the damned. See the word
applied in this sense by the Targum, on Rth_2:12; Psa_140:12; Gen_3:24; Gen_15:17.

Jam 3:7 by [the flames of] the Geh-Hinnom \Gk. ; /x:

hell most, Mft (- the only place it renders as hell; otherwise as Gehenna); /x: by hell
- most; /> by Gehenna NWT, etc.; /of hell KJV; /from hell GW; /from hell itself
CEV, GNB; /(set on fire) by the flames of the Pit TCNT; /x: by the Garbage Pit

SourceNT; /

[The only occurrence of the Greek word Gehenna outside the

Synoptic Gospels, where likewise its metaphoric for the present condition,
not future condition in after life frequently used for Gods Final
Answer.]
Here Gehenna (in Gk) is used in figure of speech.

*City; *town; village, hamlet, countryside

Gk. polis is city or town. Bethlehem is Davids town (hometown), not city.
*vison, *transfiguration

Mt 17:2 //Mk 9:2 he was transfigured to the eyes of them.

Lk 9:29 appearance of His face changed to their eyes
The so-called Transfiguration Vision is narrated in the parallel percope in the
Synoptic Gospels (Mt 17:19 //Mk 9:2-8 //Lk 9:2836). 2Pe 1:1618 refers to
it. It is not transfiguration of Jesus but transfiguration vision of Him. [It is
not a transfiguration of Yeshuas reality, but of the disciples vision. it was
the disciples eyes that were changed. God enabled them to see what is -instead of just what appears. He lifted the veil [from their eyes] edited after
Peter Kreeft (2007) The Philosophy of Jesus. pp. 100-104.]

*Fear vs. *awe; *reverence

*anxiety - <<Anxiety is the dynamic center of neuroses and thus we shall have to deal with
it all the time.>> from Karen Horney (1999), The Neurotic Personality of Our Time.

Ref: Wali van Lohuizen (2011), A Psycho-Spiritual View on the Message of Jesus, (pp. 319320)
Phobos: Fear or Awe?
About the word group phobos: Generally understood as fear, and rendered so. In classical
antiquity the term exhibited various shades. Phobos describes encounters with force expressed
as terror and anxiety but also honor and respect. [1] This concept of terror, fear and anxiety has
haunted much of Christianity as it referred to the fear of God and his punishment. It is often
seen as a heritage from the OT; we will see in a moment that the OT fear often exhibited more
the concept of awe. In the Gospels the feared fear of God does not figure at all, but surfaces
in the Epistles and is continued in early Christianity [2]. But the OT picture of fear is not so
bleak. In various layers of the OT fear refers to other connotations. TDNT (Gnther Wanke,
the author for the OT part) is quite clear on this issue, if read meticulously. Apart from
meaning fear and being afraid it also carries connotations of having someone in honor (B I 1),
of respecting (B I 2), feeling reverence, holding in respect (B II 1a, b): man treats with fear
and reverent awe especially persons and places that stand in a special relation to God (B II 2).
My interpretation is that it implies an awareness of distance. The OT formula fear not
expresses a reassurance and assistance in everyday life (B II 4) and thus diminishes this
distance: communication is open. (m phobeisthe) it means that this distance is removed:
communication is possible. Fearing God should be along with loving God. Then there is not
even room for fear of the punishment of Yahweh (B II 3b). In the Wisdom literature the fear of
Yahweh changes face and is equated with knowledge, insight and wisdom (II B 3c). Godfearing refers to people whose conduct is orientated to the will of God (B II 3a). It also refers
to fear for punishment that constantly is lurking around the corner. Yet Psalm 2.11 LXX speaks
of serving the Lord en phobi and rejoice in him en tromi. Should it be in fear and in
trembling? But why tremble when rejoicing? It refers to a quiver as is experienced in utmost
joy. Therefore: serving while in awe, and rejoicing while in a spontaneous quiver.
How to interpret phobos in the Gospels? Where it refers to an encounter with the sacred ones
reaction is that of awe, a condition of being totally impressed with something grand,
unattainable and distant, the mysterium tremendum of Rudolf Otto (cf G. van der Leeuw in
RGG II 118082). Yet this overriding confrontation with the sacred evokes an awareness of
being connected, of belonging. This reaction is completely different from a confrontation with
hostility and threat or intimidation. In first instance the confrontation with the sacred is
startling, a momentary emotion, it is a shock. When one then is told dont be shocked a
connection is established. Distance diminishes, communication starts. When the disciples are
confronted with a miracle (e.g. Mk 4.41 par) they do not fear but are startled and stand in awe.
The transfiguration cannot evoke fear; it is utter awe (Mk 9.6 par).

[1] Balz in TDNT sub A4.

[2] Balz in TDNT sub E: the word group is a favorite one in the post-apostolic fathers. In
distinction from the NT the fear of God is increasingly used in formulae.

Related words & phrases fear (pleth phobos Lk 5:26 fill with fear), fearful
(phoberos Heb 10:31); fright, frighten, afraid, dread, scare, apprehensive,
apprehension, panic, terror; alarm, gloom; scared, shaken (with fear), unsure;
insecure; shudder, tremble (friss Jam 1:2), trepidation; unnerved;
discouraged; lose ones heart; pusillanimity; irrational fear; not fear (as to
God Isa 63:17; Psa 55:9; Mal 3:5; Lk 18:4; ? Lk 12:5); vs. not be afraid;
The phrase I do not fear is, wrongly, put anaphorically in most
translations, as if not fear God Psa 56:4, 11; 118:6.
To Twitter: Fear of fear? So many things we fear of, but hardly we
pay attention to why we do fear and why we come even to fear.
Fear of God Fear of God is the other side of our love of God. Neither can
go alone without the other hand-in-hand. [Cf. reverence, respect, awe,
reverential fear; Ko. (); >> ; /x: dread, dreadful fear
cf. fearmonger with hellfire preaching e.g. Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758);
[about Gods judgment, but not about fear of Gods discipline]
Pro 1:7
Fear of YHWH is beginning of knowledge.
Psa 110:10 Beginning of wisdom is the fear of YHWH
Psa 103:13 ... so YHWH has mercy on those who fear Him.
[Note: wisdom and knowledge are Gods (from God), not of the world.]

Psa 139:14
/
for it is awe-filled H3372 Im wonderfully-made H6395.- IRENT
/for I am fearfully and wonderfully made - KJV
/for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. ESV
/for I am fearefully and wonderously made Geneva;
/>for I am awesomely and wondrously made! - ISR
/because in an awe-inspiring way I am wonderfully made.- NWT4
/xxx: because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made NWT3
/xxx: because your deeds are awesome and amazing NET (see its note
below).
/xxx: because you are fearful and wondrous! ISV;
/xxx: for with awesome ways I am distinguished LITV
/xxx: for with wonders I have been distinguished YLT;
/xxx: for I am strangely and delicately formed - BBE
/xxx: for thy [doynges] are to be dreaded, I am made after a marueylous sort Bishops

/xxx: for thou art fearfully magnified DRB;

/xxx: because you are to be feared; all you do is strange and wonderful.
GNB;
/xx: because I have been so amazingly and miraculously made. - GW
/x: because you made me in such a wonderful way. (I know how amazing that
was!) ERV;
/x: because of the wonderful way you created me CEV
/xxx: KRV (Korean gibberish)
/ - Kouge
NET tc Heb "because awesome things, I am distinct, amazing [are] your works."
The text as it stands is syntactically problematic and makes little, if any, sense. The Niphal of
( pala') occurs elsewhere only in Exo 33:16. Many take the form from ( pala'; see GKC
216 75.qq), which in the Niphal perfect means "to be amazing" (see 2Sa 1:26; Psa 118:23;
Pro 30:18).
Some, following the Septuagint (LXX) and some other ancient witnesses, also prefer to emend
the verb from first to second person, "you are amazing" (see L. C. Allen, Psalms 101-150
[WBC], 249, 251). The present translation assumes the text conflates two variants: , the
otherwise unattested masculine plural participle of , and ( nifla'ot), the usual
(feminine) plural form of the Niphal participle. The latter has been changed to a verb by later
scribes in an attempt to accommodate it syntactically. The original text likely read,
"( your works [are] awesome [and] amazing").

*Fear (verb)

have fear (of things, someone); have fear (for God); be afraid; be fearful of;
A fixed bibical phrase with the verb imperative: Have no fear (Fear not):
[In the case of imperative, it is the context which usually make clear (e.g. as in Mt 28:5) what
is the object of the verbal phrase Have no fear Be not afraid Fear not i.e. have fear of
something or something. In the example of Mt 28:10, it needs to be made clear that it is not
to be afraid of the speaker. Cf. A different scenario is Jn 12:15 Have fear any more, O
daughther of Zion there it should be made clear that it is not fear of the King who comes.
Mt 28:10 Have no more fear. Throw off all the fear you had, now that I am with yo all.
/throw off all the fear you had ARJ; /throw off all fear Cass; /Dismiss all the
fear WNT!; /Fear not - most; /Fear ye not YLT; /Do not be afraid ESV, GNB, CEV,
ISR; /Dont be afraid ERV, GW; /Be not afraid KJV, Geneva, Bishops; /Have no fear
NWT; /xx: stop being frightened ISV; /Have no fear BBE; /xx: Stop being
frightened ISV; /

*walk,

peripate
Rev 3:4; 9:20; 16:15; 21:24;
[figurative lead a life conduct in life] Rm 6:4; 8:1 v.l.; 8:4; 13:13; Act 21:21;
Eph 4:1
1Co 3:3; 7:17; 2Co 5:7; 6:16; 10:3; Gal 5:16, 25; 6:16; Eph 2:10; 4:1, 17; 5:2, 8,
15; Phi 3:16, 17, 18; Col 1:10; 2:6; 4:5; 1Th 2:12; 4:1, 12; 2Th 3:11; 2Pe 2:10;
1Jn 1:6, 7; 2:6; 2Jn 1:6; 3Jn 1:4; Jud 1:18;

stoiche - Rm 4:12
poreuomai Act 14:15

*amazed,

In most occurrences of the word amazed in the English Bibles translation

needs to be changed. The nuance of the common English word is not present in
the text. [e.g. amazed to see a nice result.][Cf. a well-known hymn title
Amazing Grace].
English word group: shocked, astonished, astounded, surprised, impressed; Cf.
word piture of amusing.
[Danker p. 167] thaumaz a. intr. wonder, be amazed/astonished/impressed/surprised Mt
8:10; Mk 15:5; Lk 1:21; 8:25; 11:38; Jn 4:27; 7:15; Act 3:12; Gal 1:6; 1Jn 3:13; Rev
17:6f; Mt 9:33; 21:20; Lk 9:43; Jn 7:21 b. tr. admire, wonder at, be surprised about Lk
7:9; 24:12; Jn 5:28; Act 7:31; 2Th 1:10; Jud 16; Ren 17:8; 13:3.
Cf. ekstasis (astonishment) Lk 5:26; ekstmi (astonish) Mk 2:12

*command commandment order tradition

Tradition of the Elders [i.e. unwritten oral Law in Judaism] [Mk 7:3, 5, 8; Mt
15:2]
*lie; *falsehood; *deception; *deceive; mislead; get astrayed;

deceive, be deceiving, be deceived

It's us who deceive others. We have ourselves constantly deceived by others, and
lo, actually we are deceiving ourselves! (John 8:44) The deceiving soul is none
other than a satan.
1Jn 2:21 lie [that which denies the truth] (not cover-up; excuse; white lie)
Quote: People believe what they want to believe - (after Tab Hunter)
All T looks like a bone to a dog. (People see only what they are looking for.) Oriental
saying
When people believe lies, it is NOT because they have to, BUT because they want to.
- (> People do not believe lies because they have to, but because they
want to Malcolm Muggeridge) [Cf. 2Th 2:11 Elohim has a force of delusion come
upon them into believing the falsehood.]
Cf. self-deception; Cf. instigation;
[adj.] evil; wicked; bad; good; right and wrong; moral/immoral; legal/illegal;
ethical;
*evil, evilness; theodicy; *problem of evil
[the reality of evil evil is generated and coming out of human heart, mind,
thought it cannot be something coming from outside (invading evil spirits).
No such thing as devil made me do it.] [Cf. demon-possession exorcism]

http://3l8hvo31a7yc2inkkn1eprjd.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/sites/7/2014/05/HowCanAGoodAndLovingGodAllowEvilTranscript.pdf
God created evil (as Jewish interpretation, taking also the inadequately
rendered in OT KJV) God controls evil? Then why God should create
evil.
The word evil as a singular noun in English usage (1) evil (- abstract
concept with no definite article. cf. evilness); (2) an evil one (person, thing,
object, thought); (3) the evil one; (4) the Evil one; vs. (5) the Evil One.

 Problem of Greek gender (masc vs. neut). Problem of personification (the

Evil one the Devil the Satan)
right and wrong; good and bad; moral and immoral
lie vs. deception, vs. falsehood
evil; wicked, wrong, malicious,
Right is what one feels good; wrong is what on feels bad?
Right is what God feels good?
Origin of evil (Not Satan) evil is being generated out of human minds
when right- and-wrong contrast is blurred and reversed, as they exercise
freedom belonging to the creature made after Gods own image, to be
independent from the Creator. Satan should be understood as a collective of all
the human evil-ness before we can personify it even this, it is only for the
purpose of our articulation, not because it became an ontorogical entity
spiritual being ghost-like spiritual force, etc..
Fr. http://3l8hvo31a7yc2inkkn1eprjd.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/sites/7/2014/05/HowCanAGoodAndLovingGodAllowEvilTranscript.pdf
Augustine defined evil as a privation of a good. In other words, evil is where
good should be but is not. This definition also specifies that evil is not a thing; it has
no substance.
This does not imply evil does not exist. Rather, it means that evil exists in the same
way as dark or cold does. Dark and cold are very real things that are ways of
speaking of the absence of light or heat. Both dark and cold are parasites, in a way,
of light and heat since light and heat can exist without dark and cold, but dark and
cold cannot exist without the existence of light and heat. The importance of this
way of thinking about evil is that although evil is real it was not created by God, but
it was made possible by God.
Although God is not directly responsible for creating evil, he is sovereign over it
and uses it to accomplish his good purposes. This idea of God and evil co-existing
is extremely difficult to reconcile at times even for the staunchest believer. And this
is precisely the rub that is so often exploited to show that God does not exist.
There are two kinds of arguments against God that use the existence of evil. One
argument holds that evil could not exist at the same time as a morally perfect, allpowerful, all-knowing God. This is called the logical argument from evil. The other
kind of argument says the amount and quality of evil makes it extremely unlikely
that a morally perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing God exists. This is known as the
evidential or probabilistic argument.
There are two kinds of answers to this question. One is called a theodicy and tries

to show Gods reasons for allowing evil. This is a difficult task given the lack of
information on the subject in the Bible. Although the Bible has a lot of material
dealing with the nature of evil and its remedy, it doesnt explicitly reveal why God
allows it. A more modest approach is to justify God by giving plausible reasons for
evil. This way of arguing is known as a defense. The advantage of a defense is that
it can show the bankruptcy of a challenge without the burden of giving specific
reasons why God permits evil.
[See next entry: * Satan; the evil one/thing; demonic spirits; ghosts]

[Related topics: Problem of evil; theodicy; the Sovereignty and Goodness of God;
moral evil; Judgment of God; Human Suffering; Molinism vs. Calvinism]
http://www3.dbu.edu/mitchell/theodicy.htm
Gregory A. Boyd (2001; 450 pp.) Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a
Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy.
http://daviddflowers.com/2010/12/10/an-open-theism-theodicy/

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/500ee7f0c4aa5f5d4c9fee39/t/540e0fffe4b04a59
e254962b/1410207743674/%22...+A+Reponse+to+Gregory+Boyd%27s+Open+The
ist+Solution.pdf

Gregory A. Boyd (1997; 414 pp.), God at War: The Bible & Spiritual Conflict

www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/42/42-2/42-2-pp251-269_JETS.pdf

Walter Wink (1986), Unmasking the Powers The Invisible Forces That Determine
Human Existence, (esp. Ch. 1. Satan pp. 9-40; and Ch. 2. The Demons pp. 4168)]
www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/03/walter-wink-and-greg-boyd-on-theproblem-of-evil/

James Brayshaw http://imaginenosatan.com/about.html

(2009), Satan Christianity's Other God: Legend, Myth, Lore, or Lie Historical and Biblical Proof
of how Man Created Satan and Made Satan to Be A God (Vol. I)
(2011), Imagine There's No Satan: How Satan Got Into The New Testament (Vol. II)
(2011), Who's The Devil Jesus Knew?: Explaining Satan In The Gospels (Vol. III)
(2012), This Is It... Satan Is Finished: Explaining Satan From Acts To Revelation (Vol. IV.)

Dennis McCallum (2009), Satan and His Kingdom: What the Bible Says and How It
Matters to You
http://powertochange.com/itv/spirituality/the-existence-of-evil/ (video)

Evil as against Gods principle. (Cf. Gen 2:9 should not be read to be about
good vs. evil, but right vs. wrong). Cf. evil as such is not an entity that exists by
itself; its come out as result of [human beings] choosing not to be good. [Not

devil made me do it.] [Cf. Hebrew word for evil, wicked simply means off the
guding path (of Elohim)]
Evil as something coming out from the dark side of human soul. Psychological
projection mechanism on to something, someone, or some object (e.g. Satan) along
with personification literary device, and anthropomorphism.
Cf. infinite evil in the original sin jargon.
Cf. So-called necessary evil; Cf. "What is worse than doing evil is being evil."
(Dietrich Bonhoeffer). How do they define the word before they use in such
expression?
The word evil in the translation of Bible is not necessarily what is meant by evil.
E.g. Isa 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I
the Lord do all these things" (KJV). Here the word evil is a wrong translation; it
means "disaster" or "catastrophe" in the passage.
Jam 1:15 [What we label as evil is not from outside or from someone else
(e.g. devil made me do it the Satan yielding power over us, but from within
ourselves.]
Lk 11:34 Cf. evil in eyes?
Mt 6:13 the evil [power] [as synecdoche = the reality of evil in the world.]
[Unjustifiably, evil in many Bibles is personified (e.g. 2Th 3:3; 1Jn 5:18, 19)
to equate this to Satan.]; /> evil - KJV; /x: the evil one many; /xx: the Evil
one; /xx: the Evil One; [See BW] [s. Jn 17:15 (out of the evil power)][s. 2Tm
4:18 (away from the evil work (in the world) apo pantos ergou ponrou )
Gk. poneros
[adj. /x: wicked NWT]
Danker p. 293. [purple is not in original]
ponros, a, on [penomai toil, work, cp. pone 'work hard' and ponos]
-1.'marked by lowness in social worth or deviation from an acceptable moral or social
standard', and so in general bad and freq. w. focus on lack of straightforwardness;
opp. of agathos
a. as adj.
(a). of living entities: humans Mt 12:34, 35a, 45b; 16:4; Lk 19:22; Ac t17:5; 2Ti 3:13; evil
spirits Mt 12:45a; Lk 7:21; Act 19:12f.
(b) of things: Jn 3:19; Act 18:14; Gal 1:4; Col 1:21; 1Ti 6:4; Heb 3:12; Jam 2:4; 2Jn 11;
3Jn 10; days permeated with evil activity Eph 5:16; 6:13 (perh. in association with the idea
of an astral evil day); boasting of a kind marked as socially base Jam 4:16. In Mt 20:15 p.
may well be rendered envious; in 6:23 and Lk 11:34 a moral dimension involving
association with 'the evil eye' in magical practice may be implied, but 3 below takes
principal account for both pass.
b. as noun [as ho poneros] etc.]
(a) of living entities:
human Mt 5:39, 45; 12:35; 1Co 5:13. A transcendent entity ho ponros the evil one, the

devil Mt 13:19 (apo pou ponrou) ; Jn 17:15 (ek tou ponrou = parallel to ek tou
kosmou); Eph 6:16 (missiles of the evil one); 1Jn 2:13f (become victorious over > conquer
the evil one); 5:18f (the evil one does not touch); prob. Mt 5:37, w. focus on his reputation
for chicanery.
(b) of thing(s): (to) ponron Mt 5:11 (every evil thing utterance that brings opprobrium
on another);; Mk 7:23 [all these evil things]; Lk 3:19 [all of evil things]; Act 25:18 [n ~~
ponrn (v.l) .]; Rm 12:9 [the thing evil]; Mt 9:4 [pl. thinking evils]
-2. 'low in quality', of produce, opp. of agathos ('of high quality') bad, poor Mt 7:l7f.
-3. 'in deteriorated or undesirable state or condition', of physical circumstance bad eyesight Mt
6:23; Lk 11:34 [s. l.a.(b)]; virulent sore Rv 16:2.

(my rebuttal comments are in red or strike out).

x: NET tn (on Jn 17:15) The phrase "the evil one" is a reference to Satan. The genitive noun
(tou ponrou) is ambiguous with regard to gender: It may represent the neuter
(to ponron), "that which is evil," or the masculine (ho ponro), "the evil one," i.e., Satan.
In view of the frequent use of the masculine in 1Jn 2:13, 14; 3:12, 5:18-19 it seems much more
probable that the masculine is to be understood here, (what the grammatical gender has anything to
do with the noun to be a person (? male)?! What about holy spirit grammatical neuter why it is
it that they make it take the pronoun he in most translations?!) and that Jesus is praying for his
disciples to be protected from Satan (woa!! Satan is a person, a power, a force?? which is to come to
the disciples just as the Devil did to Judas Jn 13:2?? Cf. Satan as a twin brother of Jesus in SDA
theology). Cf. BDAG 851 s.v. 1.b.

Evil is directly caused by human beings; not by nature, machine (androids

including), or demons. For things which can be ascribed to non-humans a different
term is required to avoid confusion and controversy in unfruitable arguments. The
starting point of evil in action is something done against others. Some excuses that
the others are not human persons (e.g. slavery); some excused that the others are
not human beings (e.g. feticides by abortionists as long as it is not out of a
womans body, it is nothing more than tissue. Some push the baby coming out
back into the womans body and tear them apart to achieve their goal of abortion to
avoid accusation on their conscience.)
It is what comes out human mind in ones thought out into action common
denominator is not badness, but standing on his own against the Creator.
subject to external psychological projection to other than self (e.g., as a Force)
and to personification (as the way Satan is commonly pictured with taking the
source of evil to be in spirit realm).
[There is no evilness in the nature with a cycle of life and death. Nature does not
know evil; is not aware of evil. Nor it is concerned about bad things, such as
natural disaster or disease, by extension death itself!]. a
10F10F

Often even an absurd question is raised did God create evil?. Obviously the questioners do know
what is meant by God, nor the meaning of evil itself.
a

Thus the notion of evil when we read the Scripture should be taken to refer to the
totality or reality of what humans do (think, say, act) which is against Gods will
and its all directed again fellow human beings. It is by the humanity who was
made in the image of God but chose to wrongly exercise their freedom of choice.
They chose to listen to the Serpents offer to desire becoming God on their own,
thus severing the direct tie between human spirit and Gods spirit. Evilness in
human is shown up whatever and whenever they do dishonor Gods name. In their
falling short of Gods glory it is closely tied to sin.
[Cf. insanity defence (mental disorder defence) not guilty by reason of
insanity.]
[Cf. Demon made me do it or Devil ~~].
Blaming the devil devil made me do it.
We get used to blame everything on the devil.
[Cf. We Have Met the Enemy, and He is Us. Not by Yogi Berra but is well
known for a title of a comic strip Pogo by Walt Kelly. www.rru.com/pogo.html This is
derived from the famous statement of Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry on the "War of
1812": "We have met the enemy and they are ours." It later appeared in a "modern
day" poster for the first Earth Day in April 1970, and next in the comic strip itself in
August 1970 in Porky Pine's mouth, and was re-used by Kelly in a subsequent Earth
Day poster (1971), and further strips and in the title of the 1972 Pogo: We Have Met
the Enemy and He Is Us book. A similar statement was actually used by Kelly many
years earlier in his introduction to The Pogo Papers (1953) which he closes with these
comments:- http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Walt_Kelly
www.igopogo.com/final_authority.htm ]
http://otegony.com/we-have-met-the-enemy has pic from posters and comic strips.]
Used synonymously in the same narrative (parables):
the Satan (//Mk 4:15), the Evil one (//Mt 13:19), the Devil (//Lk 8:12)

*evil; *the evil

Mt 5:37 the evil one;
Mt 5:39 /x: evil-doer NET; (cf. Rev 22:11 doing unrighteous things /x:
evildoer NET, ESV)
Mt_6:13 (the evil one vs. evil);
Mt_13:38 (sons of the evil one); not in //Lk 11:4.
Mt 13:19 (the evil one); //Mk 4:15 (Satan); //Lk 8:12 (the devil)
Jn_17:15;
1Jn_2:13, 14; 3:12; 5:18, 19
Eph_6:16; 2Th_3:3;

Mt 6:13b
And take us away from
(Gk. hruomai Mt 27:43. Cf. sz Mt 27:40)
[/x: deliver KJV, ESV, NASB, ; /x: rescue - NKJV; /x: save]
[hrusai (impr. aor. mid 2S) > hROUMAI BDAG p. 907 to rescue from
danger, save, rescue, deliver, preserve]; [? shield, protect]
away from [Gk. apo not ex, ek (x: out of)] /> from;
the [power of] evil. (or, the reality of evil)
[Gk. apo tou ponrou - adj. gen.masc/neu. sing.] IRENT takes it as
synecdoche; not as an evil person or even the Evil person. See * Satan is
it a person?
[In NT, the word is not used as an abstract evil as such (cf. Augustine).]
/x: wicked; /x: doing evil Jeffrey Gibson; /evil Augustine, etc. /> [the
sphere of] the evil AJR;
[The rendering in IRENT of this phrase arthrous Greek noun as the reality
of evil seems best to bring out its sense and remove confusion regarding its
identity. It is to be taken to be read in a given context as metonymic variously
for the sphere of power of evil, the evil thing, or the Evil one (person).
Here the definite article signifies the specific in contrast to general sense of
evil. A problem occurs when it is used with personification. Then it is
equated to the Devil (the Satan), which is foreign to the context of the Lords
Prayer. Cf. tre (keep and protect) ek tou ponrou Jn 17:15.]
1Jn 5:18, 19 personification of evil in most translations to equate this to Satan is
unwarranted]; (QQ to be ckecked) /xx: the Evil one; /x: the evil one most (- what does it
mean?); /xx: the wicked one KJV; /
(QQ to be ckecked)
Mt 6:13 /evil - KJV; /the Evil one; /x: the Evil One BBE, ERV; /the evil one ASV; /xx:
the evil one ASV, ESV, GW, ISV, LEB, NET, (EMTV) (- what does it mean? a human
person?);
Jn 17:15;
Mt 5:37;

[Note: Similar to Hebrew poetic structure, the clause v. 13b is parallel to the preceding
clause, v. 13a, but carries an idea not same or contrasting, but complementary.]
When translated as rescue/deliver from as in most English Bibles, what we get is a
wrong word picture of taking us out of the hand/grip of Evil one. The word deliver
sounds more like delivery out of the hands of the Evil One. The word rescue as such
suggests taking out of his grip/hand; or to snatch out of reach of the Evil one.
[//2Th 3:3 (strixei humas kai phulaxei apo tou ponrou The Lord guards/keeps us
from the evil one) in conjunction with 2:17. See also Jn 17:15 (from
out of)] [This phrase is not at all parallel to 2Tm 4:18 -- from every evil work/attack;
Didache 10:5] cf. Rm 8:23. Cf.

Mt 6:13b
but

2Th 3:3

rescue

us

away-from

the

evil (one).

Faithful

but

is

the

Lord,

who

will-strengthen

yo

from

2Tm 4:18

Will-draw-for-self

,
Jn 17:15
Not

and

me

the

He-will-guard

the

evil (one).

Lord

from

every

work

and

He-will-save

Im-requesting that

into

the

you-should-lift-up them

kingdom

out-of the

'

but

you-should-keep

them

out-of the

evil

world

[/x:

].
that

evil (one).//kosmou;

[ponros neut. (rendered as *evil) or masc. (rendered as the evil one) subject of
an exegetical issue. See 1Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18-19; Eph 6:16; 2The 3:3; Barn 2.10.]
[Not to get confused with a common word kakos (*bad - used as a noun). cf. verb.
adike.]
[NET fn: The word term may be understood as specific and personified,
referring to the devil, or possibly as a general reference to evil ( - any examples in the
Scripture to support this? ARJ). It is most likely personified since it is articular (
). Cf. also "the evildoer" in Mt 5:39, which is the same construction.]
[the Evil one (or Evil One) as capitalized; ? to differentiate from evil person/man;
evil-doing one. ? a personhood conferred on the Satan? Or, personification [Cf.
personhood or personification of spirit as in the Holy Ghost (KJV).]
[The context usually makes it clear. In Mt 13:19 ho ponros (singl. grammatical
masculine) refers to a person the evil one. Since the focus is not the nature of a
person, it should be understood as the one doing evil things. Mt 5:39 ek tou ponrou
estin (typical of something) out of the evil-doing person. Rm 12:9 abhor the evil
(one); = that which is evil. Rm 12:21 conquer the evil with the good. Cf. Rm 12:17
return kakos for kakos to no one. (badness; /x: evil).
Includes the reality of evil in man, influence of evil people, which is in turn ultimately
ascribed to the Evil one (personified; not a person, nor a spirit being). Does not carry
any sense of doing evil (Cf. B-Greek Sep. 1997 Jeffrey Gibson: "Re: ponerou in
Matt. 6:13 and the meaning of Matt 6:13b" )
[Alford p. 62 the introduction of the (ir) mention of the evil one would seem here to
be incongruous. Besides, compare the words of St. Paul, 2Tm 4:18 (hruomai apo pantos
ergou ponrou); which look very like a reminiscence of this prayer.]
[Note: we ask Gods protection from, because the Evil One is in darkness in disguise
deceiving, not easy to spot or recognize; Cf. a wrong picture of a threatening two-horned
one in a caricature.] ;
Isa 45:7

I form the light and create darkness;

of-Him the (one)

heavenly;

I make peace and create evil

I, YHWH, am doing all these things.
/xx: evil KJV; /calamity ESV, NET; //trouble Bishops, ERV; /sorrow
CEV; /blessing and disaster- GNB; /
Judaic rabbinic teaching? http://youtu.be/KGNAOZTXkac - Satan as Gods
team member, serves critical purpose and is an evil inclination; similar to ego;
and they accuse Christians of holding God vs. evil (under Satan) of the dualistic
position. Satan is as a god! [A God who creates evil is an evil God, the Satan]
[Evil is that which comes out from the dark side of soul cf. psychological
projection and literary personification affects the word evil, Satan, etc.
Related words: good, worthy, right; commendable, honorable; pure, clean,
undefiled;
Related words: *unworthy, worthless, bad, wrong, wicked, ill-(conduct), vile,
base, corrupt, pervert; (ritually) unclean, defiled;
Lk 8:15 fine and good (kal kai agath) [Gk. word study; Cf. pure katharos]
/fine and good NWT; /noble and generous Cass; /noble and good LEB; /pure and
good Bishops; /honest and good ASV, KJV, Darby, ESV, NET; /good and honest CEV,
GW, ISV; /x: good and better ABT; /good and true BBE; /x: good and perfect DRB;
/noble and good EMTV, ISR; /good and obedient GNB; /right and good LITV;
/humble and good Murdock; /xx: with pone minds and in a right spirit WNT; /upright
and good YLT; /

kakos (Mt 21:41), phaulos (Jn 5:29); ponrs (Mt 5:11; 37);
2Co 5:10 bad \{/} [good or bad good is what God declares to be good
Gen 1:3ff] [theologically, it is whether what they have done were for the glory of themselves
or of the glory of God; whether they honored Gods name];

Jn 5:29 the things good [agathos]

Jn 5:29 the unworthy things \ ; [phaulos; cf. ponros evil]; /x: evil; /
[Danker p. 370 [orig. undetermined; cheap, paltry, worthless] displaying
insensitivity about what is right and proper, bad, low-grade Jn 3:20; 5:29; Rm
9:11; 2Co 5:10; Tit 2:8; Jam 3:16]
*good (things, acts, conduct, behavior, *deeds, works) vs. *unworthy (/>
bad) Scriptural definition or criteria is whether these honor or dishonor
Gods name.
*Rewards: [good deeds to be counted for rewards.]
When we love God, we make it our aim to please Him who first loved us (1Jn 4:19)
and to serve Him with pure motives (Prv 16:2; 1Co 4:5). There is no one-to-one
correspondence btw good deeds and rewards. Our reward is to be with Him, as our
hope is in Him.

right and wrong- which is what is based on ones will

not good and evil which is what comes out of ones will
Cf. Gen 2:9; Heb 5:14.

*Satan, *devil, *demon(s); Beelzebul; chief of the demons

[demon \deemun\ vs. daemon \daymun\] [Not to be confused with a common male name
Damon (meaning gentle, tame)]
[demon in N.T.; in OT. shed (pl. shedim) translated as demons in 2 places Deu 32:17; Psa
107:37]
[Ref. Wray and Mobley (2005), The Birth of the Satan Free download http://tiny.cc/aix38x ]
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/demons.html
A demon is an evil spirit, or devil, in the ordinary English usage of the term. This definition is,
however, only approximate. In polytheistic religions the line between gods and demons is a
shifting one: there are both good demons and gods who do evil. In monotheistic systems, evil
spirits may be accepted as servants of the one God, so that demonology is bound up with
angelology and theology proper, or they may be elevated to the rank of opponents of God, in
which case their status as diabolic powers differs from that of the demons in polytheism.
[Except a few places, IRENT renders the noun as demonic spirits, rather than demon
with its wrong piture of something like ghosts or spirit beings, etc.]

Moreover, in none of the languages of the ancient Near East, including Hebrew, is there any one
general term equivalent to English "demon". [See a different quoted ref. below.] In general, the notion
of a demon in the ancient Near East was of a being less powerful than a god and less endowed with
individuality. Whereas the great gods are accorded regular public worship, demons are not; they are
dealt with in magic rites in individual cases of human suffering, which is their particular sphere.

Demons in the New Testament

New Testament demonology in part reflects contemporary popular belief, which turns up also
in rabbinic literature, and in part the dualism attested in the sectarian literature from Qumran.
Demons are called "unclean spirits" or "evil spirits," as in rabbinic literature. They are
believed to inhabit waste places. Possession by demons causes, or is associated with, various
sicknesses, especially those in which there is a perversion of the human personality, so that
the demon, not the man himself, directs his acts and speech (Mark 1:23, 26; 9:1729). The
story of how Jesus cured a demoniac by sending a legion of unclean spirits into a herd of
swine (Matt. 8:2834; Mark 5:120; Luke 8:2639) illustrates vividly the persistence of very
ancient popular belief, as does the parable of Matthew 12:4345, in which the unclean spirit
after wandering through the wilderness takes seven demons devils with him. On the other
hand, in the New Testament lesser demons have little independent personality or power, but
are subject to a prince, Beelzebul or Satan, and the demonic is often presented, not as
something occasional and relatively harmless, but as a cosmic reality of great importance, the
enemy of God and man (Eph. 6:12). Beelzebul (Beelzebub) is a name applied to the chief
demon by both Jesus and his opponents (Matt. 10:25; 12:24, 27; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:1519).
The correct explanation of the name is much disputed, and new evidence from Ugarit has not
completely cleared up the etymology. The spelling Beelzebub reflects identification of
Beelzebul with Baal-Zebub, god of Ekron (II Kings 1:2). Possibly there were two different
original forms, Beelzebul meaning "Baal is prince" or "Lord of the shrine," and Beelzebub
"Lord of flies" (cf. Ugaritic il dbb [in Gordon, Textbook, nt 3:43]).
http://jeffreyskupperman.com/2010/10/19/demons-in-judaism/
There is a generic word for demon in Hebrew: shed (pl. shedim). The term covers a lot of ground.

The Hebrew Bible, and later Talmud and then kabbalistic texts such as the Zohar also uses different
terms to refer to specific kinds of demons. Generally speaking, Jewish demons included satyr-like
creatures, evil spirits, the children of Lilith and the like. Eventually well see beings more like what
will become normative in Medieval and Renaissance occultism, though the differences, even if subtle,
are significant. We dont see fallen angle-type demons outside of the Enoch material.

Folktales of the Jews, Volume 2: Tales from Eastern Europe

pp. 40-41

www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13523-shedim
Demons in the Bible.
The demons mentioned in the Hebrew Bible are of two classes, the "se'irim" and
the "shedim".
The se'irim ("hairy beings"), to which the Israelites sacrificed in the open fields (Lev.
xvii. 7; A. V. "devils"; R. V., incorrectly, "he-goats"), are satyr-like demons,
described as dancing in the wilderness (Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14; compare Maimonides,
"Moreh," iii. 46; Vergil's "Eclogues," v. 73, "saltantes satyri"), and are identical with
the jinn of the Arabian woods and deserts (see Wellhausen, l.c., and Smith, l.c.). To
the same class belongs Azazel, the goat-like demon of the wilderness (Lev. xvi. 10 et
seq.), probably the chief of the se'irim, and Lilith (Isa. xxxiv. 14). Possibly "the roes
and hinds of the field," by which Shulamit conjures the daughters of Jerusalem to
bring her back to her lover (Cant. ii. 7, iii. 5), are faunlike spirits similar to the se'irim,
though of a harmless nature. The V04p515002.jpg (Job v. 23. A. V. "stones of the
field"), with which the righteous are said to be in leagueobviously identical with, if
not a corruption of, the V04p515003.jpg (Mishnah Kil. viii. 5), explained in Yer. Kil.
31c as V04p515004.jpgV04p515005.jpg "a fabulous mountain-man drawing
nourishment from the ground" (see Jastrow, "Dict.," and Levy, "Neuhebr. Wrterb."
s.v. V04p515006.jpg)seem to be field-demons of the same nature. The wilderness
as the home of demons was regarded as the place whence such diseases as leprosy
issued, and in cases of leprosy one of the birds set apart to be offered as an expiatory
sacrifice was released that it might carry the disease back to the desert (Lev. xiv. 7,
52; compare a similar rite in Sayce, "Hibbert Lectures," 1887, p. 461, and "Zeit. fr
Assyr." 1902, p. 149).
The Israelites also offered sacrifices to the shedim (Deu 32:17; Psa 107:37 /demons
- most; /xx: devils KJV; /evil spirits BBE; /xx: gods - GNB).
The name V04p515007.jpg (believed by Hoffmann, "Hiob," 1891, to occur in Job v. 21), for a long
time erroneously connected with "the Almighty" (V04p515008.jpg), denotes a storm-demon (from
V04p515009.jpg, Isa. xiii. 6; A. V. "destruction"; compare Psxci. 6, V04p515010.jpg, "that stormeth
about"; A. V. "that wasteth"). In Chaldean mythology the seven evil deities were known as "shedim,"
storm-demons, represented in ox-like form; and because these oxcolossi representing evil demons
were, by a peculiar law of contrast, used also as protective genii of royal palaces and the like, the name
"shed" assumed also the meaning of a propitious genius in Babylonian magic literature (see Delitzsch,

"Assyrisches Handwrterb." pp. 60, 253, 261, 646; Jensen, "Assyr.-Babyl. Mythen und Epen," 1900, p.
453; Sayce, l.c. pp. 441, 450, 463; Lenormant, l.c. pp. 48-51).

It was from Chaldea that the Hebrew word "shedim" = evil demons came to the
Israelites, and so the sacred writers in tentionally applied the word in a dyslogistic
sense to the Canaanite deities 'in the two passages quoted. But they also spoke of "the
destroyer" (V04p515011.jpg) Ex. xii. 23) as a demon whose malignant effect upon
the houses of the Israelites was to be warded off by the blood of the paschal sacrifice
sprinkled upon the lintel and the door-post (a corresponding pagan talisman is
mentioned in Isa. lvii. 8). In II Sam. xxiv; 16 and II Chron. xxi. 15 the pestilencedealing demon is called V04p515012.jpg= "the destroying angel" (compare "the
angel of the Lord" in II Kings xix. 35; Isa. xxxvii. 36), because, although they are
demons, these "evil messengers" (Ps. lxxviii. 49; A. V. "evil angels") do only the
bidding of God, their Master; they are the agents of His divine wrath.
[The word devil is not be capitalized for IRENT translation, except two
places in N.T. in Rev 12:9 and 20:2 as it appears in the fixed phrase the Devil,
also Satan. Same as in ASV] [Should the word satan be capitalized or not?]
[Cf. Devil's advocate Roman Catholic jargon]
[In IRENT, the pronoun he is carefully avoided for the word devil (esp. in Mt
4 and Lk 4) (A) to remove confusing double referents by the pronoun he in
traditional Bibles where Jesus and Devil appear in the text segment; (B) to
remove a wrong picture of personification of the devil - as if a person (a
monster?). E.g. Jn 8:44 and Jam 4:7 pronoun him/he is replaced by it.][It is
overdue to slay satan to be assigned into the land of it, instead of he,
remove the medieval comic of it image from the word itself yes, satan is a
real in the sense of real word - but not a real entity holding sway of human
minds. That everything is (just) illusion is an illusion.] Cf. Solipsism;
existentialism;
(?a two-horned, pointed tail, etc. Cf. medieval bestiary)
http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/11468/what-is-the-originof-the-devils-red-pointy-costume-and-pitchfork ]
What is Satan? A spirit-being, similar to a demon, a demonic spirit, a spirt
person (brother of Jesus? cf. Mormon doctrine). Who can be Satan? [Beezebul
as the chief; /x: prince; /x: ruler (archon) of the demons Mt 9:34; 12:24; Mk
3:22; Lk 11:15]. Its not tied to demons or capricious nature. Its found in
people and human person; working with them or working out of them. ]
[Beelzebul (Baal-zebul lord of house); /Beelzebub KJV, ASV - (Cf.
Baal-zebub - 2Kg 1:2 lord of flies)]
Whatever and howover we think what Satan is, the reality of satan cannot be
denied. No one has to believe Satan, anymore than God. It all depends one
what we mean by Satan.
It is much simpler to think Satan not as a supernatural spiritual being or force,
the chief of demons, but to recognize any person who blasphemes the name of
Elohim and any person who deceives others in the name of God.

It is formost found among people with power and with love of power esp.
political and religious of religions, cults, sects, denominations.
Satan has never said in the Bible that I am the satan - the truth of about being
Satan and identity. No human being has easy discerning eyes to tell who
amoung the human beings AER satans. A father of deception deceives people
with what is pleasing to them as they would hear as truths and par excellence
in deceiving his/its indetity (c.g. devil made me do it) is a father of all the lies
of human beings make.
[Satan = father of deception disguise, delusion, degradation, darkness, and
death].
Devil as personification of evil.

a satan; satan; Satan; the Satan

arthrous noun ho satanos rendered as the satan (Cf. /Satan most;
capitalized.)
vocative anathrous Mt 4:10 etc. (satan!)
(a) satan is anyone who thinks, says, does as Satan does E.g. Mt 8:33. Note:
Satan does not feel unlike humans. [cf. divine apatheia (impassability)]

Often evil is due to devil and is attributed to Satan, as if it is a spirit person.

In fact, Christians cannot avoid to be those saying devil made me do it. No,
evil is not something derived from devil, but from the heart of man.
Variously called: Satan; devil (false accuser, slanderer, calumniator),
Beelzebub/Beelzebul (Mt 10:25; 12:24 par), Belial (2Co 6:15); the ruler of this
world (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), the prince of the power of the air (Eph 2:2), the
god of this world (2Co 4:4), the Destroyer (1Co 10:10), a murderer from the
beginning (Jn 8:44), the enemy (Mt 13:25, 28, 39; Lk 10:19).
Cf. the evil one (Mt 13:19; Jn 17:15; 1Jn 2:13, 14; 5:18, 19; and alternate
reading in Mt 5:39; 6:13; and 2Th 3:3)
In the mind of the Biblical writer, Beelzebub was not anything in form,
substance, or power. Beelzebub is a term easily recognized to mean little more
than a false God and the false ideas associated with it. James Brayshaw
(2015), Whos the Devil Jesus Knew.
[Note: KJV and its precursor translations rendered demon (a demon, demons,
the demon, demon-possessed) incorrectly as devil.]
Satan satan in Hebrew appears a few places in TaNaKh; in the basic sense of adversary.
Satan
Job 1:6, 7, 8, 9, 12; 2:1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7; [Satan is one of angels/agents
of which power is circumscribed by God under the control of God
who sets parameter.]
Zec 3:1, 2; (in the vision of the prophet)
adversary

 Num 22:22;101F10Fa
1Kg 11:23, 25;
2Sam 19:22 (23);
Psa 109:6 (/Satan KJV);
1Ch 21:1 (an adversary NET, YLT; /a satan NAB; /Satan most)
(as adversary, opponent, antagonist, accuser nouannce of action of
someone, not a special person.) [Cf.= God did through the agent of adversary] in
//2Sam 24:1 satan is not independent, but as agent.]

In Gk. satanas, meaning adversary. Cf. The popular picture of images of the
devil in drawing and painting is not from the Bible. (See hell hades

Gehenna elsewhere in this file.) b

102F102F

the Satan

Mt 12:26;
Mk 1:13; 3:23, 26; 4:15;
Lk 4:8 v.l.; 10:18 (in the sense of human adversary cf. Yeshua
addressing to Kefa satan); 11:18; 13:16; 22:3, 31;
Jn 13:27;
Act 5:3; 26:18;
Rm 16:20; 1Co 5:5; 7:5; 2Co 2:11; 11:14; 12:7; 1Th 2:18; 2Th 2:9; 1Ti
1:20; 5:15;
Rev 2:9, 13, 24; 3:9; 12:9; 20:2, 7)
Most English translations follows an English convention to drop the definite
the word satan in Hebrew - first appearance is Num 22:22. and the angel of YHWH
stationed Himself in the road as an adversary (le-satan) against him (Balaam) /for an
adversary against KJV; /to resist NWT; /to oppose NET; /to stop ESV; / a

Acronymic word play: SATAN = S.A.T.A.N. = Spirit After Total Adamic Nature (after
in the sense of coming after to hold man in his control) the very source of all evil in the
human world.
Its not devil-made-me-do-it (unless it is ones very self or existential alter ego), but I did
it proudly in my own way turned away from God whether one is religious or secular, at the
pulpit or on the pew. Satan should not be simply taken as identical to devil which is often
depicted as a two-horned figure wearing a red costume with a pointy tail and beard, and a
trident (not pitchfork). The adjective Satanic is not in the sense of devilish, demonic,
gruesome, or cunning; but rather existentianlly human in sin (being separated from God)
and going against Gods will. Cf. Kefa (> Peter) himself was once called Satan by Yeshua
(Mt 4:10). [devil > O.E. from Latin diabolus from Gk. diabolos (slandere, accuser)].
Cf. Named as shadow (as if ones mirror image) in Edward Hays (1966), The Gospel of
Gabriel (p. 33)]
Ref. Russell (1987), Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity.
Russell (1984), Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages.
http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/11468/what-is-the-origin-of-the-devils-redpointy-costume-and-pitchfork
b

article. [Note: JNT translates mixed up among Satan, adversary, and

Devil (cf. Mt 4:1; Jn 8:44).] What is it meant by the Satan? Is it a

person? Jesus and Satan are brothers - by the Mormons.
Satan (anarthrous in vocative) in the sense of Gods adversary, someone acting
against Gods will, like Satan does. However the word cannot be rendered as
adversary. Cf. 1Pe 5:8 your opponent/adversary (antidikos) Satan [Cf. echthros
enemy, foe, adversary; > echthr to hate hostile/hateful]
Mt 4:10; (Get out of my way, Satan);
Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 Yeshua refers Satan as Ruler of this world;
Mt 16:23; //Mk 8:33; (vocative - Kefa was called Satan [Gk Satan; not the
Satan] by Yeshua - Get out of my way! you, acting like Satan) [a Satan;
someone like Satan. Cf. A Korean expression somone even less of Satan

.]
[Gods adversary; one who, following the Serpent at the Garden, decides what is
right or wrong on ones own apart from God (- a notion unrelated to whether it is
good or evil) with thought centered on mans desire for worldly things; treating
God as a means. Note of a popular depiction of devil.]
Cf. fallen angels cf. Eph 6:12 the rulers of the darkness of this world.
Cf. a great red dragon with seven heads ~ and seven diadem-crowns upon
its heads Rev 12:3-4.
Satan - chief of the demons (see above)
angels; angels < agents of the devil
angel with the basic sense of messenger. Not picturesque winged cherubic
ones. But what about angels of the devil as in Mt 25:41, the only place in the
Bible?
/the devil and its angels most; / Slanderer-Liar and his messengers
SourceNT; /the Devil and his angels GNB; /x: the Evil One and his angels
BBE;. [IRENT renders it as the devil and its agents]
*Lucifer; moring star
Rev 22:16 the bright morning star
[Here refers to the Mashiah.][Cf. the morning star 2:28] [Cf. Num 24:17 a star shall come
out of Yaakob (> Jacob) Cf. star Mt 2:2, 9][Cf. Isa 14:12 bright morning star; /x: Lucifer
KJV, Vulg. refers to Nebuchadnezzar. Many misinterprete it as Satan.]

Satan and Jesus are brothers Mormon dotrine.

Hebrew and You with Lee M. Fields www.koinoniablog.net/2014/07/hebrewand-you-with-lee-m-fields-would-you-name-your-son-lucifer.html

Today no one would dream of naming their son Lucifer! However, ancient

Christians did name their sons Lucifer, and there was a well-known Christian
named Lucifer (died c. 370). Why would any Christian parent give their son
the name of Satan?!?
I received a question from someone who was studying Isa 14:12. I suspect
the person had studied Greek but not Hebrew and was using the best tools he
could use and had available. He was trying to do research on the Greek word
, heosphoros. He had attempted to look it up in Kittels
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, but found that it was not there.
So, he asked for help. The question involved the issue of what Isa 14:12 tells
about Satan and why the KJV reads Lucifer. Here is an explanation.
The word heosphoros does not appear in Kittel, because it does not appear in
the NT. This word is the Septuagint (LXX) translation of the Hebrew
( helel ben sahar) in Isa 14:12. (Incidentally, the Qamets under the
Shin in is a pausal form used with a heavy accent; the contextual from is
with Patach, , and in both cases the word is accented on the first syllable.)
To understand how the KJV reads Lucifer, we need to look at the Hebrew,
the language in which most of the OT was composed, then the LXX, the
Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, and the Vulgate, Jeromes Latin
translation of the Hebrew OT.
First, the Hebrew. The phrase consists of three words. Helelis found only
here in the Hebrew OT, but is a word derived from a verb meaning to
shine. The noun would presumably mean shining one. The second word,
ben, means son of. Sahar is found 24 times in the Hebrew OT. It basically
means dawn (cf. Gen 19.15). In some cultures Dawn was the name of a
god. Isaiah was probably using the phrase , shining one [=star],
son of the Dawn, as a poetic reference to the planet Venus. The Hebrews
used the same word (kokab) to refer to either a star or a planet. But the
literal planet Venus was probably being used to refer to an astral deity. Isaiah
used this deity to represent the king of Babylon as a (self-proclaimed?) divine
figure. This has the effect of making the kings fall greater and therefore
more dramatic.
Second, the Greek. The three-word Hebrew phrase is rendered by
(ho heo sphoros ho pro i anatello n), O
Heosphoros, who rises early/who raises the morning. The key word,
heosphoros,has two parts: heos means morning and phoros means bearer,
one who brings. Heosphoros, bringer of the morning/dawn, is again a
reference to the planet Venus. Thus, though heo sphoros is not a literal
translation of helel ben sahar, it is an accurate translation of a phrase
referring to Venus, an exact equivalent of helel ben sahar. The interpretation
of the Bible text by the LXX translators is probably the same as that
mentioned above.

Third, the Latin. The exact Latin equivalent of the Greek Heosphoros is
Lucifer. Luci comes from lux meaning light and fer is the same as the
Greek phoros, bearer. So, though it had other uses, Lucifer is a term for the
planet Venus, just as the Greek and the Hebrew are.
www.koinoniablog.net/2014/08/hebrew-and-you-with-lee-m-fields-when-didlucifer-become-a-name-equivalent-to-satan.html
The sources for the identification between Lucifer and Satan are difficult to
date, but they all come from post-New Testament times. There are three basic
groups of sources to check plus the NT.
OT Pseudepigraphic Works
First, many OT pseudepigraphic works were originally Jewish and then later
reworked by Christians. We begin to see Satan equated with Venus here. For
example, in The Life of Adam and Eve, thought by many to have been
composed between 100 B.C. and CE 200, probably closer to CE 100, with
Greek and Latin translations between then and 400, though this is all in
dispute now (see J. R. Levinson, Adam and Eve, Literature Concerning in
Dictionary of NT Background, 45). In 9:1 Satan is said to have transformed
himself into the brightness of the angels. Eve, complaining to Satan about
his continual onslaught of deception to lead her into sin, asks in 11:23,
Have we stolen your glory and made you without honor? In 12:1, the devil
responds that the reason for this pursuit is that it is on account of them that he
was expelled and deprived of his glory which I had in the heavens in the
midst of angels, and was cast out onto the earth. The cause for this
expulsion was the very creation of man. Man was created in the image of
God. Therefore Michael the angel presented Adam before all the angels and
told them to worship the image of God. Satan refused because he was
superior to man and man should worship him. Other angels began to follow
suit. Michael warned of the threat of Gods wrath. To this Satan responded,
If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and
will be like the most high (cf. Isa 14.13; Dan 8.10; Obad 4; Job 22.12; Jude
9). Whether the identification is Jewish or Christian, I cannot tell. It may
have been a Jewish idea. The writers of these works often rewrote the Bible
stories.
Later Jewish Rabbinic Works
Second, in the later Jewish works of the rabbis (Talmud and others). The
earlier rabbinic works do not make the Lucifer-Satan connection. Rather they
apply Isa 14:12 to Gods judgment on human rulers. For example, in the
Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 149b quotes Isa 14:12. It takes a lesson from
Nebuchadnezzar and Zedekiah to teach that it is right to punish the wicked.
There is no treatment of helel ben sahar, and no identification with Satan or
hint of reference to any other superhuman being.

NT Sources
In the NT there are only three verses which may apply, Luke 10:18; Rev 9:1
and 12:9. In Rev 12:9 Satan is clear, but no star is mentioned. In Rev 9:1, a
star is fallen from heaven to earth. But is this a reference to Isa 14:12? If it is,
is it teaching that Isa 14:12 is talking about Satan? Perhaps, but I think it is
better to say that Rev 9:1 is applying the same terminology that Isaiah does
(namely, of a powerful one who is cast down from his high place by God) to
Satan. Therefore Isa 14:12 need not be interpreted of Satan in any way. Lk
10:18 is no more conclusive than Rev 9:1.
The earliest Christians to identify the figure of Isaiah 14:12 with Satan seem
to be the contemporaries Tertullian (d. c. 225) and Origen (d. about 250).
Tertullian in his Against Marcion 5.17 quotes Isa 14:13-14 and applies it to
the devil (diabolus). Though Origen wrote in Greek, his First Principles
work is preserved only in the Latin translation of Rufinius. In 1.5.5 Rufinius
translation does contain the word Lucifer in quoting Isa 14:12. Many later
church fathers continued this line of interpretation.
Conclusion: The Short Answer
Isaiah 14:12 simply does not give any factual information about the history of
Satan:
(1) Isaiahs context is about the fall of the king of Babylon. Kings were often
referred to as stars; Isa 14:12 would be describing the fall of the greatest (in
some sense) one.
(2) Lucifer was not originally a name for Satan, but referred to Venus.
(3) It was only later that Christians, perhaps following some writings of OT
pseudepigrapha, which were sometimes heavily steeped in speculative stories
about angels, made this identification.
The name Lucifer, then, meaning light-bearer, is quite appropriate for
Christians and their task of bringing the light of the gospel to the world. Jesus
himself, the ultimate Light-bearer (Jn 1:4, 5, 9; 8:12; 9:5), is called the
*morning star and bright morning star in Rev 2:28; 22:16, respectively,
another term for the planet Venus. Of course, given the historic identification
of Lucifer as the name for Satan, this meaning would be completely lost
today.

*devil

synonymous with the Satan (Mt 12:26 etc. See below)

also called figuratively the Serpent (as in the Garden of Eden in Gen
3:1ff)
See below the evil Mt 6:13

Devil cf. DEvil

a devil, [i.e. someone like the Devil; to be as Devil] (Jn 6:70 one of you is a
devil) most; /x: an adversary JNT, CLV, Rhm; /accuser - Diagl; /a slanderer
NWT; /x: the devil NET, PNT; /xx: the Devil HCSB; /a son of the Evil One
BBE; /xxx: a demon CEV; /a devil (of the evil one and a false accuser) AMP;
/xx: an informer GSNT; /xx: a traitor ONT; /a false accuser ONT fn; /
Devils son (huie diabolous in vocative) (Act 13:10)
the Devil (x 29) ho diabolos
[Devil, not devil, as it is

/the Devil ALT, EBTV, HCSB, NWT, MSG, MRC, LITV, MKJV; /as
the devil KJV, EMTV, Wuest, Cass and most; /x: the Adversary
JNT, CLV; /xx: the adversary Rhm; /x: the Accuser Etheridge; /xx:
the accuser Diagl; /xx: the Calumniator Murdock; /xx: the Evil One
BBE; /diabolo Vulg; /x: KKJV, KRV; / - JSS; /
Mt 4:1, 5, 8, 11; 13:39; 25:41;
Lk 4:2, 3, 6, 13; 8:12; (4:5 v.l.);
Jn 8:44; 13:2; Act 10:38; 13:10; Eph 4:27; 6:11;
1Ti 3:6; 1Ti 3:7; 2Ti 2:26; Heb 2:14; Jam 4:7; 1Pe 5:8; 1Jn 3:8, 10;
Jud 1:9; Rev 2:10; 12:12; 20:2, 10;
Rev_12:9 (the one called Devil).
Cf. the Devil, falsehood, lies in Jn 8:44 (See EE here27)
rulers of the darkness of the world Eph 6:12
*demon [cf. English word - daemon]
a demon
Mt 11:18; 12:22; Lk 7:33; Jn 7:20; 8:48, 49, 52; 10:20, 21;
the demon

Mt 9:33; 17:18; Mk 7:26, 29, 30; Lk 4:35; 8:29; 9:42; 11:14;

demons, the demons
Mt 8:31; 9:34; Mk 1:34; 3:15, 22; 6:13; 9:38; 16:9; Lk 4:41; 8:2, 27,
30, 33, 35,38; 9:1, 49; 10:17; 11:15; Act 19:13; 1Co 10:20, 21; 1Ti 4:1;
Jas 2:19; Rev 9:20; 16:14; 18:2;
Related words and phrases [See EE here28 for details in a collection of
cross-reference in the Scripture]
cast out demons (cf. exorcism)
Mt 7:22; 10:8; 12:24, 27, 28; Mk_1:39; 3:15; 16:17; 11:15, 18, 19, 20; 13:32;
Beelzebul - Mt 12:27 (chief demon)
the evil spirit Act 19:15, 16;
the unclean spirit Mt 12:43; Mk 1:26; 9:25; Lk 8:29; 9:42; 11:24;
an unclean spirit Mk 1:23; 3:30; 5:2; 7:25;
every unclean spirit Rev 18:2;
unclean spirits Mt 10:1; Lk 6:18; Act 5:16; 8:7; Rev 16:13;

the unclean spirits Mk 1:27; 3:11; 5:13; 6:7; Lk 4:36;

a spirit of Python Act 16:16;
demon-instigated (daimnids) demonic (Jas 3:15)
demon-afflicted (> daimonizomai); (physically and mentally afflicted);
Mt 4:24; 8:16, 28, 33; 9:32; Mk 1:32; 5:15, 16, 18; Lk 8:36; Jn 10:21b; /
demon-possessed - most;
Cf. daimn Mk 5:12; Lk 4:35; Mk 7:29
Cf. daimonion > daimon 1Ti 4:1;
Cf. daimonio des Jas 3:15 /demonic - most; /x: devilish KJV; /
Cf. ech daimonia Lk 8:27; Jn 10:21a. (have demons = have demonic spirits
IRENT; cf. *demon-afflicted
Cf. arch Rm 8:38;
Cf.
Mk 5:2, (man with an unclean spirit); Lk 4:33, (have a unclean spirit of demon);
Act 16:16 have a spirit of divination
Lk 22:3; Jn 13:27 (satan entered); Cf. Jn 13:2 (devil)

[From Palmer, Gospel Harmony, footnote] (to be checked for the validity and
proofs of his statements)
The devil and Satan are the same being. Before God created mankind, he created the
angels. Satan used to be an angel, who God created to be the "covering cherub" (a
certain kind of angel) and the "star of the morning."
The early church fathers and the Latin Vulgate translation named him "Lucifer," that
is, "Light Bearer," although this name is not found in the original languages of the
Bible. In Isaiah 14:12 he was called Morning Star, Son of the Dawn. He was an
archangel, the highest rank of ruling angels. He was a very beautiful and powerful
being. But he became narcissistic and self-willed and aspired to make himself equal
with God. So God ordered Michael, the archangel, to throw him out of heaven. There
was a great war in heaven and Michael and his angels won. And when Lucifer left
heaven, he took his third of all the angels with him (Revelation 12:4) and they
followed him. So Lucifer became Satan, which means adversary, and he was later
also identified with a Canaanite idol named Baalzeboul, or Prince Baal, the prince of
demons. The one third of the angels that left with him are now the lesser demons,
also called evil spirits. Satan and some (the rest are in Tartarus, that is, the Abyss or
bottomless shaft Jude 6; Lk 8:31; Rev. 9:1,2,11; 11:7; 17:8; 20:1-3) of his servant
spirits now roam the earth, in bitter and lonely hatred of God, opposing God's
pleasure in any way they can. Contrary to myth, they do not live in hell. God did not
banish them there yet, and no being in the universe would voluntarily go there! (On
the contrary, scripture says that they are in a constant quest for rest, in the form of the
water in human beings, or even pigs Mt 12:43, Lk 11:24 or Diatess 11:18; and Luke
8:32,33 or Diatess 12:16-17.) No, Satan is here with us, as "the prince of the kingdom
of the air" (Eph. 2:2; 4:11,12) going around trying to lead people astray. He is the
Father of Lies (John 8:44). The first person he lied to was Eve, the first woman, and

because she believed him, all mankind is in a state of fallenness along with him
(Genesis 3:1-24) He is the enemy of our souls (I Peter 5:8). See Isaiah 14:12-14;
Ezekiel 28:12-19; Rev. 12:1-17

Blaming the devil devil made me do it. See under * evil.

*Kingdom; vs. kingdom(s); Kingdom of Elohim; Kingdom of God; Kingdom of

Heavens
Kingdom of Elohim > Kingdom of God; >> Gods Kingdom
Mk 1:15; 4:11, etc. 14x;
Lk 4:43; 6:20, etc. 32x;
Jn 3:3, 5 - 2x;
Mt 12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43 -3x; [+ Mt 6:33 His Kingdom]
[In the Acts 6x; in the Epistles 4x].
= "kingdom of Mashiah" (Mt 13:41; 20:21)
= "kingdom of Mashiah and of Elohim" (Eph 5:5)
= "kingdom of David" (Mk 11:10)
= "the kingdom" (Mt 8:12; 13:19)
= "kingdom of heaven" (Mt 3:2; 4:17, etc. 32x)
There no separate kingdom of a future state to be realized and of a present reality not
fully realized. No such thing as kingdom within a persons heart. It is the kingly rule
of the Spirit of Elohim.
all denote the same thing under different aspects, viz.:
(1) Mashiahs mediatorial authority, or his rule on the earth;
(2) the blessings and advantages of all kinds that flow from this rule;
(3) the subjects of this kingdom taken collectively

http://youtu.be/e1KVgdRpz5s The Kingdom Agenda - Tony Evans

http://youtu.be/IrATAsm51LU The Kingdom Agenda - Bible Study Session
One
Ref: Wali van Lohuizen (2011), A Psycho-Spiritual View on the Message of
Jesus in the Gospels: Presence and Transformation in Some Logia as a Sign of
Mysticism, Part II pp.81-165.
See the next entry Kingdom of the Heavens vs. Kingdom of God.

Yeshua Himself as Kingdom Reign of Elohim

Kingdom is near Lk 21:31

Kingdom is in the midst of you Lk 17:21

Kingdom has come upon you Lk 10:9
The Greek word basileia in the sense of a kingly reign*.
The notion kingdom is of king and his subjects, tightly bound to a territory
and ruling with power. Ruling, however, is based on the laws of rules,
regulations, and reward-and-punishment. Political kingdoms and governments
in human history (earthly and worldly even religious kingdoms) are
fundamentally run on pursuit of power and pleasure with power to take from
and power to control over people, making them puppets, parrots, pawns, pets,
and preys to predators with pomp and pride if not outright enslavement a and
an Orwellian state power by its ruling caste. This makes the world to be full of
jokes made of false, farce, fake, fraud, etc. all shameful AND shameless.
Power of the people, by the people and for the people has turned into
Populace of the power, by the power and for the power complete perversion
of the legacy of Abraham Lincoln.
103F103F

*Power The hallmark of having power is being able to act at all, to do what
one wants to do, when one wants to do it, how one wans to do it. quoted
from p. 145 in Lip Service by Marianne LaFrance (2011). Hand in hand with
pleasure, power is to control, leading to control over others into enslavement
and dependence (making people crave for being under someones control)
The Kingdom reign of Elohim (Kingdom of God) Gods Kingdom is Gods
action in activity and movement from God empowered in spirit (not
spiritual as if spiritualized or spiritualistic). The idea of Kingdom reign of
Elohim, the central message of Yeshuas Gospel, is not out of Yeshuas own
idea or conviction. The coming Kingdom of God (or, Kingdom of Heaven)
is a part of conventional Judaism b (after Joel Carmichael).
104F104F

It is not a place; like a place to go (esp. after ones death in a jargon of heaven
and hell), but Gods reign realized in the person of Yeshua himself, the reality
for a person (humanity) belong to.
Since God Himself rules with His Word, an English word *reign is a more
accurate term with the word picture of Gods action and moving of Gods
a

Related words to play: [coterie, clique, in-group, inner circle, gang, camp, pack, crony, obsequy,
sycophant; kowtow; flatterer; adulator bootlicking; groveling; cowering; fawning; brown-nosing]
b
. Ref. Joel Carmichael (1962), The Death of Jesus, Ch. 6. The Kingdom of God, p. 82. it is
repeated even nowadays by pious Jews three times daily in the prayer called Shemoneh Esreh, No. 17.
More importantly, it was not a divine work accomplished within the soul of the individual; it was
not a spiritual reformation of the individual, but was something put into effect outside the individual: it
was a material transformation of the universe.
Cf. www.hebrew4christians.com/Prayers/Daily_Prayers/Shemoneh_Esrei/Avodah/avodah.html . . .
May our eyes see You return to Zion in mercy. Blessed are You, O Lord, Who restores His Presence to
Zion.

spirit sweeping over the created world, holding human affair under it. It exists
in something of a dynamic relationality a. Yeshua Himself ushered into human
history; not only it has a very different semantic field from the common
English word kingdom which refers to a human political power. It is for the
Gods poor people to join and enter. (Mt 5:3 cf. misunderstanding as
spritual poverty impoverished spirit; dispirited; etc.)
105F105F

Kingdom vs. *reign: [Other related words sovereign rule; rule; domain;
sovereignty; kingship ( Jn 18:36 IRENT)]
Kingdom word picture of territory (with military might for its unending
appetite of expansion), held by king in power over his obedient (feared)
subjects and over enemies, imperialism; patriarchy with male dominance;
power of taxation;
The English word reign - its aural image does not come as clear as we can
hope for. (Cf. rhyming with rein and rain).
IRENT renders the Greek basileia consistently as Kingdom reign when it
refers to Gods except as kingdom (uncapitalized) only when referring to a
political worldly power entity. Since the English word God does not tell it is
used differently than in generic sense, IRENT renders it Kingdom reign of
Elohim [See elsewhere in this file for Elohim as the translation of Greek
word the God.]
The major difference of the Kingdom reign which is of Judaic tradition from
that which is announced by the Lordship of Yeshua the Mashiah is that He
Himself is ushering in and it is the reign by Him and in Him. It does not have
power as its purpose, as Gods power itself is inexhaustible. Nor the word
may be rendered as power, which is more tied to the notion of God and
Gods will. His Kingdom reign is in the very giving of power and in the
empowerment of His creation, which was made after His image, to participate
in life of creative work.
The expression in the Gospels Kingdom is at hand (/near; /drawn near; >
eggiz) is not just the promise of God is to be fulfilled (Andrew Greely, The
Jesus Myth p. 39 www.questia.com/library/140244/the-jesus-myth )
The relation between the King and His people is love to give and love to
create. It is in contrast to the relation based on power between kings and
their subjects, which encompasses rules, regulations, and rewardspunishments. Instead of Gods image and Words (i.e. Torah = Teachings), it
feeds on ideologies with much doublespeak as in Orwellian society. For God
it is possible to give, since His love is inexhaustible.
The word love used in the Scripture has nothing much to do with love in
a

dynamic relationality - See under Trinity for this term.

English used for human interpersonal level. In a sense, this love is the very
power of God power in Spirit (cf. the very God is love 1Jn 4:8, 16).
Power corrupts a simple self-evident true statement, as the purpose of power
is power itself. Since power is only finite, power has to eat up others power
and eventually gets dissipated. (Cf. the so-called Laws of Thermodynamics in
the realm of physics can be equally extended into the human social realm.)
In N.T., the Kingdom of Elohim is NOT something Christians expect to
come in the future at the so-called second coming of Christ (cf.
Postponement theory entertained by the so-called Dispensational theology).
Neither has it anything to do with heaven where a person would go after
death. It is simply an embodiment in Yeshua the Mashiah Himself, Gods
Kingdom is in Him, through Him, with Him. (Cf. Rm 14:17). It is the very
first proclamation He made at the beginning of His ministry The appointed
time is fulfilled, and the kingdom reign of Elohim is at hand: repent and put
trust in this good news (of the reign of Elohim) (Mk 1:15 IRENT
translation). It was at hand with His coming there and then; not it was to
come in the future. The reality of the Kingdom that has come in Him has
nothing to do with rejection of Yeshua as their Mashiah, Prophet, Priest, and
King on the part of Yehudim authorities in their religion.
The Kingdom IS the very present reality in the person of Yeshua the Mashiah:
(See THE KINGDOM OF GOD, POSTPONED OR PRESENT? (Aug 2013 )
www.ralphwoodrow.org/articles/kingdom-of-God.pdf )

Mk 1:15; //Mt 4:17; 10:7; Mt 3:2; Mk 9:1 (Cf. Lk 2:26); Lk 10:9-11; Lk

17:20-21 (not within you, but among you. Cf. Ezk 11:19; 36:26-27; Lk
19:11; Mt 6:10 (not it will come, but it comes to us now and here with
His spirit quickening us); Mt 23:13; Lk 11:52; Mk 9:43-49; Mt 12:34.
Its fulfillment Mt 26:54; Act 2:23; 4:28; 26:22-23; Lk 23:51; 16:16; Col
1:13; Lk 24:49; Acts 1:8; Mt 16:19; Mt 18:3;
See the phrase The Kingdom IS like ~ (in parables): Mt 13:24, 31, 33,
44, 45, 47; 20:1; 22:2; 25:14. 18:4; 5:3, 10; 11:11; 12:28;
Act 13:27;
Jn 18:36; Rm 14:1g7; 1Co 4:20
Rev 1:6, 9;
Cf. King of the Jews Mt 2:2; 27:11, 29, 37; Mk 15:2, 9, 12, 18, 26; Lk
23:3, 37, 38; Jn 18:33, 39; 19:3, 19, 21;
The reign of Mashiah: Acts 2:29-35; Eph 1:20-22; Heb 10:12, 13; 1Co
15:25, 26; Rev 17:14; Rm 14:17.
Gods kingdom, being everlasting and unending, is both present and future

from eternity in the past to the eternity in the future and that future will be
GREAT, GRAND and GLORIOUS.
See also an enlightening discourse (29 min video on Vimeo) by Tony Evans vimeo.com/55044299 Concept of the Kingdom.
Kingdom of the Heavens vs. Kingdom of the God

Kingdom of the Heavens

This is the way IRENT renders as in WNT with an initial cap for Kingdom
to show that it has nothing corresponding to the political human kingdoms of
the world history (Cf. Jn 18:36) and an initial capital letter for Heaven to
show that it is used as a metonym.
kingdom of heaven most English translations;
kingdom of the heavens ALT = EBTV, NWT, Whiston, Etheridge,
Rhm;
Kingdom of Heaven (JNT, TCNT, GSNT, MRC);
Kingdom of heaven (GNB);
kingdom of Heaven (PNT, LITV, MKJV).
This phrase Kingdom of the Heavens appear only in G-Mt (x 31 places):
Mt 3:2; 4:17; 5:3, 10, 19, 20; 7:21; 8:11; 10:7; 11:11, 12; 13:11, 24, 31, 33,
44, 45, 47; 52; 16:19; 18:1, 3, 4, 23; 19:12, 14, 23; 20:1; 22:2; 23:14;
25:1.

The expression, reflecting a Hebrew idiom, seems to have somewhat

different nuance and word picture than the synonymous phrase Kingdom of
the God and used interchangeably when compared to the comparable texts
in other Gospels. The latter is which is shown also in G-Mt but less
frequently (Mt_6:33; Mt_12:28; Mt_19:24; Mt_21:31, 43) and rendered as
Kingdom reign of Elohim in IRENT. However,
[Note: there a few who take them to refer to the different age of dispensation
in the history. However, when we stay away of making doctrines, it seems
that Kingdom of the Heavens carries the sense of Gods sovereignty in the
heavenly realm whereas Kingdom of Elohim is Gods will being
accomplished over the humanity on earthly realm Mt 6:10 (cf. ? Gods
Kingdom on earth).
kingdom vs. reign and related words in English

reign [problem of rhyming rein, rain]

(1) a period during which a sovereign rules.
(2) royal rule or authority; sovereignty.

(3) dominating power or influence (e.g. the reign of law).

kingdom [Cf. empire; cf. monarchy]
(1) a state or government having a king or queen as its head.
(2) [fig.] anything conceived as constituting a realm or sphere of
independent action or control: (e.g. the kingdom of thought.)
(3) the spiritual sovereignty of God or Christ.
(4) the domain over which the spiritual sovereignty of God or Christ
extends, whether in heaven or on earth.
realm - the domain, including the subjects, over which the king has
jurisdiction; figuratively, a sphere of power or influence: the laws of the realm.
dominion
enter into the kingdom

[It has nothing to do with a non-biblical phrase go to heaven (after death)

(heavenly mansion; paradise?).]

Mt 5:20 //Mt 18:3 have ome and enter into the Kingdom reign of the Heavens;
(find themselves entered into the reign of Elohim).
/> join ( - as if a movement); />> enter (as if in the territorial image of the
kingdom). In his own voice, He was inviting to come into the Kingdom, which is
what His Gospel is for. The Kingdom is not something apart from Yeshua
Himself. He was not telling to go and enter into the Kingdom somewhere out
there, but to come to me, entering into the Kingdom.
Jn 3:3 (see the Kingdom of Elohim); Jn 3:5 (enter into the Kingdom of
Elohim).

*power; *energy; *force; *work

force ('physical force'), power (physical, economic, political, etc.), energy

(kinetic vs. potential; speed, velocity, accelartion, work); 'force power' - a
jargon as in 'Force Users'; cf. exertion of power

*authority; *power; *privilege; *might

Vocab: authority, faculty, competence; ability, capacity, capability, potential,

faculty, competence,

Gk. exousia
Heb. s'mikhah
*authority; *power (Jn 10:18; Rev 20:6); *privilege (right
prerogative Jn 1:12). Ko. and kanji - , , , , , .
(cf. power of his resurrection Phi 3:10)

The word authority has to do with headship and leadership. It is tied with power controlling power with man, but creative power with God.

Related words:
dunamis Mt 22:29 (power), 25:15 (ability); Mt 9:39 (mighty work /x:
miracle)
doxa (glory) Mt 24:30
katakurieuo Mt 20:25
[Gk. vocabulary study power, might, authority, dominion/lordship 1Co
15:24; Eph 1:21; Col 2:10]
arch (government NWT; principality, rule KJV; /x: rule ISR);
exousia (/power, authority KJV; /authority NWT);
dunamis (/power - NWT; /power, might KJV); [pl. mighty works >
miracles]
kuriots (/dominion KJV; /x: lordship - NWT; /xx: mastery ISR)

Authority is something to be given and to be received ultimately [the

basis of exercise of] authority is all from God. In normal person-to-person
relation, any authority even in husband-wife or man-woman relation is to
be given by the other. It is not something to be taken from other it is in
dictator-slave relation.
1Tm 2:12 be taking husbands proper position [See more in the
Appendix of IRENT Pauline Writings.]
(authente NT hapax [BDAG p. 150. to assume a stance of
independent authority, give orders to, dictate to w. gen. of pers.
ANDROS, w. DIDASKEIN, 1Ti 2:12 (practically 'tell a man what to
do' JB]) />>take over authority of her husband; //get ones
way/dominate /usurp authority/shout orders at, act like a chief toward,
bark at, get upper hand][x: /have authority over NIV; /exercise authority
over - NWT; problem of English expressions - authority over someone
on what submission to someone for what] [A detailed discussion on
this text is in the Appendix of Paul #11-14.]
[cf. /neque dominari viro (dominate) Old Latin; / neque dominari in
virum (dominate over) Vulgate; /usurp Geneva, Bishops; /take
authority over La Sainte, Casiodoro de Reina; /usurp authority over
KJV; /domineer over Goodspeed, NEB; /tell what to do CEV; /dictate
to REB; /]
So-called *miracles Numerous articles and books are written under the heading
of miracles in the Bible, miracles in N.T., or miracles of Jesus [For a list of
miracles http://christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html] [All the Gods gift
whatever we are and we have is the supra-natural work of God. /x: supernatural;
/x: miracle. That begins with Life, Light, Love, and Language. It is simply a fool to

see everything we see is by an accident and evolution. Where did their own
sacrosanct idols (time and space and consciousness) come from? If they are
from nothing, where this nothing come from?
Related Greek words

1. Smeion, a sign, i.e., an evidence of a divine commission; an

attestation of a divine message (Mt 12:38, 39; 16:1, 4; Mk 8:11; Lk
11:16; 23:8; Jn 2:11, 18, 23; Acts 6:8, etc.); a token of the presence
and working of God; the seal of a higher power.
2. Terata, wonders; wonder-causing events; portents; producing
astonishment in the beholder (Acts 2:19).
3. Dunameis, might works; works of Gods power (Acts 2:22; Rm
15:19; 2The 2:9); of a new and higher power. [/x: powerful works NWT]
4. Erga, works -- of Him who is wonderful in working (Jn 5:20,
36).
Examples of these words occurring in a cluster:
Act 2:22 signs, wonders, mighty works
2Co 12:12; Heb 2:4 signs, wonders, mighty works
Rm 15:19 signs and wonders
2Th 2:9 every powerful-work (> power) yes, signs and wonders to
deceive
The phrase mighty work reflects the true meaning of the original Greek. Many
translations use miracle to render two different Greek words mighty work and
sign. In contrast, the English word miracle which is commonly used for
translation has a very different sense, connotation and nuance. In the Scripture,
there is nothing equivalent to this modern English (which has connotation of
natural law broken) all wondrous works to their eyes are Gods mighty works,
which serves as sign pointing to the very God.
[Note: difference in nuance between *might, power, authority; mighty vs.
powerful. The phrase mighty God is not same as powerful God. Cf. the
expression mighty power of God.]
These are all signs by mighty works of God (through Yeshua), revelatory acts, all
are supra-natural, not supernatural.
The commen English word miracle (a common mistaken practice of Bible
translations) conveys only a nuance ofsupernatural things or miraculous feats or
something from super-human power as if of a magic. It is a misleading and
unsuitable for a translation work in N.T.
[Cf. Jesus as a mircle worker par excellence? Yeshua did not come as a miracle
worker who was performing or practicing miracles [like (1) the rain maker Abba
Chilkiah story in Talmud, (2) the Honi circle-drawer story in Josephus]. Cf.
Christian miracle-mongers and peddlers of supranatural things all from the

deceiving spirit of the world, treating Him as a God-man. Religious or non-religius

people are so enarmored with miracles. Whatever they can see as awesome and
remarkable things in the Bible are labeled as miracles, which in turn they tend to
crave after. Yes, in literary sense and in linguistc usage, we are not wrong to say
everything is a miracle. Then, what constitutes a miracle, or what should be nonmiracles?]
Note: The Transfiguration Vision in the three Synoptic Gosples was a Gods
revelatory act through Yeshua to bring up the coming of the Kingdom reign of
Elohim. It is hardy to be labelled as a miracle as done by many writers, albeit it
was said to be a miracle perfomed on Himself! Another one is a reading of the
Gospel narrative as walking on the water without sinking / drowning a really
miraculous feat people like to entertain.

*cross, *execution stake; *patibulum; *stipes; *crucify

[Needs editing out duplicate statements]

The Greek word stauros (a stake) is translated as cross in most English Bibles
which was derived from Latin crux. It refers to a device the Romans employed for
executing criminals, usually a simple upright pole on which a criminal is fastened
(called crux simplex in Latin). In addition to this upright pole (Lat. stipes), often a
transverse beam (Lat. patibulum) affixed on which the stretched arms are bound.
The basic meaning of crux Latin translation word, is a stake; cross is a later
acquired meaning. The word cross, a religious jargon, is the symbol of
Christianity.
It was a device for execution from the ancient times, in the East and in ancient
Greece. It was in Rome, however, that from its early republican times the cross
was most frequently used as an instrument of punishment, and amid circumstances
of great severity and even cruelty. It is certain, however, that it was absolutely
forbidden to inflict this degrading and infamous punishment on a Roman citizen.
Within the Gospel narratives, is what Yeshua was put on (bound/nailed) was an
execution stake, the tranditional translation word cross should be avoided, as
it interject anachronism. Not: it is not a torture stake (as in NWT and several
other versions)29.
The word is used for the actual execution devise (e.g. Mt 27:40, 48) as well as in
a figurative sense (e.g. Mt 10:38; 16:24) from the practice of having a criminal
made carry his own to a place of execution as if for a public show. It is the
patibulum (cross-beam) that is carried by the offender to a place where an upright
stake is already in place [this also facilitated execution of criminals in a large

number]. What Shimon carried for Yeshua (Mt 27:32 etc.) is probably this crossbeam, rather than the whole execution device. If so, the Greek word was probably
used in the text as synecdoche; IRENT put a footnote on execution stake to bring
the readers attention on this point.
From the early Yerusalem Mashiahn Community (> Messianic Community; >>
Church) on, it has become the symbol of the Mashiahn faith. In the text,
however, where this word carries this particular sense in the Apostles and the
Epistles in NT, IRENT retains the word but capitalized (Cross), since the word
there in the text was no longer used to refer to an execution device as such, but it
was to represent always as the symbol for the redemptive death of Yeshu the
Mashiah.
Figurative use of the expression carrying ones own execution stake in Yeshuas
sayings: Mt 10:38; 16:24; Mk 8:34; Lk 9:23; 14:27.
Here, Gk. stauros is used as synecdoche for its cross-beam part (Latin, patibulum) which
is what a criminal carries on himself to a place of execution, rather than the whole device
including an upright pole (Latin, stipes).] [Used figuratively as being put on public
display (shame-bringing) as if a criminal on the way to execution by crucifixion.]
It is not in the sense that those who want to follow Him have to be prepared for death (=
ko. ). It does not refer to negative or adverse
circumstances in ones life (the pain of life), but rather something which demands the
decision to surrender ones will to God. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing else. The one
who is to follow Yeshua must make that decision every day in life. It means death of
oneself in regard to all everyone and everything, tangible or intangible, in the world one may hold dear. No decision could be more painful. This is what is meant by dying to
self for Yeshuas sake, not giving up ones life as in English idiom]

In a few times outside the Gospels (in Act 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Gal 3:13; 1Pe 2:24)
the Greek xulon (wooden-stake, a piece of log of wood) is used which is
different from dendron living, green tree. Some mistake it as a tree trunk (as of a
live tree); to translate it as tree (as in KJV) to mislead.

stauros (noun)
stauros (noun)
execution stake vs. Cross in IRENT translation
In the Gospels (x 16)

Of Yeshua (x 11)
Mt 27:32, 40; 42;
Mk 15:21, 30,32;
Lk 23:26;
Jn 19:17, 19, 25, 31;

Figurative (x 5)
Mt 10:38; 16:24;
Mk 8:34;
Lk 9:23; 14:27;

Outside the Gospels (x 11)

Of Yeshuas (x 2)
Phi 2:8;
Heb 12:2;

As the symbol (x 9) @
1Co 1:17, 18;
Gal 5:11; 6:12, 14;
Eph 2:16;
Phi 3:18;
Col 1:20; 2:14

@ The noun is translated in IRENT as execution stake except where

it was used as the symbol of Yeshuas redemptive death, rendering as
Cross (capitalized).
Note: Gk. xulon (tree used in the context of Yeshuas crucifixion) is
rendered in IRENT as wooden-stake, not as tree: Act 5:30; 10:39;
13:29; Gal 3:13; and 1Pe 2:24
The common figure of symbol is crux immissa (or Latin cross). Various forms,
such as crux commissa (or Tau cross in T-shape), are seen in Church history
and tradition. Not to be confused with crucifix (a Latin cross with a
representation of His body hanging from it), which is of Constantine Catholic
Church tradition as the symbol of His sacrifice in His suffering and death. A few
groups do not have crosses as a symbol of the faith. [It has nothing to do with
figures of similar shape such as ankh (ancient Egyptian symbol) or swastika (a
common ancient symbol).]

Crux immissa vs. crux simplex:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion#Cross_shape
William Smith, in A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John
Murray, London, 1875]
www.caic.org.au/jws/cross/chapter5.htm

Justus Lipsius (1629) in his book De Cruce Liber Tres states that the Lords

cross was the traditional two-beamed Roman cross (crux immissa) with a
picture of it (p. 47). A picture of Crux simplex was also illustrated (p. 19).
Cf. FURCA a fork, was also the name of an instrument of punishment. It was a piece of
wood in the form of the letter A, which was placed upon the shoulders of the offender, whose
hands were tied to it. Slaves were frequently punished in this way, and were obliged to carry
about the furca wherever they went (Donat. ad Ter. Andr. III.5.12; Plut. Coriol. 24; Plaut. Cas.
II.6.37); whence the appellation of furcifer was applied to a man as a term of reproach (Cic. in
Vatin. 6). The furca was used in the ancient mode of capital punishment among the Romans; the
criminal was tied to it, and then scourged to death (Liv. I.26; Suet. Ner.49).b The patibulum was
also an instrument of punishment, resembling the furca; it appears to have been in the form of
the letter (Plaut. Mil. II.4.7, Mostell. I.1.53). Both the furca and patibulum were also
employed as crosses, to which criminals were nailed (in furca suspendere, Dig. 48 tit. 13 s.6; tit.
19 s.28 15; tit. 19 s.38).

*Crucify
The corresponding verb stauro, meaning to put on an execution stake (and
hang up), is appropriately rendered as crucify (itself of a Latin origin) in most
English Bible translations. That would lead to death by prolonged exhaustion and
asphyxiation, sometimes taking several days to death.
IRENT renders in most places (1) as crucify when it is in the sense of legal
execution. (2) Only when the actual act putting on the stake itself is in focus, as in
a few places, it seems better to render as put on the execution stake (e.g. Mk
15:24), which is somewhat verbose.
Note: A number of English translations a use the word impale in place of crucify.
Such a practice is an example of glossary fallacy, simply copying from old glossary
books (which are not even dictionaries, nor lexicons). The English word impale [>
Lat. in + palus (stake)] has entirely different meanings (1) to pierce and transfix with
a sharp pointed stick or stake; (2) (in rare use) to enclose with pales or stakes. It has
nothing to do with to crucify, a Roman method of executing.
106F106F

In one place (Act 2:23) the Greek verb prospgnumi (to fasten) is used.
Note:
1. Greek noun for the execution itself, crucifixion, does not appear in the
Scripture.
impale In NWT 2013 all its occurrences have been corrected and replaced with a phrase such as
execute on the stake, somewhat verbose and ponderous it may be For the cross they keep torture
stake instead of more appropriate execution stake. Unlike the term crucify, it fails to bring the
image of the epochal event but simply describing the activity of the procedure.
a

2. Not to be confused with hanging a dead body on a stake which, in O.T., it

was for hanging the dead body to exhibit for all to see (Deu 21:22-23), not for
execution.
List of the verbs

prospgnumi (fasten) Act 2:23

stauro (crucify; put on execution stake)

Mt 20:19; 23:34; 26:2; 27:22, 23, 26,31, 35, 38, 44; 28:5;
Mk 15:13, 14, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 32; 16:6;
Lk 23:21 [2x], 23, 33; 24:7, 20;
Jn 19:6 [3x], 10, 15 [2x], 16, 18, 20, 23, 32, 41;
Act 2:36; 4:10;
Rm 6:6; 1Co 1:13, 23; 2:2, 8; 2Co 13:4;
Gal 2:20; 3:1; 5:24; 6:14; Heb 6:6; Rev 11:8;

*Crucifixion history of crucifixion in ancient time.

Details and History of Crucifixion - The Nazarene Way
www.thenazareneway.com/details_history_of_crucifixion.htm
Crucifixion is an ancient method of execution, in which the victim was tied or nailed to a .... Crucifixion, while
rare in recent times, was used at Dachau during the ...
History of crucifixion and archeological proof of the cross, as ...
www.bible.ca/d-history-archeology-crucifixion-cross.htm
Britannica reports that the first historical record of Crucifixion was about 519 BC ... During this early period, a
wooden beam, known as a furca or patibulum was ...
Ancient Crucifixion - Bible History Online
www.bible-history.com/biblestudy/crucifixion.html
Crucifixion was commonly practiced among the ancient Romans .... Scythains, Indians, Germans, and from the
earliest times among the Greeks and Romans.
Roman Crucifixion Methods Reveal the History of ...
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/.../crucifixion/roman-crucifixion-methods-...
Jul 17, 2011 - What do we know about the history of crucifixion? ... Download your copy of Ancient Israel in
Egypt and the Exodus and start receiving Bible ..... The nine times the word phrase nailed to a cross is used in
Christian Scripture ...
A Tomb in Jerusalem Reveals the History of Crucifixion and ...
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/.../crucifixion/a-tomb-in-jerusalem-reveals...
Jul 22, 2011 - In the history of crucifixion, the death of Jesus of Nazareth stands out as the ... During this
early period, a wooden beam, known as a furca or ...
Crucifixion was also used in pogram in the medieval period (e.g. during Crusade) against the Jews.
www.ushmm.org/research/the-center-for-advanced-holocaust-studies/programs-ethics-religion-theholocaust/articles-and-resources/christian-persecution-of-jews-over-the-centuries/christian-persecution-of-jewsover-the-centuries
Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle ...
www.cs.unc.edu/.../estimates....
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Estimates of the Number Killed by the Papacy in the Middle Ages and later 1. Chapter 0. Introduction 2. Chapter
1. Examples of figures concerning the ...
The Persecution Of The Jewish People In The Middle Ages
www.yesnet.yk.ca/schools/projects/.../persecution/persecution.html
The Jewish people were viewed differently by Christian people and they were treated as ... The Christians blamed
the Jewish people for the crucifixion of Jesus, ...

Christian Persecution of Jews over the Centuries United ...

www.ushmm.org/...persecutio...
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
There was no mention of the resurrection of one individual well before Elijah's announcement. The Jesus Jews
were convinced that their people's scriptures had ...

*Crucifixion of the Mashiah

signifies His redemptive death on the Pesach day. His suffering, crucifixion and
death as such do not save. [His suffering does not equate with crucifixion with
pain, agony, and violence, etc.] It is the God Elohim who saves and in
His plan of salvation, both of individual person or people, was carried out to
restore and bring in as His people. It is His obendience to His Father that
accomplishes the task according to the Torah (teaching), that He died as Pesach
sacrifice. He could not die on any other day. The festival of Pesach (Festival of
Matzah) is for celebration that YHWH Elohim brought His chosen people out of
the slavery of Pharaohs Egypt (Exodus 12:14-18). However, there is another
very important reason for celebrating it by those who know Yeshua, who has
made it Pesach the father has chosen to free the world from the slavery of sin!
(Mt 26:1, 17). And the Mashiah made sure that He kept this Holy Day in the
midst of His calling to take away the sin of the world! (Mt 26:26-29). The
celebration of the Pesach with Festival of Matzah is for the chosen people, for the
chosen, and for all in the world with ears to hear His voice.
The one who died was Yeshua, the promised Mashiah, the only-brought-forth
Son of Elohim, and the Lamb of Elohim. It is not God who died (as is seen in the
gnostic and docetic elements of Catholic Church teaching). The cry of Psalm
Yeshua recited is the cry of all Gods humanity, not a personal anguish of a man
treated cruelly and put to death on the execution stake. It is not God himself (the
God; ho theos; Elohim), the Father, who died, neither God the Son [a
Trinitarian jargon of Constantine Catholic Church doctrine], but Gods Mashiah
(> Christ), Gods Image, Logos (Word) of Elohim, and Son of Elohim. Here
Elohim, Father to Yeshua, accepted Yeshuas obedience even to death on the
Cross. We should not read something like Gods abandoning or forsaking of
His Son. Human beings fail, but God does not fail; when human beings die, God
does not die also. It is not a sadistic, cruel picture of God, according to which a
bloodthirsty God calls for the sacrifice of his Son. The God only suffers through
His Son because His love of the Son and humanity. On the cross of Yeshua His
Mashiah it was not simply a God who was crucified: the God, ho theos, Deus
pater omnipotens, Elohim. (Where was the Holy Ghost in there?). There is no
room for unbiblical pagan docetic idea of suffering God, a crucified God, even
a death of God on the cross. [Cf. unbiblical Latin phrase patripassianism, the
view that God the Father himself suffered. Father suffered figuratively! sharing

pain in fellowiship.]
[Some material garnered from Hans Kng (1993), Credo The Apostles Creed
Explained for Today (pp. 86-87).]

So-called sign of the cross a ritual performed in Constantine Catholic

Church tradition.

*Shabbat; *sabbath; *rest (place of resting)

The word sabbath is in common usage of English, derived from the

Biblical word, used specifically in its original sense, but alsofiguratively.
The Shabbat (in Hebrew) which appears in the Scripture has nothing to do
with something of Friday for Muslims (the day of jummah prayer), of
Saturday for Jewish people, nor of Sunday for Christians,
Shabbat is for God-given rest on 7th day of the lunar week, not just for
worship, but specifically for resting from labor. It is not characterized by
what one should NOT do on that day in so much regulations and rules. It
reflects Elohims resting from all His work which He had done in the
creation week Gen 2:2.
The word is most common used metonymically as day of shabbat. In a few
places in the Scripture, it is about resting, not about day to keep. E.g.
Lev 23:26-32.

Ref:
(1) C. H. Mackintosh (1858), A Scriptural Inquiry into the True Nature of
Sabbath, the Law, and Christian Ministry.
(2) Robert Henry Charles (1923), Lectures on the Decalogue. Ch. 4 The
Fourth Commandment.
The question of which day is Sabbath is to be answered only after a prior
question what is Shabbat (Sabbath) is answered properly. Though it is usually
used as a metonym for day of Shabbat in N.T. the word Shabbat does not
mean a day itself. It is taking rest from work of labor and getting refreshed; it
is not about not doing things which characterizes sabbath-keeping by
Sabbatarians in Judaism/Yehudism or in Christian denominations. The 7th day
of the Creation serves as its antitype, but it was not for sabbath-keeping.
Elohim enterend into the creation rest ceasing from the work of His creation
to set the creation into motion, into life (e.g. Adam from Gensis Ch. 2 onward).
God Himself did not keep the 7th day Sabbath there and then! Shabbat rest

was His gift to the people of Israel (His chosen people) upon the Exodus
emancipation from hundred years of slavery in Egypt under the Pharaohs rule.
The so-called Sabbath-keeping is set for the Yehudim, not for every human
beings and societies.
The Fourth Commandment is usually understood as remember the Sabbath
day to keep it holy and makes a particular day as a sacred day with a serious
penalty for not keeping it. (similar to a taboo in some indigenous religions).
No, it is not about not doing things. On the contarly it is for life and for
creation. It is not for worship or service either.
rest resting and refreshing - katapausis (that which is promised) Heb 3:11;
4:1, 3, 5. [Cf. (to cease working) Gen 2:2-3]
[problem with English words - rest as the remainder; place of resting with association with
R.I.P.]; /His (his) rest most; /his place of rest GW; />> the place of rest - CEV; /that
rest he spoke GNB; /Gods Rest TCNT, ERV; /his Rest Mft; /

[cf. sabatismos 4:9 sabbath-rest]

Shabbat Heb; sabbath English
The shabbat keeping is in the Ten Commandments (Ten Words), which is
Gods gift to Israelites His Chosen people in the setting of the giving of manna
after the exodus from Pharaohs Egypt [Exo 16:13]. A day of shabbat is a
special day to set apart to be kept to Yahweh for all time by His covenant
people. It serves as one of the important ethnic boundary markers of Jewish
people in the history. It belongs to the Mosaic Covenant, not Abrahamic. It is
for relief for body from labor+ rest for soul+ replenishment in spirit, to be
kept on 7th day (for daytime period) of the lunar week, not Saturday from
Friday sunset to Saturday sunset which is the practice of the rabbinic Judaism.
We read in O.T. that YHWH Elohim set apart seventh day of the lunar week as
a day of rest, a sabbath, a gift to This was in the Ten Words (Ten
Commandments) (Exo 20: 8-11; //Lev 23: 3) [Also narrated in Exo 31:12-16.]
The verb set apart does not mean make it holy. The Shabbat day is not a
holy day, nor a holiday to keep and observe; it is the day of God-given resting
and refreshining to enjoy Life in His Loving care. Not worship or service day to
go somewhere and to congregate for rituals, rites, and liturgies. The day set for
Shabbat was simply seventh day of the lunar week in the Creation Calendar; not
Saturday, nor Sunday, or any other day of the solar week, it may fall on any of
these Roman calendar days of the week in the Roman (late Julian and
Gregorian) calendar. (Note: early Julian calendar had 8-day week.) It is
completely pointless to argue whether it is to be kept on Saturday and what are
the things not be done by so-called Christians. Constantine Catholic Church
completely divorced itself from whatever of Judaism; Sunday worship eclipsed

the Shabbat and the Pesach is replaced with the Easter. Some come up with
Sunday as Christian sabbath which is oxymoron.
Shabbat keeping was one of the major contentious issues over which the
Yehudim authorities and leaders to have brought to challenge Yeshua as to who
He is and where He got His authority.
One important point which should not to be missed: The word *shabbat (>
*Sabbath) in the Scripture basically means shabbat rest (> Sabbath rest; Gk.
sabbatismos Heb 4:9) a. It is in the Lord with the Lord, because of the Lord,
from the Lord, and for the Lord, not on a certain day. It is the shalom which
Yeshua gives. Taking shabbat rest is in Yeshua Himself, not in keeping a
certain day of the week, nor having a worship service on a certain day once a
week. Yes, shabbat rest is Yeshua Himself, just as salvation in Yeshua Himself,
as there is no shabbat rest or salvation other than in Him, through Him, and
because of Him.
107F107F

It is used in that sense in the phrase Lord of Shabbat (Mt 12:8; //Mk 2:28;
//Lk 6:5), 30 which itself may be phrased as a verbal phrase having (or
exercising) lordship over shabbat-rest. The word in this phrase does not refer
to sabbath day, as if He is the Lord who enjoins people to keep a certain day
for shabbat; i.e. what shabbat is (dos and donts), does not find any meaning
outside Him. A typical Sabbatarian claim that He is saying that He has the
authority to determine how the day is to be kept (Mk 2:27-28) is a result of
being bound by human tradition, missing the core meaning of shabbat itself in
the whole Scripture.
[Mt 12:8 kurios gar estin
ho huios tou anthrpou [kai] tou sabbatou]
[Lk 6:5
[Mk 2:28

(hoti) kurios estin

hste kurios estin

ho huios tou anthrpou

ho huios tou anthrpou

kai tou sabbatou]

kai tou sabbatoU]

Also in O.T. in Lev 16:29-31 (= 23:27-32), the word shabbat in conjunction

with the Day of Atonement does not refer to shabbat day. It is shabbat rest to
have for the Israelites, not shabbat day to keep set apart to YHWH Elohim.
Yeshua tells us He is the giver of true shabbat rest. Mt 11:28-30 <Yeshua as
true shabbat rest> After the theme <Sons authority from Father> (11:27), it
a

Shabbat rest > Sabbath rest - The Gk. word for this occurs only once in the Greek N.T.: "There
remains, then, a Sabbath-rest [sabbatismos] for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest
also rests from his own work, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter
that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience" (Heb 4:9) Ref.
www.sabbatismos.com/about-sabbatismos/ The expression in O.T. (Lev 23:3) shabbth shabbthn in
Hebrew (sabbata anapausis in LXX) shabbathon seems equivalent to this sabbatismos. This
expression was seen in several places in O.T., importantly for the weekly shabbat, not only for those in
festival seasons. There is no sabbathon day distinct from sabbath day as some tries to prove that
there were two distinct sabbaths in a festival week (though they may fall on same day).

proceeds with the theme <Yeshua, true shabbat rest> which is fully developed
in the next several pericopes (cf. 12:8).
In O.T. dispensation, Gods shabbat rest came with provision of one day in a week (for
daytime of 7th day of the lunar week). It is not to set up a prohibitory regulation, or a
legalistic ritual. As for sabbath day stipulated in Ten Commandments was given to
Israelites after Exodus and belongs to Mosaic Covenant, not Abrahamic one. The
meaning of shabbat (rest) is (1) Relief from labor for body, (2) Rest for soul; (3)
Replenishment for spirit; and NOT (1) regulation, (2) restriction, (3) requirement,
ritual for the sake of regulation and requirement.
How is day of shabbat rest related to day of church public worship service?
Anything to do with the ancient Judaic holy convocation which was also on the
7th-day shabbat day?

Weekly Offerings Num 28:10 This is the burnt offering for every Sabbath,
besides the continual burnt offering and its drink offering.
holy convocations on seventh day shabbat (Lev 23:3); on the 1st (- on
7th-day shabbat) and last day of the Festival of Matzah; Shavuot (Lev 23:2111); on the first day of the 7th month with shofar blowing (Lev 23:24); on
the 10th of the 7th month Yom-Kippur (Lev 23:7); on the first day of
Sukkot (15th of 7th mo. 7th-day shabbat) (Lev 23:34-35)]

A specified phrase the day of the shabbat is found in Lk_13:14, 16; 14:5. The
word shabbat itself, however, is more frequently used as metonymically for
shabbat day, which is on 7th day of the lunar week. [It is not of the solar week.

As appear in the Scripture 7th day of the lunar week does NOT correspond to
Saturday which is an unbiblical term. The seven named days of the week in
Gregorian calendar has no correspondence to the seven numbered days of the
biblical week.]

Shabbat day begins at sunrise, just as any day in the

Scripture does, unlike a 24-hr day in rabbinic Jewish
calendar (reckoning to start at sunset). Friday sunset to Sat.
sunset in Gregorian calendar.
Shabbat rest applies to daytime, since the night is already
time for rest.

This cannot be overemphasized enough to relieve people confusion, contention,

and contradiction in the various arguments related to the Passion Week
chronology: There is NO more than one sabbath in a week. There is no
additional shabbat day in the 7-week long Festivals the false idea brewed by
misunderstanding of the true Scripture-based calendar vis--vis the rabbinic
Jewish and the Julian-Gregorian Roman calendars. [See the separate file Walk
through the Scripture #6 - Passion Week Chronology for IRENT Vol. III Supplement].

To reiterate: there is only one shabbat day in a 7-day long week, that is, on
seventh day. The first day and last days of seven-day long Festivals are special.
Since shabbat is on the first day of the festival, the shabbat day is called High
Shabbat (Jn 19:31).
Question - how has a cultic/religious practice of worship in Judaism as such
become to be integral to keeping of the day of shabbat-rest? Cf. worship on
Sunday or Saturday in Christian religions.
The plural form shabbats it means (1) as inclusive as (several, a series of,
any, or all) shabbats Mt 12:5, 10, 11; Mk 1:21; 2:24; 3:2, 4; Lk 4:16 (en t
hmera tn sabbatn); 4:31; 6:2, 9; Act 17:2; Col 2:16, (2) as [en] tois sabbasin
as an idiom one or any of shabbats (Mt 12:1, 12; Mk 2:23), (3) or it is used in
the sense of week (e.g. Mt 28:1).

Related words:
sabbatical year [Heb. shmita, shevitt] (the seventh year of the seven-year
agricultural cycle mandated by the Torah for the Land of Israel. The land is left
to lie fallow and all agricultural activity, including plowing, planting, pruning
and harvesting, is forbidden by halakha (Jewish law) [Exo 23:10-11; Lev
25:1-7; 20-22; Deu 15:1-6; 31:10-23]
jubilee year (50th year after 7 cycles of sabbatical years) Lev 25:10
annual shabbat a day of shabbat rest - Lev 23:27, 32 on the day of YomKippur, tenth of the seventh month (Tishri) with the fasting itself from the
evening of 9th to sunset of 10th. [Often misunderstood to read wrongly as
shabbat itself is something from the evening to evening (to justify Jewish
reckoning of a calendar day).]

Exo 20:8-11
20:8

20:9

20:10

"Remember the day of shabbat to set it apart to God,

[Exo 16:23-30 in the giving of manna] [Cf. Deu 5:12-16 keep ~]
For six days you are to labor
and you do all your work.
But the seventh day is shabbat
to YHWH your Elohim.
You must not do any work,
you nor your son nor your daughter,
your slave man nor your slave girl
nor your domestic animal

20:11

nor your alien resident who is within your gates. (cf. Ex 23:12)
For in six days YHWH made the heavens and the earth,
the sea and everything that is in them,
and He proceeded to rest on the seventh day.
There, YHWH blessed the sabbath day
and set it apart for Himself. [cf. Gen 2:1-3; Ex 31:13-17]]

Ref. C. H. Mackintosh (1858), A Scriptural Inquiry into the Sabbath the Law and
Christian Ministry by CHM.pdf [See in the separately uploaded file On Sabbath
(Shabbat).

Shabbat (/sabbath) is an important Scriptural thematic word. It was a major issue of

contention with which Yeshua confronted in the Gospels to challenge the Yehudim
authorities to show who He truly is.
We come to know from the Scripture (OT and NT) that
(1) it is one of the Ten Commandments.
(2) it was to keep it holy on the seventh day of the week, and
(3) it says thou shall not do any work.
From the Scripture we should not miss the following:
(1) it is to the people of Israel that the Ten Commandments was given (after
the Exodus). The Ten Words (in Hebrew) is at the core of the Mosaic Law of
Judaism throughout its history, binding them throughout the generations until a
renewed Covenant is given by God Himself. It is one of a few ethnic and religious
boundary markers for the people of Israel the Gentiles are not included in its
commonwealth. Only Judaic people or proselytes to Judaism are required to keep;
others are not given the blessing of the law.
(2) It is to be kept on the seventh day of the lunar week according to the
Scripture-based calendar, not on the one of the named days of the solar week
according to the rabbinic Jewish or the modern Julian-Gregorian calendars. There is
no correspondence between 7th day of the lunar week and Saturday (which is 7th,
6th or 1st day of the week, different countries/religions keeping differently).
(3) It is unbending; and none are allowed to do any work, There is no room
here for introducing what we deem to be "works of necessity". Moreover, there is
nothing in O.T. to equate shabbat keeping with so-called worshiping (which was
then the Temple-based ritual and sacrifice).

In modern times, a major controversy is brought out by the so-called Sabbatarian

who take keeping sabbath on Saturday as the essential requirement for being a true
believer in their fold. It is presumptuous at best, however, for people outside Judaism
to claim of keeping this commandment at their peril of being excommunicated.
Without keeping eyes open to all the truths about the shabbat they lack proper
understanding of the true meaning of shabbat-keeping, bordering on legalism.
Yeshua came to bring the entire Law of God to its fullest with the renewed Covenant
in His blood, and this He accomplished it in the very person of Himself, through His

Life and Death. Thus the broken relation of humanity to the Creator God is restored,
which could not be achieved on the basis of peoples keeping the Law. So-called
Christian sabbath turns out to be not about a certain day but a special person,
because He Himself IS our shabbat-rest. To have true shabbat is not to be found in
keeping certain rules scrupulously on a certain day. On the contrary, it is to fully en
joy Gods shalom every day of our mortal life with Him, in Him and through
Him, to the glory of God the Father. With such shabbat-rest we have entered, the
remainder of the Ten Commandments is lived out, not because of the
commandments, but because of Yeshua the Mashiah Himself who abides in us in
spirit as we abide in Him.

Scriptural and non-scriptural words and phrases shabbat vs. sabbath; shabbat rest;
sabbath observation; sabbath day keeping; festival sabbath, weekly sabbath, Saturday
sabbath, etc.

*fruit; fruitage; *crops; *harvest; *grain

fruit [, Ko.] E.g. figs, grapes, olives; pomegranate (in OT

only; Exo 28:34 etc.);
fruitage [ Ko.] [e.g. fruitage NWT; />> fruit; Act 2:30; Rm
1:13; Gal 5:22 (~ of the Spirit); Eph 5:9; Phi 1:22; 4:17.]
harvest, crop (therismos) [, Ko.] (to reap; be ripe)
produce (gennma offspring) (e.g. Mt 26:29; //Mk 14:25; //Lk 22:18)
WNT, YLT, LITV, NETfn; /x: fruit KJV; /x: product NWT, Murdock;
(lachanon) /herb Lk 11:42; (mint, rue, and every herb) KJV; garden
plant (Mt 13:32; //Mk 4:32); / vegetable [, Ko] Rm 14:2
NWT;WNT; /x: herb KJV; /
grain e.g. wheat, barley; /x: corn KJV.
kokkos kernel seed, grain Mt 13:31; J 12:24; 1Co 15:37, etc.
*seed, (kernel) [() Ko.] Gk. sperma [The word seed of a person (as in
seed of Abraham) is in figurative use to carry the sense of Danker p. 325 1.
source of propagation seed (of plants; of humans Hb 11:18); - 2. product of
propagation a. of ancestral continuity or lineage seed, posterity, - b. w. focus on a
specific descendant seed, descendant (Gal 3:16); c. w. focus on production of
divine characteristics through Gods own, seed 1Jn 3:9 (genein CEB is a frivolous
translation). [See Gal 3:16 a Pauline midrash with word-play between seed and
seeds, which in OT is singular word in plural sense. LXX has it singular Gk.] [Is
the English word seed acceptable as a translation word in NT, when it means
offspring or descendant?]

Cf. sperma (seed) collective singular - rendered as descendant or descendants

(/xx: offsprings - ESV. Cf. a descendant Mt 22:25. Also Gal 3:16 where
difference btw singular and plural words are detailed) cf. gennema (Mt 12:34);
gnos (Act 17:28) offspiring.

Mt 22:24, 25 //Mk 12:19, 20, 21 //Lk 20:28

Lk 1:55
Jn 7:42 Rm 1:3; 2Ti 2:8 of David
Jn 8:33, 87 Act 3:25; Rm 4:13, 16, 18; 9:7; 9:8; 11:1; 2Co 11:22
Gal 3:16, 19, 3:29 Heb 2:16; 11:11, 18 of Abraham :
Act 9:29;
Act 7:5 ; Act 13:23;
Rev 12:17
Wine; sour wine; produce of the vineyard (fruit of the vine);

[Related words; grape-vine; grape; to tread; wine press (yeqeb); blood of

grapes (dam anavim Gen 49:11); grape wine; old wine; sour wine vs.
vinegar; must; skin bag; ]
sour wine [Gk. oxos] [Mk 15:36 etc.] (NKJV, ESV, NET, etc.) wine gets old
and turns into vinegar becoming sour; /xx: vinegar KJV+, NIV; /
[equivalent to Latin posca cheap sour wine diluted heavily with water for
slaves and soldiers. Prob. it was there for the soldiers who had performed the
crucifixion NETfn]
produce of the vineyard [Mt 26:29; //Mk 14:25; //Lk 22:18]; /fruit of the
vine KJV, NET; /fruit of the grapevine ALT; /produce of the
vine; /> product of the vine; / [See the next entry vineyard; vine;
branch.]
[It refers to grape juice undergone fermentation. As grapes were harvested in
the summer or early fall, so at Pesach time in spring fresh grape juice
would not have been available. Here, the expression with a symbolic reference
to blood is for its color, not for wine as such.] [that is, grape juice
compressed out from grapes, what has come out of, produce (primary)
product of grape vine; which has been in fermentation process.]
[Indexical and connotation of this word are not same as modern wine as in
the church tradition of celebrating Eucharist. Resembling blood, it is
consistently appears as that symbol of shed blood; is not (fully fermented)
wine. - Ref: Jacob O. Meyer, Wine or Grape Juice? the Correct Memorial
Emblem of the Messiahs Blood (Assemblies of Yahweh, Bethel, PA, 1987)
www.assembliesofyahweh.com/ ]
Related words;

genma product, fruit Mt 26:29; //Mk 14:25; //Lk 22:18. (some GNT

text has it wrongly gennma). As collective pl. produce 12:18 v.l.; in

imagery 2Co 9:10.
gennma offspring, brood, always in imagery of snakes, Mt 3:7 etc.]

therismos harvest (Mt 9:37 etc.)

karpos fruit, fruitage, produce; (yield/gain Jn 4:36; Rm 1:13; Phi 1:22;

4:17)

vineyard; vines; branches

Related Greek words:

ampelourgon the one in charge of the vineyard (not vine keeper); Lk
13:7 /vineyard worker; /x: vinedresser (- archaic) (cf. kpouros Jn 20:15
gardener)
klados branch (in contrast to root) (Mt 13:32; Rm 11:16b, etc.)
ampeln vineyard Mk 12:1f; // Lk 13:6
ampelos
(1) vine, grapevine Jam 3:12;
(2) vineyard /vine most;
fruit of the vineyard [Mt 26:29; //Mk 14:25; //Lk 22:18];
vineyard (Jn 15:1, 5)
vineyard of the earth (ampelos ts gs) Rev 14:19; 14:18 v.l.) *;
klma grape vine (Jn 15:2, 5, 6) /branch most;
kpos garden (Lk 13:19; Jn 18:1, 26; 19:41)
*NET tn: gathered the grapes from the vineyard of the earth.
vineyard. Or "vine." BDAG (54 s. a) states, "
. to harvest the grapes fr. the vine of the earth (i.e.
fr. the earth, symbol. repr. as a grapevine) Rev_14:18 (i.e. Revelation
14:18f.); but may be taking on the meaning of , as oft. in pap.,
possibly PHib. 70b, 2 [III bc]." The latter alternative has been followed in
the translation ( "vineyard").

Ref. for semantic shift in Greek vine to vineyard and branch to vine:
[prophetic warning over Yisrael pictured as the Vineyard of YHWH Isa
5:1, 2-7. Cf. Mt 21:33-46]

[vine Ps 80:8,9]
[Ref. C.C. Caragounis: Is Jesus the Vine or the Vineyard? in The
Development of Greek and the New Testament (2006 Baker) pp. 247-261
{Dec 21, 2007 [B-Greek] Chrys C. Caragounis' Book on the Development of Greek}

http://anebooks.blogspot.com/2007/05/is-jesus-vine-or-vineyard.html
www.lsn.se/2509/Debate.htm]

*Pesach (> *Passover); *unleavend breads; *Matzah;

Meaning of Hebrew verb pasach for the Pesach (Passover): To pass over,
or to protect?
Ref: What Does the Word Passover ( , pesach) Mean?
www.torahresource.com/EnglishArticles/Pesach_Means_Protection.pdf

[For further details, see a separate file The Passion Week Chronology.]
Three major Pilgrimage Festivals of Judaism Pesach (Passover), Shavuot
(Weeks or Pentecost), and Sukkot (Tabernacles, Tents or Booths).
The most important festival in Judaism consists of a day of Pesach feast with
Pesach meal and seven days of Festival of the unleavened breads (matzah)
the Pesach season (total eight days) with matzah eating is referred to simply
as Pesach (Lk 22:1 Cf. Mk 14:1). Rabbinic Judaism of observation of
Pesach Festival from Nisan 15 for seven or eight days, with a day from
sunset. The day of Pesach is called Erev Pesach).
Lk (1) during the Passion Week Lk 22:1, 7, 8, 11, 13, 15, in addition to
(2) when Yeshua was 12-year old;
Mt (1) during the Passion Week Mt 26:2, 17 ,1 8, 19;
Mk (1) during the Passion Week Mk 14:1, 12, 14, 16
Jn (1) During the Passion Week (CE 30) [See below for a list of its 7
occurrences], in addition to (2) [the second Pesach - shortly before <Feeding
Five Thousands> (CE 29); Jn 6:4; and (3) [the first Pesach with the <Temple
Incident> during the first year of Yeshuas ministry (CE 28); Jn 2:13, 23;
G-Jn

Text reads:

11:55
x2
12:1;
13:1
18:39

The Pesach of the Yehudim was

near
six days before the Pesach

19:14
18:28

Preparation of the Pesach

eat meals for the Pesach season

before the Festival of the Pesach

release on the occasion of the

Pesach

Sense of
Pesach

festival of Matzah
festival of Matzah
festival of Matzah
festival of Matzah
Pesach feast/day
(idiom) = celebrate
the festival

Pesach meal (cf. Passover or Paschal meal); rabbinic ritual Seder meal; Last
Supper
[See Clarifying the Pesach Chronology]

The first month of the year by lunar months is *Abib in the spring
time which yields barely harvest for the Wave Barley Sheaf offering on
Abib 16 (omer offering) (Lev 23:11) with the Pesach day on Abib 14
and the first day of the Matzah Festival on Abib 15 (= sabbath, 7th day of
the lunar week).
The Pesach (>Passover) meal was on Abib 14 evening (Nisan 15).
Yeshua died when the Pesach lamb was slaughter. (Seder a ceremonial
meal on the first night of Pesach Nisan 15 - is a term for what was
developed later in the rabbinic Judaism.) [Exo 12:3 a lamb for each
household not for each person. In the same way the salvation of
YHWH through Yeshua the Mashiah is a matter of the whole household,
not just individuals.]
The Lords Last Supper was not the Pesach meal. Its Synoptic accounts
need to be carefully read to avoid such a common misconception which
would put the Scripture texts contradictory to each other, as they brush
aside by explaining away (e.g. there were meals on two consecutive days
by two different group of people using two different calendars!) what GJn clearly tells it was not.
(Mk 14:12-25; Mt 26:17-29; Lk 22:7-23)
The Greek phrase esthi to pascha (eat the passover) is an idiom to be
understood as eat meals for the Pesach season, i.e, to celebrate the
Pesach festival. (For Yeshuas group - Mt 26:17; //Mk 14:12, 14; //Lk
22:11; for Yehudim authorities Jn 18:28)

Cf. the Lords Supper (1Co 11:23-34) [an annual commemoration; the only
injunction Yeshua left to His disciples, neither for His resurrection, nor for His
birth.
[Cf. Other non-biblical terms of church jargon used for this:
Eucharist (based on the Greek word eucharisteu Mt 26:27meaning "give
thanks", which the Lord Supper itself has nothing to do with).108Fa10
Holy Communion; [1Co 10:16] Lord Supper is for a remembrance until the
Parousia of the Lord when it is to be a celebration]
Christian Passover (- oxymoron);
Memorial Supper ("this do in remembrance of me")
A chuch sacrament
Cf. Catholic Mass

[Ref. www.ralphwoodrow.org/articles/lords_supper.pdf ]

One of seven sacraments of Roman Catholic Church, with celebration Mass,

Crown; wreath; laurel

Gk. stephanos
wreath, victors wreath, laurel; /> crown
Rev 6:2; 14:14 on Yeshua the Mashiah)
Mt 27:29; Mk 15:17; Jn 19:2; /wreath of thorny twigs; /x: crown of thorns
most); /

Gk. diadma
(royal) crown, diadem only in Rev (Rev 12:3; 13:1; 19:12)

astrologer-magi;

See WB No. 3 (Names, Persons, and People)

*star of Bethlehem;

See *Morning star* Lucifer

See WB No. 2 (Time and Space)
*Praetorium
(Gk. praitrion Lat. loan word).
Praetorium originally signified a generals tent within a Roman castra, castellum, or
encampment. It derived from the name of one of the chief Roman magistrates, the praetor. a
109F109F

It was to refer to a place of residence of the chief official in the subjugated Roman
territory (Mt 27:27; Mk 15:16; Jn 18:28, 33; 19:9 - of Pilate)

The term was also used for the emperor's headquarters and other large
residential buildings or palaces.

Phi 1:3 throughout the whole praetorium in Rome during Paulos

imprisonment)
Act 23:35 en t praitri Herdou (Lit. Herods Praetorim) the Praetorium [at
Caesarea Maritima] built by Herod the Great, not Herods palace.

praetor (Latin, "leader") was originally the title of the highest-ranking civil servant in the
Roman Republic, but later became a position directly below the rank of consul.

*sanctuary; *tabernacle; vs. *tent; *booth; *synagogue; *Mishkan; *Miqdash;

*Temple;

[See WB #4]
Related words: (pagan) temples; shrines; Temple; Temple sanctuary; Temple
courts; Temple treasury; tabernacle. Related words: altar Miskan and 'Ohel
Mo'ed -pdf

Related words: the Holy Place; the Most Holy Place (Heb. Kodesh Kodashim);
House of YHWH [Exo 23:19; 34:26; Deu 23:18; (bayith Heb; /oikos
LXX)]; Temple Mount (Heb. Har HaBayit)
*Sanhedrin;

[cf. a sanhedrin a local court]

Edited from www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Sanhedrin.html
The ancient Judaic court system was called the Sanhedrin. The Great
Sanhedrin was the supreme religious body in the Land of Israel during the
time of the Holy Temple. There were also smaller religious Sanhedrins in
every town in the Land of Israel, as well as a civil political-democratic
Sanhedrin. These Sanhedrins existed until the abolishment of the rabbinic
patriarchate in about 425 CE.
The earliest record of a Sanhedrin is by Josephus who wrote of a political
Sanhedrin convened by the Romans in 57 BC. Hellenistic sources generally
depict the Sanhedrin as a political and judicial council headed by the
countrys ruler.
Tannaitic sources describe the Great Sanhedrin as a religious assembly of
71 sages who met in the Chamber of Hewn Stones in the Temple in
Jerusalem. The Great Sanhedrin met daily during the daytime, and did not
meet on the Sabbath, festivals or festival eves. It was the final authority on
Jewish law and any scholar who went against its decisions was put to death
as a zaken mamre (rebellious elder). The Sanhedrin was led by a president
called the nasi (lit. "prince") and a vice president called the av bet din (lit.
"father of the court"). The other 69 sages sat in a semicircle facing the
leaders. It is unclear whether the leaders included the high priest.
The Sanhedrin judged accused lawbreakers, but could not initiate arrests. It
required a minimum of two witnesses to convict a suspect. There were no
attorneys. Instead, the accusing witness stated the offense in the presence of
the accused and the accused could call witnesses on his own behalf. The
court questioned the accused, the accusers and the defense witnesses.
The Great Sanhedrin dealt with religious and ritualistic Temple matters,
criminal matters appertaining to the secular court, proceedings in

connection with the discovery of a corpse, trials of adulterous wives, tithes,

preparation of Torah Scrolls for the king and the Temple, drawing up the
calendar and the solving of difficulties relating to ritual law.
In about 30 C., the Great Sanhedrin lost its authority to inflict capital
punishment. After the Temple was destroyed, so was the Great Sanhedrin.
A Sanhedrin in Yavneh took over many of its functions, under the authority
of Rabban Gamliel. The rabbis in the Sanhedrin served as judges and
attracted students who came to learn their oral traditions and scriptural
interpretations. From Yavneh, the Sanhedrin moved to different cities in the
Galilee, eventually ending up in Tiberias.
Local Sanhedrins consisted of different numbers of sages, depending on the
nature of the offenses it dealt with. For example, only a Sanhedrin of 71
could judge a whole tribe, a false prophet or the high priest. There were
Sanhedrins of 23 for capital cases and of three scholars to deal with civil or
lesser criminal cases.

Sources: Blackman, Philip. Introduction to Tractate Sanhedrin of the

Mishnah. 1963.
Dimont, Max. Jews, Jews, God and History. 1962.
Encyclopedia Judaica "Sanhedrin". 1971.
Kung, Hans. Judaism. 1992.
Seltzer, Robert M. Jewish People, Jewish Thought. 1980.

*church; *ekklesia, congregation; Church; Cf. assembly

[The word church usually connotes something of institutional church

unsuitable for a translation word in NT.]
http://btdnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Biblical-and-HistoricalReflection-on-Ecclesiology-and-Insider-Movements-Tim-Tennent.pdf
<< In these contexts, the very word Christian has strong connotations
and associations with Western culture or foreign-ness. For many of them the
words Christian and Church call to mind British imperialism or
colonialism or worse. In short, the phraseChristian church may carry very
negative, cultural connotations whereas Christ may not. >>
With the reality of the churches in Christandom in its two millennia history

down the current status from its astrocity to its vanity (typified by so-called
megachurch boom), the word church should not belong to the biblical
words in the Bible text.
[To change other peoples religion to 'Christianity', join a 'church', and
adopting a Christian culture was not the mandate of Yeshua. Instead,
Yeshua without a religion that is foreign to them, a religion of anity
(Christianism). Moverover Chritian vocabulary (jargon, Christianesea) is a
barrier for people to hear the Scripture, associated with Western culture and
political and religious power.
The word church is unsuitable for a translation word in the N.T., as it
carries very different meaning, most commonly as (1) a building and local
organization of people, or (2) a particular denomination hardly it can be all
inclusive (cf. universal or catholic church in Apostles Creed sanctam
ecclesiam catholicam). Cf. the expressions their church, my church, etc.
churchless Christianity www.reclaimingthemind.org/papers/ets/2005/Tennent/Tennent.pdf
www.internationalbulletin.org/issues/2005-04/2005-04-171tennent.pdf
The problem and inappropriateness of the term catholicity, catholic related
to the church (as in Apostles Creed << believe in the holy catholic
church >>). https://bavinckinstitute.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/05/Bavinck_Catholicity_CTJ27.pdf
In the sense of universality? [Linguistically the word is not easily
dissocitated from something to do with a sectarian of Universalists.] What
does it mean by a universal church?
Heb. edah
Cf. assembly
Cf. government; polity; organization; society; movement;
Cf. Church vs. Messianic community (in JNT translation by David Stein; in
Mt 16:18 he renders as my community (Cf. my church for most English
translations and the living community in me in IRENT)), which fails to bring
out its true sense (cf. my neighborhood community?); Mashian community
(IRENT); Body of Mashiah (> Body of Christ). In some way, descriptive
names would be People of the Way or Children of Light brotherhood of
Mashiah, gathering in Yeshua, etc. Ref: Evaluation-Churchless_Christianity12-2012 www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=695

Part of being a Christian is speaking Christianese, Christian jargon (an insider language).

Cf. Gemeinshaft vs. Gesellshaft

Ferdinand Tonnies (1887), Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (English
translation 1957 Community and Society).
http://media.pfeiffer.edu/lridener/courses/GEMEIN.HTML
www.enotes.com/research-starters/gemeinschaft-gesellschaft
The Greek word ekklsia is basically an assembly of a particular group of people
for a purpose (such as for a meeting for civic affairs in a city).
In the Gospels, no word appeared which is equivalent to English word churh in
modern usage, especially so when there was no Christianity and its churches there
and then.
It is used in the sense of congregation (Mt 18:17) of people sharing common
spirit of life and community of people (Mt 16:18). Many English Bibles translate
as church (e.g. in KJV, ESV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, HCSB, NIV, NET). It is an
example par excellence of anachronism which misleads the readers. The common
English word church is a non-biblical term, often referring to a building,
denomination, or an organization. E.g. For the Catholics, it means their own
Roman Catholic Church. In his Jewish New Testament, David Stein renders
ekklsia as 'Messianic community' (except Mt 16:18 as my Community). A
problem with it is the connotation and associatin of the word Messianic with the
Messianic movements, etc. A problem with the word community is the nuance it
carries as a common secular sociological jargon. The Church (other than as used
for a title for religious denomination) is what the Body of the Mashiahn community
is. [Cf. body as not a physical human body, but as a polity. See the word play on
body in 1Co 12:12. Cf. corporate Body belonging to the Lord 1Co 11:29.]

When the Greek word in the N.T. is specifically tied to the teaching of the
Mashiah, IRENT renders variously depending on the context (sense and referent) ,
instead of the conventional word church:
(1) the living community in me of those called out by Elohim - Mt
16:18; a [Cf. my Community JNT]; />> my Church (or church) most;
/x: my congregation NWT, Bishops; /x: my Assembly (or assembly)
ALT, ISR, LITV, Rhm; /my ecclesia CLV. [It is not in the sense of
church, neither of assembly, nor of congregation. It is best understood in
its etymological sense of called-out, i.e. the people called out by Yeshua
which is saying equivalent to Gods own special chosen people (Tit 2:14;
1Pe 2:9) in the Mashiah.] [referring to the corporate body of Yeshua the
Mashiah Himself][The Church, which is a human organization, is not the
goal of Yeshuas mission; it is not a place where Kingdom of God is to be
found.]
(2) gathered people - Mt 18:17; gathered believers Rm 16:5; Col 4:15;
10F10F

Mt 16:18 This verse is the notorious proof text for the Catholic doctrine of Petrine
primacy which is in turn the basis of its Papal supremacy .
a

(3) Congregation (of assembled people in common tie) Act 11:26; 13:1;
14:23; 15:3; Rm 16:1, 5, 23; 11:18; 14:4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 35; Col
4:15, 16; 1Ti 5:16; Phm 1:2; 3Jn 9,10; Heb 2:12 (O.T.) congregations 1Co 16:19; Rm 6:6
(4) congregation of Mashian community 1Co 4:17; 6:4; 12:28; 14:4; 2Co 8:1
(pl); Phi 4:15; Jas 5:14;3Jn 6
(5) gathering of a congregation 1Co 14:28, 34, 45;
(6) Mashiahn community- Act 2:47 v.l.; 14:27; 20:17; the Mashiahn
Community Eph 1:22; Eph 3:10, 21; 5:23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32; Col
1:18, 24; 1Th 1:1; 3:5; 2Th 1:1; Rev 2:1, 8,:12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14;
(7) the Mashiahn Community (in Yerusalem) Act 5:11; 8:1, 3; 11:22;
12:1, 5; 15:4, 22; 18:22; 1Co 4:17; Phi 3:6;
(8) Mashiahn Community (of Elohim) (> church of God) Act 20:28; 1Co
1:2; 10:32; 11:22; 15:9; 2Co 1:1; Gal 1:13; 1Ti 3:5;
Unrelated to the Mashiahn:

Cf. congregration - Heb 2:12 (Ps 22:22 of Israelties); - most, ASV; />>
meeting GNB; /xx: church KJV, DRB; /xxx: Church Geneva;
Cf. assembly (gathering of people meeting for matters of common
interest) Act 19:32 (of those in power convened for a meeting); Act 7:38
(of Israelites with Mosheh in Mt. Sinai); Act 19:39, 40; Heb 12:23 (of the
firstborn)

Cf. plths (multitude; a large number of people) Act 19:9 /xx:

congregation - NET;
Cf. sunag (Act 11:26) to assemble together to covene

a church a place or building for gathering of people for particular religious

activities by a religious organization; often such an organization.
the church; esp. as the Church a denomination organization such as
Catholic Church, Orthodox ~, Protestant ~, Methodist ~, etc.
The basis of Church, the Church, churches with a cetain people group around
the core befiefs and practices is power, the priestly power over people,
indoctrinated and enslaved with their beliefs.
Note: The biblical word church (church as appeared in most English as
translation of ekklesia) is a typical anachronism with church/religious jargons.
Ekklesia and church have nothing much in common; instead it gives rise to
completely wrong reading of the Scripture. No word church appears in
IRENT.
Danker p. 117
1 a gathering of people meeting for matters of common interest, assembly
-a. in Hellenic society, w. ennomos, emphasizing statutory time for meeting Act 19:39.
Cp. the non-regulated gathering vs. 32, 40.
-b. in the early Messianic community, of pers. gathering in a meeting place Rm 16:5;
1Co 16:19; Col 4:15; Phm 2; with focus on deliberation Mt 18:17; Ac 15:22; 1Co

6:4; 14:35; with focus on a cultic meeting 11:18; 14:4f, 28; 3Jn 6. Usage in b is
closely connected with the understanding of Israel as God's chosen community and
Christ followers/Messianists in legitimate continuity, hence2. 'God's people as a community', assembly, congregation
-a. specifically in ref. to OT Israel Act 7:38; Hb 2:12.
-b. with focus on Messianists in an area but without ref. to one specific meeting place
as in lb
(a) in general Ac 5:11; 8:3 (here the generic term alongside implied house
congregations); 1Co 4:17; Phil 4:15.
(b) of Christ followers in a named locality: Macedonia 2Co 8:1; Thessalonica 1Th1:1;
and others; the global community of Christ followers Mt 16:18; 1Co 12:28; Eph 1:22
and oft.; Col 1:18, 24; Phil 3:6. e. tou theou God's assembly/church 1Co 10:32 al.; e.
tou christou Christ's assembly/church Ro 16:16 [pl. congregations]
(The gloss 'church' is freq. used to render e., but with the result that connection with
usage in the LXX and connection with Israel is lost.)

Quoting (adapted from Christian Courier, Dec. 2013, p. 11, Brandon Renfroe):
Use of the biblical word Church in four senses of the Greek word ekklesia in the
religious context:
Universally Mt 16:18; 2Th 2:14; Eph 1:22-23
Regionally Act 9:31;
Locally 1Co 1:2; Rev 1:4
Assembled 1Co 11:18; 14:34
Modern Christian churches may be traced back to the N.T. age, however the word
Church in these texs is anachronistic and misleading. IRENT does not use it in its
translation of N.T.
Quoting: Bryant J. Williams III in B-Hebrew:
Two Hebrew words that normally translated "congregation": QAHAL and `EDAH.
These two words are translated in the LXX by several different words, of which, two
are primary.
1. QAHAL (assembly) is normally translated in the LXX by ekklsia (assembly;
which in N.T. often translated as church) in the majority of instances, but also by
ochlos (crowd) and pltos (multitude). What is striking is that in Genesis, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Ezekiel 32:23 QAHAL is translated by sunagog.
2. `EDAH is normally translated by sunagog (congregation; transliterated into
English as Synagogue). Of the 225 times in the LXX sunagog is word used, but in it
there are 34 times that has no Hebrew equivalent.

Gods temple (1Co 3:16; 2Co 6:16; Eph 2:21) as the believers corporate Body
of Mashiah church . Cf. 1Co 6:19 the Body of you people is the temple of
the holy Spirit you (plural) refers to the corporate Body of the believers
(Church) as in 3:16. Not an individuals physical body as some claim to be for
indwelling of holy Spirit.
temples (of false-gods > idols) shrines 1Co 6:19
Clearly, the language of the church being the Body of Mashiah (sma
Christou; Mashiahs Body - 1Co 12:27) and Bride of Mashiah (Rev 21:9) are
more than mere metaphor. Instead, they are ontological facts. Its a mysterious
new reality set forth in Scripture. For many in the church this has become
nothing more than theological jargon.
The words of Yeshua to Shaul (> Saul) (Act 9:4-5) are a sobering reminder that
the church is not only the physical representation of Mashiah on the earth (i.e.,
what the church does she does as his ambassadors), but also that what is done
to/against the so-called church is done to/against Mashiah, the glorious
bridegroom.
Which one is real Church?
To build it up, or to tear down (2Co 13:10)?

*worship; (cf. worship services); render sacred service; *offering; *sacrifice;

[worship verb and noun] [the word with the concept used in the Bible is not
same use as a religious jargon.]
We worship God but what does it mean to worship and to worship God?
Do worship someone, something, some immaterial ones, or some ideas (why
not angels babies American idols)? other than God? Respect? Praise? Adore?
Revere? Venerate?
Worshipping someone-something as God (= god): That one worship does
not necessarily god, nor the God. Worshiped by man does not mean that a
god-being is being worshiped. Same for the verb pray. Pray to someone does
not mean someone is a god-being. Someone believed to be sinless, to know all
things, etc. does not mean this someone is a god-being.
Is it only God we say we worship? Veneration, adoration, praise, prostrate
before or bow down, do obeisance, etc.? We worship something or someone
worship for what reason? We worship God, But, someone is said to be
worshiped in the English Bible does not prove that he is God.

bow down before, prostrate oneself before ~~ (in homage; in reverance),

do obeisance, do/show/bring/pay homage to i.e. doing act as of
worshipping/adoration/veneration Mt 2:2, 8, 11; 14:33, Heb 1:6, etc. [same
Greek word proskuneo rendered as to worship to bring different nuance,
focus, usage and context.]
Cf. bend ones knee Phi 2:10.
[Likewise, to call upon the name of Jesus 1Co 1:2, or Act 7:59 does not mean
Jesus was God they were addressing to.]
worship of God [either as in a corporate or personal worship] - as paying
honor to God for who He is and what He does. The chief end of man is
this very thing, to glorify God and enjoy Him forever [Westminster
Catechism]. We are to worship the right God-being whom we know who
He is; and are to worship in spirit and truth.
On the other hand, the word worship in English (as well as Hebrew or
Greek) may be used in reference to other than God kings as
representing God, and even to glorified saints (1Chr 29:20; Rev 3:9),
angels (Rev 22:9), Satan (Mt 4:9 Cf. v.10), ideas, things (as in
paganism). It is fallacious thus to argue that because Jesus is
worshipped, he mus be God. [See also Jesus is God? issue.]
Christological progress: Veneration/adoration of the risen Lord to
worship of Jesus is in parallel to <Man, Son-of-man a divine man
the (only begottent Son of God (metaphoric) mystical pre-existent
eternal God the Son (metaphysical) God-Man.

Related words to worship: kohen (priests), sacrifice, altar a;

1F1F

Related terms: altar b ; atonement; Death of Mashiah; lamb, Lamb of

God; Leviticus, Lord's Supper, Lords Last Supper; kohen (priest);
kehunnah c (priesthood; priestly office/service); spirituality; Tabernacle
(vs. tent); Temple; (pagan) shrine;
12F12F

13F13F

Worship and shabbat Shabbat is of a rest day with congregation

gathering. It is not directly related with worship, nor day of worship
service. [The problem of defining worship which is not same as church
practice of worship service on a certain day most on Sunday;
Sabbatarians on Saturday.]

*Sacrifice: d
14F14F

(a nonreligious dictionary meaning) giving up what you value in exchange

for something you don't value, or for no reason at all. It also means
identifying something you love only to abandon it for the sake of something
that has no meaning for you. Sacrificing has to do with killing, surrendering,
and enduring loss.
[Below is adopted from Bakers Evangelical Dictionary
www.biblestudytools.com/offerings-and-sacrifices.html
Sacrifice under the OT sacrificial system is a concept not present in the Western
culture. Offerings and sacrifices were a key part of the practice of relationship
with God from Cain and Abel, to Noah, to the Patriarchs, to Jethro the priest of
Median, to the ratification of the Mosaic covenant by sacrifice before the
tabernacle was built. They remained central to the ritual systems of the tabernacle
Altar of Incense Lk 1:11 located in the Holy Place. (Not in the Holy of the Holy
Places, which was accessed once a year by Kohen HaGadol.)
Note: Heb 9:4 thumiatrion is not incense altar (thusiastrion), but incense censer, which
was to be brought into the Holy of the Holy Places, taken off from the the incense alter in the
Holy Place.]
b
Altar of Incense Lk 1:11 located in the Holy Place. (Not in the Holy of the Holy Places,
which was accessed once a year by Kohen HaGadol.)
Note: Heb 9:4 thumiatrion is not incense altar (thusiastrion), but incense censer, which
was to be brought into the Holy of the Holy Places, taken off from the the incense alter in the
Holy Place.]
c
kehunnah:
Danker p. 174
hierateia Lk 1:9; Heb 7:5 priestly offices/service [Cf. leitourgia Lk 1:23]
hiersun Heb 7:11ff, 24 priestly offices, priesthood
[Linguistically unrelated is Hawaiian word kahuna (a person functions as priest, prophet, healer,
sorcerer, magician, wizard, minister, or expert in any profession in ancient Hawaii.)]
a

sacrifice (a nonreligious dictionary meaning) giving up what you value in

exchange for something you don't value, or for no reason at all. It also means
identifying something you love only to abandon it for the sake of something that has no
meaning for you. Sacrificing has to do with killing, surrendering, and enduring loss.
d

and the first and second temples and, therefore, to the Old Testament theology of
God's "presence" and his relationship to ancient Israel as his "kingdom of
priests." When God became present with us in the person of Yeshua haMashiah
(the Logos incarnate) these Old Testament offerings and sacrifices continued to
yield much in terms of Yeshua as our sacrifice, Yeshua as our Kohen haGadol,
and our commitment and ministry on the part of Mashiah followers of ourselves
and our kingdom labors as a sacrifice to God.

In the Old Testament.

The Hebrew expression "to present an offering" is a combination of the verb
"to present, bring near, offer" (hiqrib) and its cognate noun "offering"
(qorban). The Hebrew word normally translated "sacrifice" (zebah) does not
occur in Leviticus 1-3 until 3:1 in the introduction to the "peace offering"
section (see also vv. 3, 6, 9). The term for "offering" continues to be used
there (vv. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14). Thus, one can say that the peace offering was a
particular kind of "offering" that was also a "sacrifice"it involved an animal
that was killed and then eaten as part of a communal meal.
Related terms; burnt offering; peace (/fellowship) offering; grain and drink
offering; sin or purification offering; guilt (or reparation) offering.

In the New Testament.

The verb thu, "to slaughter, sacrifice" an animal, is used fourteen times in the
New Testament referring to (1) nonsacrificial animals killed (Jn 10:10; Act
10:13; 11:7) and prepared for a wedding feast (Mt 22:4) or other kind of
celebration (Lk 15:23, 27, 30); (2) the slaughter of the Pesach lamb (Mk
14:12; Lk 22:7; 1Co 5:7); and (3) offerings to pagan gods (Acts 14:13, 18;
1Co 10:20).
The noun thusia, ["sacrifice, offering, act of offering" (cf. the verb above),
occurs twenty-nine times referring, for example, to specific Old Testament
passages (e.g., Mt 9:13; 12:7), fulfillment of Old Testament sacrificial
regulations (Lk 2:24) or festival celebrations (1Co 10:18), and the sacrifice of
Christ on the Cross (Eph 5:2). Prosphora, "offering, sacrifice, gift; act of
offering; grain offering" (x 9; cf. the verb prospher, "to offer, present"),
refers to Mashiahs presentation of himself to God as an offering (Eph 5:2;
Heb 10:10, 14) and the Old Testament offerings (Heb 10:5). The term dron,
"gift", occurs nineteen times in the New Testament; sixteen of those times it
refers to sacrificial gifts or offerings to God.
In the person of who Yeshua was and in what He has done in obedience to His
Father, all the sacrificial system (which was at the core of Judaism) is
completed. The core of Catholic tradition in the practice of Mass, a Cathoric
liturgy which colloquially refres to the entire church service in general, is
simply conitunation of O.T. practice directly opposite of what N.T. claims.

Yashua the Mashiah and the Old Testament Sacrificial System.

Yashua as our "Pesach sacrifice."

Yashua as our suffering servant "guilt offering."

Yashua as our new covenant ratification "peace offering." Lk 22:1-23;

Yashua as our "sin offering." Rm 3:24b-25a; 8:3; 2Co 5:21; 1Jn 1:9;
2:2
The sacrifice of Yeshua and the whole Old Testament sacrificial system.
Heb 9-10 opens with a summary of the Old Testament sanctuary
system, beginning with a description of the sanctuary itself and ending

with the distinction between the sacrifices that were offered throughout
the year versus the Day of Atonement.
The Mashiah followers and the Old Testament sacrificial system.
Act 21:23-26; Psa 51:17; Rm 12:1, Php 2:17; 1Pe 2:18-25
*worship; cf. worship services; *devotion; *veneration; *offering; *sacrifice;
sacrificial rites; *Mass; religious service

corporate worship or worship in personal context www.ccclh.org/pdf/Worship.pdf

[See also GG-topical to *worship; sacred-service verbs and nouns];
worship is a term for a cultic ritual. A typical example is Catholic Mass. What
actually is something called worship is difficult to characterize, esp. among
various Protestant groups, where a sermon is a focal point along with praise
song and prayers.
Questions: What is worship? What is true worship? this presupposes the
question what is worship is already answered. What is worship, then? the
meaning of worship the purpose of worship corporate worship public
worship private worship - when google searched, we get gazillion hits! How
this religious jargon worship different from devotion, with (religious pious)
adoration set aside? Do Christians worship Jesus [sic]? Is it same as
devotion? Worship as God? When He is worshiped, where is YHWH Elohim?
On His left side? Where is the Holy Ghost [sic]? To the left side of Elohim? Or
are they at different levels of positioning? How can we avoid God-talk in
anthropomorphic mindset which tends to be actually of three Gods
linguistically speaking when it is claimed that they are three different and
distinct persons, howsoever the word person is defined to fit ones doctrines
all of which are actually man-made, not God-given, nor Scripturepronounced?

()
*idol; false gods; *idolatory Col 3:5; idolator - Eph 5:5
idol - Act 7:41;; 1Co 8:1, 4, 7; 10:19; idols Act 15:20, 29; 15:29; 17:16;
21:25; Rm 2:22; 1Co 8:1, 4, 7,10; 2Co 6:16; 1Th 1:9; 1Jn 5:21; Rev 2:14, 20;
9:20;

IRENT renders as pagan false god idol of pagan god carved idol of false
god false gods - 1Jn 5:21

*graven image; *icon, iconography

Problem of English word idol itself has its meaning and usage different from
used as a translation word in the Bible. E.g. common English usage American
Idol; an idol and inspiration, etc. The expression idol worship may not have
anything to do with a religious sense.

graven image (Exo 20:4; Deu 4:16) is anything, animal or human image, for
the purpose of recognizing, giving honor to, or representing a god or deity.
Carved out of stone, wood, or metal. It could be a statue of a person or animal,
or a relief carving in a wall or pole. It is differentiated from a molten image (Exo
34:17), which is melted metal poured into a cast.
icons images with a religious content, meaning and use. Most icons are twodimensional; mosaics, paintings, enamels, miniatures, but ancient three
dimensional icons also exist. [common practice and tradition esp. in Eastern
Orthodox Church.] [People would look for icons when there is no connction to
God Himself through spirit.]
Ref:
What is an icon ?
http://thewayofbeauty.org/2010/05/just-what-do-catholics-believe-abouticons/
the Iconoclastic Controversy in the East
catholic.com/tracts/do-catholics-worship-statues
http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/14957/what-is-thedifference-between-icons-and-idols-in-churches-that-permit-icons
[Note: what does it mean by worshiping someone or something other than the
basic sense of bowing down before? What people do have nothing really to do
with icons beyond having it so that they are reminded of something or
someone?] [Cf. The practice of asking [dead] saints to intercede for people with
God" is not in the Bible but in the Catholic Church tradition. How is devotion to
Mary different from devotion to God, when the Church elevated Mary as Queen
of Heaven, which itself is a very common pagan theme?]

Religious priestly sacrificial rites ( ) is what Catholic Mass is. Cf.

Yeshua our Kohen haGadol is the end of sacrificial system, as the Temple-based
religion was done with; He is the end of priestly office for Mashiah believers,
who do not believe in a religion (of Christianity).
Only in the mind-set of religiosity, people believe in a religion. (In Korean people
speak of [ = (, religion), not teaching]. Cf.
Catholic Church Religion; Mormon Church religion, etc.
Worship is not worship is not worship. Worship is what we have in our
response to our god in our life. Not to be confused with worship services as in
churches. [Cf. person worship; public worship; Judaic sacrifice] [Related

words: adore, admire, devote (to someone or something), honor, praise;

idolize, service, obedience,]
As words have meaning, if we use a wrong word, we can often convey a
completely different meaning. Likewise if we use a word carelessly we not only
fail to communicate accurately but also we become a victim of our own strange
ideas and docrines. One of the weapon possessed by human mind is to use of
words to manipulate others (Orwellian double-talk is just an extreme example)
to create doctrines and also find proof texts in the Bible to suit their agenda.
This is what is done by all the sectarian as well as denominational parties.
Unfortunately a similar thing that happens quite often when we translate a
word from one language to another without a clear understand of the meaning
of the original word being translated.
Gk. proskune;
Danker p. 305 [pros, kune to kiss (freq. part of social ritual)] recognize authors
prestige by offering special honor, ordinarily through a gesture of prostration, do
obeisance to, pay homage to
a. to humans Mt 18:26; Act 10:25; Rev 3:9.
Especially in honor of Jesus Mt 2:2, 8, 11; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; Jn 9:38 b to beings considered transcendent (whether identified as such expressly or by
implication), ordinarily w. focus on religious aspect ,worship
(1) deity in monotheistic cult Mt 4;10; Lk 4:8; Jn 4;20f, 22b; Heb 1:6; 11:21;
Rv 4:10; 5:14
(2) deity in polytheistic cult Act 7:43
(3) malevolent beings Mt 4:9; Lk 4:7; Rev 9:20 and freq. in Rev.
(4) angelic beings, w. gesture of prostration tantamount to religious devotion Rev
22:8
(5) Jesus as risen Lord Mt 28:9, 17; Lk 24:52

to worship
[Fr. Old Eng. worthiness acknowledgment of worth
Gk. proskune; (corresponding Hebrew word hw)

pay homage to (vs. bring homage to show homage to different

nuance)
Cf. do obeisance to (- obsolete use); Ko. , as in Mt 2:2;
18:26, etc. [To the risen Yeshua Mt 28:9, 17; Lk 24:52 should belong to
this sense, not as worship, which is anachronistic reading, esp. so
when He was yet to asend to Father for glorification and, in His spirit to
be with His people to eternity.][Cf. problem inherent in Trinitarian
mindset is to bring worship and praise to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,
as if they are seprate persons worthy of worshipping, picturing
strangely as three having taken a place side by side. As Elohim is spirit
(Jn 4:24 not a spirit as in KJV), there no space, place or time can be

related to God-being. Or would they appear sequentially as people pray

to them, as each waiting his turn?!
worship; ko. Mt 4:12, etc.

English Bibles often translate indiscriminately as worship even when its

nuance and sense require it differently. E.g. the word worship is unfit for
translation in the context in the examples here: e.g.
1Sa 1:28 (Eli prostrated himself before YHWH)
Mt 2:2, 11 (Magi pay homage to a new king; paid homage to the child)
This Greek word itself does not tell that its object of the act is particularly
divine or God. Only with a translation English word worship its use is limit
to God-being. It is only the context that let it carry a special sense as
worship God.
Cf. prospipt prostrate before fall down bow down to (at someones feet)
Mk 3:11; 5:33; 7:25; Lk 5:8; 8:28, 47; Act 16:29.
Cf. gonupeteo Mk 10:17 (kneel down, go down on ones knees)
Cf. tithemi to gonata Mk 15:19 (bend the knees)
worship; *sacred service (to God); /

Rm 12:1
to present the bodies {Rm 6:6, 12; 8:11} of yor own as a living sacrifice,
one that has been consecrated,
one that is well-pleasing to Elohim;
this being what yor sacred-service
belonging to Gods word should be. [cf. Jn 4:24]
Rm 12:1 sacred-service (Gk. latreia) 31
Word study of related Greek words for service ministry see EE here.32
latreia, latreu, leitourgia
Word study of related Greek words for priest high priest see EE here.33
Worship and shabbat Shabbat is of a rest day with congregation
gathering. It is not directly related with worship, nor day of worship
service. [The problem of defining worship which is not same as church
practice of worship service on a certain day most on Sunday;
Sabbatarians on Saturday.]
Related words

*Worship service a jargon for liturgical public worship of a church;

not same as worship in the Bible. (cf. public worship music
worship etc.
missa (Latin, English Mass) a non-biblical Catholic liturgical
practice.
What is called equivalent to worship service in the practice of
Yehudism and the modern rabbinic Judaism?

What is it when we call *worship of religious practices and traditions?

Is it like coming into a place together with prayer to a certain direction and to
bow down? To rise up and to sit down to sing hymns, to listen to sermons or
exhortations, to pass plates for collecting paper money? To whom is our
actual worship directed?
Where does it say how we are to worship God? [coming into the presence
of God to praise, thank, and honor His name at personal level in each
ones real life and at corporate level with public gathering.]
worship God Act 18:7, 13; 1Co 14:25; Rev 7:11; 11:16; 19:4, 10; 22:9; [Cf.
In OT Exo 3:12; 2Sa 15:32; Psa 74:8]
Cf. *sacrifice or offering of various kinds for various purposes in OT,
prominently with blood motif.
We can see how to worship God though not directly in Torah:
(1) in Shema Yisrael [of Judaism] Deu 6:4 (variously translated) quoted in

NT in Mk 12:29; partly in //Lk 10:27ff; //Mt 22:37ff.

(2) in the first part of Ten Words (Ten Commandments) Exo 20:3-7;
//Deu 5:6-11.
Exo 20:3 You shall not have other gods in place of me, [YHWH Elohim].
[in place of me > before me most] to worship a Him; to praise Him
[HalleluYah], the Sovereign, the Creator, the Savior.
15F15F

It is a persons (peoples) whole-hearted living towards Elohim of Covenant,

not certain religious activities of devotion, piety, solemnity or liturgy.

Heb 1:6 (All Gods angels) pay homage to the (Son) (proskune) [needs to clarify on
English word to worship definition and usage (of to be used or not to be) to avoid a
stalemate on the questions of Is Jesus God. Elohim (the God) alone is to be worshiped.
Then do Christians worship Jesus? What does it mean by worshiping God? What does it
mean by worshiping Jesus? What does it mean not to worship Jesus? When we worship/pray
where Yeshua the risen Lord be and what He would be doing? Similar questions also
arises when the Holy Ghost (KJV) is claimed to be another person (among three) and is
called God]; [worship as a translation word requires problems of its usage in English
within and without Church.]
/pay homage to Cass, Noyes; /worship most; /prostrate themselves in worship before

worship Him - "It behooves us to be careful what we worship, for what we are worshipping we
are becoming," Ralph Waldo Emerson said. This is true. Because a person becomes or does what
his god is, he must know who God is and must be careful regarding his reaction to this
commandment because it affects every area of life, thoughts, and action. It is not just a tiny sidebar
of life. If kept as it should, it becomes part of the very foundation of what we are becoming.
[modified from Matthew 22:37-38 John W. Ritenbaugh]

 ALT, EBTV; /do obeisance to NWT; /do reverence to ISR; /bow before GSNT;
/bow down before TCNT; /

[Fr. Old Eng. worthiness acknowledgment of worth

Cf. Rev 5:12b Worthy is the Lamb who was killed to receive power and
wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and praise!"
5:13b "To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb be praise, honor,
glory, and ruling power forever and ever!".

Muse on worship
Vs. Sacrifice (esp. in O.T.)
https://youtu.be/OBolhd32IKo How do we worship God?
How do we worship? At timeline 08:00
Worship is Cf. public worship is a liturgical execution.
True worship
Worship the true Elohim
What is worship? It is not something we have to!
In New Covenant habit (life style) of celebrating in joy and exalting God in
communion with Him rejoicing, fullness of joy, rejuvenate, shalom, hope,
and strength come: Ps 16:8 Gods right hand (power of God in spirit, not
power of positive thinking)
Becoming like Yeshua path of living

receive; accept; welcome; take; take ~ in.

Gk. dechomai an important word when used in the Scripture for interpersonal
relation. English synonyms, receive, accept, take, welome, etc., have different
nuance. [welcome for hospitality or entertainment]
Cf. chreas; lamban; paralamban; klronoimen; sunag (Mt 25:43);
ahead of before

[E-sword search on NET ahead of]

pro prospou Mk 1:2; //Mt 11:10; //Lk 7:27 before (the presence/face of)
(/x: ahead of very different word picture getting ahead); Lk 10:1
emprosthen //Lk 7:27
pros Mk 6:33;
proag go before
proere foretell?
apenanti Mt 21:2; /x: over against KJV archaism
katenanti Mk 11:2; 13:3; Lk 19:30 opposite across?

remain, *dwell, stay, *abide in; abide by;

Gk. men another important word in the Scripture when used for
interpersonal relation. the English word abide as an archaic traditional
translation word (as in KJV, ASV, etc.) carries a different word image than
remain dwell or stay which cannot bring into the translated text.
[www.etymonline.com/abide abide (v.) Old English abidan, gebidan "remain, wait,
delay, remain behind," from ge- completive prefix (denoting onward motion; see a(1)) + bidan "bide, remain, wait, dwell" (see bide). Originally intransitive (with
genitive of the object: we abidon his "we waited for him"); transitive sense emerged in
Middle English. Meaning "to put up with" (now usually negative) first recorded
1520s. Related: Abided; abiding. The historical conjugation is abide, abode, abidden,
but the modern formation is now generally weak.] [cf. abide by (the rule)]
intransitive verb

1. to stand fast; remain; go on being

2. [Archaic] to stay; reside (in or at)
transitive verb
1. to await
2. to submit to; put up with
confess, acknowledge, accept, divulge

*confession - homologe tn kaln homologian 1Ti 6:12, 13

Heb 13:15b acknowledging the name of Yeshua
Jam 5:16 open up and acknowledge yor wrong doings (for forgiveness) > /x:
confess your sins;
/acknowledgment; /attestation professing; made a good profession; /professed
the good profession; give confession; confess the good confession EMTV;
confession; giving witness BBE; /confess your faith in Jesus ERV; /firmly
professed your faith GNB;;
[English word confession is a church jargon with a wrong picture of
confessing to spit out when caught or on inquisition. Also a special Catholic
Church jargon; professing, profession totally different meaning]

*house;

Used in various senses. E.g. House of God.

*anoint;

[See also * Mashiah, * Messiah, * Christ, * Anointed]

Heb. mashach - (to apply oil on)
to apply on (something) - Isa 21:5 (on breastplates); Jer 22:14
(paint the paneling of a house); for sanctifing or dedicating to a
special purpose for God (Exo 29:36 the Altar).
to apply oil on the body - Amos 6:6
to apply oil on something by pouring oil on the head was used
as a symbolic act for officially, designating and setting apart a
person for a certain, public, leadership function in the
community. It was a one-time event much like an inauguration
or ordination. In O.T. for three kinds of leaders anointed for
their role - kohanim (Exo 28:41), kings (1Sm 10:1), and
prophets (1Ki. 19:16). A major difference between Israel and
the other nations was that when God had someone anointed or
authorized for leadership He also provided the empowering of
the Holy Spirit to do the job (1Sam 16:13; Isa 61:1) (cf.
different verb in Ps 23:5 oil on the head Cf. Mt 6:17
aleipho);
Heb. mashiach - anointed one Isa 45:1 one authorized and empowered leader Dan 9:26
?? moshiach; mashuach

The English word anoint, used figuratively outside a religious context, is

now mainly heard as a church jargon (e.g. anointing of the sick as in a
Catholic Church rite of Extreme Unction; anointing the body before burial).
IRENT uses this English word anoint only in this special sense when it is
rendering Greek verb chri which is for an act of consecrating someone by
pouring oil on his head for a position of priest, prophet, or king. [The
Greeks had no such ceremony for installing leaders by pouring oil on them
as did the Israelites; therefore the word itself was not comprehensible to
them.]

This is not to be confuse with Greek word aleiph (to apply something such
as olive oil or perfumed oil) is often translated as anoint to the confusion
of modern English speakers. Greek word aleiph (to apply something such
as olive oil or perfumed oil) is often translated as anoint to cause a wrong
word picture to modern English speakers. E.g. even anoint your head (Mt
6:17 grease) ; anoint the eyes (Jn 9:6 apply rub) in addition to
anoint with oil who are sick (Mk 6:13; Jam 5:14) as well as anoint the
(dead) body (Mk 14:8; 16:1; which itself gets confused as if its burialpreparation yet not completed). [In the subtitle of the text, the word
anointing is used as a technical jargon e.g. as it anointing of Yeshua by
the woman in the Passion narratives.]
Cf. anointing oil [chrism] the term ointment is a church jargon, it is
linguistically incorrect.
See above for Christ (the Anointed One); Mashiah; Messiah;
Cf. Gk chrima, chrisma (ointment, cream, unguent, emollient); chri,
chriomai smear or rub on; apply on; daub, anoint.

*grave; *tomb; *memorial-tomb; burial-place

sepulchre (sepulcher) or sepulture; burial chamber; loculi; ossuaries;

sarcophagi (coffins)
Burial in the ground vs. burial by entombment. Cf. cremation.
tomb [Gk. mnmeion is rendered as memorial-tomb in IRENT.] It is
not a common grave (for burial in the ground), but a cave tomb where
burial is by entombment of the body.
Ref.
https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/behold-lamb-god/jesus-and-ossuaries-first-centuryjewish-burial-practices-and-lost-tomb
Burial by entombment in a rock-hewn tomb usually consisted of two separate and
distinct burials. The first burial was the simple placement of the body in the tomb either
in a niche (loculus, Latin for a little place, and in Hebrew, kokh, plural kokhim)
shafts cut as deep as a body in the burial chamberor on an arcosoliuma bench or
shelf cut out of the wall of a tomb.
The second burial occurred about a year later when family members reentered the tomb,
carefully took the bones of the deceased (the flesh had completely decomposed), and
placed them in a specially prepared, separate container known as an ossuary (from
Latin os, bone). These chests were placed in small niches in the tomb for permanent
burial.

[Mk 15:46 parallel. Yosef Arimathea was not using his own tomb as a temporary one
for Yeshua!] The normal Roman practice was that a criminal was not buried but his
corpse was left hanging on the execution stake. Yosef of Ramathayim (Joseph of
Arimathea), the important Sanhedrin member, was able to have this bypassed by
Pilate.
*burial; *entomb; *embalm

Anointing vs.
Enbalming as in ancient Egyptian practice. Also in Western culuture; no
such thing is in Judaism.
The body of Yeshua was NOT buried in a grave but entombed. His burial
by by enntombment. Entombment, inhumation, interment Cf. burial, burying,
reburial.
[http://craigaevans.com/Burial_Traditions.pdf Craig A. Evans, Jewish Burial Traditions
and the Resurrection of Jesus leaving the bodies of the executed unburied was
exceptional, not typical. It was, in fact, a departure from normal Roman practice in
Jewish Palestine.]

Ref: Jodi Magness (2013), The Archaeology of the Holy Land - Ch. 11 Ancient Jewish
tombs and burial customs (to 70 C.E.) pp. 230ff
By the first century C.E., Jerusalem was surrounded by a necropolis of rock-cut tombs.

These tombs are characterized by the following features:

1) The rock-cut tombs are artificially hewn, underground caves cut into the bedrock
slopes around Jerusalem.
2) With few exceptions, the tombs were located outside the walls of the city.
3) Each tomb was used by a family over the course of several generations, as
reflected by the biblical expression he slept with [or was gathered to] his fathers
(for example Judges 2:10; 2Chr 32:33; 33:20; 34:28).
4) When a member of the family died, the body was wrapped in a shroud and
sometimes placed in a coffin, and was then laid in the tomb as an individual
inhumation, even if the bones were later collected and placed elsewhere.
5) Because of the expense associated with hewing a burial cave into bedrock, only
the wealthier members of Jerusalems population the upper classes could afford
rock-cut tombs. The lower classes apparently disposed of their dead in a manner that
has left fewer traces in the archaeological record for example, in individual trench
graves or cist graves dug into the ground.
6) From the earliest periods, the layout and decoration of Jerusalems rockcut tombs
exhibited foreign cultural influences and fashions. Evidence for such influence and
indeed, for the use of rock-cut tombs is attested only in times when Jerusalems
Jewish elite enjoyed an autonomous or semi-autonomous status; that is, in the late
First Temple period (late Iron Age) and the late Second Temple period (Herodian
period). During these periods the Jerusalem elite adopted foreign fashions that were
introduced by the rulers or governing authorities.

want desire wish *will be willing

Gk. thel (desire, want,)

The English phrase be willing is an idiom with an adjectival phrase
(disposed or inclined toward; not brought about by coercion or force),
and cannot be used as present progressive tense as it would be for other
verbs). It is not appropriate for rendering Gk. verb. In negative form
refuse is accurate than not willing to. E.g. Jn 5:40.
will confusing with will as a common auxiliary verb for future tense.
wish of a very different nuance.

*transformation; metamorphosis
Rm 12:2 get transformed by His spirit [Gk. metamorphosis (Cf. 2Co 3:18;
Col 3:2)] metamorphosis radical change in ones mindset] [reformation or revival
in religion is nonbiblical church jargon. The Scripture tells only transformation and
continual renewal.]; />continue being transformed let God - ARJ; /be
transformed most, SENT; /xxx: transform yourselves Diagl; /

[Cf. Acrostic TRANSFORM for education - Teaching the truth based on the Word of

God (Scripture-centered); Responding to the world (Cross-cultural Philosophy);

Affirming the responsibility (Social involvement); Networkingthe partners
(Partnership Philosophy); Situating the practice (Purpose-driven Philosophy);
Facilitating the mutuality of learning (Learner-centered Philosophy); Orchestrating the
whole person (Whole-personality Philosophy); Responsive and responsible; Modeling
as a learner (Role Model Philosophy) edited from
http://biblical.edu/images/stories/ESLPLUS/ohphilosophyofeducation.pdf ]

*righteous; *righteousness; *justify; *justification; cf. *justice

[English word righteous carries a judicial nuance. However, it is not about

not wrong or fixing wrong, but to be or to stand right to the measure to
be worthy [or having come to be worthy] to the standard (Gods or mans)
not worthy (enough) or acceptable (enough).
The word righteousness in the Scripture is, like love, a relational noun (being
righteous), not an abstract concept, idea, ideal to achieve (cf. be justified), character,
essence, etc. This word to be righteous deserves to be freshly re-defined away from
the traditional understanding it in a judicial or evaluative sense as being worthy to
Gods standard, i.e. worthy to the very name of Elohim.
Righteous before God worthy before God, not because it is useful to God, or is
justified before God, but to be worthy to the very name of *Elohim (YHWH) all
because of His name to keep honored and not to take it in an unworthy manner (/
*in vain).
It is one of the reasons that, name lies on the top among all the weighty words in the
Bible. It is in the name, for the name, by the name that God acts and relates to the
world. The Name is what carries His Spirit of divine power and love.

Righteousness:
Mt 5:6, 10, 20; 6:1, 33; 21:32 righteousness (state of) being [proven]
righteous (proven not to prove, but get proven or be declared)
Mt 6:1 act of righteousness
Mt 3:15; all that is righteous, with being righteous meaning worthy to
the name; honorable to ones name.

Righteous: Mt 9:13; 10:42; 13:17, 43, 49; 27:20, 24 v.l.,

Lk 1:6; righteous before Elohim; 1:6; righteousness before Elohim
Jam 2:21ff
be [proven] righteous before God = righteous for Gods name before
God = to be righteous is not on our own but gift of God in His grace all by

the blood of Yeshua when one comes to Him to put faith in Him.

vs. be [proven] righteous before men = righteous for ones name sake
before men, (ultimately to honor Gods name); it is not worthy because one
is judged worthy to the eyes of men; only with faith in Him sanctified in
the Spirit which bring them to bear fruits (Gal 5:22-23 fruitage of the
Spirit). . Cf. righteous in virtue

Gods righteousness \dikaiosun theou

[Gods (anarthrous before God /x: /x: from God; /xx: in possession by
God]
[righteousness (anarthrous) - state of being righteous before God (e.g. Jam
1:20)][not God is (a) just (person), nor God is righteous; not Gods
attribute or essence, something God has.] /x: justice.
[righteous - worthy to His name in right relation to God right
standing before God]

Rm 1:17; 3:21, 22 it is Gods righteousness not the righteousness of

God, nor righteousness of Elohim (the God), that which God has or that
which belongs to God. a [Cf. Rm 10:3 the (aforementioned) righteousness
from Elohim genitive, but not in the sense of
Elohim]
16F16F

Related words:
adikos unjust, unfair;
adikia unrighteousness, wrong doing, unfairness;
adike;
adikma; /
Danker p. 97 dikaios
1. verify to be in the right justify Mt 11:29; 12:37; Lk 7:29; 10:29; 18:14; Rm
2:13; 3:4, 20; 4:2; 1Co 4:4; Gal 5:4; 1Ti 3:16; Jam 2:21, 24f
2 put into a condition or state of uprightness, justify, set right Act 13:38f (in
connection with forgiveness of sins mediated through Jesus); Rm 3:24, 26, 28, 30;
4:5; 5:1, 9; 8:30; 1Co 6:11; Gal 2:16f; 3:8; Tit 3:7

Lk 7:29 acknowledge Elohim to be God of righteousness.

Cf. related words vindicate ( show or prove to be right, reasonable, or
justified et.); be accepted; *justify in very different sense often used
be/give a good reason for etc.
In the basic sense, it is not a judicial concept being right with right
standing upright but right relation in the sense that God sees us worthy
not our being worthy for Him to love, but to live in His love. Yes, sinners are
God is righteous God is this God is that? Truth is, He, the Reality, is not. It is only how He is as
our human mind sees how God is. (Linguistic anthropomorphism and literary rhetoricism)
a

worthy to be saved, not that He is going to save them because He found them
worthy, but, since He has already saved the humanity at the moment Adam fell,
it means to have them see and realize His love and take salvation in to allow
them to be and to live the way they were made in the beginning after Gods
own image. Such righteousness is Gods gift He gives it and He sees us
worthy all because He is love. He always loves in one direction from high to
low as the stream of water flows, non-stop, and He wants make sure and wants
help for us to come into His love He even had to let His son offer His own
soul.
To say Yeshua is righteousness is like the expression Yeshua is salvation,
means that He is the embodiment of all the righteousness. He IS our
righteousness. It would be foolish to look for it from elsewhere, by mistaking
this word as an elusive, legalistic, doctrinal term. He has proven that, by His
sacrificial redemptive death, we are shown to be worthy to His Father, when
we come to place our faith on Him, entrusting everything on to Him. To be
worthy to become Gods children and to be worthy for name, not worthy to be
loved all that not because we have done or we could do something to appease,
other than hearing the message about the Mashiah being proclaimed (Rm
10:17), answering to His call, and opening the door when He gently knocks on
it (Rev 3:20).
work, works, deeds

Gk. ergon

1. task, assignment M
ergazomai
1. w. focus on effort as such in the course of activity (intr.)
be at work, be active Mt 21:28; Lk 13:14; J 5:17; Ro 4:4f; 1Co 4:12; 1Th 2:9;
2Th 3:8. - Mt 25:16 (e.en do business with).
2.w. focus on result of effort (trans.), do, effect, carry out Mt 7:23; 26:10; Ac
13:41; Ro 2:10; 13:10; 2Co 7:10; Col3:23; Hb 11:33; Jam 1:20. e.tn brsin
expend effort on the food Jn 6:27; e. ta hiera do the temple work 1Co 9:13; e. n
thalassan get living from the sea Rv 18:17.
ergasia business, trade; gain, profit; effort
ergats worker, laborer; doer,
ergon [cp. erd 'do']
1. task, assignment Mk 13:34; J 4:34; 17:4Act 13:2; 14:26; 15:38; 1Co
15:58; 2Ti 4:5; Rv 2:5. - This may be the place for 1Th 3:1, but s. 4.
2. deed, action Mt 5:16 and oft. - W: descriptive genitive connoting
manifestation, practical expression Ro 2:15; Eph 4:12; 1Th 1:3; 2Th 1: 11; Jam
1:4. Linked with LOGOS Lk 24:19; Ac 7:22; Col 3:17; 2Th 2:17; Js 2:14.

 3. pass. aspect of E. a work, product Ac 7:41; 1Co 3:13-15; Hb 1:10; 2Pt

3:10; 1Jn 3:8.
4. thing, matter Ac 5:38; some would place 1Ti 3:1 here, but s. 1.
erethiz [= Hom. ereth 'provoke, trouble'] rouse by challenging; the more usual
neg. sense vex, harass Col 3:21; by rhetorical ext. in positive sense challenge
2Co 9:2

holy sacred; consecrated; hallow;sanctify glorify praise bless (God); cf.

divine, pious, religious, devout

*murder; *kill; *slay; *slaughter; put to death; execute; destroy ()

take others life; /put ~ to death, bring ~ to death, execute; take life away from;

bring one to death put to death have one dead remove; get ride of
[Cf. shall not murder is it a logical statement? do not commit a crime/sin
of murder as a Gods commandment? People commits (killing) and then it
turns out to be, or judged to be a murder. We can hardly admonish people a
moral imperative not murder. We may say if you kill, it would be a murder
or better not commit a murder, etc.
Hebrew words
ratsakh H7523 murder Exo 20:13 (Ten Commandment);
muth H4191 kill (H )
Gk. synonyms how to render them correctly in the context:

phoneuo take life kill a. with legal authorization execute, w.

connotation of evil intent Mt 23:31, 35 b. without legal authorization
murder Mt 5:21 and numerous similar rendering, including Jam 2:11a,
of Exo 20:13f; so also in the rhetorical statement Jam 2:11b. Danker p.
375
apollumi Mt 2:13, 12:14, etc. /get rid of IRENT; /destroy - KJV, ESV;
/xxx: kill NIV Jews Jesus killer of anti-Semitic language in the
Christian church history.
katalu Mt 5:17, etc. annul; make void /x: destroy KJV
apokteino (apo + kteino intensive form kill off Danker p. 33) Lk
12:5, Jn 7:2 etc. kill

On English word *kill

Other than unintentional killing (as self-defense or by accident) the sense
of English word kill presupposes desire, intention and action on the part
of the actor.
I can kill you it is not about ability but I would if I want or decide.
Jn 7:2
Yehudim have Yeshua to bring to death, not put to death, nor kill
(most translations). Problem of the agent of the verb and of anti-Semitic
rhetoric (Jews as Jesus killer).
Lk 12:5
It reads that [God] kills!
The meaning of the word may be kill, as a lexical gloss, but is it the
sense of the word in that particular context? What about in the different
cultural context (e.g. what you will eat/drink vs. food you need to
sustain your life - Mt 6:35) in the ancient times vs. in modern affluent
times)?. It presupposes that God can kill. But then what does it mean?
This verse might serve a best proof text for hell-preaching when it is read
in the eisegetic mindset out of the context, which tells that God shall take
care of those coming after Gods people when they are on their mission of
proclaiming the good news.
[e.g. Jonathan Edwards (theologian) (17031758) known for his sermon "Sinners in the
Hands of an Angry God" (1741) quotes Lk 12:4-5, which would be well suited for
hellfire-preaching when taken out of the context.34]

phoneu Mt 5:21 = 19:18; [Ten Commandments Exo 20:13; Deu

5:17]
Mt 5:21 take others life (its going after someone and kill) [= Mt 19:18
//Mk 10:19; //Lk 18:20; Ex. 20:13; Dt. 5:17] [whethen the text is in N.T., or
O.T. of Gods Commandments, it is not kill (ASV) or murder (KJV), nor
commit murder all incorrect translation all legalses. There is no command
as such to say do not murder. One may harbor an intention to murder, murder
or commit murder is a legalese.] /xxx: put to death BBE (- prohibition of life
sentence??); /x: kill KJV; /xx: murder NET; /commit murder GNB, LEB;

[hilarious commandment! shall do no murder KJV; never murder GW;

must not murder ISV. These sound like an inside talk among murderers (Gk.
phoneus). Similar to shall not commit a murder (or, even a homicide=!

thu Jn 10:10; Act 10:13; 11:7;

apoktein Rev 6:8; 9:15;
sphaz Rev 6:4;

anthrpoktonos 1Jn 3:15;

God can kill Of course? But, what sense would this statement
make? God is life; how God on Himself kill life? Can God be an
agent of the act (of killing)?
It is perfectly understood when it says gods can kill a person or people
in pagan or mythological setting, but in what sense and in what way God
kills a person? or to say God can kill whom, for what, and how. Is it
Scriptural to think God as an agent of such act, which is contrary to Gods
very nature, Life, when even God Himself does not bring down judgment
sentence [Jn 5:22] but have people judged by what they have done [Cf. Jn
8:15]?
Lk 12:5 [Yo should rather] fear the one who, after he has killed, has
authority to throw into hell (ESV) not power, but authority (to
delegate) to throw into.
Cf. See the text which phrases very differently from G-Lk: //Mk 10:28
rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in
Gehenna (NWT) [putting aside the issue of correctly rendering as
GeHenna over hell] [Cf. have both ~ brought to IRENT]
In this rather unusual phrasing in G-Lk text, most interprets the agent that
kill is taken as God; also the one who throws into hell is God.
In the sense *kill in English means go after and put someone on death;
kill off by some personal agent. It would not include killing occurring as
self-defense or as accident on the part of an agent.
What person/people does the patient (or grammatical object) of the verb
throw refer to? Any particular group?
What does the subject yo (in plural) refer to? the listeners (the disciples
of Yeshua)?
Cf. IRENT rendering of Lukan text: When life is taken away, He has
authority to have them thrown into the [place like] Geh-Hinnom [for
destruction in fire].

*shalom; *peace; harmony

shalom - a Hebrew word rich in meaning. Most English Bibles render as peace.
However, it is not just peace (as if achievable by mans effort), or absence of
conflict or war or being peaceful which mortal human wish to have on earth, but
covers contentment, well-being, completeness, harmony, etc. It is always from God
and because of God Gods shalom, the shalom God gives (Eph 1:2).
peace pictured as absence of war or conflict, instead of *harmony, which is one
supreme idea in oriental socient.
Catholic jargon: sign of peace

*pray request /ask for; *prayer; *Lords Prayer; *benediction

The Hebrew word Tefilah ( )is generally translated into English as "prayer".
But this is not an accurate translation, for to pray [as in common English usage]
means to beg, beseech, implore, and the like,@ for which we have a number of
Hebrew words which more accurately convey this meaning. Our daily prayers
are not simply requests addressed to Gd to give us our daily needs and nothing
more. Of course, such requests are also included in our prayers, but by and large
our prayers are much more than that, [quoted from
www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/682090/jewish/The-Meaning-of-Prayer.htm - a
copy is included in <IRENT Vol. III Supplement (Collections #1)>]
#

[such is common in all languages, cultures, and religions, including primitive to

receive favors and to fend off evils or misfurtunes.]
www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=pray
@

[Yehudim pray three times a day] [Minkhah is the afternoon prayer (evening prayer).
Shakharit, recited upon arising, and Maariv before going to bed.] [See Act 10:3]

Praying to the God of the Scripture in the name of who He has let Yeshua. We
pray to Elohim in the name of Yeshua the Lord. We dont pray to YHWH God
in his own name (YHWH) it would be as an invoking of a god to hear people
as in shamanism and all religions with shamanistic roots. To pray in the name of
Yeshua does not make Yeshua (as the Son of Elohim) same as YHWH (Elohim
the Father).
Prayer is a communicative act in contact with the Creater God, who cares about
His creation. Without it, there is no relationship to be found, which is the seed of
Gods Love. Prayer as in the Bible is not same as prayer as in Church liturgy.
Being the essential in our living as it is Gods commandment (i.e. He wants us to
be doing), when, how often, how long, where, in what bodily postion or posture,
etc. are from the mindset of payer as a liturgical process. The God we pray to is
God who comes to us. He is not who we need to manipulate/invoke for Him to
come, as He is a self-giving God. We dont come to Him, but bring ourselfves
into His presence. We are not alone, indeed. We are not even alone with
ourselves; to live is to be with others. [praise, thanksgiving, and confession (I
am sorry) are part and parcel of prayer making room to bring petition and
intercession to Him. Such things, meditation or contemplation, are secondary
to prayer.]
Our praying is essentially in waiting and listening to hear what He reveals of
His will to receive spirit (= breathing-in of His spirit), just as air we breathe in,
with our spirit tuned on the frequency of spirit to resonates with it.]

breathing life, that is, living in spirit, is having been connected to God in
personal relation in a direct line for life-giving spirit to and quicken and sustain
(breath - like oxygen for the body).
Breath is same word as spirit in Hebrew. It is free flow of Gods spirit (= as
breathing air oxygen for the body) from above to quicken and resonate the
persons spirit. It is through the Word of God (Scripture).
When a prayer is listen a Him, one gets nourished in spirit and it becomes
feasible say to, talk to and tell as Elohim is person-in-relation (not
personal). b He always hears us, whether we say or not. Our problem is of
hearing Him. It is not a monologue. Thus prayer is not constrained by our
language c. Through this open channel it carries up ACTS [Adoration-praise,
Confession, Thanksgiving, and Supplication] to God. The A.C.T.S is what is
carried in prayer, but it is not prayer itself. To have a communication line open.
It is actually what worship is to be.] d
17F17F

18F18F

19F19F

120F120F

Thus pray (praying; to pray) needs to be distinguished from the word prayer as
a countable noun which refers to what is brought up through praying, such as
petition. No petition can reach Him unless one is connected to Him in lifesustaining breathing/prayer. It is not by becoming conscious of Gods presence.
It is by asking Why? Why Lord? (as one would not know His name to call
Why Adonai?), Why me? It is not by asking for (me).
a

Listening and hearing Listening is where Love is.

person-in-relation: Dave Hunt writes Rejecting the truth God has revealed to everyone,
man perverts the witness of creation and conscience and creates his own gods. The very appeal of the
"Star Wars Force" or some "higher power" is that a force, being impersonal, cannot hold one morally
accountable but, like atomic power, can be used by man to his own ends. Clearly, God has to be a
personal Being to create and relate to mankind. -- 5 "Justice and Justification," The Berean
b

Call, Feb.1, 2002 The fact is not God being does not have to be a person, or
described to be a person, in order to be the Creator God. Linguistic and logical
problems what does it mean by God, by personal (in contrast to impersonal?),
and why God has to be? Elohim is not a person, nor a personal being. Elohim as
God-being is a being of person-in-relation. He is supra-personal. He comes as a being
and a person to humans, the creation made after His own image, through His Son.
ARJ.
Prayer by itself is not language-bound: And in the same way the Spirit also comes to our
aid and bears up in our present weakness indeed, we do not know what to pray as we
ought, but the Spirit itself pleads in with for us, out of our groanings that can find no words to
express. (Rm 8:26)
d
*Origen distinguished four kinds of prayer: praise (proseuch), petition (deisis);
intercession (enteuxis), and thanksgiving (eucharistia). Only the prayer of praise, which
Origen equated with prayer in the strict sense (kyriolexia), may be addressed to God. Prayers
of petition, intercession, and thanksgiving (katachrstiks) may be addressed to Christ as
high priest. From Catherine M. Lacugna (1973), God for Us the Trinity & Christian Life
(p. 125).
c

It does not concern about place (near or remote), preparation, practice,

procedure, time or a period of time. It is always and everywhere. It is not related
to meditation or contemplation. It is alien to so-called transcendental meditation,
meditation to Enlightenment, mysticism, etc. [Note: emptying ones mind
always brings the mind back to the filled-in state. A Latin phrase: natura
abhorret a vacuo - Nature abhors vacuum. See also Mt 12:43-45.]
In the insightful admonition which Paul gave: adialeipts proseuchesthe
(unceasingly be you praying) we come to realize that prayer is not same as
talking to God, petitioning/requesting, thanksgiving, confessing, or
praising in speech or in silence. Such are things which are impossible to do
unceasingly. It is not constantly, continuously, continually, at all times,
often as we need, or lasting long as scheduled. [Cf. Col 1:9 not ceasing
praying over you. Not pray for you but hold and carry you in our prayer.]
Most of time, this common and simple word pray is used and understood with
a generic God in ones mind and even just a short step from wishing wishful
thinking and desiring or hoping. Praying is not talking to a God-being to
get things done or to have wishes come, petitioning, begging, conjuring up
incantation, or offering up wishes for God do something, or calling up a
power or the Force, etc. Not a formula to be put into use. Not same as
meditation, talking down to oneself, self-hypnosis, mystical experiencing,
or self-awakening (achieving a transcendental state of mind). It is not chanting,
reciting something of Bible verses or mantra. All these have shamanic
characteristics, treating God as nothing more than a genie in Aladdins lamp.
(Cf. A prayer in the O.T. turned into a Christian mantra in The Prayer of
Jabez by Wilkinson).]
Even in the supposedly religious and quasi-religious setting, it has become a
ritual, liturgy, or a routine, without from being connected to YHWH Elohim,
who is the reality of God-being. [E.g. inauguration prayer, public prayers, etc.]
Cf. The Korean word for to pray is which is borrowed from the common
vocabulary with the expression of native indigenous religion with an element of
shamanic practice. (cf. , )
Cf. prosperity gospel health, wealth, prosperity, fortune; Cf. Word of Faith
cult. A prayer becomes a means to achieve ones wishes.
Prayer is not same as petitioning. Note two different verbs in the same sentence
Mt 21:22 //Mk 11:24 praying (proseuchomai) vs. requesting /asking for
(aiteo).
Cf. as a phrase as prayer and petition Act 1:14; Phi 4:6. The question why
arent our prayers answered today should be honestly phrased as why does not
God answer what we asked for? The reasons: (1) God we pray to is not the
very Elohim who is our Father. God we call is not much different than God
people are fond of calling. His holy name, even if they know what it is, remains
hollow; (2) Who are we so that Elohim would know and see what we need; (3)

Are we praying unceasingly to refresh our spirit and nourish our soul so that we
are connected to God in spirit tuned on the same frequency so that our petition
can reach Him? (4) We are asking wrong things (Cf. Mt 6:11 bread from
heaven to nurish our soul); (4) We are asking without the ground whereby Elohim
can hear in the name of Yeshua, the Mashiah of YHWH Elohim; (5) Elohim
has already bestowed all the things necessary for us to live (Ps 23:1). We are
blessed blessed of Elohim Himself. Are we asking for pleasure, pride, and
power to carry out our plans, instead of hornoring the name of Father?
Related words:
aite (Danker p. 11 ask for in expectation of a response, ask, ask for, request Mt
6:8; 7:7; Lk 11:9; Jam 1:6. Mt 5:42; Act 13:28. Mt 27:29; Act 16:29; 1Co 1:22.
With double accusative of persons approached and thing requested Mt 7:9; Mk
10:35; Jn 16:23
erta (1) ask (a question) Mt 15:23; 16:13 Mk 4:10; Lk 22:68; Jn 1:19; 4:47;
5:12; 16:5, 23; Ac 1:6 (2) ask, in sense of making a request Mk 7:26; Lk 5:3; 8:37;
Jn 16:26; Act 10:48; 18:20; Phi 4:3; 1Th 4:1; 5:12; 1Jn 5:16; 2Jn 5 Danker p.
150
eperta inquire, question; request, demand. [Danker p. 139 1 put a question
to, ask Mt 12:10; Mk 5:9; 8:23; 11:29; Lk 22:64; Jn 9:23; 1Co 14:35; cp. Act
23:34. Mt 27:11; Mk 15:2; Act 5:27. W. double acc. Mk 7:17 2 make a request
ask for Mt 16:1]

parakale entreat, plead, beseech, ask for

eksate ask for, demand (as a right; cp. Job 1-2) Lk 22:31 (- fr. Danker p.
132)
(cf. eksgsato - [Danker p. 134 1 aor.mid.ind. 3sg. of exaite]
proseuch prayer

deisis petition, supplication Lk 1:13; 2:37; 5:33; Act 1:14; Phi 4:6
enteuxis intercession 1Ti 2:1 (prayer, intercession, and petition)
entugchan Danker p. 131 approach, appeal Act 25:24; Rm 8:27, 34; 11:2; Heb
7:25

enteuxis prayer 1Ti 2:1; 4:5

euch supplication Jam 5:15

In the Lords Prayer (Mt 6:9-13; //Lk 11:2-4) Yeshua empowers His
followers to pray. It is to God as to a father as Yeshua showed. The Lords
Prayer is not a list of petitions (three petitions toward God + three
petitions for us).
A prayer to Elohim (the God) is praise, petition, and pledge and then put
into praxis in the name of Yeshua the Mashiah in holy spirit. It is not same
as what is called prayer in Judaism, Islam, and other religions. It is not
shamanic petitions or rubbing Aladdins lamp to chant give me this and
give me that. It is independent to meditation, recital, chanting, or singing.
The petition being asked to carry out the divine will is as already has been

given; and these are being pledged into praxis in our daily lives. It is not
bound by time, place, and people.
Gods blessing and benevolence are in store for Him to give out freely;
simply ask then it will be given unless there is blockage with us to make
us unable to receive.
Petition is something we ask which needs to move Gods will for His sake,
to let His plan for us is created we ask with our total surrender for His will
be done through us. (Hannah and Samuel 1Sa 1:1-28)
Mt 6:33 seek foremost the Kingdom reign of God
Phi 4:19 the very Elohim, who is in charge of me in every need, shall
supply all your need by Mashiah Yeshua out of His wonderful riches.

*benediction
Num 6:22-25
2Co 13:14(13)
The divine grace through the Lord Yeshua the Mashiah
and the Love from Elohim
and the fellowship [of Life in] in the holy Spirit
be with yo all.
benediction ( , Cf. ) is not a prayer, nor a special prayer,
neither blessing others. It is a pronouncement of Gods blessing on the
congregation. It is to be received in faith with thanksgiving and rejoicing
nothing to do with ones decision and determination to have it done (
, It
is not something demands our faith to receive, but receive in faiths; nor it is
done with making up ones mind or being determined with human spirit.)
[Not (as if the subject is the pronoucer. Wishful thinking? Or as if on
behalf of God, one makes a pronouncing? In the sense of will be there?), nor
= pray, beg, but = to be with you - in Ko.) .] A
pastors giving benediction in the worship program, thought as their
prerogative (read big deal) to be jealously guarded, which comes with their
position/power, is not a Gods grace.
[The Protestant tradition of Benedicition in the worship service does not
have anything resembling the Constantine Catholic and Eastern Church
tradition of Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament consisting of Exposition,
Adoration, Bendiction and Reposition (www.thesacredheart.com/bene.htm )]

Cf. to bless GodH1288 (barak); Gk euloge (G2127); e.g. Gen 24:48 a;

Psa 66:8;
cf. God bless (people) Gen 39:5; Psa 24:5; Deu 23:20
Cf. people bless others Gen 24:60; Deu 23:11, 12; Gen 27:25; 48:9
Cf. blessing on something Deu 11:29 [pronounce (H5414) blessing
(H1293) on Mout Gerizim]
12F12F

*fellowship [of Life] in the holy Spirit

Not working of the Spirit, fellowshiping with Mr. Holy Spirit, but
fellowship/communion of the believers in Gods Spirit. Not communicating
with, talking to, praying to, meditating on God the Holy Spirit [sic], the third
person, who are supposedly alongside with God the Father and God the
Son [sic] of Tirinity God.]; /xx: the H.S. communicating himself to you
Cass
2Co 13:13 (14) followiship [of Life] in the holy Spirit
/(v. 13):
/The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy
Spirit be with you all. NET; /I pray that the Lord Jesus Christ will bless you and be
kind to you! May God bless you with his love, and may the Holy Spirit join all your hearts
together. CEV;

(v. 14):
/the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy
Ghost, be with you all KJV ; /The favour of the Master Messiah, and the love of
Elohim, and the fellowship of the Set-apart Spirit be with all of you. ISR; /The favour
of the Adon haMashiah, and the love of (YHWH), and the fellowship of the Ruah
haQodesh be with all of you. HalleluYah;

prayer for the dead

2Tm 1:16-18 May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, 18 may the Lord
grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that Day!and you well know all the service he rendered at
Ephesus. [NET fn - a reference to the day when Onesiphorus stands before Christ to give account for
his service (cf. 2Ti_1:12; 1Co_3:13; 2Co_5:9-10)]
[The
text
is
used
for
unbiblical
Catholic
doctrine
of
purgatory
www.newadvent.org/cathen/04653a.htm
.Onesiphorus was asumed already dead but do not come remotely close to providing the coveted
evidence for the validity of prayers for the dead.
www.christiancourier.com/articles/1068-did-paul-pray-for-the-dead ]

Gen 24:48 two associated verbs here - H6915 kadad (bow down) and H7812 shachah =
G4352 proskuneo (prostate oneself before). [Cf. kampt + gonu - Rm 11:4; 14:11; Phi 2:10.
Cf. different kinds of bows, prostration]

www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Library.sr/CT/BQA/k/182/Should-Christian-Pray-for-DeadEcclesiastes-95.htm ]

be baptized for the dead

(be baptized) for the dead 1Co 15:29 (huper tn nekrn) what sense is for? (to bring them out of
the Catholic purgatory? /over the dead ones; /for the sake of; /for the purpose of being dead ones
NWT; /< be immersed for [being to remain as] the dead IRENT

*Sinners prayer
an Evangelical jargon its content as well as the way it is employed is not in
harmony with what the Bible says. [The Sinner's Prayer - Is It Biblical?
http://carm.org/sinners-prayer ]

to call to name to describe

The phrase to call someone something (a) as a title, (b) as a name or (c)
descriptor. To call someone God does not mean that that someone is God.
Cf. to call out; to cry (out).
foretell predict; *prophesy; *prophecy

In the Scripture, nothing is about predicting but foretelling. There is no such thing
as Jesus predicts something in the Bible e.g. of Kefas denial (Mt 26:33-34 etc.),
His suffering and death (Mt 16:21 etc.), etc. [Cf. prophecy mania; prediction freaks,
fortune peddling.]
Prophecy - the proclaiming the messages God wants to have delivered to give
warning. It is not about predicting future (as prophecy games some are fond of taking some Bible verses out of the whole context which have appeared in the
history, especially last 200 years as the world itself has gone through troubles,
turmoils and throes into degeneration and decay at the spiritual level, and at the
same time awakening at diverse areas of human endeavor, even more accelerating
pace at the turn of the century of 2000 CE.) It is to come out of the believers mouth
as they interpret the events of the world, social, economic, political, religious,
ideological, and intellectual spheres. As illegal becomes legal, abnormal becomes
normal, wrong becomes right, bad becomes good, these are our last days living in
the generation of perversion, each of human becomes its own god with the purpose
of ones existence is in the pursuit of power and pleasure riding on industrial and
then information revolution in recent human history.

Related word: *revelation, mystery; *reveal [fr. Latin revelare, formed as re+ velum a veil]
See prophets.

*prophesy IRENT renders in Epistles as proclaim out Gods message in

public 1Co 11:4
So-called Messianic prophecies
It is said that he books of the Old Testament contain many passages about the
Messiah. However, we have to make clear of problems in this line of arguments
1. An anointed one (e.g. king) should not be confused with (2) the Messiah,
which itself needs a precise definition and identification. Does the text say about
the Messiah or about a person coming as Messiah?
2. Even if the OT text is about the very (promised) Messah, the sense of the word
is a person in position of a king, prophet, or priest. Does it carry the sense of
Christ subject the various Christian doctrines. NT writers quoted and edited to

use these OT text for their midrashic exegesis purpose in their keygramtic, not
historical, writing of Gospel of/about Yeshua coming as the Mashiah and as the
Son of Elohim. Not God the Son having a human title of Mashiah came in a
human being. See WB #3 Names, Person, People.

*leaven

See also *unleavened bread (matzah) in the Passion narratives.

Lk 12:1+para. leavening of the Pharisees /> leaven [not leavening agent as
such here (i.e. sourdough 13:21), but leavening effect in the process of baking bread
flour mixed with water to make dough let it sit to get fermented to have dough
rise.] [alludes to their teaching which is hypocrisy] (cf. 1Co 15:6-8; Gal 5:9)
Leavening means rising of the dough not about having used leavening agent (yeast, baking
soda, etc.). The field flour, mixed it with water, rises when kept at room temperature (cf.
starter; sour-dough) [www.yhrim.com/Are_we_to_Keep_7_or_8_Days_of_Chag_Matzoth_1125-5992.pdf ] cf. Mt 13:33.]

*reveal; *manifest; *appear

apokalupto reveal; x: show

phanero make known; show; disclose
phaneros; emphans; (adj) manifest, in the open, publicly known, disclosed;
recognizable, known; apparent;

Problem with the word revelation (1) revealing vs. (2) what is revealed.
Problem with the word appearance (1) outward look rather than (2) act of
appearing.

*repent; *repentance;

metanoe (to repent) intransitive (~ apo; ~ ek) [not repenting (something sins, errors,
wrongs) or repenting about (something) regretting and making correction/fixing] Mt 3:2;
4:17; 11:20, 21; Mk 1:15; 6:12; Lk 13:3, 5; 15:7, 10; 16:30; 17:4; Act 2:38; 3:19; 8:22;
17:30; 26:20; Rev 2:5, 16, 21, 22; 3:3, 19; 9:20, 21; 16:9, 11; Cf. metanoe + epistreph
turn back to (God) Act 3:19 (x: be converted KJV)
/> change your thinking ARJ (- thinking - too abstract); /Get yo all turned around and be
repenting ARJ; /get repented; /> repent most; /be repenting ALT; /repent of your sins
and turn to God NLT; /turn from your sins to God JNT; /x: turn away from your sins
NIrV, GNB; /x: Let your hearts be turned from sin- BBE; /change your hearts and lives
ERV; /change your hearts SENT; /Turn to God and change the way you think and act, - GW;
/turn back to God CEV; /Repent (think differently; change your mind, regretting your sins
and changing your conduct), - AMP; /You must repent [i.e., change your hearts and lives], AUV; /Be having a change of mind which issues in regret and a change of conduct Wuest;
/xx: Change your life. MSG; /xxx: Reform YLT; /

metanoia repentance 2Co 7:9, many others. Changing in mindset; not

willingness to change. (get confronted by Gods grace and goodness and get
convicted change ones thinking and mindset turn from wrongs/sins turn to God)
to receive Gods forgiveness Broken relation restored (sin burden removed and sin
guilt covered-over) fruit of repentance.] [change in mind, not change-of-mind] [Not
repentance of sin, but repentance for forgiveness Mk 1:4]
> dianoia (mind)
Cf. metamellomai (feel remorse, regret) - Mt 21:29, 32; 27:3; Heb 7:21; 2Co 7:8; /xx:
repent KJV; (cf. Ezk 14:6 turn and return from epistraphte kai apostrepsate apo)
Cf. epistreph (to turn, turn around, turn to of direction or conduct) [+ from (apo)].
[BDAG p. 382];

It is to turn from what you are with change in mindset/thinking (as by turning
to God) confronted by Gods goodness and grace. Not change-of mind as if
having second thought, changing ones thoughts, feeling, or thought. (Cf. make
up ones mind).
Cf. it is not to feel remorse or deep sorrow about, or to regret; nor to repair
or to restore, to be converted. It is basically turn away from. See EE on Gk
word study on repent.35
See * forgiveness.
See a related term *perversion, which is conceptually opposite to repentence.
verbs - complete perfect fulfill accomplish mature

To clean up
$$
Danker p. 349
teleios 'free from any deficiency, omission, or corruption', complete, perfect-a. of integrity
relative to character, personal identity, or an avowed objective Mt 5:48a (with God as model
vs. 48b); 19:21; 1 Cor 2:6; 14:20; Eph 4:13; Phil 3:15; Col 1:28; 4:12; Hb 5:14; Js 1:4; 3:2; 1 J
4:18.-b. of things that are at the highest point of quality: the will of God Ro 12:2; that which
will supersede or bring to perfection present phenomena TO TEAEtov 1 Cor 13:10; gift Js
1:17; law ofliberty 1:25; tent, comp. TEAELOTEpa crxriv~ Hb 9:11.
teleiots 'quality of completeness', perfection, as high point in expression of congregational
integrity or unity Col 3:14; as high point of achievement in a process of personal maturation
Hb 6:1.
teleio 'bring to a point at which nothing is missing'
-a. of carrying out a responsibility or task complete Lk 13:32; Jn 4:34; 5:36; 17:4; Ac 20:24;
Hb 7:19. W. focus on doing someth. within a specific span of time Lk 2:43.
-b. of bringing someth. to a designed conclusion complete Jn 19:28 (of scripture; cf. its
preceding clause all things accomplished tele) ; Jam 2:22 -(faith);
www.tillhecomes.org/sermons/james/james_2_14-26/ 1Jn 2:5; 4:12, 17. (love). be
brought to its goal is better rendering. Of persons integrally united Jn 17:23.
-c. of bringing to the ultimate point of maturation complete, to perfect
(a). in ref. to ethical/spiritual perfection Phi 3:12; Hb 7:28; 9:9; 10:1, 14; 11:40; 12:23; 1Jn

4:18.
(b) in ref. to total qualification for an assignment, perh. = to consecrate Hb 2:10; 5:9.
teleisis 'a bringing to full realization'
-a. fulfillment, of promise Lk 1:45.
-b. perfection, of a cultic system deficient in total effectiveness Hb 7:11.
teleophore bear to full maturity Lk 8: 14.
teleuta intr. 'come to an end', transf. sense die Mt 2:19 al.
tele 'bring to completion', of functioning in a manner that leaves nothing undone
-a. to end, a speech or instruction Mt 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; a period of time Rv 20:3, 5, 7.
-b. do (completely), of carrying out an action or objective
to the fullest extent Mt 10:23; Lk 2:39; 12:50; Jn 19:28, 30; Ac 13:29; Rom 2:27; Gal 5:16; 2
Ti 4:7; Js 2:8; Rv 11:7; 15:1, 8; 17:17. Of prophecy Lk 18:31; 22:37.
-c. achieve fully, to perfect 2 Cor 12:9.-d. make payment, pay, of rendering what is due Mt
17:24; Rm 13:6.
telos
1. 'a point in time that marks culmination'
-a. w. focus on termination, end Mt 24:6, 13f; Mk 3:26; 13:7, 13; Lk 1:33; 21:9; Jn 13:1; 1Co
1:8; 1Pe 4:7. With oux Lk 1:33. Adv. hes telous; until the end 2 Cor 1:13 (some render
'fully').-b. w. focus on culminating mode, outcome, end Mt 26:58; Lk 22:37; Rom 6:2lf (for
wordplay, see 2 below); 2Co 11:15; Phi 3:19; 1Ti 1:5; Heb 6:8; 1Pt 1:9. TO TEAoc; xupiou the
Lord's ending, viz. of Job's long trial Jam 5:11. eita to telos next the concluding phase 1Co
15:24.
-c. w. focus on aspect of completion, end Rom 10:4. By metonymy, to telos; as part of a title
signifiying the one who brings everything to completion, of God Rev 21:6; of Christ 22:13.
Adv. phrases, finally: eis telos; Mt 10:22; Lk 18:5; to de telos; 1Pt 3:8.
-2. revenue, tax Mt 17:25; Rom 13:7; in wordplay 6:21ff.

*abide vs. dwell, remain, stay

dwell locative sense;

remain, stay temporal sense
abide relational sense
commune jargonish
1Jn 2:6 be abiding (MENW abide; remain; reside. See NET tn for difficulty of choosing one.
Also 1Jn 2:19, 24; 3:15, 24; 2Jn 1:9); /abides (many); / is living BBE;/are (His) CEV; />
remain HCSB; /> remain in union with GNB; /live in [fellowship with] Jesus AUV; /live
GW, NLT; />>be intimate with MSG; /x: stays ISR; /resides NET; /be continuing in
WNT; /dwells ARJ; /live in intimate relation with ARJ; / live in union with ARJ; /(his
life) is indissolubly linked to (the life of Christ) Barclay;

proclaim vs. preach

Gk. kruss - The English word preach is a church jargon with different word
picture and association e.g. hellfire preaching; preaching from the pulpit. This
expression preach is retained in IRENT only when used in the sense of giving

admonition, reprimanding, and warning (Mt 12:41).

Most instances it should be proclaim (even in conjunction with repent, because
the content of proclaiming is not about repenting but the Kingdom as the very
present reality e.g. Mt 4:17).
Modern English translations still keep preach in many instances. KJV has
proclaim in only two places Lk 12:3; Rev 5:2 where preach is totally unfit.
The Good News of the Kingdom reign of God is to be proclaimed; it is not
something to be preached.
Related English words: announce, declare, herald
Related Greek words:
Cf. appagell (Mt 12:18) report back; relate, report, declare; announce,
proclaim;;
Cf. anaggell (Jn 16:13;) report; announce, proclaim; teach [Act 20:20 /x:
preach Danker p. 23]
Cf. euaggeliz proclaim good news
Cf. diamarturomai (Act 20:24) testify
Cf. lale (Act 3:17) tell

*holy spirit, holy Spirit vs. the holy Spirit; *Holy Ghost

Discussed in BW #3
*body; *soul; *spirit; *blood; *flesh; *psyche; *blood; *flesh

Discussed in BW #3
*heart mind thinking conscience; human being; *man

Discussed in BW #3
Gk. kardia is close to mind (seat of thinking) than heart as the seat of feeing.
E.g. Mt 5:8 pure in mind vs. pure in heart most (cf. in Korean no
equivalent idiom to English one.) / KKJV; /
- KRV; /
Heart is the depth of a soul (i.e., persons being) where thought, will, and
feelings are in (nuclear) fusion, so to speak.
*blessed vs. *be happy; *happiness; *blessing, *reward, *inheritance

Cf. what is Abrahamic blessing?

Cf. be praised
Two overriding Gods blessing onto our life absolute freedom and shalom

When we have already, what blessing do we need? [Mt 5:45; Ps 23:1]

Are we not to ask our Father His mercy, instead?
What blessing do we have to ask Him? Only things that honor His name through our life.
[Mt 6:9b] How can three square meals to satisfy us everey day to be something we should
ask, as Eugene Peterson tells that thats what the Lord has taught us to prayer (a satanic
verse in his Bible translation, The Message).

makarios (adj): /blessed; /x: happy - many; /xx: fortunate a few;

A common English word happy carries different nuance in various usage.
Derived from hap for luck or fortune, happy has nothing to do with makarios
and improper and misleading translation to tickle the ears in our happiness-crazed
culture.
[An example of lexicographic fallacy in an erroneous assertion by John Ligor
(1836), A New Version of Four Gospels. p. 15 The proper word is happy.
Blessed is always in Scripture eulogtos, benedictus. simply he accepts a
translation something to dictate how the text should be read. It is possible that he
may get from the word blessing a word picture of material worldy things to
possess.]
eulogeo
This is in IRENT renders as to give blessed words (to a person) give a blessing
over praise (e.g. Mk 6:41 to God over the bread); /> bless - most; />> praise;
cf. Mk 11:9 etc. as Blessed words to ~. [Cf. Job 2:9 NET tn The verb is literally
, (barakh, "bless"). As in the earlier uses, the meaning probably has more to do
with renouncing God than of speaking a curse. The actual word may be taken as a
theological euphemism for the verb ( qillel, "curse"). If Job's wife had meant
that he was trying to justify himself rather than God, "bless God" might be
translated "speak well of God," the resolution accepted by God in Job_42:7-8
following Job's double confession of having spoken wrongly of God (Job_40:3-5;
Job_42:1-6).]
aine
to praise; Lk 24:53 v.l.; Rm 15:11. Danker p. 10. with acc. Lk 2:13 al.; with dat.
Rev 19:5).
cf. blessing (giving blessed words) vs. blessedness vs. grace

Problem of the word, esp. blessing: it is now a common jargon in and out of religions,
with word a picture of health, wealth, and prosperity, rather than Gods shalom, Gods
words. The basic meaning is give good words. For the ungodly they are just good and
nice words, but for Gods people they are blessed words from God ultimately the Word,
the Logos, the God Himself.
[What is for us to say Bless you! when someone sneezes? About same as good
morning. Related to shamanic practice of seeking favor to spirits.
cf. favored with favor
*HalleluYah; /*Hallelujah - most; /> Alleluia KJV, etc.; [= Praise Yah (Yah a short
form of YHWH)]; [alllouia - a Greek transliterate of the Hebrew (e.g. Psa 116:19). In N.T. only
occurs in Rev 9:1, 3, 4, 6. See O.T. Psa 117:1 quoted in Rm 15:11.]
IRENT renders it as Praise Yah. English word Hallelujah, pronounced as Halleluyah, is
used often as a Christian jargon, its meaning and sense being mostly obscured and the
Name is not being appreciated.

Mk 11:9 praised is \ (having been blessed/praised); > euloge;

[See EE on Mt 21:9]; /Praise (God) GNB; /Praised and blessed AMP; /xxx: Having been
blessed [is] ALT (- grammatical fallacy); /blessed most, SourceNT (In its fn, she writes:
This is one Greek word for two English words blessed and happy. Did she
mean to write blessed and praised? Confused with MAKARIOI, which she
renders as happy?]

Reward Gk. misthos Danker p. 235 - pay, wages (Mt 20:8; Lk 10:7; Jn 4:36; Act 1:18;
Rm 4:4; 1Ti 5:18; Jam 5:4; 2Pe 2:13, 15; Jud 11; pay, reward (Mt 6:2; Mk 9:41; 1Co
38; 9:176; 2Jn 8; Rev 11:18; ambivalently 22:12);
Something to be receive now to enjoy, not *promise (something in future).
Special cases for reward:
Mt 5:12 vs. your reward is great in the heavens (NWT) your reward in heaven
is great (JNT) - ? Reward to be received in the heavens? Great from the heavens
point of view?
Mt 6:1 Reward from your heavenly Father (is given open here on earth, not
there in heaven after death.
Gal 5:22-23 fruitage of the spirit as to what would be the reward by God. (See
*righteous; *justification.)
Mt 6:20 Treasures (thsauros) to be treasured up in heaven things you do on
earth; not something God gives (cf. reward).
Treasure in heaven cannot be other than blessed Words (cf. euloge give
blessed words > bless);

Related word: Gk. apodidmi to repay; Mt 6:4ff (to *respond to; /x: to reward)
Happy (from hap meaning luck. Related word - fortunate) describes a reactive
state in ones feeling and entirely foreign to the Greek word makarios (blessed) in use
throughout the Scripture, as in Mt 5:3 ff (in the Beatitudes).
Cf. Prosperity gospel of wealth, health and happiness.
Cf. The phrase pursuit of happiness as one of the unalienable rights in the United
States Declaration of Independence a satanic phrase.
Cf. happy and predict - Two examples alien to the spirit of the Scripture.
*happiness
What is happiness? What is true happiness?
Most people love happiness. Observe carefully though, most of unhappy
people actually do love unhappiness, their own making. As if addicted!
Other related questions: What does happiness mean to you? What are the characterics of
happy people?
When searched on the web for a meaningful definition of happiness you will see a lot
of non-answer. What we find often is a description of various epiphenomena. They can
spot happiness in some or unhappiness in others without much difficulty. They tend to
dwell on other issues such as how to find out what makes (or should make) us happy.
Instead of pinning down on what happiness is, it is more about how to be happy, or
things which make one happy or what things cannot make happy. People desire
happiness, but it is not a desire per se.
Basically happiness is a mental reaction producing positive emotion effect with our
feeling to stimulus from external and even internal sources, which can be any. It depends
how a person is muture, psychologically and spiritually. To be happy persons is not
because a certain stimulus is accessible to make them happy, but it is because they can
and choose to react positivey to any stimulus. A truly happy person is not in need of a
particular kind of stimuli, but actually creates happiness. It is only possible by those who
are blessed as to their spirit [Mt 5:3], blessed of God Himself, nothing to do with things
of the world. Sadly many English Bibles translate Gk. makarioi as happy, being totally
ignorant and negligent in their blindness to the wonderful Scriptural truths. a
12F12F

Happiness freak Such frivolous Bible translations would be comforting for those cultic
attractions of happiness, wealth, and prosperity gospel, prevalent among all walks of life,
being hooked on peddling of Gods Word heavily imbued with positive-thinking
psychology, possibility thinking preaching, etc. The phrase pursuit of happiness was found
its way into the United States Declaration of Independence (1776) itself
a

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are

created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness. "

[Check it out - https://youtu.be/imangO2AlaE (Rabbi Zelig Pliskin: A Masterclass

In Happiness)]
A quote of the day:

Hell is where one is happy to be by oneself, with oneself, and for

oneself, that is, one lives by existing to oneself.
Give tithe and you sure get blessing! Yeah, its blessing from a
god who takes in your money in no time smiling.
Life for fun with pleasure, or to be in joy.

*bless, *praise, *magnify, *glorify, *sanctify, *consecrate; *consecration; set

apart for holy purpose; *holiness

(God is) holy what does it mean? Cf. pure

hagiasmos /*sanctification ( holiness) [ consecration: the

noun itself does not appear in the N.T.]; (being set apart from the
world towards God ) /xx: set-apartness - ISR
1Co 1:30; 1Th 4:3, 4; 2Th 2:13; Heb 12:14; 1Pe 1:2;
Rm 6:19, 22 (xx: holiness KJV, NWT3+4a)
hagiosun holiness (Cf. sacredness) Rm 1:4; 2Co 7:1; 1Th 3:13
hagiots holiness Heb 12:10;
Cf. hagios holy 1Pe 1:15-16 (cf. Rm 6:11).
Cf. saints IRENT renders as Gods consecrated ones

'to sanctify' and concerate are not same:

consecrate = 'To set apart to a sacred purpose or to religious use'

sanctify (as a biblical word) = to set apart as worthy for God to see and be
pleased. Not 'to declare holy'. Not 'to make holy'. [Cf. Jn 10:36 the word is
phrased out in IRENT to bring its sense set apart for the holy purpose.]
[Cf. Related concept: purification as in Judaic purification
regulation. God wants to see us pure, not righteous, right, saved,
sinless, etc. these are simply in the consequence in the life of
believers.] [pure as to the heart Mt 5:8 we are made pure by
God; and we keep our heart pure]

These rights are not something the Creator God would give to us, but something mortal
human beings demand. Why? Happiness is just a by-product of our life in God, when we
honor the very name of Him YHWH. Happiness naturally follows our being thankful
persons. Only those people blessed of God Himself, that is, His spirit can be thankful and
happy persons. Be happy! No, better be a thankful person.
a

[NWT3+4 cf. haplots simplicity 2Co 1:12; /xx: holiness]

In God-human relation almost all of Gods acta toward man is not

static abstract, but is thought of bidirectional process (not
reciprocal); with the God as the agent and the give and man as the
responder. Mans response may be positive/negative,
presence/absenece.
E.g.
love God loves first; *sanctification God sets (sanctify) us apart
from the world and we set apart (sanctify) ourselves from the
world; salvation God saves; human receives in faith;
*justification God declares us righteous; we stand righteous
before God and before men,
*thank, *thanksgiving; being a thankful person

Foremost, we thank God, not for something, but for who He is and for
who we are.
Thank for something? It does not mean that one is a person who is
thanking in everything (1Th 5:18). Even evil persons do thank.
Do not be anxious over anything, but in everything by prayer and
supplication along with thanksgiving let YOUR petitions be made known
to God (Phi 4:4)

1Th 5:18

In everything [+]
be yo giving thanks [to keep Gods name honored]

everything [+] [+ in and with yo; from and to yo; and for and against yo]
giving thanks [Thanking God is the hallmark of those who experientially know who
God is, and their first step approach the presence of God Himself, without which there is
no prayer. Thus, the Lords Prayer (Mt 6) itself does not mention this, because any prayer
can only come after.][To love God is to thank and praise and to keep His name honored
in our life as His love is flowing through to others.] [Keep looking for something to
thank for.]

in everything [yore doing and that which comes to yo] ; (in

everything you are to do and bring forth, or you are facing/encountering. Keep
finding out things to thank for.); [+ about to do and to face; everything we are
facing, everything to have come and about to come] /in connection with everything
(give thanks) NWT; 1 /in everything - most, ALT, NASB, AMP, etc.; /(give thanks) for
everything Mft, SoureNT, AUV; />> at all times ERV; 2 (reactive): /for everything; /in
every circumstance of life WNT; /in all circumstances ESV, Cassirer, NLT, GNB, NRSV,
NIV duo, /whatever circumstances TNT; /(thank God) no matter what happens MSG; /(give
thanks) no matter what happens - NIrV; /x: whatever happens GW, CEV, GSNT

(- tone of
que ce ra); /> under all circumstances - TCNT; /(be thankful) whatever the circumstances
may be PNT; /Ko. ; /> [- reflects the sense of all instead of
a

God in His Love acts from His will and expression (i.e. the Logos).

every/x: ; /x: ] [because of as well as in spite of each fact]

[everything yo have, or yo do, and that which come to yo; and everything yo dont
have, or dont do, and that which doesnt come to yo all things in the past, present, and
future] [Everything of my life every hour, every day is to thank for; simply its so
precious.][Everything of me what I am, who I am, how I am.] [Note: Let go of all
things on me and with me.][In turn, giving thanks does make things bearable.][cf.
nothing Rm 8:38-39] [When it says, it tells us that we are going to look for something
to thank for. We in our life are going to create something we thank for. Its not passively
getting some reward for things we do in keeping with the law or prosperity principle.]

[for everything, for what little we have (- learning to live without), in every
circumstance of life (whether we want/like; what little we understand or not.)]
[Cf. Lk 16:10-12 trustworthy a in small things]
123F123F

[Here is a small secret. Usually giving thanks is a retrospective or passive

expression, that is, one does thank upon things done or happened. However, a
much more fruitful way is life of thanksgiving when it is in a prospective mode,
that is, one does something (doing or encountering things-events-persons) in a
way that, however small or minute, something thankful is, intentionally, generated
or found. Make it a habit to think before one undertakes anything, small or large,
petty or important: how I would this to be thankful to God for it Is it something
I will be thankful and brining glory to Him? Look for something to thank for and
to praise Him in the ordinary experience and encounter, a hidden sparkle of
beauty in the ugly world. One step further keep on creative and worthy work so
that one can have things to thank for.]
be you giving thanks [to keep Gods name honored] [euxariste (to give
thanks) = fr. eu + xariste. cf. cognates xaris (grace); xair (to rejoice) See EE
above] (live in thanks; not saying thanks); [See. Mt 6:13 honor the name of
God.] 1 />be you giving thanks [in praise of Him] ARJ; /give thanks most, SourceNT (- a
word picture of instances of giving thanks; />be giving thanks ALT, CLV; />> keep thanking
God CEV (- a word picture of continuous or keep repeating rather than bringing out the
nuance of the way one lives in thanks); /> Give thanks {to God} ERV; />Thank [God] AMP,
AUV; /> thank God Mft, MSG, GSNT; /x: express thanks ACV; /?: give praise BBE; / 2

(static): />>be thankful, (whatever the circumstances may be). PNT; />> be thankful (in all
circumstances) - NLT, />>be thankful (in connection with everything) - NWT; />> (in every
circumstance of life) be thankful WNT; /

[Jam 1:17; Eph 5:20; 2Co 9:15. www.wcg.org/av/SpOL/spol168.htm Thanks

Be To God Joseph Tkach] [give thanks to anyone; be thankful of Him] [The
appropriate everyday expression is not I thank you for this but I thank God
for you doing this]
[Without living in thanks here comes complaints resentment bitterness
anger hate vengefulness feel hurt make hurt, etc. In other words, a life
being wasted in hell, internal hell, which contributes itself to external hell in
collective scale, which is in turn in the hands of Satan. safeguard away from
*trustworthy vs. faithful vs. reliable faithful person is trustworthy; may not be reliable as one
wishes.
a

the Evil one (apo away from; not ek out of; from) Mt 6:13.]
[Combination of the expressions be thankful and no matter what happens
makes this verse a very static (sit-and-wait-and then) and reactive (usu. only
for something good happened) approach to life. Thank for what you are; for
what you are in; for what you have (incl. ability)]
[Where there are worries, complaints, discontents, doubts, no giving of thanks
is found. Receive with the hands kept open to overflow. Where there is no
sharing and giving, no giving of thanks is found.]
[Love of God (a) thanks-giving (b) praising (c) adoration (thirst for Gods
word).]
Related words and phrases: idiom - thanks for nothing.
*friend; *fella;

philos friend (Lk 14:10 etc.)

hetairos you fella vocative (Mt 20:13; 22:12; 26:50) /x: friend most; /> fellow
NWT (too formal for in colloquial speech); /My man - Mft; /> My friend Cass, WNT,
Etheridge; / ~, my friend - PNT; /x: Comrade CLV, MRC, YLT; / Ko (ARJ);
agaptoi my beloved ones 1Jn 3:2

*Lake vs. *Sea; vs. water

Gk word thalassa is used for both sea and lake. To follow English usage of the
words, this is rendered as Lake (capitalized) when it refers specifically to the
Lake Galilee; it is phrased out as Galilee Lake Mt 4:13, Mk 5:13 when it
needs to be clarified. Often, simply as lake.
Jn 6:1; 21:1 Lake of Tiberias ([= Sea of Galilee = Lake Gennesaret Mt 14:34;
Lk 5:1; Num 34:11]

Cf. aigialos (shore beach sea-coast) Jn 21:4 etc.

Cf. Lk 5:1 calls it specifically Limn Gennsaret (Lake Gennesaret).
Cf. Mt 4:15 Referring to the Great Sea (the Mediterranean).
Cf. the Dead Sea the name itself is not in N.T.
Live on the lake; live by the lake (close bay); live on the water; live on water (as
in a boat house). Similar expressions with walk walk on water no
corresponding Gk. phrase in the Bible. Cf. walk over water.
e.g. sit by the lake (Mt 13:1 Gk. para tn thalassan), or walk by the lake (Mt
14:25 Gk. epi tn thalassan accusative). [Cf. epi ts thalassan (genitive) Jn
21:1 > at the Lake on [the shore of] the Lake of Tiberias by the Lake side]

Jesus walking on the water, recorded in three of the Gospels (Matthew 14:25, 26; Mark
6:48, 49; John 6:19),[?? more than any other, convinced Jesus disciples that He was
indeed the Son of God (Matthew 14:3233).]

To import EE from IRENT.

*wilderness; *desert; *desolate area

Jn 1:23 desert-wilderness [of Yohanans activity] (= Mk 1:4; Lk 3:4) [=

Bethany on the east across River Jordan (that is, in Perea) Jn 1:28] [Arid
region; not outdoor wilderness or sand desert.] [linked to the place the
prophet Eliyahu was taken up to heaven in a chariot of fire - 2Kg 2:4-11] [cf.
wilderness of Judea - Mt 3:1]
Jn 1:28 Bethany ~ across the Jordan River (on its eastern bank, that is,
Bethany in Perea. Cf. Bethany in Judea) [in the wilderness Mk 1:4; Lk
1:80; 3:2; the wilderness of Judea - Mt 3:1]
recline (at meal)
Mt 8:11 (recline at banquet); Lk 22:14etc. (recline for a meal) recline at meal;

/recline at table JNT, ESV duo; /take ones place at the table NET, NRSV;
/x: sit down KJV; /
Mt 14:19 (recline on the grass) /recline; /take ones place on; /sit down
most (- appropriate rendering).
NET tn: as 1st century Middle Eastern meals were not eaten while sitting at a
table, but while reclining on one's side on the floor with the head closest to the
low table and the feet farthest away.

world, universe, inhabited world, earth; the heart of the earth (= Yerusalem);
peace, shalom

*baptize, *baptism; *immerse, *immersion-rite

rhantiz (sprinkle Hb 9:13; cleanse oneself Mk 7:4 v.l.);

katacheo (pour down Mk 14:3);
baptiz (immerse; /> baptize)

[Cf. (religious) rites (formal ceremonies; e.g. Judaic circumcision rite brit-milah);
vs. rituals (repetitive acts); vs. ceremonies, vs. liturgy]
[proxy baptism baptism for the dead ones by Mormonism. See 1Co 15:29
for the proper translation of for their being to remain dead ones]. [Cf. purgatory,
indulgences, in Catholicism.]
[unbiblical infant baptism]
[A chuch practice of baptism is one of the important rites conducted by a church.
It is connected with the Judaic purification ritual (mikvah) to which the immersion
by Yohanan (> John the Baptizer; /x: John the Baptist) is related. In OT and in
the Gospels, it had to do with cleansing (purification). People would dip themselves
down into the water and rise straight up from the water! Yeshua (Mt 3:16; Mt 1:10) was
NOT thrown back and lifted forward (3 times) by Yohanan! It was not in the name of
Jesus or in the name of Trinity, unlike church baptism.]

[Motive of self-dying of the baptism is a Pauline midrash.] [The original Greek

word for this in the Gosples has nothing to do with a rite or ritual and should not
be read anachronistically with baptism by the Church several different ways it is
practiced, e.g. sprinkling water, baptistry.]
A expression baptism saves a person (or a person is saved by baptism,
being baptized save a person) is typical from Christian mindset of religiosity.
When people say baptism, they mean it a water baptism, baptismal-rite of
church. It is not a symbol. It is simply a seal by the congregation. It is not same
as immersion or other forms of baptismal rite. Such rite in the Bible is an
immersion-rite into water as a seal for the person having come to Elohim in the
name of Yeshua to be a member of His flock. It is into death of our own
being so that we are brought into Life eternal in the Mashiah. It points to
immersion into the Spirit of Elohim ( > baptism in the spirit).
When people say save, they mean something done by the standard and norm
of the regilion practiced by a church. Biblical salvation as ones personal life
event is nothing other than coming to Elohim having received His forgiveness
and is a beginning of life-long salvation (together with fellow believers) until
resurrection Life is received.
Baptism does not save a person. It is Elohim who saves person, who comes
to Him by placing trust in the person of Yeshua the Messiah. The Bible does
not save them. Religion does not. Church does not. Religious life does not.

 baptize into the name of Jesus; Act 2:38 epi t onomati (upon the name
of) be immersed on the basis of the name of Yeshua the Mashiah into
receving remisson of sins not for the remission of (i.e. in order to
receive) [baptize in the name of Jesus Christ KJV]
Cf.in the name of Jesus Act 10:48 en t onomati;
Cf. into the name of Father, of the Son, and of the holy Sprit (Mt 28:19 eis
to onoma tou patros kai tou huiou kai tou hagiou pneumatos)] Cf. into the
name of Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (KJV)]
baptism with water, with fire, with spirit.]
The Greek verb baptiz (Cf. bapt dip, dip in Lk 16:24; Jn 13:26, etc.) [See
also under into the name]
(1) wash, purify Mk 7:4; Lk 11:38;
(2) immerse, dip, plunge, wash, baptize IRENT renders as immerse
receive immersion-rite.
(in connection with Yohanan): Mt 3:6, 11a, 13, 14; Mk 1:5, 8a, 9; 6:14;
Lk 7:29
(in the Mashiahn community) Mt 28:19; Mk 16:16; Act 2:41; 1Co 12:13;
Gal 3:27
(in extended sense) Mt 3:11b; 20:22, 23; Mk 1:8b; 10:38, 39; Lk 12:50;
(in figurative typology) 1Co 10:2
The Greek noun baptisma is translated mostly as baptism. However, IRENT
renders it as immersion-rite because the traditional word connotes quite
differently in meaning,, connotation, association and word picture and it is
impossible to convey its original sense in the original setting, a typical example
of words of ecclesiastical anachronism. It was a simple act of a person dipping
his body to immerse himself into running water and to rise out of it; never in
such an elaborate style as in some churches. Moreover it is never with
sprinkling with water as in Constantine Catholic Church tradition. (See EE
for Korean and Japanese translations.36) Similarly, translating it as immersion
(as in receive immersion-rite brings an additional picture (being ritualized)
which is not present in the text.
It is a symbol as a person is brought into the Mashiahn community (1Co 12:13
into one [corporate] body). Baptism follows salvation; salvation does not
follow baptism (Mk 16:16) (cf. Act 10:47). Baptism is not what saves a
person. (cf. 1Pe 3:21)
It is in water (in the River Jordan by Yohanan - Mt 3:11; //Mk 1:8; //Lk
3:16; //Jn 1:26; 31, 33; //Act 1:5; 11:16) with water as a symbol of spirit.
With fire Mt 3:11; //Lk 3:16. [in token of repentance [leading] into

[receiving] Gods forgiveness of sins much more than Judaic

purification rites.]
It is with holy spirit (Mt 3:11; //Mk 1:8; //Lk 3:16; //Jn 1:33; //Act 1:5;
11:16), not with the Holy Spirit (- most English translations), nor with
the Holy Ghost (- KJV, Wesley, Whiston), with the holy Ghost
(Geneva), with the holy ghost (Bishops).
It is in the name of Yeshua the Mashiah (Act 2:38; 8:16); in the name of
the Lord (Act 10:48); in the name of the Lord Yeshua (Act 19:5)
It is [to bring] into the Mashiah (Gal 3:27); It is into the Mashiah Yeshua
and into His death (Rm 6:3); into death (Rm 6:4).
It is not into others name (1Co 1:13, 15). Cf. Israelites were into Moses
during the Exodus (1Co 1:13; 10:2);
It is [to bring] into the name of Father, Son, Holy Spirit (Mt 28:19b). [into
the name of is in the sense of into the covenant reality of]
Note: [The common phrase in my name (of Yeshua) is found in the
quoted saying of Yeshua in Historia Ecclesiae by Eusebius Go ye, and
make disciples of all nations in my name. (His quoting unrelated to do the
next sentence (Mt 28:19b) on baptismal rite) See *Great Commission.]
Cf. Yohanans baptism of repentance in water (Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3; Act 13:24;
19:4)
*Life vs. life; *Life eternal; *eternal life; everlasting life;

Note: IRENT uses capitalized Life (of/from God) differently from life (of
human and other biological existence).
[Gk. zo e - NET fn: John uses 37 times: 17 times it occurs with
(aionios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from
context that "eternal" life is meant. The two uses in Jn 1:4, if they do not refer to
"eternal" life, would be the only exceptions. (Also. uses zo e 13 times, always of
"eternal" life.). NET sn An allusion to Ps 36:9, which gives significant OT
background: "For with you is the fountain of life; In your light we see light." In
later Judaism, Lk 4:2 expresses a similar idea. Life, especially Life eternal, will
become one of the major themes of John's Gospel.] [Jn 5:26 life in the Son];
*Life eternal; > *eternal Life /x: everlasting life
[This is what Life is in N.T. It has no temporal sense such as long life-span
living forever with dying, etc. Terribly translated everlasting life (KJV, DRB,
Geneva, Bishops, MKJV, LITV, NWT) has become a religious or biblical jargon.
The basic sense of eternal is belonging to God or from God, or Gods.
Thematically similar to the metaphoric use of the Heavens ( God Himself,
rather than an invisible place).

Cf. * resurrection Life;

Cf. (imperishable, uncorruptible, > immortal - aphthartos ) Cf. concept of
immortality (not-dying, no-death) that which in the Scripture belongs
only to God. Cf. pagan soul immortality.
44x in N.T.
(3x) Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46;
(2x) Mk 10:17, 30;
(3x) Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30;
(2x) Act 13:46, 48;
(4x) Rm 2:7; 5:21; 6:22, 23; (1x) Gal 6:8;
(2x) 1Ti_1:16; 6:12; (2x) Tit 1:2; 3:7; (1x) Jud 1:21;
(17x) Jn 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40; 47, 54, 68; 10:28;
12:25, 50; 17:2, 3;
(6x) 1Jn 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; (Cf. 1Jn 5:12; Life)
[various rendering -e.g. in Jn 3:36]
/life eternal Murdock; /eternal life most, ASV, Darby; /life which is eternal
Etheridge; /xx: everlasting life KJV++, LITV, MKJV, Bishops, Geneva, Noyes, NWT,
ISR; /xx: the Life of the Ages WNT; /xx: life age-lasting Diagl; /xx: life ageabiding Rhm; /xx: life age-during- YLT; /xx: never ending life AUV; /xx: has life
forever ERV; /xx: life complete and forever MSG (- baloney); /xxx: Immortal Life
TCNT; /

A leader asks Jesus how one can inherit eternal life as wealthy leader (Lk
18:18); a certain rich man (Mk 10:17, 22); as a young rich one (Mt 19:16).
He knows that God exists and that he is accountable to that God, so his question is
particularly focused: "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" If God
exists, then the goal of life must be related to his purpose for us. The expression is
unique to New Testament time. In the Old Testament one could inherit the land
(Gen 28:4; Deu 1:8; 2:12; 4:1). Or one might speak of the Lord as one's inheritance
(Ps 15:5 LXX). Mention is made of an "eternal inheritance," but its nature is not
specified in the context (Ps 36:18 LXX). Daniel 12:2 speaks of the just who will
rise to eternal life.

44 x Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30;

Jn 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40; 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25,
50; 17:2, 3;
Act 13:46, 48;
Rm 2:7; 5:21; 6:22, 23; Gal 6:8; 1Ti_1:16; 6:12; Tit 1:2; 3:7;
1Jn 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jud 1:21;
(Cf. 1Jn 5:12; Life)
A problem of eternal life on liguistic and literary as well as practal level, lies in its

historical and traditional tie to a biblical jargon everlasting life (KJV), which puts
emphasis on duration and future-pointing quite contrary to what it is, now and
here in fullness of life, not mundane life, nor religious life.
Words of weighty idea in the Scripture have become fragmentary in our thought
and become abstract theology-rich concepts and sepiliaty terms.

To live for a believer in Yeshua is to live Life from God (aka eternal life);
it is to live in Gods love and in Gods spirit (not spiritualism, nor
something to do with the Holy Ghost). Such life is what we take with
profund sense of gratefulness. We are not ashamed of what we do, what we
have done, what we are all these being less than what we should (have),
we could (have); esp. less than others (, , ,
),
but are to be ashamed when we are unclean and unpure, looking at oneself,
rather than looking to our Creator; turning to darkness, rather than walking
in light.
Christian beliefs have these all fragmented as if separate independent things
to ponder, study and analize life, love, spirit jus as they are all
fragmented into cults, sects, churches, denominations, Christian religions.
We should not ask Gods will to be told do this or that or dont do this or
that. God is not a small god who would tell us so. Gods will for us is to
live the Life from God and in our life to honor His name for whatever we do
and to do whatever honors His name as we are eager to do not trusting our
human inclination and schemes, but His providence.
[eternal life in Synoptic Gospel as inheritance, as reward comparable to resurrection life in
G-John and Pauline Epistles.]

The opposite of Life eternal is not everlasting death or everlasting dying, but
eternal absence of Life, that is, eternal cut-off from Life.
25:46a eternal cut-off [from Life] ~~ eternal Life /eternal punishment and eternal life -

most, SourceNT; /x: everlasting ~ life eternal KJV, Wuest; /x: everlasting cutting-off ~
everlasting life NWT; /x: everlasting punishment ~ everlasting life Cass, ISR, LITV, MKJV,
NKJV, GSNT; /cutting-off age-lasting ~ life age-lasting Diagl; /x: punished forever ~ etenal
life CEV, NIrV; /x: punishment forever ~ (go and and have life) forever ERV; /forever ~
eternal NIrV; /the Punishment of the Ages ~ the Life of the Ages WNT; /aeonian
punishment ~ aeonian life TCNT; /chastening eonian ~ life eonian CLV; /the torment which is
eternal ~ the life which is eternal Etheridge; /agebiding correction ~ agebding life; /x: never
ending punishment ~ never ending life AUV; /aeternum iusti ~ vitam aeternam Vulg; /

cut-off from Life

/being cut-off; /x: cutting off NWT (- unpolished English; unclear sense); /x: punishment

most (not fit in thecontext and theme); /xxx: torment Etheridge; /correction Rhm; /x: be
punished (forever) CEV;

[they are to go off into eternal punishment with KOLASIS (+ restorative/disciplinary) may not
allude to the final condition of them, in contrast to kolasis cut-off [Cf. BDAG p. 702] here

in the sense of cut-off from Life. Also 1Jn 4:18 cut-off from Love). Not about the final
condition as olethros (2Th 1:9 destruction as a final sentencing and condition). The
problem with punishment in English (1) association with torment, torture, hell-fire
preaching, etc. and (2) confusion with judgment.
[Cf. kolaz BDAG p. 555]
[cf. *judgment *KRISIS; cf. to sentence, condemn KATADIKAZW Lk 6:37; cf.
KATATRIMA condemnation Rm 8:1][Not to mix up with eternal judgment (Heb 6:2; Mk
3:29 v.l.), going into or receivng the sentencing of destruction (2Th 1:9) or being thrown into the
eternal fire (Rev 20:15, Jud 7)] [cf. to perish] (Cf. eternal sin Mk 3:29)]
[Cf. lift off air (> cut off); prune kathair of vine branch in Jn 15:2; cut down ekkopt of a
tree in Mt 3:10]
[In this verse eternal cut-off is paired with eternal Life. The thematic antithesis to eternal life is
not eternal death/dying, but eternal absence of Life. That is, eternal cut-off from Life. Eternal
punishment does not fit for the context.]
[The adjectival word eternal ainion is not a word oftemperal concept, nothing with time or
duration (as in KJV translation everlasting), nor of final condition. The word eternity is not
endlessness, unending, etc., but metanymic for God himself and Gods realm.]
Ref: www.forananswer.org/Matthew/Mt25_46.htm

Cf.

krisis Mk 3:29 /x: eternal damnation (krisis) vs. forgiveness

(/eternal judgment ISR; /xxx: everlasting sin NWT) [Mt 23:33
judgment (of GeHinnom/Gehenna)]
dik Act 25:15 judgment KJV, ISR; judgment of condemnation
NWT;/
katakrima Rm 5:16, 18; 8:1 condemnation
katakrisis 2Co 3:9 condemnation

Various meanings of the word *life in English (other than biblical sense):
1. the condition of living or the state of being alive. The condition, quality,
or fact of being a living organism to distinguish from inanimate
existence.
2. the experience of being alive;
3. the course of events and activities (for human and biological beings).
4. (for animate or inanimate) the period during which something is
functional; between birth and the present time;
5. the period between the present until the end (or death). Legal life
sentence
6. the cause or source of living; the animating principle; a person who (or a
thing which) makes or keeps a thing alive.

7. the existence of an individual being, human or animal.

Related words: being alive; living, livelihood; lifespan, lifetime, life-time;
biography, life history, life story; (life) career; animateness, liveliness, aliveness.
Cf. soul, spirit, person, organism, being, existence.
Quotation: Life and jokes:
Life is something to take serious. Life is all jokes dont take them serious unless
they have bones in them.

Translation issue on Mt 25:46:

everlasting cutting-off ~~ everlasting life (NWT) [similar examples: cut
off forever (Capel, NT-CHCG, Og), eternally cut off (FLV6), the
aionian cutting-off (Emphatic Diaglott), age-lasting cutting-of (Tomane)]
eternal punishment ~~ eternal life (most);
everlasting punishment ~~ life eternal (KJV)
[Note: misguided translations: an everlasting pruning (Miller), an eonian
pruning (Mitchell)]
1. everlasting cutting-off (NWT) an English phrase which does not make
sense. Being cut-off unendingly, or cutting continuously forever? Keep cutting
endlessly? [Chopping a tree would not be an unending process, though it may
take more than one swing of an axe.] [an everlasting pruning is worse. Is the
text giving a picture of garden work?]
2. eternal cutoff forever a decent English. However, cut off of what? Cut off
from what? It falls also into a diachronic etymological fallacy.
3. eternal punishment
- Many do not understand that 'eternal' does not mean endless, unending,
etc., taking it as a temporal concept of a eternal duration. Not about be
punished forever (ERV). It is rather about eternal impact and result.
- Many have a wrong word picture of punishment confused with a different
word torture,
- It is however in the text is used in the text itself as what is in contrast to
'eternal life'. It is really nothing more than a cut-off from eternal life itself,
that is, the very God Himself as the source of Life.
- The phrase eternal punishment is NOT a proof text to keep unbiblical
hellfire preaching tradition unquenchable, which is closely interwoven with
a Greek soul immortality. The biblical jargon hell (word of a pagan origin)
has unbiblical meaning and usage; confused with hades. (Cf. Dantes
Inferno)
Cf. Known as the greatest hellfire preacher - Jonathan Edwards (d. 1758) the
last preacher in the Puritan tradition(of 18th and 19th century in Europe and
America).
Note: soul immortality denies the very meaning and significance of

resurrection and resurrection life. It is the source of misreading the text Lk

23:43 to see the paradise as a place of bliss when a person goes after death
(on the same day!).
*die; expire, give out soul; not die without dying

[Enoch and Elijah are the only two people God took to heaven without them
dying. It does not mean they did not die. Heb 11:5 In faith Enoch was taken
away so as to not see death,
Gen 5:24 tells us, "Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God
took him away." 2Kg 2:11 tells us, "Suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of
fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a
whirlwind." Enoch is described as a man who "walked with God for 300 years"
(Genesis 5:23). Elijah was perhaps the most powerful of God's prophets in the
Old Testament. There are also prophecies of Elijah's return (Mal 4:5-6).

*kill, murder, slay, slaughter, exterminate, put to death, execute,

phoneu (kill, murder)

Thou shall not murder as a command?? Prevention of murder crime murder is a crime judicially sentenced). Cf. IRENT rendering shall not
take others life

*death; *resurrection

Antithesis of life. The Scripture concerns mostly with (1) death of biological
life, especially physical life of human beings (Gk. bios), and (2) death of ones
spirit (opp. quickening). Cf. Gk psuch is commonly rendered as life in
most Bible translations but inadequate and often misleading. IRENT renders it
as ones being of life or, in idiomatic phrase, as soul.
pass from death unto Life Jn 5:24
eternal Life; Life eternal; cf. life after death
eternal punishment Mt 25:46
eternal destruction 2Th 1:9
eternal fire Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jud 1:7
eternal judgement Heb 6:2
eternal sin Mk 3:29
[Note: use of the word everlasting (adjective) as translation word for Gk.
ainios is incorrect and misleading as if it is of a temporal concept of
unending ever-continuing without ending or endless. e.g. NWT; some
both KJV.
Cf. the second death [Rev 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8];
Cf. eternal shame Dan 12:2
Cf. geuomai thanatou (5x) [IRENT renders as come to face death >
have experience of]- Mt 16:28 //Mk 9:1 //Lk_9:27; Jn 8:52; Heb 2:9; [idiom

 experience death (NET); /x: die; /x: (to) *taste death - most; /x: (to) taste of
death KJV, ASV, etc. [NET tn: the Greek verb does not mean "sample a small
amount" (as a typical English reader might infer from the word "taste"), but
"experience something cognitively or emotionally; come to know something"
(cf. BDAG 195 s.v. 2).]
Resurrection vs.
soul immortality [See below * mortal] pagan Greek idea. soul in
this phrase is not same as soul in other usage.
soul sleep (conditional immortality) 37 unbiblical; [Cf. biblical
figurative expression to sleep for being dead.
reincarnation; transmigration of soul a prevalent pagan idea in
Hinduism.
Cf. resuscitation; near-death experience (NDE) with hypeliteralism
for heaven and hell subject experience with braing working beneath
conscious level is non-Scriptural. [Ref. Hank Hanegraaff (2013),

AfterLife: What You Really Want to Know About Heaven, the Hereafter,
& Near-Death Experiences]

Cf. out-of-body experience (OBE or OOBE); hallucination; having a

vision; seeing an appartition;

What does it mean by soul anyway? [In Greek philosophy, (human) body has
mind and soul.] a
128F128F

Does resurrection apply only to the body? Does spirit live outside a body,
like a ghost? - [ www.letusreason.org/doct15.htm Arguing for Soul-sleep]
How is the doctrine developed on Sheol, Hades as temporary hell, and
Paradise as temporary heaven?
Where was Yeshua after He died until His resurrection? Was He still alive (His
soul)? Only his body was dead? What about His spirit? Alive as a ghost?
Current issues on death:
End-of-life (EOL) decision making ethical and legal issues
brain death
suicide
euthanasia
Neuronal actity vsion, hallucination, dream, etc.

Check it out - https://youtu.be/YzFUXKk2B4I (Rabbi Friedman - The Soul and

the Afterlife: Where Do We Go From Here?)

The Third Resurrection: What Is Its Value?

The Final Harvest
Basic Doctrines: The Third Resurrection
Basic Doctrines: The Second Resurrection
Basic Doctrines: Eternal Judgment

Reading material: Peter Hicks (2003), The Journey So Far Philosophy Through the Ages.

Death: The End of the Beginning

Problem with Enoch and Elijah many believe that they did not die! Based
on their reading of Gen 5:24 and Heb 11:5 texts they assert that Hanok
(>Enoch) didnt die. Same for Eliyahu 2Kg 2:11 (> Elijah). If they didnt die,
what happended? Transferred to heaven? Where does the Bible say a person
may go to heaven (while some may go to hell)? Such heaven and hell is
unbiblical language. Cf. Heb 9:27; 11:35, 40; Jn 3:13; 8:51
Whatever heaven is (for that matter whatever non-scriptural hell is for those
who believe it), it is not anyone to go to only the Son of Elohim as Jn 3:13
clearly declares.
mortal vs. *perishable; *immortal vs. *imperishable

From the Bible we can form a doctrine of immortality. and even a doctrine of
human soul, all subject to definition of the terms. No such concept as
immortality is in O.T. However, the common thought of soul immortality is
pagan and unbiblical. The concept of imortality is an attribute to the Creator
God Himself. The soul of a human being dies. As the body dies, it decays. The
soul is put in a sleep state, having no consciousness. Only with Gods grace
through the work of Yeshua the Mashiah, the believers in Hm attain immorality
after resurrection. Without death of a soul (as in soul immortal pagan doctrine)
there is to be no resurrection. Faith in Elohim and in His Son is faith of
resurrection; not faith of immortal soul; but immortality to put on with
resurrection life.

Rm 1:23 (aphthartos ~phthrotos); /the perishable God-being (vs. a perishable

human being);
Rm 2:7 (aphtharsia); imperishableness; /xxx: imortality
1Tm 6:16 the only One to whom immortality (athanasia) belongs; /has
immortality; /x: possess immortality.
1Co 9:25 (perishable); 15:42 (~ imperishable ), 53, 54 (aphthora perishableness
~~ athanasia immortalness); /x: corruption KJV;
Mk 16:8 v.l.; 1Ti 1:17; 1Pe 1:4; (imperishable); 1Pe 1:23 (perishable,
imperishable)
Gk. phtharos (perishable) and aphtharos (imperishable) (Rm 1:2; 1Co 9:25; Eph 6:24,
etc.). [ /x: incorruptible - problem of the word with ethical political picture.]

perishable in the sense of disappearing by losing its relevance and significance,

not as food being perished.
Cf.akantalutos indissoluble; /indestructible NET, NWT, WNT; /x: endless
KJV, etc; /x: never ends; Heb 7:16
Cf. Act 10:26 kag autos anthrpos eimi I myself am also a mere man. /xx: I too
am a more mortal NET (- for his humanity, but it does not have anything to do with
being mortal. The word mortal should not be lightly used in translation, other than
as an antonym of Gk. word athanasia).
Soul immortality a Greek philosophy; a very common belief in diverse
indigenous primitive pagan religions and cults, including syncretic Constatine
Catholic Church. Unbiblical. [Cf. Thou shall surely die Gen 3:3-4. Is the verse
Satans lie vs. deception with a right-wrong perveted truth? Does he use lies to
deceive or use truths, half-baked they may be?]
In the Scripture, the concept of immortality is something belonging to God. The
words soul and immortality are often put together (words in the Bibles), both
without clear definition, give rise to an idea contrary to the Scripture. In fact,
English word soul is a translation word for both Gk. and Hebrew. Gk. psuche
does not mean soul; soul is its gloss. a By itself negates the whole meaning and
significance of the Resurrection in the Scripture. [The favorite proof text is Lk
16:19-31, a parable read literally for such an un-bibilical doctrine. Again here is
a problem with words and definitions to give rise to diametrically opposing
human doctrines: they argue about soul without defining the term. Each side
has a different thing in mind. None is talking and arguing about the same thing.
129F129F

gloss vs. meaning. E.g. word is not the meaning of Gk. Logos (Jn 1:1), but a gloss. Gk. Logos is
not something which simply means word in English. Used as a translation word there, but in some
diffirent texts, it is translated differently to fit the context.
a

immortality a metaphysical construct, not theological idea. Elohim, the

Ultimate Reality of Being, cannot be described or explained by any human
language without being imprecise, unclear, inaccurate, and approximate with
anthropromophism. The concept of death, which is in the vocabulary of human
language, belongs only to the created world (including biological); it does not
belong to a vocabulary of the realm of spirit. Thus an immortal God is nothing
but a philosophers God and the same for the God who is dead.
"God is dead", quoted statement by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche,
applies to philosophers God, not Elohim in the Scripture.
Different from but confused with other theological jargon - kenosis
theothanatology (Death_of_God_theology ) such as by Friedrich Hegel
Cf. a God who is beyond Being
tripartite soul view of human nature tripartite soul uh?
*eternal everlasting; for ever and ever

Greek words and ainios (a.) from ain (n.)

*eternal, belonging to (the realm/dimension of) eternity, i.e., to God.

It is not used in a temporal sense as much (e.g. such as everlasting
un-ending). Life eternal (eternal Life) is Life from God, not a life
which is everlasting or lasting to eternaity; not of spiritual vitality (of
God). Cf. resurrection life Yeshua is risen to Life (Gk. zo), but
Lazarus (G-Jn 11) came to life (living Gk. bios) for a foretaste of
resurrection life. E.g. the question is the universe eternal? has one
answer, No, as eternal is not about temporal existence of indefinite
duration, which cannot be verified by measurement or observed.
Related words: * forever; into the * aeon;
KJV: (/x: everlasting < eternal; /x: damnation < judgment)
Mt 25:46 everlasting punishment (eternal cut-off IRNT) vs. eternal life: the only
occurrence in N.T.
Mk 3:29 /x: eternal damnation (krisis) vs. forgiveness (/eternal judgment ISR;
/xxx: everlasting sin NWT) [krisis - Mt 23:33 judgment of Gehenna]
Mk 12:40 /x: damnation (krima) (< judgment)
Heb 6:2 eternal judgment (krima)
2Th 1:9 everlasting destruction

Jud 1:6 everlasting chains (eternal bonds NWT)

Jud 1:7 vengeance of eternal fire
[See *life eternal; *eternal life; *judgment]
Heb 5:9 eternal salvation
Rm 1:20 his eternal power and Godhead
Rm 16:26 everlasting God
2Pe 1:11 the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour J.C.
2Co 4:17 eternal weight of glory
2Ti 2:10; 1Pe 5:10eternal glory
Heb 9:15 eternal inheritance
Heb 3:20 everlasting covenant
2Co 4:18 things which are seen are temporal; ~~ not seen are eternal
2Co 5:1 a house ~~ eternal in the heavens
Eph 3:11 eteranl purpose
Rev 14:6 everstaing gospel (everlasting good news NWT)
2Th 2:16 everlasting consaltion and good hope
1Ti 1:17 King eteral, immortal, ~~
1Ti 6:16 to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen

*resurrection; resurrection of the dead (ones);

arise; rise; He is risen; He was raised

[Green verses referring to Yeshua; purple others]

The common phrase is ek nekrn

[cf. out of the death ek tou thanatou

Jn 5:24]
The expression from out of dead ones (> from the dead) is not same as from
death. The phrase is not a simple event that He rose, but connotes general

resurrection which is initiated by Yeshuas resurrection.]

be raised from out of dead ones [God is the agent to raise]

Mt 17:9;; Mk6:14, 16; Lk 9:7; Jn 21:14; Act 3:15; 4:10; 10:41; 13:30, 34 ;
Rm 4:24; 6:4, 9; 7:4; 8:11; 10:9; 1Co 15:12a, 20; Gal 1:1; 1Th 1:10; 1Pe
1:21;
(Jn 12:1, 9, 17; Heb 11:19)
raise from out of the dead ones - Jn 2:22; Eph 1:20; Col 2:12;
rise from out of dead ones Mk 9:9, 10; 12:25; Lk 24:46; Jn 20:9; Act 17:3,
31; 2Ti 2:8; (Lk 16:31;Eph 5:14) [God raises; the person rises up]
bring up from out of dead ones Rm 10:7; Heb 13:20;

The resurrection from out of the dead ones Lk 20:35;

resurrection from out of among dead ones 1Pe 1:3;
are alive from out of dead ones Rm 6:13;
life from out of dead ones Rm 11:15;
Firstborn from out of the dead Col 1:18; Rev 1:5
Cf. with the preposition apo (from; away from)
poreuomai apo nekrn (go from dead ones) Lk 16:30; [from the realm
of the dead]
apo ton nekrn (rise from the dead ones) Mt 14:2; Mt 27:64; 28:7
Cf. with genitive
from out of resurrection of dead ones Act 26:23 (many render as a verb);
Rm 1:4; 1Co 15:12b;
the resurrection of the dead ones Act 4:2; 1Co 15:42;
resurrection of dead ones Act 17:32; 23:6; 24:21; 1Co 15:13, 21; Heb 6:2;
resurrection of dead ones [eis tn exanastasin resurrection that lifts me
up (IRENT)] Phi 3:11
Cf. There is no biblical expression resurrection from death raised from death,
etc. (as in CEVrenders wrongly) with the abstract noun death resurrection and
from death are tautological. Conceptually resurrection is not something to come
from death.Resurrection is not something from death but victory over death.
The Scriptural phrase from out of the dead ones (> from the dead) connotes
general resurrection which is true, not an instance of a persons resurrection. Same
for the Resurrection of the Mashiah; it is His resurrection from out of the dead ones.
Paul interprets His resurrection as the initiation (> beginning) of the general
resurrection (Rm 1:4 ex anastases nekrn Adrio Knig (1989), The Eclipse of
Christ in Eschatology, p. 79)

Resurrection of human beings:

E.g. the son of the widow of Nain (Lk 7:15), the daughter of Ya'ir (> Jairus; Lk 8:54
- 55), Lazarus (Jn 11:38 44 anistmi), Eutychus, Dorcas, etc. [all bodily
resurrections; raised in body physical dimension; raised back to life. Cf. Mt
10:8; 11:5.]
nekrous egeirete Mt 10:8 (raise dead ones)
peri anastases nekrn - Act 17:32, 24:6, 21
anaza come to life (x: live again KJV); /Rev 20:5
eis tn exanastasin tn ek (/tn) nekrn Phi 3:11; also Act 4:2
ts exanastes ek nekrn Lk 20:35
peri ts exanastes ek nekrn Mt 22:31
anastasis nekrn 1Co 15:13, 21; anastasis tn nekrn 1Co 15:42

Resurrection of Yeshua: [His resurrection is not the climax of His life story of
Immanuel. It is His *Ascension to His Father, YHWH Elohim and glorification,
from when He comes to the believers in Spirit. Coming back to Father completes
the purpose of Logos Incarnate and Immanuel not to become another person of
God-head as in the Trinitarian theology (one of three god-persons), as well as in the
anti-Triniarian one (e.g. Jehovahs Witnesses one of two, Almighty God and
mighty God).
Rm 4:24 ex anastases nekrn resurrection out of among the dead ones
1Co 15:12 ek nekrn eggertai (> egeir raise)

1Pe 1:3 di anastases ~ ek nekrn

*bread; *wine; produce of vineyard (fruit of the vine); *food

bread as main staple; (barley or wheat bread). Problem in translation this word
occurs when the cultural setting is different. It is a problem in the culture where
bread is not a main staple of diet as in the rice-based agriculture.38
*provision for soul (life)
*manna (Exo 16:4; Jn 6:30-31) What the people of Yisrael after their Exodus
complained was that they had to subsist only on manna as their food, to which
they were given quail later. It was the lack of those which they were able to
enjoy while they were living in bondage of the Pharaohs Egypt.
Yeshua as bread of Life.Yeshua Himself as genuine bread from heaven (/x:
true bread most) Jn 6:32
Bread from above for today (in the Lords Prayer)
Matzah (Unleavened Bread) for the Pesach season 39
New wine; old wine; sour wine
new wine [to be made] Mt 9:17; //Mk 2:22; //Lk 5:38 /[ = must grape juice to put to
ferment]; [not newly opened or decanted (Ko. ) ; not opposite of aged
(ko. ; /x:) =sour wine (/x: vinegar - KJV) - 27:48 (oxos - wine turns
sour as it gets aged into vinegar]; /[freshly squeezed grape juice for] new wine [to be
made] ARJ; /new wine most; /fresh wine Mft, CLV; //freshly squeezed grape juice
AUV ( - lacks any reference to wine in making); /new wine in making ARJ; /new wine to
/just made Wuest; /

[ must (n1.): "new wine," O.E. must, from L. mustum, short for vinum mustum "fresh wine,"
neut. of mustus "fresh, new.][TransLIne Fn: The word means new in the sense of young.
Jesus is referring to undeveloped wine, not yet fermented. So the intent is that no one puts
unfermented wine into worn out wineskins. Such skins are hard and inflexible. Same word
as new later in this verse; Col 3:10; Heb 12:24; young in Tit 2:4; and younger is Lk
15:12; Act 5:6; 1Tm 5:1; Tit 2:6. Used 23 times. GK 3742.]
[cf. pomace = marc]
sour wine Mt 27:48; //Mk 15:36; //Lk 23:36 (Gk. oxos wine which got old, turning
gradually into vinegar); [cf. oinos wine Mk 15:23 etc.] [equivalen to Latin posca cheap
sour wine diluted heavily with water for slaves and soldiers. Was prob. there for the soldiers
who had performed the crucifixion NETfn]; /sour wine NKJV, NET, ESV, NRSV, NASB,

HCSB, Wuest, NWT; /x: vinegar KJV+, PNT, RSV, JNT, Diagl, GW, ERV, Mft, Rhm,
Etheridge, Murdock, ASV, YLT; /x: wine vinegar ALT, NIV trio; /xx: bitter wine BBE;
/x: common wine TCNT, GSNT; /cheap wine GNB; /x: wine CEV; /vinegar (a mixture
of sour wine and water) AMP; /

Yeshua My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his
work. Jn 4:34.

*fish; *lamb/goat/pigeon
*wine; produce of vineyard (fruit of the vine); sour wine (x: vinegar); vine
and vine branches.

[Ref www.cai.org/bible-studies/hebrew-and-greek-words-translated-wine ]
Gk oinos 28x in N.T. (femented) wine
Gk. gleukos Act 21:13 (sweet) wine
produce of vineyard (> fruit of vines) Lk 22:20 etc.
Cf. blood of grapes [i.e. grape juice must] Gen 49:11, Deu 32:14
Gk. oxos sour wine (Jn 19:29, 30); /x: vinegar.
Druken - Eph 5:18 (drunken, intoxicated). cf. 1Tm 3:3, 8 (given to wine
given much to wine). Cf. Heb. shekar (LXX sikera) intoxicates.
Jn 4:46 water and wine (cf. the expression water and blood)
Wine for celebration Jn 2; Deu 14:26;
Bread and wine (Heb. yayin) - Gen 14:18
wine symbolic of Gods wrath (Rev 14:8). Cf. 16:9 wine of
Babylons fornication
As such wine would be inappropriate word/thing in the light of sobriety and
mumility at Pesach in setting of the Lord Last Supper.

The Old Testament never mentions a cup for Passover -- only the lamb,
unleavened bread, and bitter herbs.
The drink offering used in regular Old Testament sacrifices comes from
the Hebrew word "nacak," and it. Although called a "drink" offering
because it was liquid, it was not drunk but always "poured out" at the
altar.
The cup that was drunk in the New Covenant Passover service is
unrelated to the drink offering of OT sacrifices (Heb. word nacak which
means to pour out) was not to drink, but pour out at the Altar. Paul
wrote to Timothy that he was ready to be offered (Greek "spendomai",
poured out like a drink offering") at the end of his ministry.

Both Yahshua and Paul referred to the Passover drink simply as "cup" or
"fruit of the vine." They NEVER used "wine" in referring to the cup.
Wine as such would be inappropriate word/thing in the light of sobriety
and mumility at Pesach in setting of the Lord Last Supper.
Grape juice had to have been in the vessel of the Pesach setting. Pure,
unadulterated (unfermented) "blood of the grape" is the only proper
symbol for the pure, saving blood (Heb. dam) (a symbol of life) of
Yahshua the Messiah in the Pesach.
Ref. http://yrm.org/wine_or_grape_juice.htm

*see, *know, *say problem with simple words

see with eyes? discern; look at; observe; notice; understand, etc.
know know about; get knowledge of (about); get to know (experientially);
say speak, tell, utter;
Related English words behold, lo!, See, observe, look, Listen,
regard, be revealed to, manifest, confront;
Related words appearance, form, *image;
*languages; *tongues; speaking in tongues

Related words language a, dialect, parlance, jargon, speech;

Related words words, terms, terminology
Related words linguistics, phonology, semantics, phonetics;
Releted words glossolalia ("speaking in tongues"); spirit baptism;
130F130F

The word TONGUES in Greek is an organ of speech in the body;

metonymically the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from
that of other nations. In other words, it is a LANGUAGE that is spoken and
understood by someone on the earth. But what christians do IS BABBLING!
How did a gift from the holy Spirit go from a LANGUAGE that can be
understood, to BABBLING other than in shamanic (spiritism) influence?
tongue [Gk. glssa]
a

http://youtu.be/iDc34AXWIls What is language and why does it matter? by Noam Chomsky

(2013)
(caution: an hour and half long.)

 an organ for speech, taste, and swallowing.

Mk 7:33, 35; Lk 1:64; 16:24; Rev 16:10; Jas 3:5;
in figurative usage
Act 2:3, 26; Rm 3:13; 14:11; Phi 2:11; Jas 1:26; 3:6, 8; 1Jn 3:18;
metonym as language(s)
singular 1Co 12:10, 28; 13:8; 14:14, 19, 22, 26; 1Pe 3:10;
plural Mk 16:17 (speak in new languages they pick up); 1Co 14:21;
metonym as in the verbal phrase Gk. lale glss speak in a language [of
ones own]
plural Act 10:46; 19:6; 1Co 12:30; 13:1; 1Co 14: 5, 6, 18, 23, 39; Rev
17:15;
singular 1Co 14:2, 4, 9, 13, 27; Rev 14:6;

Nowhere is suggested anything ecstatic, strange, alien, supernatural,

inspired, gibberish, etc. In 1Co 14, KJV a phrase in italic unknown added
in 1Co 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, 27 (but not 1Co 14:5, 6, 9, 14, 19, 21, 22, 26, 39). It is
unnecessary and actually misleading. It is nothing unknown on earth, but
incomprehensible to people.
In English, speak and tongue come together only in idiomatic expressions,
such as speak in ones mother tongue or ones native tongue. In normal
English diction, it is to speak in (a certain) language; to speak with (use of
certain) languages. To have tongues in the translated English is due to (1)
being insensitive to the way a word is used; (2) copying the traditional
translations; (3) or standing on glossalists agenda.
1. tongue as metonymic for language (cf. dialect)
1Co 12:10 different kinds of tongues heter gne glssn (also 12:28,
30)
1Co 13:1 speak in the human tongues lale tais glssais tn anthrpn
Act 19:6; 1Co 12:30 speak in tongues lale glssais foreign languages
Act 10:46 speak in tongues lale glssais Gentiles native languages
Act 2:4 speak in other tongues lale hetrais glssais (foreign)
Act 2:11 speak in our tongue lale hmetrais glssais
Mk 16:17 speak in a new tongue lale glsse kainais (newly acquired)
2. Examples of various rending 1Co 14:2 in a language of his own:
1 (singular - tongue): /speak in a tongue most, NKJV, ASV, Etheridge,

Wuest; /in a tongue PNT, Mft; /x: in an unknown tongue KJV, AMP,
Noyes; /in an unknown tongue WNT; /x: with a tongue Diagl; /xx: in
strange tongues GNB; /xx: in an inspired tongue Cass; /
2 (singular - language):/in another language HCSB; /in another language
HNV, GW, ISV, MRC; /with a tongue Rhm; /in a language CLV; /in a
language [supernaturally] - AUV; /in a language he had not known before NIrV; /languages that other dont know CEV;

3 (/x: plural): /xx: in tongues NLT; /x: with tongues Whiston;

4 (paraphrase):/xxx: speak ecstatically GSNT; /x: makes use of tongues

BBE; /xx: uses the gift of tongue TCNT; /xx: A person {that has the gift
of} speaking in a {different} language ERV; /xx: If you praise him in the
private language of tongues MSG (- baloney);
The exact phrase speak in tongues (lale glssais )(tongues in plural) (KJV,
ASV, etc) is only in some Bibles (some mixed up with speak with tongues) for
Act 10:46; 19:6; 1Co 14:5, 6, 39.

E.g. in Act 10:46 (NIV, NET, ESV, Webster, WNT ISV, LEB, LITV, BBE).
Cf. /speak in another languages (GW); /speak different language- ERV; /speak
with diverse tongues Murdock; /xxx: speak in strange tongues GNB; /xx:
speak unkown languages CEV; /xxxx: gave utterance in tonges of ecstasy
Cass; /

Act 10:46 speaking with languages [native of their own] (Also 19:6. Cf.
Act 2:4ff) [/speak in languages; /speaking with tongues biblical jargon; /xx:
speak in tongues unEnglish cult jargon]
3. So-called speaking in tongues (Glossolalia) with 1Co 14:

Glossolalia a phenomenon of speaking in unintelligible utterances (often in a

religious setting).
It is a hall maker of Pentecostalism sect. The classic Pentecostal belief that
speaking in tongues is the real evidence of the second baptism of the Holy
Spirit [sic] and a sure sign of personal salvation. It is practiced by
Pentecostals. They have a jargon private prayer language ecstatic utterance
for such a jibberish. Some Charismatics which are found among various
denominations of Pretestants, Catholics and Orthodox - glossolalists (tonguespeakers). Renewalists, a term for Pentecostals and Charistmatics, are
increasing worldwise, esp. in the developing countries Latin America,
Southern Asia, and Africa.
They claim they are speaking a heavenly language or a language of spirit, They
find their needed proof texts in 1Co 14 for their practice of tongue-speaking.
They may say it is a gift of the Holy Spirit, but some of them say it is not a
gift but something anyone can pick up and become fluent by practicing.
Most claims (if not openly) that it is a sure sign of ones salvation (being bornagain). This is, in fact, a sure sign of self-deception (of being deceived and
of deceiving themselves. Whatever the word salvation may mean to them has

nothing to do with YHWHs restoration of Kingdom reign in the person of

Yeshua.
Similar tongue-speaking is a common occurrence in utterances
indistinguishable from such as observed in rituals of a shamanism which has
an apotropaic function (warding off evil). It is un-Scriptural. The Apostle Paul
wrote in length a whole chapter on this issue to reprimand the Corinthian
congregation in the midst of the center of the ungodly world, who was unshed
of their pagan origin). In fact, the tongue-speakers take a complete opposite of
what he wrote; claiming that he was actually commending their practice and
Paul himself was one of them! Wherever the phrase speaking in tongues
which is nothing other than saying speak in languages, all these are to them
same as their own speaking in gibberish, babbling spirit-possessed which
cannot be anything to do with holy Spirit, Spirit of Elohim.
The only time anybody in the Bible ever talks with not their own voice is
when they are demon-possessed. [Steven L Anderson
http://youtu.be/at9MZ54Hst4 ]. (e.g. Isa 29) [also Mk 5:9 //Lk 8:30 demon
named Legion]
Reading material:
www.biblestudents.com/tonguesspeaking.html (GLOSSOLALIA: SPEAKING
IN TONGUES)

*marriage; *divorce; *adultery

Marriage is a social contract of tribal construct in human history. Such is what

we have as a civic union whether the ceremony is performed at a place of a
religious institute and whether a priest/pastor presides over it have no bearing
on it. We have a certificate of marriage contract. [Cf. Rm 7:2-3]
How can such a marriage be a binding one for people in the light of the New
Covenant by Yeshua the Mashiah? A legalistic approach reading a Bible
translation literally goes against the spirit of Yeshua as the Lord. As we see
callousness of our hearts, as Mosheh had seen even in the Gods chosen people,
we should not make a blunder by interpreting the Scriptural texts in our own
terms on the issue of marriage and divorce, considering we live now in
different societies of diverse cultures. Even use of the word divorce for a
Bible translation word is anachronistic. (E.g. husband putting his wife away
from his household Mt 19:7 is not equivalent at all to getting divorced in
modern western societies.)
Such is in contrast to marriage covenant, a covenantal union, as the Scripture
has shown from the time of Creation what marriage should be, to be married in

truth. It is not possible to hold a marriage covenant as long as we remain in the

spirit of the world, but, with Gods grace, if we only live in harmony with the
Law, that is, the Way of the Mashiah, in the blessed Kingdom reign of
Elohim. [Cf. Concerning people marrived while there were in darkness before
having come into the Truth. a]
13F13F

Now the spirit of the world is at its work to pervert the meaning of words we
have used and cherished throughout human life and language. This generation
of the sons of perversion now wants to change the definition of the word
marriage itself to become possessed by the unclean spirit with the purpose of
their life itself grounded on the pursuit of power and pleasure. The word which
is a covenant relation to form a family and to ensure the family of mankind is
changing a mere faade for convenience, cohabitation and copulation, to
satisfy their need of power-pleasure principle.
Related words: betrothal, engagement, wedding, wedding-feast (>> marriage
ceremony), conjugal, marital; romantic love40;
Adultery sexual relation between a married person and a partner other than
the lawful spouse.

Gk. porneia; *fornication

The Gk is rendered differently depending on the context: Note the word
fornication appears in the limited texts, such as in Jn 8:41 and in Revelation.
It is not limited to a specific kinds of act; it does not include incest, rape, etc.]

fornication (Jn 8:41) notice the tone in the speech;

marital infidelity (Mt 5:32; 19:9) x: unlawful marriage (see NAB).
sexual immoralities (Mt 15:19; Mk 7:21);
sexual immorality (Act 15:20, 29; 21:25; 1Co 5:1; 6:13, 18; 7:2; 10:8;
2Co 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 5:3; Col 3:5; 1Th 4:3; Jud 1:7; Rev 2:14, 20,
21; 9:21; 14:8;
as her fornication Rev 17:2, 4; ; 18:3, 9; 19:2. [The word used often

figuractively in the spiritual-religious sense similar to idolatry, that is,

worshiping false gods. Also 2Ch 21:10-14; Ezk 16 ] [Cf. whoring after
gods/demons/idols (Exo 34:15-16; Lev 17:7; Ezk 6:9 in KJV).]

1Co 7:10-16 Because as those not in the TRUTH at the time of marriage we were
not under a covenant, we were under a contract! And all contracts are pierceable. So
as those Now under the covenant but not under the covenant when we married, we are
not bound to stay but free to marry again as under the covenant when the other party
wants to leave; doing so, we are not committing adultery.
a

*espouse; engage;

Mt 1:18 (Gk. mnsteu commit to marriage); /be espoused - KJV; /be

betrothed ESV, NASB; /x: be engaged to most; /be promised in marriage

to; /x: be pledged to be married.
It was between two families; there was no custom of dating or engagement
as such. A maiden is given to her husband-to-be and she would move into the
new household after a provisional period (about a year).

*conscience
suneidsis /conscience /sense of what is right and wrong NIrV.
*right and wrong; good and evil;
[Gen 2:9ff]

The two good and evil are not opposite as a prevalent thought in
dualism. Things are good when God pronounced so (Gen 1:4, 8, 9, 12, 17,
21, 25, and 31); evil is absence (deficiency) of goodness. Not to be
confused with (knowing) good and evil (with a tone of morality), a
phrase in Genesis (2:9, 17; 3:7, 22), which should be better translated as
(knowing) right and wrong (in existential for relationship of God and
man to be in harmony of Gods creation work).
accuracy and *precision; *correct; ;
A correct answer may not be the right answer. How one knows it
to be correct to begin with? Lexicographically, grammatically,
taking prescriptively? Exegetically, doctrinally, or even on ones
own authoritative opinions and fickleness? e.g. politically
correctness is always a wrong answer.

proof; falsification; falsifiable; argument; claim; proven, verifiable.

*sky; *heaven; cosmos; universe;

*generation; age; age-world; world; aeon

Generation Gk. genea with usual sense of a period of 40 years of human

life span. The primary meaning is a group of people born at about the same
time and living at the same time, sharing similar attitudes and interests.
Several related Greek words:

ethnos (translated as "nation" in Mt 24: 7, 9, 14), or

genos (translated as "generation" in 1Pe. 2:9 and having more of a
meaning of "kin" or "kind"), (offspring KJV Act 27:28, 29; Rev
22:6), or
suggenes (translated as "race" in Rm 9:3 NN and meaning "kinsmen,
fellow countrymen or a relative by blood)," or
gennema (translated as "generation" (KJV) but most othres as "offspring
in Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33, etc. meaning a type or progeny of people with
like character and attributes).

Concordance:
all the generations fourteen generations Mt 1:17
this generation

Mt 11:16; 12:41, 42; 23:36; 24:34;

Mk 8:12; 13:30;
Lk 7:31; 11:29, 30, 31, 32, 15, 51; 17:25; 21:32;
that generation Heb_3:10;
this generation of truth-perversion- Acts 2:40 (from Deu 32:5, 20).
Cf. on us and our children Mt 27:25. (not someone in the future).

In the fixed phrase this generaton it means the people of that particular
generation. It refers to the people of generation which Yeshua himself
belonged to. It does not refer to a future generation (2000 years or more far
out into the future from the time of the Gospels!). It has nothing to do with
race, nation, family, or a kind of people. Many in their peculiar eschatology try
to force such meaning into the text in only three places (Mt 23:36; 24:34 and
Lk 21:32); when they occurs in the so-called Olivet Discrouse. An example of
unbiblical agenda-driven eisegesis par excellenece.

*perverse, *perversion

*Perversion in the Scripture has to be seen in the context; it is not moral or

sexual perversion. IRENT renders the expression genea diestrammen
generation perverting truth.
(perverse generation KJV, ASV, NET, DRB, JUB; perverted generation
Darby, EMTV, LEB; crooked generation) Mt 17:17; Lk 9:41; Act 20:30; Php
2:15;

What is being perverted may refer to ones behavior and conduct a. However,
it often is used with a much deeper meaning. It is to take abnormal as normal,
wrong as right, evil as good, and illegal becomes legal, etc. in social and
cultural as well as ideological and intellectual realm.
More over, the perverting people think and claim that their way is nothing
wrong with it and rather demand others accept their way in the same
principle govering human conduct to see the purpose of life lies in pursuit of
power and pleasure, a Satanic verse, while what they think and claim is the
norm. Perverted behavior and conduct are perverted because they come out of
the mindset of those perverting truth. [It should not be taken to suggest what is
termed in psychiatry as paraphilias (sexual perversions).41 ]
132F132F

It is conceptually in the opposite of *repentence.

See EE for Greek synonyms of diastreph here42 .

Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15;

Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Php_2:15;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
Jud_1:7;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Rom_1:27; Eph_4:19; Php_2:15;
In ones Attitude, Behavior, Conduct and Demeanor what a person really is shown into Agenda
and Action.
aa

Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Rom_1:28; Php_2:15; 2Th_3:2; 1Ti_6:5; Jas_3:16;

Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 1Ti_6:5;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 1Ti_6:5;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 1Ti_6:5;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_19:26; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 2Th_3:2; Tit_3:11;
1Pe_2:18;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_19:26; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
1Pe_2:18;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 2Th_3:2; 1Ti_1:9; Tit_3:11;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Php_2:15; 2Th_3:2; 1Pe_2:18;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Php_2:15; 2Th_3:2; 1Pe_2:18;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Php_2:15; Tit_3:11;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Php_2:15; 1Ti_6:5;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_20:30; Php_2:15;
Mat_17:17; Luk_9:41; Act_2:40; Act_20:30; Php_2:15;

*perdition,

[Gk. apoleia (> apollumi) destruction waste loss destructon ruin]

perdition is a typical biblical jargon as in the phrase son of perdition (KJV)
(man doomed to destruction) in two places, Jn 1:12 (for Judas Iscariot) and
2Th 2:3 (for the man of lawlessness).

*tithing; *tithe; one tenth;

tithe [meaning one tenth of whats gained on crops and herds; collected from the people
of eleven Tribes of Yisrael to support the Tribe of Lewi who were charged with Miqdash (>
temple) service but without having their own land allotted. The word is used as a church jargon
for a contribution.]
In NT - Mt 23:23; L k 11:42; 18:12; Heb 7:5, 6, 8, 9

The English word tithe (from Old English: teogoa "tenth") is a onetenth part of something. In this sense it is used by some English Bibles

to translate the equivalent Hebrew word in Gen 14:18-20 (a tenth of

battle booty Abram gave to Malki-Tzedek); 28:12-22. (a tenth of all God
gives Yaakob). It is properly rendered as tenth as in most English
Bibles and it has nothing to do with tithing. (Cf. /xx: tithes KJV; /x: a
tithe LITV)
Heb. maaser
(Ref. www.biblicalheritage.org/bible%20studies/tithes.htm )
As in Judaic practice in the ancient Insrael decribed in the Mosaic
tithing law, the word tithe and tithing are mentioned in Deu 14:22-23;
24-25; 14:28-29; 12:17-18; 26:12; Lev 27:30-32; Num 18:21, 24, 26;
[also 2Ch 31:5-6; Neh 10:38; 13:12; Mal 3:10. It was a tenth of
agricultural yield as befitting the agricultural society and applied only for
Israelites living in Israel. The primary purpose of the tithing arrangement
under the Law had been to support Israels temple and priesthood.
It is true that Levitical priests continued serving at the temple in
Yerusalem until it was destroyed in 70 CE, but Christians from and after
30 CE upon the Crucifixion of Yeshua, became part of a new spiritual
priesthood that was not supported by tithes.Rm 6:14;Heb 7:12;1Pe
2:9. In NT the word tithe (as verb) appears in Lk 18:12 and Heb 7:5
both referring to the practice under Mosaic Law.
Many Christian churches take over this term conveniently for their
practice of collecting a tenth of ones income for their use. As
Christians, they were encouraged to give support to the Christian
ministry both by their own ministerial activity and by material
contributions. Instead of giving fixed, specified amounts to defray
congregational expenses, they were to contribute according to what a
person has, giving as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or
under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. (2Co 8:12; 9:7) They
were encouraged to follow the principle: Let the older men who preside
in a fine way be reckoned worthy of double honor, especially those who
work hard in speaking and teaching. For the scripture says: You must
not muzzle a bull when it threshes out the grain; also: The workman is
worthy of his wages. (1Ti 5:17,18) However, the apostle Paul set an
example in seeking to avoid bringing an undue financial burden on the
congregation.Act 18:3; 1Th 2:9. All that goes by the label tithe is
what was to be given only to the Levites, which was a tenth of the
produce from the land. Nothing to be by obligation to help others for
whatever noble purposes.
Related word: temple-tax [that which was to support the Miqdash
(temple) service in Yerusalem.]

*honor and *shame

Honor, dishonor, shame, shamed; shameless; shameful; reverence;

reverent; Reverent; keeping ones face; *face in oriental concept.
[Mt 6:9 to have the name of Elohim honored and sanctified is at the
core of prayer to God.] [Cf. 1Sam 2:30 YHWH declares those
honoring me I will honor. Cf. Instead of honor Bishops translation
reads as worship; DRB as glorify.]
Cf. English words rude, blatant, dishonoring, shaming, disrespect, irreverent,
impertinent, abusing, abusive, blasphemous; bold, improper, impudent,
unbecomingly; uncouth
Shame shameful people are shameless. [two words of seemingly
opposite meaning are, in fact, paradoxically of same sense. E.g. valuable vs.
invaluable; almost done vs. almost not done.
Oriental societies honor and shame as the back bone of their ethics and
social conduct. [Ref: Bruce Malina (2001, 3rd ed.), The New Testament World:
Insights from Cultural Anthropology. Ch. 1 Honor and Shame: Pivotal Value
pp. 37-57.] [Check for quite a few books on honor and shame.]
Jerome H. Neyrey (1998), Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew
Cf. Matthean genealogy in Mt 1:2-6 includes women in the background of the
oriental social value of honor and shame.
Ref. Craig S. Keener (2009), The Gospel of Matthew: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary
*freedom; *liberty
freedom from and freedom to salvation from and salvation to - Tit 2:11-14; Lk 4:18-19;
Rm 8:1-2; 2Co 3:17-18; Jam 1: 25; 2:12; Gal 6:1-5.

free - Old English fro (adjective), fron (verb), of Germanic origin; related
to Dutch vrij and German frei, from an Indo-European root meaning to love,
shared by friend.
liberty from Latin libertas > liber (free)
two different Greek words.

ophesis (Lk 4:18a, b; //Isa 61:1) "release, pardon, cancellation, letting go."
Lk 4:18a NET sn: The release in view here is comprehensive, both at a

physical level and a spiritual one, as the entire ministry of Jesus makes clear
(Lk 1:77-79; 7:47; 24:47; Act 2:38; 5:31; 10:43).
Lk 4:18b NET sn The essence of Jesus' messianic work is expressed in the
phrase to set free. This line from Isaiah 58 says that Jesus will do what the
nation had failed to do. It makes the proclamation messianic, not merely
prophetic, because Jesus doesn't just proclaim the message he brings the
deliverance. The word translated set free is the same Greek word (,
aphesi) translated release earlier in the verse.
eleutheria - "freedom, liberty, freedom from"

Liberty vs liberation:

2Co 3:17 freedom the Spirit of the Lord gives;

Jam 1:25; 2:12 law of liberty

Lk 4:18 (//Isa 61:1-2): liberate set free (the Israel from religious and political
as well as spirital level; even also in the case of opening opened the eyes of a
blind man).

freedom of will (free will); logical, legal, and libertarian freedom; political
freedom; economical freedom, religious freedom, etc.
Freedom from and freedom to
The kind of freedom in the Scripture is basically freedom of choice God has
given to human beings created after His own image.
Liberty ? a rather political philosophical construct.
Related words: enslavement, slavery, bondage, shackle, restriction, limitation,
imposition, constraints, coercion, aggression, oppression, harassment,
threatening;
Quote: "May we think of freedom, not as the right to do as we please, but as
the opportunity to do what is right." (Peter Marshall)
*equal; *same; *identical; identity;

E.g. with King and his son relation as an example. Son is equal to Father, it
does not mean Son is same as Father. Father is the king. What king is, so the
Son is as Father is. (In this expression king does not refer to the king.)
Father and Son are one, that is, one in kingship (authority, power, and reign).
Father and Son are two different persons. See *trinity where Father is the
God (= Elohim); Son is not the God, but what God is (that is, God-being).
Grammatically it is correct to say Son is God, that is, in the sense of Son is
as God. However the way the word is used in English, God (without the
definite article) cannot be differentiated. Hence, a very common serious
misconception Jesus is God (cf. Jesus is God). The name of our God is
Jesus, or even Jesus and Johovah is the same peson.

identity, being identical, to be same, to be equal to; to make identical to; one
and same; another vs. different; unique, only-and-one (Gk. monogens)

type, antitype, prototype, copy, image, imitation (fakeness vs. being modeled
after), form (morph);
Portrait (1) artistic visual presentation of a person in which the face with its expression
is dominant in images, photos, paintings, drawings, sculptures, etc. [This is not
without problems of icon; icon worship; idol; idolatry]; (2) figuratively a descriptive
verbal picture of characterization, usually of a person.
A portrait goes beyond the outer appearance to probe the emotional depth of the human
soul. In a portrait, a true artist tries to capture what the person is really about."

for the sake of vs. for someones (somethings) sake; on behalf of vs. in
behalf of; instead of vs. in (someones) stead

on (someones) account; on the account of; on the basis of

Cf. for (someone/something) for the benefit of because of in ones place
[See below for in behalf of vs. on behalf of in English grammar]
die for ~ = [in behalf of; /x: on behalf of in most cases] over 10x. All in
reference to death of Yeshua the Mashiah
die ~ apothnsk (die; /x: put to death; /give his life)
for (someone): huper (cf. eis, dia; charin;)
[the agent of the verb the Mashiah]
Rm 5:6; uper asebn ;
Rm 5:8; 1Th 5:10; uper hmon;
1Co 15:3; uper tn hamartin hmon;
2Co 5:14; uper pantn
2Co 5:15; uper pantn; uper autn
Gal 3:13; genomenos uper hmon katara (curse) - /in place of us; /in our
place CEV; /x: instead of us NWT (vs. in our stead archaic); /x: for us
most; [ collocation prob. as well - curse for us];
[the agent of the verb Yeshua]
Jn 11:50 uper tou laou (/x: on behalf of our people; /> in behalf of the people
NWT; /for the people most;
Jn 11:51, 52 uper tou ethnous (/for the nation most; /for that nation KJV+,
Geneva; /xx: for the Jewish people ERV, GNB; /xx: for the Jewish nation NET,
GW; /in behalf of NET; /for the people Bishops, Murdock;

Heb 2:9 [Yeshua comes to face (/experience; /x: taste) death]; /for all
LITV, MKJV; /for everyone most, ISR, NWT4; /xxx: for all men
Geneva, Murdock; /xxx: for every thing DRB; /xxx: for every man
KJV, JUB; /for every [man] NWT3; /on behalf of every one ARJ; /on
behalf of everyone Cass, NET;

[agent believers]

Eph 3:1 (Paul) /for most; /in behalf of ASV, EMTV, NWT
Eph 3:13 (tribulations) /> for you most ASV; /in your behalf - ,
NWT; /x:on behalf of LEB, NETfn, EMTV; /for your sake
Murdock; /
2Co 5:20a / ~ KRV; (=in place of)
/ambassors on behalf of ~ on behalf of Christ ASV;
/for ~ in behalf Murdock;
/in behalf of ~ in behalf of YLT; /
/for ~ in Christ stead KJV;
/are the Messiahs representatives ( Cf. samples) on the Messiahs
behalf ISV
/are Christs representatives ~ on behalf of GW;
/x: for ~ In hebalf Murdock;
/for ~ on behalf of ESV; /
/for Christ ~ on Christ behalf NET;
/substituting for ~ As substitutes for NWT;
/speak for ~ speak for (?? as if spokesmen) ERV;
other examples for huper: for the sake of Rm 1:5 ~ of His name
ESV; /xxx: in behalf of Darby; /xxx: for the sake of Christ - CEV; 2Th
1:5 ~ of the Kingdom (in Darby only); 2Co 12:10 for the sake of
Mashiah; /> for Christ most; /for the sake of Christ ESV, NET; /x:
for Chists sake KJV, ASV, GNB ( - now heard as an expletive);
1Co 15:29 (get baptized) just to end up as the dead ones \(baptiz)
huper tn nekrn; exegetically difficult expression (s. EE in IRENT)

Concordance study on for the sake of:

Gk. dia - 2Co_4:5; ABP; Heb_1:14; ASV; 2Th_3:12; CEV
Check the Gk as well as context and nuance for the following.
1Co_9:23; 1Co_11:9; 2Co_7:12; Gal_3:19; Php_2:30; 2Th_1:5; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11;
Darby
Rom_11:28; 2Ti_2:10; DRB
Rom_11:28; Rom_14:20; 1Co_8:11; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_10:28; 2Co_7:12; Eph_6:20;
Php_1:29; Php_3:7; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; Heb_1:14; EMTV
Rom_1:5; Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; Rom_13:5; Rom_14:20; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_10:28;
2Co_7:12; Php_1:29; Php_3:7; Col_1:24; 1Ti_5:23; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:1; Phm_1:6;
Heb_1:14; ESV
Rom_1:5; Rom_11:28; 1Co_10:28; 2Co_8:19; Eph_3:1; Php_2:22; Php_2:30;
Php_3:8; 2Ti_2:10; Phm_1:1; Phm_1:23; GNB
Rom_9:3; 1Co_9:23; 2Ti_1:8; 2Ti_2:10; GW
Rom_1:5; Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; Rom_13:5; Rom_14:20; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_10:28;
Eph_3:1; Php_3:7; Php_3:8; 2Ti_1:8; 2Ti_2:10; Heb_11:26; ISV
1Co_10:28; 2Ti_2:10; Phm_1:9; JUB
Rom_4:23; Rom_4:24; Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; 1Co_4:10; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_10:25;

1Co_10:27; 1Co_10:28; 1Co_11:9; 2Co_4:5; 2Co_12:10; Eph_3:1; Eph_6:20;

Php_3:8; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; Heb_1:14; Heb_11:26; LEB
Rom_5:7; Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; 1Co_4:10; 1Co_11:9; 2Co_4:5; 2Co_7:12;
2Co_12:10; Gal_3:19; Php_2:13; Tit_1:11; LITV
Rom_15:30; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_10:28; 2Co_7:12; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; MKJV
1Co_10:28; 2Co_1:11; 2Co_7:12; 2Co_12:19; Eph_3:1; Php_3:8; Col_4:3; Tit_1:11;
Murdock
Rom_4:25; Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; Rom_14:20; 1Co_11:9; 2Co_12:10; 2Co_13:8;
Eph_3:1; Php_1:13; Php_1:25; Php_2:13; Col_1:24; 2Ti_2:10; Phm_1:9; Phm_1:13;
NET
Rom_4:24; Rom_4:25; Rom_11:28; Rom_14:20; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_11:9; Php_2:13;
1Ti_5:23; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; Phm_1:1; Phm_1:9; Phm_1:13; NWT Php_1:13 NWT4
Rom_9:3; Rom_11:28; Rom_14:20; 1Co_4:10; 2Co_4:5; 2Co_4:11; 2Co_7:12;
2Co_12:10; Col_1:24; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; ISR
2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; Web
Rom_11:19; Rom_11:28; 1Co_9:23; 1Co_9:25; 2Co_4:5; 2Co_4:11; Gal_3:19;
Php_1:13; Php_2:30; Col_4:3; 2Th_1:5; 1Ti_5:23; 2Ti_2:10; Tit_1:11; Phm_1:23;
Heb_12:2; WNT
Rom_14:20; YLT

*seal vs. *mark; *secret; *mystery; [bible] code; cipher; reveal (to make it clear
and open); revelation (act and the content).
,

mark; imprint, charagma Rev 13:16, 17; 14:9, 11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4;
[Cf. mark of the beast Rev 16:2; 19:20]

sealing up Rev 10:4; 20:3, 10. (to seal to secure vs. to seal up to keep hidden)
seal shragis Rev 6:3, 5, 7, 9, 12; 7:2; 8:1; Rev 9:4; 22:10;

*heavens (pl.) vs. heaven (sing.)

Mt 6:10
heavens (pl.) vs. heaven (sing. in v. 10):
A recent article:

Jonathan T. Pennington: "Heaven" and "Heavens" in the LXX: Exploring the

Relationship Between SHAMAYIM and OURANOS, Bulletin of the International
Organ. for Septuagint and Cognate Studies 36 (2003) 39-59.
The plural is actually more common in G-Mt the usual explanation is that it
represents the Hebrew form, which is plural (special dual just like elohim) form
hashamayyim. (Carl W. Conrad)
Meaning of heaven(s) in O.T. & N.T.
(1) sky: Mt 6:26 birds of the heaven (tou ouranou Singl.) Cf. (outer) space (),
(2) God: (circumlocution): Mt 3:2 Kingdom of the heavens
(3) Realm of God: (Rev 20:1 out of the heaven; Rev 21:10 out of the heaven from
God);(Rev 12:1 signs in the heaven)
(4) Created thing, universe: Rev 14:7 (made the heaven and the earth)
(3) powers of heavenly realms: (Rev 20:11 the earth and the heaven) (Rev 21:1 the
former earth and the former heaven)
heavens Contrasting to the heavens in Gen 1:1, where it was more of the created
universe, in the Lords Prayer, its not the universe (; ; ); with deisticpantheistic idea of gods immanence god is in everything and everywhere) with its
implied spatial sense. It is used symbolically as the antithesis of the earth reversal
of all that belongs to the earth (and the order of things in the world), revolutionary just
as resurrection.

Outside the Bible, when the word heaven is used, it usually refers to something
which is opposite of hell, which itself is unscriptural term; heaven and hell instead
of biblical jargon heaven and earth. E.g. heaven or hell you go. People take it
something like Paradise, or even Nirvana, etc.
On the common quasi-religious expression to go to heaven a (after death) (usu. in
company with another expression go to the hell (after death). [See heaven and hell].
These are not Biblical ideas though commonly used by religious as well as nonreligious people.
13F

In the Bible, there is no such idea found. It is an erroneous conflation of two different
ideas enter into the Kingdom reign of Elohim and after death. The Kingdom reign
of Elohim has come to us in the person of Yeshua; those who respond to His call joins
its movement and enter into it (Mt 6:13; Jn 3:5; cf. Jn 3:3) to take the privilege of
becoming Gods children of God (Jn 1:12). Actually the picture of heaven to which
one goes after death may be found rather in a different idea of * paradise (Lk 23:43).
Ofter it is conflated with Jn 14:2 many abodes in the house(hold) of my Father ~~~
To go to heaven is a common quasi-religious expression, having common with an idea from
indigenous tribal religion is heard more often than to go to hell, and it is often heard where * hellfire
preaching is also heard;. It is go to heaven-kingdo ( (= kingdom of the heavens in
G-Mt) in Korean expression.
a

prepare a place fo you all (the disciples). [Note, Tyndale translation has it mansions
(which is carried to KJV) which does not mean a large imposing house as in modern
English, but a dwelling place.
Reading materials on heaven:
These may cover much more than heaven as such and heaven which is dealt in
these may by and large not be a biblical heaven, just as when people speak of heaven.
This shows an example par excellence of eisegesis (reading into the Bible). The
Scriptural reality of Kingdom reign of the Heavens (Elohim) which is here on earth
in the person of Yeshua Himself is confused and conflated with syncretic mixture of
varied pagan and non-religious popular ideas about after-life and idea of paradisenirvana.

David Biema, Times, Mar 24, 1997. pp.71-77. Does Heaven Exist?
[Cf. What in the world people mean by heaven?]
Peter Kreeft (1990), Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Heaven.
(1989), Heaven, the Heart's Deepest Longing.
Joseph M. Stowell (2006), Eternity: Reclaiming a Passion for What Endures.

heaven and hell

Heaven and hell is a prevalent but non-biblical idea, unlike the expression
the heaven and the earth [Cf. in heaven ~ upon earth ~ underneath the earth
(Rev 5:3, 13); out of heaven to earth (Rev 9:1); the heaven ~ the earth ~ the
sea (Rev 10:6); the heaven and the earth and sea (Rev 14:7; 20:11). Cf. a new
heaven and a new earth and the former heaven and the former earth (Rev
21:1).]
As a common theme in hell fire preaching, the idea of some go to heaven and
some go to hell after death is non-biblical, but useful.
Twitter/ounbbl
If you don't know sure, you ARE in hell. If you do know, you may well be in
heaven now. Heaven or hell is not a place you go after death.
*proof; *evidence;
People believe what they want to believe; people dont believe what they dont want
to believe. Belief just gives a seed for proof.

Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence - truly. Presence of evidence

is not enough evidence for conviction. Belief is not faith; faith is not belief.
Related words: myopic view; colored view; blind spot; presupposition; presumption;
assumption; hypothesis; synthesis; thesis; *fallacy; belief, conviction; logic; syllogism;

proof texting; statement, equation; premise; agenda; figure of speech; rhetoric; circular
logic (circularity); paradox, oxymoron, double entendre, word play, word association;
particularization, abstractizationa, signalization, conceptualization, Philosophic burden
of proof Philosophical skepticism basic beliefs, Evidence theories of justification;
[fallacy of similarity to prove that presence of something similar provides validity
(Cf. identical structural parallel b);
fallacy of counting scholarly noses to find support from finding as many scholars to
be comfortable;
fallacy of successive copying of which the original did not have itself well proven.
lexicographic fallacy relies for evidence on someones lexigraphic expertise or on
some published lexcons or dictionaries, which are in reality nothing more than a
glossary book. The dictionary simply collects the meaning of a work they could read
from its usage.
fallacy of looking for bones jumping on the texts for proof text like a dog on
something looking like a bone. E.g. Calling the common phrase I am as if its Gods
name, even superstitiously thinking capitalization I AM would make it something
special and mysterious.]
134F

Ref. www.logicalfallacies.info/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

Circular Reasoning - Logically Fallacious

Circular reasoning vs. Tautology (rhetoric) (not to be confused with tautology in
propositional logic)

Circular reasoning: the premise is restated as the conclusion in an argument,

instead of deriving the conclusion from the premise with arguments.
e.g. in pseudo-science: the evolutionist's dating of fossils according to the rock
strata they are found in, while at the same time dating the strata according to the
"index fossils" they contain. Dating a rock based on the fossil it contains only
works if it is assumed that evolution is true. As one paleontologist admitted, "For
most biologists, the strongest reason for accepting the evolutionary hypothesis is
their acceptance of some theory that entails it" (David G. Kitts, "Paleontology and
Evolutionary Theory," in Evolution, Sep.1974, p. 466)
e.g. in pseudo-belief: God exists because the Bible says God exists-and, since
God wrote the Bible, it must be true. This argument is problematic from a purely
logical standpoint since it bases belief in God's existence on the Christian belief
that the Bible comes from God. [Note a misleading expression as the Bibleis
simply translation product of the Scripture, which .]

e.g. church clich: The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in
the Bible. "I believe the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true." these
clich are not just illogical but also erroneous and unbiblical. The word Bible as

Henri Wald (1975), Introduction to Dialectical Logic p. 77 Abstractization whereby the

content of notions is formed and generalization whereby their sphere is formed are the two
edges of the outcome of induction. Abstractization and generalization means revealing the
essence and the general and formation of the concept.
b
the phrase in http://elihubooks.blogspot.com/2011/11/bart-d-ehrman-daniel-b-wallace-and.html
a

such does not appear in the Bible. And nowhere in the Bible God tell the Bible is
the Word of God.
my hour; my time; appointed time

my hour Gk. h ho ra mou (hour in figurative sense); /mine hour KJV; />
my time
Jn 2:4; 7:6;
his hour /> his time Jn 7:30; 8:20
my time Gk ho kairos ho emos Jn 7:6

Gk. chronos vs. kairos vs. hora

kairos is rendered in NWT:
an appointed time - 1Co 7:5;
the appointed time
Mt 8:29; 26:18
Mt 26:18 (the appointed time for me is near); Mk 1:15; 13:33; Lk 1:20; Rm 5:6;
1Co 7:5 (for an appointed time); Heb 9:9, 10; 1Pe 4:17; Rev_11:18;
[Rev_1:3; Rev_22:10]; - the appointed time is near (eggus /at hand)
the due time (for me, for you,)
Lk 21:8; Jn 7:6, 8; 1Co 4:5; 2Th 2:6; 4:6;
1Pe_5:6 (in due time);
NWT
is near
Mt24:32, 33; 26:18; Mk 13:28, 29; Lk 21:30,31; Act 1:12; Rm 10:8; Php 4:5; Heb 6:8;
8:13; Rev 1:3; Rev 22:10;
at hand
Mat_3:2; 4:17; 10:7; 26:18, 45,46; Mk 1:15; 14:42; Lk 21:30,31; Jn 2:13; 7:2; 11:55;
19:42; Rm 13:12; Php 4:5; 2Th 2:2; 2Ti 4:6; 1Pe 4:7; Rev 1:3; 22:10;

Cf. Jn 7:6 hetoimos /ready; /x: at hand - NWT

*time; *space; space-time; dimensions, universe, physics, cosmology.

For entries hour, day, time, etc.,

see WB#5 (Walk through the Scripture #5 Time, Calendar and Chronology).

Hour (Gk. hora) is not hour as on the clock. Used figuratively as it my hour
has come in the Bible, hour is different nuance and usage than time in
English idiom.
Hours in ordinal, 1st hour, 6th hour, etc., in Greek text is an hour-period
(daytime or nighttime divieded into 12.)

Such a mysterious thing is! [From Wikipedia: time is a dimension in which

events can be ordered from the past through the present into the
future, and also the measure of durations of events and the intervals
between them. Time has long been a major subject of study in religion,
philosophy, and science, but defining it in a manner applicable to all
fields without circularity has consistently eluded scholars. ] Now
most of time, it is about duration of time. E.g. A definition ["time is what
clocks measure" is actually a definition of duration, not time per se.
Newtonian time time as a dimension, independent of events, in
which events occur in sequence. Another view is, it is, instead, a part
of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and
number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This
second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz and Immanuel Kant,
holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself
measurable nor can it be travelled. Time is one of the seven
fundamental physical quantities in the International System of Units]
Note: here time is actually duration of time.

Does the idea that time is a dimension really help us comprehend and
feet what this thing called time? What about the way we perceive that
time flows and flows continuously without time freeze?
As Time, space, energy and matter (the whole shebang of physics and
physical reality) is just a Gods created work by His fiat, the God of the
Scripture is supra-temporal (beyond the time dimension) though He
intimately relates to it, especially for humankind, a creation after His
own image. Any statement which tells about God is necessarily
anthropomorphic.
Like energy in physics, which exists in discrete quanta, time itself may be seen to
exist in discrete time quanta. See EE for atom of time 43
[Is time real? - https://youtu.be/FVINOl0Ctfk
What things really exist https://youtu.be/H9Q6SWcTA9w http://bit.ly/1G9SEkx;
Quentin Smith - Why is there Something rather than Nothing? https://youtu.be/M5n4mJkVivs
Aslo check a related site http://bit.ly/1LUPlQS ]

*thesis; synthesis; antithesis

Solution, resulotion, dis-solution of problems

Dialectic; Neo-orthodoxy; rationality ; reasoning; diairesis; deduction, induction;

logic; statements, premises; conclusions; syllogism

"logos" or rational appeal, "pathos" or emotional appeal, and "ethos" or ethical appeal;

*betray; hand over; deliver

Gk. paradidmi /betray, deliver over/up; /x: give up, /handed over

Danker p. 266-7[red added by ARJ]

paradidmi [para, didmi] 'convey fr. one position to another', in general
hand over
(a) of subjecting a pers. to custodial procedure, which could involve
various stages and numerous parties in the judicial process
- (1) of delivery to an authority or penalty, either by a party in the
chain of responsibility or by someone filled with animus, hand
over, deliver Yohanan the Baptizer Mt 4:12; a person to a court Mt
5:25; 10:17, 19 to persecution 24:9, 10;
Judas as the agent Mt 10:4; 26:15, 16, 21, 23, 24f; Mk 13:9; 14:10,
11, 18, 21; Lk 22:4, 6, 22 (prob. w. connotation of betrayal, cp.
6:16); 24:20, 48; Jn 6:64; 71; 12:4; 13:2, 11, 21; 18:30; Act 3:13;
7:42; 8:3; 12:4; 21:11; 22:4; 1Co 11:23; 2Co 4:11;
Mt 26:46; Jn 18:2, 5; 21:20 (betrayer),
(2) of divine action, punitive or remedial hand over Rm 1:24, 26,
28; 1Co 5:5; 1Ti 1:20; 2Pe 2:4;
refer. to Yeshua as an atonement sacrifice redemptive Rm 4:25;
8:32; sim. Eph 5:2 = 25. Mk 9:31; Lk 9:22, 44; 24:7 Yeshua to
authorities Mt 20:18; 26:45; Mk 15:1, 15; Mt 17:22;
- (b) of transmission of a thing, w. circumstance or intention signalled by
context hand over, give: money Mt 25:20; spirit Jn 19:30; hand down:
custom Act 6:14; instruction 16:4; 1Co 11:2; 15:3; 2Pe 2:21; model of
instruction Rm 6:17; power Lk 4:6; body 1Co 13:3; reign 15:24. Of
action exposing oneself to hazard risk Act 15:26.
- (c) of entrusting someone to another commit, commend Act 14:26;
15:40; 1Pe 2:23.
- (d) of submission to immorality Eph 4:19.
- (e) of a crop ripe to deliver its produce Mk4:29.
papadids, paradotheis, paradotnai, paradothmai, paradoi, paradoth
pres. act. ind. 2 sg., 1 aor. pass. ptc., 1 aor. pass. inf., 1 fut. pass., 2
aor.act. subj. 3 sg., and 1aor. pass. subj. of paradidmi
paradounai, paradous, parad, parads, 2 aor. act. inf., 2 aor. act. ptc.,
2
aor. act. subj. 3 sg., and fut. act. ind. of paradidmi.
1Co 11:73; Act 3:13
Mt 17:22; 20:18; 26:2, 45; Mk 9:31; 14:41; Lk 9:22, 44; 24:7 The Sonof-man is handed over to. [It was Yeshuas surrender to Fathers will, not
getting betrayed. Cf. Judas as a betrayer v. 46 of Him to the Yehudim
Authorites, divulging where they could have their hand on Him.
/xx: betrayed most; [See BW *betray]/x: betray.

Judas betrays Him [to be handed over] to the Yehudim Authorities (i.e.
the Sadducees in power)
Mt 10:4; 26:15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25; 27:3, 4;
Mk 3:19; 14:10, 11, 18;
Lk 22:4, 6, 21, 22, 48;
Jn 6: 64, 71; 12:4; 13:2, 11, 21;
Judas - Betrayer Mt 26:46; Mk 14:42, 44; Jn 18:2, 5; 21:20
Betrayer- Act 7:52;
Lk 21:16 (btw people)
*Letters vs. Epistles
www.sbts.edu/documents/tschreiner/3.3_article.pdf
Letters or Epistles? - How should we understand the Pauline compositions?
Adolf Deissmann early in the century argued that they should be designated as
letters rather than epistles. Epistles were artistic works, designed for a larger
audience and intended to last forever as literary compositions. Letters, on the other
hand, were addressed to specific situations, dashed off to meet the immediate
needs of readers. Paul, Adolf Deissmann insisted, did not write careful literary
compositions that were intended for posterity, which were intended to function
authoritatively in the life of the church over the years. He wrote in the ordinary
language of his day in response to situations as they arose. Deissmann, despite the
validity of some of his insights, overstated his case. most scholars no longer
see Deissmanns sharp cleavage between letters and epistles as credible.
IRENT adopts the term *Epistle, except in the case of Pauls personal letters (socalled Pastoral Epistles and Letter to Philemon) since it helps to differentiate from the
more common English word letters which has different meanings, word picture and
word association.

*offerings; *sacrifice;
nouns offering prosphora; sacrifice thusia (Hebrew zevakh) Mt 9:13, etc.
verbs prospher; spend

Mt 5:23; to offer gift upon the alter prospher to dron epi to thusiastrion
Act 21:26 (Alter in the Temle)
Mk 12:33; Heb 10:8 whole burnt offering (holocaust a holokautma)
135F

holocaust reading materials:

The Holocaust, a genocide perpetrated by the Nazis
[http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/18/entertainment/la-et-cm-holocaust-museum-puts-alfredrosenberg-diaries-online-20131218]
Peter Novick (2000) The Holocaust in American Life
Holocaust in American history:
David Stannard (1993), American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World
a

Heb 10:11 to offer sacrifice prospher thusias)

Eph 5:2; /offering (prosphora) and sacrifice (thusia) - /x: gift and offering
ISR;
Heb 10:5 sacrifice and offering you want (thusian kai prosphoran ~ ethel ); /x:
slaughter and meal offering ISR;
Heb 10:6 whole burnt offerings (holokautma) and sacrifces for sin.
Phi 2:17 spend epi th thusia to pour out as libation (drink offering) upon the
sacrifice
Related terms: Holocaust sacrifice (a burnt offering. Heb. Shoah); animal sacrifice;
slaughter offering; korban sacrifice, and oblation (Hebrew minchah); peace offering
(Hebrew: Zeva shelamim), Thank offering (Hebrew todah); Votive offering; free-will
offering; olive branch; ritually clean;

Russell Thornton (1990), American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A Population History
Since 1492 (The Civilization of the American Indian Series)
Ward Churchill (2001), A Little Matter of Genocide: Holocaust and Denial in the Americas
1492 to the Present

*psychology, *psychiatry, *psychoanalysis

Believers taking on thes charged terms/jargon to deal questions scripturally:

psychology model
understanding of person (Creation) biblical?
psychopathology model
diagnosis of root causes/problems (Fall) biblical?
psychotherapy model
approach to caring and prescribing cures (Redemption/Sanctification)
biblical?

(Ref. Robert W. Kellemen (2014), Gospel-Centered Counseling)

The practice of psychoanalysis does not belong to medical profession; psychoanalysts

are not physicians and are not related to medical profession of psychiatrists, not to
psychologists. (Freudianism a; neo-Freudianism)
136F

Psychoanalysis, (www.simplypsychology.org/psychoanalysis.html) founded by

Sigmund Freud, is a religion b by itself with his theory of infantile sexuality adopted as
the creed of the Freudian Church, propagated by the Freudian School.
137F

Etymology: since 1906, from Psychoanalyse, coined 1896 in French by Freud from
Latinized form of Greek psyche- "mental" + German Analyse, from Greek analysis.
Freud earlier used psychische analyse (1894).
The book by Sigmund Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams (1899 in German, Die
Traumdeutung) introduces key concepts that would later become central to
psychoanalysis. It emphasizes the role of the unconscious mind, which is one of the
underlying principles in Freudian psychology. It marked the beginning of
psychoanalysis and is a fascinating text revealing Freuds unique talent as a writer and
ambitious theorist
(from http://psychology.about.com/od/sigmundfreud/gr/interpretation.htm )
His essay, Beyond the Pleasure Principle (1920 in German, Jenseits des

Lustprinzips).
Ref. Richard Webster (1995), Why Freud Was Wrong Sin, Science, and
Psychoanalysis.
a

www.victorianweb.org/science/freud/intro.html Freud and Freudianism

http://youtu.be/x_YLy6yZeaw Introduction to Century of the Self ["This series is about how those in
power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass
democracy." - Adam Curtis. BBC - Press Office - The Century of the Self ]
Religion, religion, O, religion. Just as evolutionism is, and also scientism is. [The concept
of evolution, metaphysical or scientific, should not be confused with evolutionism.] In the
same line, Marxism is a religion, which emerged as communism of a political idealogy with
materialism, dictatorship and militarism.
b

Related words:
behaviorism (Cf. B. F. Skinner, an American psychologist)
(Reading material: FROM PIGEON TO SUPERMAN AND BACK
AGAIN);

Pop psychology (popular psychology, pop psych, Psychobabble; self-help );

human potential movement;
*knowledge; *theology; *philosophy; *metaphysics;
What does it mean to know God? It certainly not knowing about God, nor
about having knowledge of (about) God. Neither it is knowing Him at deeper,
mystic, esoteric, metaphysical, or spiritual level. It is to be experiential
relation to Elohim the Creator (not God) by living in His Love, Light, and Life.
To know Him, is prerequisite of believing in Him, to love Him, and to pray to
Him; in turn to put ones trust in Him and to receive His Love is prerequisite of
knowing Him. This way of thinking is reciprocating as in a circle, not moving in
a line.
How do we know God? How do we have God-talk? All the statements or talks about
God is from human attempt using language and vocabulary which is miserably
inadequate to delve into the great mystery God Himself. It cannot be other than in
anthropomorphic language. The difficulty is much more than the attempt to make
valid statements about subatomic structure in quantum theory of the modern physics.
Here things are not subject to our direct observation; identify, describe and make
statements about them from the trace they leave behind.
To know God: JI Packer (1993), Knowing God
[Theology is mans talk of God issue; how close it is to what the Scripture reveals,
explains, and proclaims, is to be seen. The problem is not that American churches are
left with a deep and chronic deficit in theology, but that most of things in theologies
are not in harmony with the Scripture, because they are born of mans ever-unstable
religious doctrines and traditions.]
Check a variety of theology - *contextual theology; kingdom theology, liberation
theology, Catholic theology, Pretestant theology, biblical theology, etc.
*ontology; epistemology
www.ontology.co/
www.academia.edu/4826761/On_the_Ontological_Status_of_Human_Embryos
http://eje-online.org/content/151/Suppl_3/U17.long Carlos Alonso: An ontological
view of the human embryo. A paradigm

*foreknowledge;
1Pe 1:2; kata prognsin theou patros

[to those
foreknowledge?

chosen]

as

according

to

Gods

plan

or

most renders as the foreknowledge as if God has the stock of data on the future, and
also has and ability to correctly predict the future.
[Danker p. 298
proginsk (1) be previously acquainted with Act 26:5; aleady know about 2Pt
3:17; (2) have plans for; know before 1Pt 1:20; Rm 8:29; 11:2;
prognsis state of having in mind, plan, purpose, as opposed to someth.
happesing fortuitously [s. proginsk (2)] Act 2:23; 1Pt 1:2
Act 2:23 t rsmen boul kai prognsei tou theou
1Pe 1:2 (kata prognsis theou) Q: Did God Know That Adam and Eve Would Sin?
Is
this
Gods
ability
to
refrain
from
using
foreknowledge?
(http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011006). This line of thinking is in fact bringing
Gods thinking to a mere human level.
The problem of the question itself shows our limited linguistic and litrary ability to
grasp what is meant by to know and would sin. What does it mean to know in the
context? Is it not much of prior knowledge such as pediciton correctly (as God is
supra-temporal, unbound by time domoin), but rather He has already decided (s.
CEV). What does it mean to sin, not a abstract concept with a noun? Is it not a
dynamic relation of God to human kind, rather than committing some act?

God has given freedom of choice when He made them in His own image.
[cf. thelma will desire]

*last day; last days; the end; eschaton; *eschatology

the end the end times the end of the world consummation in these last days
[Ref: Adrio Knig (1989), The Eclipse of Christ in Eschatology highly readable and
excellent, not a word to be missed.]
on the last day (/> at the last day; /> in the last day)
en t eschat hmera - Jn 6:39; 11:24 (resurrection); Jn 12:48; (judgment)
t eschat hmera Jn 6:40, 44, 54; (resurrection)
Cf. en t eschat hmera (on the last day - great day - of the festival) Jn 7:37;
the last days

ep tais eschatais hmerais (in the last days) Act 2:17;

ep
eschatais hmerais (in the last day) Jam 5:3; 2Ti 3:1;
ep
eschatn tn hmern toun (in these last days) Heb 1:2;

ep

eschatn tn hmern (in the last days) 2Pe 3:3;

Cf. end of {the} time cf. end of the age

ep eschatou tou chronou [/en eschat chron] Jud 18;

Cf. the consummation (> end) of the age beginning of the age to come of
the Kingdom reign of Elohim.

sunteleai tou ainos Mt 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:20 etc.

[From pp. 64-65 Herman Hoyt (1969), The End Times] (with minor
editing; purple are not his.)
The phrase "second coming" (a theological jargon) does not appear in the
New Testament. It is first found in the writings of the Church Fathers. But
the New Testament is full of the idea. Such synonymous expressions as
"come again" (Jn 14:3) and "appear the second time" (Heb 9:28) do
appear in the New Testament.
There is some truth in the fact that Christ spoke of various comings. In
relation to the Holy Spirit, Christ said, "I will come to you", and "we will
come unto him" (Jn 14:18, 23). In the sense of providential, spiritual
judgment Christ said to the Church at Ephesus, "I will come unto thee
quickly" (Rev 2:5). But these "comings" are never confused with that
grand and final eschatological event which is designated in theology as
"the second coming".
Nine Greek Terms Defined
Though the New Testament abounds in terms and expressions concerning
the second coming of Christ, nine are cited here as helpful in preparing
the student for the unfolding of the general nature of the second coming in
the New Testament.
Ho erchomenos This word means the one who is coming or the coming
one. This came to be a title of the Messiah. John the Baptizer used it: "Are
you the one who should come ... ?" (Mt 11:3). The exultant multitude
used it on the day of His anti-triumphal entry: "Blessed is he that comes in
the name of YHWH " (Mt 21:9) . The writer of Hebrews used it
specifically as referring to the second coming: For yet a little while, and
he that shall come will come" (Heb 10:37)
[Fn -"Who is to come" appears four times in the AV of Revelation
(1:4, 8; 4:8; 11:17). The ASV omits it in 11:17. It does not appear in
the Greek text of 16:5. Explanation for the omission in 11:17 and 16:5
may be that Christ has already come in that the rapture took place.]
Erchomai reerring to the act of coming from one place to another, this

word is used over and over again as referring to the second coming of
Christ (see Mt 24:30; Mk 14:62; Lk 21:27; Jn 14:3; 1Co 4:5;2Th 1:10;
2Jn 7; Jude 14; Rev 1:7; 22:7, 12, 20).
Katabain Used to mean to come down or to descend, this word lays
emphasis upon the direction in the act of coming. This word is used of the
first coming of Christ: "For I came down from heaven" (Jn 6:38). It is also
used of the second coming of Christ: "For the Lord himself shall descend
from heaven with a shout" (1Th 4:16)
Hk In meaning, this word marks the result in the act of coming. It
means one has arrived. Christ used this word in relation to His first
coming: "For I came forth and am come from God" (Jn 8:42, ASV) .
Christ also used the same word in relation to His second coming: "If
therefore you shall not watch, I will come as a thief, and thou shalt not
know what hour I will come upon thee" (Rev 3:3, ASV).
Parousia Denoting arrival and presence, this word occurs over and over
again in relation to the second coming of Christ. Paul used the word of
himself in such a way as to indicate its meaning: "Not as in my presence
only, but now much more in my absence" (Phi 2:12). Since the word came
to be used of the arrival and
presence of a ruler, it was very easy for the early Christians to use this
word of the arrival and presence of Christ on the earth: "For what is our
hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our
Lord Jesus Christ at his coming?" (1Th 2:19). In the Gospels parousia of
the Son-of-man occurs only in G-Mt (Mt 24:3, 27, 37, 39). G-Mk and GLk has it comingin //Mk 13:24; //Lk 21:27 for the parallel to Mt 24:27.
In the Epistles, parousia of the Lord Yeshua the Mashiah is mentioned:
1Co 15:23; 1Th 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2Th 2:1, 8; Jas 5:7, 8; 2Pe 1:16; 3:4; 1Jn 2:28.

Apokalupsis This is a compound word meanining to unveil or uncover

and is usually translated by the word revelation. It is used in many
connections, but also in relation to the second coming of Christ. This
word is rendered "appearing" in 1Pe 1:7 and revelation coming (KJV),
appearing manifestation come again (ERV) in 1Co 1:7. But in Rev
1:1, as in most other places, it is translated "revelation". This word
describes The nature of Christs arrival and presence on the earth. It will
unveiling of His divine glory.
Phanero Sometimes translated as show or appear (Jn 21:1; Col
3:4), or manifest (1Jn 3:5), this word means to bring out into the open
and make clear and plain that which hitherto existed but was not known.
The word is used of Christ and believers in 1Jn 3:2 (ASV): "Beloved, now
are we children of God, and it is not yet made manifest what we shall be.
We know that, if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for we shall

see him even as he is."

Epiphain Meaning to bring to light or to full visibility, this word was
used of Christ at His First coming, when by the appearing of our Saviour
Jesus Christ" (2Tm 1:10) life and immortality were brought to light. It is
also used of the second coming to denote the "brightness" of His presence
on the earth (2Th 2:8), that particular quality after which the saints yearn
and which causes them to love His "appearing" (2Tim 4:8).
Hora A word meaning to see with the eyes, it is used of the sight that
will greet the seeing eyes of manking at the second coming of Christ. It
was used of Christ at His first coming: "But I said unto you, That ye also
have seen me, and believe not" (Jn 6:36). Following His resurrection it is
said that he "appeared" to Simon (Lk 24:34). "And unto them that look for
him shall he appear the second time" (Heb 9:28).
Cf. Gk parousia (come to be present) most renders as coming (as if
to be in the future); cf. presence (as if already realized event) NWT:
Mt 24:3, 27, 37, 39; of the Son-of-man;
1Co 15:23; (of Mashiah);
1Th 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; Jas 5:7, 8; 2Pe 1:16; 3:4; 2Th 2:1, 8 (of our

Lord Yeshua the Mashiah);

1Jn 2:28; (the Son)
1Co 16:17; 2Co 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phi 1:26; 2:12;(individuals)
2Th 2:9; (of the lawless one)
2Pe 3:12 (of the day of Elohim)

Cf. vocab: second time again

*rapture a popular jargon of Christian eschatology with rapture craze or rupture
doctrine or theory, which are un-biblical. [The English word itself is not in any
English Bible translation, despite the religious mania (Cf. the popular fiction, The
Left Behind). The word appeared in the writings of Matthew Henry (in his
commentary 1806) and Nelson Darby (1827 as in pre-tribulation rapture for Rapture
Doctrine Premillenialism; Dispensationalism) base on the Greek verb in 1Th 4:17
harpagisometha (> harpaz)]. Cf. tribulation pre-tribulation various millennialisms.
[Ref: www.askelm.com/essentials/ess025.htm Ch. 17 The Rapture Theory - Its
Surprising Origin in EL Martin (1999), Essentials of N.T. Doctrine]
1Th 4:17 snatched up - NETfn; /< gathered up GNB, ERV (- cf. episunag in Mt
24:31; 2Th 2:1); /swept up PNT; /caught up most, KJV+, Cass, NAB, Barclay; /x:

snatched away CLV; /caught away NWT, Diagl, Rotherham; /taken up CEV, BBE,
DRB; /x: rapt with Etheridge; /rapienmur (> rapio) Vulg (> raptizo - Latin caught
up); ( after gathered up, to return with the Lord; not disappearing. Not rapture of

eschatological jargon - rapture-mania with a non-biblical rapture-removal in a pretribulation rapture idea. [Cf. English word rapture means a state of being carried away
by overwhelming emotion. The sense of seizure or capture is archaic usage]
[NET tn suddenly caught up - Or "snatched up." The Greek verb implies that
the action is quick or forceful, so the translation supplied the adverb "suddenly" to make

this implicit notion clear.] (Not related to paralambanetai Mt 24:36-41)

https://youtu.be/p20zDOjlRdc [Chuck Missler: The Rapture Part 1 of 12]

Chuck Missler (2003), The Rapture: Christianity's Most Preposterous Belief (Audio
or Kindle Edition)
Cf. Jn 14:1-4
harpagisometha 1Th 4:16, when the "dead in Christ" and "we who are alive and
remain" will be "caught up in the clouds" to meet "the Lord in the air"
harpaz Act 8:39, 2Co 12:2-4; Rev 12:5. catch up; take up away;
Cf. English idiom in a rapture Act 10:10; 11:5; 22:17 (JUB); Lk 1:67 (WNT);

*war; *battle; *fight; conflict; attack; assult;

contention, argument, quarrel, dispute; (family) feud, enmity; hostilities, hostility;

*enemy; vs. friends; vs. neighbor

*enemies, foes, adversaries, opponents; combatants; those who are against (someone),
hurting/harming others; accusers. [Cf. concept of nonresistance, pacifism, tolerantism]
[our adversaries vs. our enemies vs. those who take us as enemies]
The English word enemy covers a wide semantic field, from the well-known love your
enemies to shall be saved from our enemies. Enemies of whom, in what sense of enemy
- (Mt 5:44; Lk 1:71; 6:27; 19:43; Rm 5:10; Rm 11:28; Phi 3:18; Col 1:21; Hebrews 10:13;
Rev11:5, 12, etc.). IRENT renders as those who are against you in the so-called Love
Your Enemies commandments in Mt 5:44 //Lk 6:27.]
The problem of Love Your Enemies: the following group of people are inappropriate to
simply label as enemies:
Those persecute you; hate you; curse you; hurt; harm, etc. [Cf. Lk 6:28 epreaz
/exploit; /treat spitefully (RSV), despitefully KJV; /mistreat; /cruel; /abuse; /hurt;
/treat badly; /insult; /ill-treat]
[Cf. Lk 10:29-37 <Parable of Good Samaritan> is not about who is my enemy but who is
my neighbor. Cf. Startley, ed. (1992), The Love of Enemy and Nonretaliation in the N.T., p.
137ff.]
[word count: enemy, enemies - 30x KJV, ESV; 32x NWT; 35x NET]

Danker p. 157
echthra [echthros] enmity Lk 23:12; Ro 8:7 (cp. e. tou theou enmity with/
toward God Jam 4:4); Gal 5:20; Eph 2:14, 16.
echthros [cp. (to) echthos; 'hate': etym. unclear)
- 1. as adj.
- a. in act. sense inimical, hostile Mt 13:28 (but s. 2).
- b. in pass. sense treated as enemies on account of you Rm 11:28 (but
s. 2).
- 2. as noun, w. or without the art, 'one who is inimical', enemy Mt 5:43f;
22:44; Lk 1:71; Act 13:10; Rm 5:10; 12:20; 1Co 15:26; Gal 4:16; Phi
3:18; Col 1:21; 2Th 3:15; Jam 4:4; Rv 11:5, 12. e. anthrps may be
rendered some enemy Mt 13:28 (cp. 1). In Rm 11:28 echthroi di humas
may plausibly be rendered enemies (of God or Christ) for your sakes.
Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words:
Enemy:
an adjective, primarily denoting "hated" or "hateful" (akin to echthos,

"hate;" perhaps associated with ektos, "outside"), hence, in the Active

sense, denotes "hating, hostile;" it is used as a noun signifying an "enemy,"
adversary, and is said
(a) of the Devil, Mt 13:39; Lk 10:19;
(b) of death, 1Co 15:26;
(e) of one who is opposed to righteousness, Act 13:10;
(i) of foes, Mt 5:43, 44; 10:36; Lk 6:27, 35: Rm 12:20; 1Co 15:25; Gal
4:16.
(c) of the professing believer who would be a friend of the world, thus
turning himself into an enemy of God, Jam 4:4;
(d) of men who are opposed to Christ, Mt 13:25, 28; 22:44; Mk 12:36;
Lk 19:27; 20:43; Act 2:35; Rm 11:28; Phi 3:18; Heb 1:13; 10:13; or to
His servants, Rev 11:5, 12; to the nation of Israel, Luk 1:71, 74; 19:43;
(f) of Israel in its alienation from God, Rm 11:28;
(g) of the unregenerate in their attitude toward God, Rm 5:10; Col 1:21;
(h) of believers in their former state, 2Th 3:15;
See FOE. Cp. echthra, "enmity."

*dumb vs. mute;

A fixed phrase - dumb and deaf
*fool, foolish, stupid, moronic

*as, *like, just as; as if; similar; likened to;

The nefarious IS. A statement in the form of A is B. The copula be verb in third
person singular (is) is used rarely in the sense of to be same, identical, or equal, but
to be as. Cf. figure of speech; analogy; simile.
[Note: significant difference between as and like]
E.g. God is like (noun) vs. God is as (noun). God is as a person vs. God is a
person. vs. God is spirit vs. God is as spirit / As spirit is, God is
When we say God is a person, such as the one who exists alone, what we actually
say is no more than God is as a person who comes to us a relational God; not as an
isolated person. Cf. personable.
*perfect, mature, perfection, fullness, maturity
[related words; growth, development, maturation]
maturity - physical, psychological, * spirital (> spiritual)

goal, fullness,
Heb 6:1 (epi tn teleiotta) [its not about one becoming mature person, or attain
maturity or perfection (in whatever sense), but moving on to the fullest level (in
knowledge and understanding) pertaining to the Mashiah.]
Cf. teleios 1Co 14:20 grown-up; /x: men; /x: mature man (people);
*water; rain; flood; deluge

Noahs Flood: As it rained the mountains were covered out, [no longer to be
visible]. Not covered over by the rising water level, submerged!

*confess = to acknowledge, admit, accept and answer; attest (give testimony);

*visible; recognizable, discernable, observable, understandable,
*darkness, decay, destruction, death; disease, disorder; deadlines;
*emotion; feeling; mood; moody; gut feeling (intuition, cf. instinct);

*Hope; to hope; hopefully; I hope so; I wish;

*pain, hurt, ache, pathos, Han; sickness vs. illness; afflictions;

*god; *gods; deity; idols; graven images

[see also Walk Through the Scripture #3 Names, Persons, and People]

Atheism, Antitheism; Agnosticism; pantheism; panetheism; deism; finite godism, monethism, monaltry vs henotheism; polytheism
[In many cases, the word God is actually used in the sense of God-being
without specifically referencing to and identifying the one true God, Elohim of
the Scriptue.
E.g. from. http://3l8hvo31a7yc2inkkn1eprjd.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/sites/7/2014/05/HowCanWeKnowTheChristianGodIsTheOneT
rueGod-Transcript.pdf
Every religion has a different view of God.
Here God is not YHWH Elohim, the Almighty God, whom Yeshua called
Father.

Though there are often similarities between these views, the common
ground is merely superficial. There are fundamental differences that make
each religion distinct and unreconcilable. Logically, contradictory claims
cannot all be true, either one view of God is true or all of them are false

Here again the statement is incorrect, as both views can be true on their own,
since God in both postions does not have same meaning and reference.]
Cf. *Godhead Deity, Divinity, Trinity. theological jargons
Greekwords in NT
Other than theos [mostly arthrous the God (= Elohim); and anarthrous ( =
God-being), esp. other than nominative case]:
theion
theion (Act 17:29) adj. divine

theiots (Rm 1:20) divinity, divine nature

theots (Col 2:9) deity, divine quality

godhead/Godhed/godheed used in KJV, ESV, etc. since Wycliffe (1395)

and Tyndale (1525)
Cf. Eph 3:19 the fullness of Elohim
God-being divine being divine nature divine quality all that God is
Godship NWT Rm 1:20) Godhead these theological and translational
jargons are difficult to pindown their difference.

God, god, gods, mighty ones;

(tribal, pagan) tutelary god; ();
Most people of churchianity turn even the true God (YHWH) into their tutelary
god which would do their bidding (e.g. bless me).
*godly; *pious
*godliness, *piety, ascetic;
*(ritually) clean, defiled;
set-apart, sanctified, holy, consecrated, saintly, devout, godly, pious, piety; cf.
religious, religiosity vs. religion;

*fasting

to fast; vs. do fasting or keep fastings

v. to fast < to keep fasting
n. a fast < a fasting (abstaing from food);
To avoid word confusion with fast (adj, adv rapid, firm, etc.) as in the
phrase hold fast, IRENT instead uses for the noun the word fasting.

*fire
Often used in figuratively e.g. together with immersion-rite (of Yohanan the
Baptizer) with a sense of refining fire. (Mt 3:11 44)
Not to be confused with the expression tongues of flame (> fire) in Act 2:1-4.
Cf. fire of baptism an English idiom, carrying a sense of suffering for a purpose.
immersed with holy Spirit and with fire Lk 3:16
Hooked on fire, hell and brimstone:

the angels will throw the [evil] into the furnace of the fire Mt 13:50
etc. (furnace = fire appositive, rather than fiery flaming blazing)
into eternal fire Mt 18:8;
into the Geh-Hinnom of fire Mt 5:2; 18:9
into the Geh-Hinnom {of fire} Mk 9:47

into Geh-Hinnom, into the fire ~ unquenchable Mk 9:43,

into Geh-Hinnom, {into the fire unquenchable} Mk 9:{45} (phrase);
where ~ the fire ~ unquenchable Mk 9:{44} (verse),{46} (verse),
into Geh-Hinnom, {of the fire} and there ~ fire unquenchable Mk 9:48

rained fire and sulfur Lk 17:29 (Sodom)

He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire Lk 3:17
the one with a mark receved on the forehead or on the hand . will
drink the wine of Gods wrath and tormented with fire and sulfur Rev
14:10
the Lake of burning fire with sulfur Rev 19:20; 21:8
the Lake of fire Rev 20:14, 15
the Lake of fire and sulfur Rev 20:10
But the present heavens and the earth being kept in store by the same
Word, are being kept for fire until the day of judgment and destruction of
ungodly men. 2Pe 3:7

*antichrists; false messiahs

See in BW #3.
*family; *marriage; *fatherhood;

[See WB #3 for *Father as to Elohim in O.T. and N.T.]

Father in human family:

Reading material: Mitch Albom, Dads dont matter? Thats nonsense when
did it bocme so difficult to extol fatherhood (in Chicago Tribune 6/25/2014)
What does a father bring to the table? I can cite a few things I got from my
own: Strength. Quiet confidence.Discipline. Responsibility. And love all
displayed differently than my mother, which was fine. My father also taught us
how to be a husband, how to respect a woman, when to lead and when to
support http://goo.gl/rfWJQ7

husband and wife:

1Tm 3:2; Tit 1:6 man who sticks to his own wife (minas gunaikos andra. Also 1Tm 3:12 minas gunaikos andres (pl).
Not in the sense of only one wife a husband should have or should have had without polygamy
or divorce, but rather it points to one with wife (cf. Gen 2:23).
1Tm 3:2 man who sticks to his own wife (= Tit 1:6; minas gunaikos andra. mias as not
just one by counting, but the one he has one and only] [Also 1Tm 3:12 with plural andres.]
[Cf.
http://tinyurl.com/y27aqz
http://englishbibles.blogspot.com/2006/10/husband-of-onewife.html ]
[Parallel syntax in 1Tm 5:9 minas gunaikos andra, henos andros gun /faithful to his wife;
faithful to her husband TNIV, NEB; /> devoted solely to ~ - NETfn] [NETfn: It is frequently
understood to refer to the marital status of the church leader, excluding from leadership those who
are (1) unmarried, (2) polygamous, (3) divorced, or (4) remarried after being widowed. A
different interpretation is reflected in the NEB's translation "faithful to his one wife."]
[i.e. loyal to his wife and her alone. It has nothing to do with married only once or one has to be
for monogamy.]; /husband of one wife LITV, MKJV; /a husband of one wife, - NWT / 1
/man of one woman kind ARJ; /> one-wife husband; /> a one-wife kind of a man Wuest; 2
/> [the] husband of one wife [or, a one-wife kind of man], - ALT; /the husband of [only] one
wife, - AUV; /the husband of but one wife NIV; /> the husband of one wife most, incl.
KJV++;, (Diagl), (Rhm); /x: must have only one wife GW, GNB, ERV (- against bigamy or
polygamy?); / 3 (no second marriage for a widower?); /x: married only once NRSV; /must be
only married once Mft; /must be married to one wife only, - PNT; / 4 /faithful to his wife
JNT, NIrV, NIV, NLT; /a faithful husband TCNT; /> faithful in marriage CEV;

/committed to his wife MSG; /true to his one wife WNT; /

be subjected to submission; authority of husband;

*Homosexuality

Homosexuality as such is not sin, but it is in sin, just as heterosexuality is.

Humanity itself is in sin (Cf. Gen 19:1-13; Lev 18:22; Rm 1:26-27; 3:23;
1Co 6:9); so is our sexuality. The homosexuals problem is not being
homosexual, but all that they represent to others is manifestation of their
sinfulness like any other pleasure-oriented human behavior their action,
behavior, conduct, lifestyle, agenda, movement, ideology for the pursuit of
power and pleasure with effect on other people and Gods creation order
(life, family, and society) dominated by sexual drive. They decide to be
homosexual when they say have come out of the closet. Heterosexuality is
norm of Gods created order fundamental to human society, family and
culture. A heterosexual person does not decide when he becomes
heterosexual it was already as decided when human beings are created by
God.
1Co 6:9 malakos (effeminate homosexual - IRENT) and arsenokoits
(male homosexual - IRENT). They are often incorrectly and ridiculously
rendered intentionally: [underlined for the unacceptable translation phrases].
E.g. (- offending? offending whom?) (practicing? drilling?)

effeminates and abusers of themselves with mankind KJV;

effeminates and abusers of themselves with man KJV;
male prostitutes and homosexuals LITV, ISV;
male prostitutes and homosexual offenders NIV;
passive homosexual partners and practicing homosexual NET;
men who submit to homosexual acts and men who practice homosexuality NWT;
a pervert or behaves like a homosexual CEV;
homosexual perverts GNB; /
homosexuals and sodomites EMTV;
men who let other men use them for sex or who have sex with other men ERV (technically detailed!);
men who practice homosexuality ESV;
homosexuals GW;
passive homosexual partners, nor dominant homosexual partners LEB;
JSS;
abusers, homosexuals MKJV;

Note: reading by gay proponents of the Greek words very differently (incl. etymological
fallacy and argument from absence) An example of how they are desperate to justify
themselves:
htt://theogeek.blogspot.com/2008/02/homosexuals-shall-not-inherit-kingdom.html
"malakos" which literally means "soft" and is a fairly common Greek word that

depending on context can mean virtually anything... The context of Paul's list is
moral vices and so meanings from definition 3 above are appropriate ones and thus
"lack of self control" seems best. Some people appear to have decided that the word
can mean 'soft' in a sexual sense and thus mean 'effeminate' or 'passive homosexual
partner', which I suppose is possible. There seems no reason to think the context here
merits such a translation though. "arsenokoites" (literally "man-bed") Elsewhere it
is said to be something mainly done by men with men but which can even be done to a
woman In short, Greek usage provides no reason at all to think that the word means
"homosexual". No study I have ever seen has concluded that the word meant
"homosexual" in Greek. In short, I see no reason to think either malakos or
arsenokoites in 1 Cor 6:9 have anything to do with homosexuality whatsoever. Such
translations are simply a result of poor scholarship. simply a gay-agenda driven
venting by an Anglican!
Even the translation of the Bible (e.g. Source NT by Ann Nyland) is altered to suit their
agenda.

*marriage; *divorce; adultery

Marriage is a social contract of tribal construct in human history. Such is what

we have as a civic union whether the ceremony is performed at a place of a
religious institute and whether a priest/pastor presides over it have no bearing
on it. We have a certificate of marriage contract. [Cf. Rm 7:2-3]
How can such a marriage be a binding one for people in the light of the New
Covenant by Yeshua the Mashiah? A legalistic approach reading a Bible
translation literally goes against the spirit of Yeshua as the Lord. As we see
callousness of our hearts, as Mosheh had seen even in the Gods chosen people,
we should not make a blunder by interpreting the Scriptural texts in our own
terms on the issue of marriage and divorce, considering we live now in
different societies of diverse cultures. Even use of the word divorce for a
Bible translation word is anachronistic. (E.g. husband putting his wife away
from his household Mt 19:7 is not equivalent at all to getting divorced in
modern western societies.)
Such is in contrast to marriage covenant, a covenantal union, as the Scripture
has shown from the time of Creation what marriage should be, to be married in
truth. It is not possible to hold a marriage covenant as long as we remain in the
spirit of the world, but, with Gods grace, if we only live in harmony with the
Law, that is, the Way of the Mashiah, in the blessed Kingdom reign of
Elohim. [Cf. Concerning people marrived while there were in darkness before
having come into the Truth.a]

1Co 7:10-16 Because as those not in the TRUTH at the time of marriage we were
not under a covenant, we were under a contract! And all contracts are pierceable. So
as those Now under the covenant but not under the covenant when we married, we are
a

Now the spirit of the world is at its work to pervert the meaning of words we
have used and cherished throughout human life and language. This generation
of the sons of perversion now wants to change the definition of the word
marriage itself to become possessed by the unclean spirit with the purpose of
their life itself grounded on the pursuit of power and pleasure. The word which
is a covenant relation to form a family and to ensure the family of mankind is
changing a mere faade for convenience, cohabitation and copulation, to
satisfy their need of power-pleasure principle.
Related words: betrothal, engagement, wedding, wedding-feast (>> marriage
ceremony), conjugal, marital; romantic love45;
*espouse; engage;

[marrigage of personal and family union, not based on sexual style and
preference in the Bible is not same as marriage concept in the western society.
Betrothal (Heb. Ketubah) is the initial part. Btw two families; with payment
of the dowery she is then set apart (sanctified). Isa 61:10; Jdge 14:10-11; Jer
2:32; Isa 49:18; Psa 45:8-15, - Bridegroom departs from weddingto Fathers
House prepares room addition; bride prepares his imminent return.
https://youtu.be/p20zDOjlRdc at 8:50 time marker (on Jewish wedding).
Docrine of imminency believes are taught to expect the Savior fromheaven
at any moment (Phi 3:20; Tit 2:13; Heb 9:28; 1Th 1:10; 4:18; 5:6; Rev 22:20)
expresses hope and a warm spirit of expectancy (1Th 1:10)]
Mt 1:18 (Gk. mnsteu commit to marriage) given into marriage [arranged
between two families];;
/betrothed, ESV, NASB; /x: espoused - KJV archaic; / () - Ko.;
/xx: engaged most; /x: promised (or pledged) to marry; /xx: () Ko.

It was between two families; there was no custom of dating or engagement

as such. A maiden is given to her husband-to-be and she would move into the
new household after a provisional period (about a year).

not bound to stay but free to marry again as under the covenant when the other party
wants to leave; doing so, we are not committing adultery.

On *sermon

[cf. preaching teaching]

Are Sermons Too Few or Too Many?
Clint Roberts, 2014-05-27
May 27th, 2014 at www.reclaimingthemind.org
Say the word sermon and the average person doesnt get too thrilled. In fact for a lot of
people the word is only used as a pejorative (as in, You can spare me the sermon, OK?).
But consider the sermon in its true sense the message or homily or whatever you choose to
call that which is taught aloud on a regular basis to a corporate church gathering. Its not a
popular word, and its not a popular concept. Maybe thats not entirely bad. If it were, then
by now wed have had to witness a nauseating reality show competition in which young
preachers go one at a time & America texts in its vote for the best sermon.
But to the degree that the sermon has a bad rap, whose fault is it? The sermon is one thing
that is definitely not in short supply. America in particular is a land of 10,000 sermons, in
just about any given week, and with a vast array of differences between them. A 72 hour trip
around the internet would show you an endless matrix of church and other websites with all
the sermons you could sample in every bit of free time you have. If I were Dr. Seuss my title
for this would be Oh the Sermons Youll Hear.
While a number of people in the present secularized society have only heard snippets of
sermons, or have only a distant memory of sermons they heard as children, those with
particular interest in the thinking and doing of churches realize that there are more species of
sermon than of insect living in your backyard. Below is my own catalog of many (maybe
most?) of the different kinds or types of sermons preached on a regular basis somewhere not
too far from any of us. It is a homiletical parade of the good, the bad, and the ugly. As you
move down the list you will see that I begin with more standard fare but then later I get to
some of the more bizarre and even obnoxious kinds of sermons, where I include some links
to examples that you will find entertaining and/or disturbing.
On to the Carnival of Sermons
The Expository Sermon: Verse-by-Verse
I begin with the ancient standard, the time honored, the historically preeminent, and the
unfortunately not nearly as popular as it once was: verse-by-verse exposition. It is still the
sermon of choice for a great many of the most serious and devout. Its a harder sell, though,
for the masses today, since it demands more of the listener, moves more slowly and
carefully, seeming to the short attention spans of today like a boring and tedious study of
words and ideas that requires too much detailed concentration on the text and its meaning.
The Expository Sermon: Passages & Narratives
Not every expository sermon is necessarily of the verse-by-verse variety, so I thought this
deserving of its own category. Sermons can still be very text-based but with a wider view.
Some of the books within the book do not lend themselves as much to verse-by-verse, like
Old Testament narratives, wisdom literature and exotic apocalyptic visions. Much as in the
case of the difference between literal word-for-word translations vs. thought for thought
(dynamic equivalence) translations, sometimes an exegesis and exposition that is not
merely one-word-at-a-time (or even one-verse-at-a-time) is more appropriate and effective in
communication of what is in those words (and verses).

The Theological / Doctrinal Sermon

Sure to shrink a crowd these days, sermons of this kind would hardly even be understood by
a lot of modern church-goers. The language would at best seem vaguely familiar while
arcane, and at worst completely foreign. A friend of mine said he once used the word
supralapsarian in a sermon on salvation and the Fall, and afterward someone asked him,
What was that super-cali-fragilistic thing you talked about? The fact is youll be hard
pressed to hear a sermon that even includes much overt theology, let alone one that
emphasizes or prioritizes it.
The Apologetics Sermon
For this sermon type the Christmas message would likely be on the historical existence of
Jesus and maybe astronomical proof of the appearance of the star. At Easter it would be a
defense of the resurrection. Often philosophical, regularly featuring evidences for Christian
beliefs, and naturally emphasizing arguments in contemporary debates like creation &
design over blind evolution, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family, etc. For this kind
of sermon defending the truth is paramount and arming or equipping people is the goal.
The Current Issues Sermon
Some preachers keep up with everything going on and make it the theme of or at least the
launching point of their sermons. Consider how many sermons included a reference to or
take-off on Y2K on the last Sunday of the year 1999. This could be broad enough to
encompass news, politics, social events, trends, entertainment, etc. In the old days the adage
was about having the Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other, but todays
equivalent would have to include several other types of media carrying the significant news
and topics of the moment.
The Therapeutic Sermon
We used to call it self help and before that felt needs, but the focus is on the common
everyday problems of people and offering solutions for them, given with an energetic
encouragement that these problems can and will be solved. Some refer to the message as the
Gospel of Self-Esteem. As popular now as perhaps ever (Osteen isnt hurting for members
any more than Oprah is hurting for viewers), the appeal of the message is its practical value
to help bring you relief, to help resolve your relationship problems, to give your stressed and
troubled psyche some healing, maybe even give you some wisdom and advice to assist your
financial woes. This phenomenon can be seen as the Christian version of what is in the wider
culture of endless life-coaches offering strategies and products. With a nod back to Norman
Vincent Peales positive thinking and Robert Schullers possibility living, these sermons
key on those Bible verses that will provide the recipe to make the Chicken Soup for your
Soul. They are practical, and usually given with lots of you can do it kind of
encouragement. Part pep-talk and part promise that God will help, heal, restore, etc., for so
many people in our society with so many issues, these sermons command attention. Their
popularity is the reason so many people continue to baffle me by pointing to teachers like
Joyce Meyer as their main spiritual guides in life (her teaching also includes a jolt of
prosperity teaching see below).
The Charismatic Sermon
Outsiders consider these the most entertaining, and the extreme version mostly a
stereotype might include snake handling and people jumping out of their wheelchairs after
getting Holy-Ghost slapped on the head. This kind of sermon often displays very little
substance and sometimes even a dose of heresy, or at least some weird ideas made up on the
spot during the preachers rant (especially if its being revealed on the spot see the Free
Association sermon on this list). Usually the preacher roams, yells and sweats, but not
always. He (or she, since in this case it might sometimes be a woman) may break into
tongues now and again, and will almost certainly call for plenty of amens and hallelujahs
along the way. The level of charisma is a spectrum (mild to extreme) and can be relative to
peoples experience. Some people think a raised or clapping hand makes a church

charismatic, while those who have spent hours in the throes of Toronto blessing type
pandemonium will probably have a much higher standard for what counts as charismatic.
This category can be confusing since charismatic can refer either to the theology of the
sermon or the style in which it is delivered. Not all Holy Ghost hollerin is theologically
*charismatic, and not all of those who hold to charismatic doctrine jump, sweat and dance
down the aisles.
The Prosperity Sermon
The much discussed and (rightly) maligned sermon that proffers the Prosperity Gospel is
its own category. Dont fuse or blend it with the traditional charismatic sermon, because
they are distinct. While most who preach it happen also to advocate a charismatic emphasis
on miracles and gifts, along with a style that fits charismatic worship, not everyone does.
Once again, Osteen sometimes teaches something of a soft version of this in his own unique
way, and his is not in the traditional charismatic stylings. What really sets this sermon apart
is its clear focus on health and wealth as we sometimes say. Unfortunately this is the kind
of sermon that so many around the world have heard as their example of Christian
preaching, thanks to the reach of television stretching back a few decades to when those
advocating this began to make use of that medium. Televangelists have found that this
sermon has cash value, and since the message itself justifies and encourages wealth, they
have gone hog wild. For many years people with cable have been subject to witnessing this
kind of message as they channel surf. Sometimes it is more of a pitch than a sermon, filmed
not in front of a congregation but in a small infomercial studio. It includes all sorts of bizarre
gimmicks (see Peter Popoffs Miracle Manna as an example). By now everyone knows
this twisted heresy about speaking increase into your life, sowing seeds of faith, reaping
harvests and hundred-fold returns all specifically financial references, of course. Your
faith is a spiritual power wielded through the instrument of your tongue to unlock riches and
perfect health, forcing Gods hand in a sense, making him bend the metaphysical elements
with your very words so that they yield what you want in this life. It is the Christianized
version of what the larger pop-spiritual world has seen in books like The Secret.
The Anecdotal Sermon
You may wonder why this is its own kind of sermon, but Ive heard enough of them through
the years that I think it deserves its own title. While most sermons may include anecdotes
little stories told about this or that, often personal accounts this is a sermon that features
one or more of them as the main course. Often those speaking to youth groups do this. A
personal story grabs and keeps attention, so it may help hold short attention spans. But Ive
heard effective speakers also use lots of anecdotes such that the stories, taken all together,
end up comprising a large portion of the entire message. The stories are compelling and
often begin with lines like, I was traveling on a plane recently and sat next to a man who
If it is a well-travelled popular preacher he may tell a lot of stories about that itself, as
in, Recently I was speaking to a large group in a city I will not name, and afterwards a
woman came up to me
The General Spirituality Sermon
In many of the more theologically liberal churches, often representing some of the old
mainline denominations, you hear sermons that could easily be given at a social gathering of
any kind. We can call it general spirituality or even borrow the term that sociologist
Christian Smith coined to describe the diluted semi-Christian belief system of so many
American teenagers: moralistic therapeutic deism. These sermons are least likely to offend
any of the members of a diverse audience. They are ecumenically friendly (non-sectarian
as they might like to say) by keeping things so broad that most Catholic, Orthodox or
Protestant people could mostly agree with what is being said. For that matter, many
Muslims, Mormons and Buddhists could agree with much of it too. They tend not to inspire
all that much in the hearers, who are most likely to compliment such sermons with things
like What a lovely message and That was very nice.

The Academic Sermon

A statistical anomaly, this kind of sermon still gets preached in a few places. It is a now
unpopular style that was once heard in certain denominations, the sermon sounding a lot like
a lecture. It is a well-researched sermon, with lots of preparation. It has solid content, a diet
of meat without a lot of empty carbs. You might get extensive word etymologies, exquisite
historical detail, robust background, and probably good quotations from ancient sources,
modern scholars and maybe Shakespeare now and again. The only problem is most people
today cant hang with something like this for more than 4 minutes. It is subject to the charge
of being elitist, ivory-tower theology. I remember after a sermon I once preached in my
younger days a nice man said to me afterwards, You do know this isnt a seminary class,
right?
The Prophetic or Apocalyptic Sermon
Very much like the Current Events Sermon already described, only with a determined
dedication to interpreting the end times. Often camping out in the more difficult prophetic or
apocalyptic writings that other preachers tend to avoid (e.g., Ezekiels wheel in the sky, John
the Revelators seven bowls of judgment, etc.), but also quite adept at finding prophetic
threads in everything from proverbs to hymns to parables, it is from among the ranks of
these preachers that embarrassing headline-grabbing rapture predictions usually originate.
They keep a finger in the Book of Daniel and an eye on the always tumultuous events in the
Middle East. If you want to be especially effective at this kind of sermon, you have to learn
to pronounce Israel as Izrul John Hagee-style, and refer to it at least 50 times per sermon.
The Spontaneous Free-Association Sermon
Nearly every sort of sermon involves some level of planning and preparation. At the very
least there will likely be a main point or points; some will use notes, some may even write
out a full manuscript. But there is a special kind of sermon that dispenses will all of this.
Maybe youve heard one. It is a stream-of-consciousness meandering or letting the Spirit
lead journey with the destination unknown even to the speaker. A typical candidate for this
is either a very old, experienced long-tenured preacher who is perfectly comfortable just
talkin to his people from the pulpit every week; or it is a certain kind of charismatic
preacher who lets the Spirit give him the utterance on the spot. I have heard preachers like
this read a text and then just walk around for the next 25 minutes making it up as they go,
none of it having much to do with the text, the sermon itself not really having an aim or a
point. But whether hes speaking directly from his heart or talking directly out of his
[something else], in my experience there is rarely much benefit to the hearer outside of some
mild amusement and, depending on the natural gifts of the speaker, a level of entertainment.
At its very worst it can seem almost like gibberish (as exemplified in this really bad lip
reading gag).
The Giving a Speech Sermon
The direct opposite of free-association is a carefully written script. We are all familiar with
this style of public reading due to political speeches and papers read at academic
conferences. But it can be a style of preaching and a kind of sermon as well. The words have
been carefully chosen, and most often the delivery is not terribly enthusiastic or exciting,
especially by preaching standards. This is another sermon type that was once more common
but today would likely be found only in a small number of high church environments. Ive
heard Roman Catholic priests give homilies that are basically short speeches they are
reading. One interesting note on this style: it is the preferred way of the big shots who lead
the massive LDS Church (the Mormons). When I lived in their shadow I would watch some
of their semi-annual meetings viewed by millions of their members around the world. There
in the enormous conference center their leading apostles would give talks (sermons), which
amounted to mostly soft monotone reading off a teleprompter of words painstakingly crafted
with help from what amounts to speechwriters (Here is the current Mormon
prophet/president from the most recent conference). If you are ever tempted to think your
churchs sermons are boring, just be glad youre not a Mormon.

The Stand-Up Comedy Sermon

Humor is always effective if the speaker is effective with it. People who speak to young
audiences can force it too much, of course. Ive heard preachers who are not naturally
inclined toward it decide to try a stand-up act in front of a room full of teenagers hoping it
will bridge the gap. This is dangerous. Now Ill admit that when someone has the chops for
it (good timing and all), I enjoy plenty o comedy on the part of the speaker. Im even
critical of some preachers who I think are really good but seem to have no sense of humor
whatsoever. But on the other hand, when an attempt at humor bombs it can have a backfiring
effect on the whole sermon. And of course if the message is to have a meaningful point,
there should be at least part of it that is not evoking laughs. There are wrong reasons for a
sermon to be funny, as we all know. And there are wrong methods for getting a crowd to
laugh, as the once infamous holy laughter phenomenon demonstrated. If people are going
to roll in the aisles, Id rather it be because theyre hearing something like this.
The Screamfest
And speaking of comedy, outsiders always get a special kick out of preachers who yell most
or all of their sermons, making such sermons unique in and of themselves. Many preachers
will raise their voices in certain places, but the screamers start belting it out the moment they
open their mouths and keep it a maximum volume until the last amen. While some will be
tempted to see this as mostly within black churches, it is actually found among preachers of
all backgrounds and types. Ive seen screamers in white collars and screamers in T-shirts.
They can be young or old. All thats needed is a good set of pipes and lung capacity. These
guys (and sometimes women too) can shred their vocal cords nightly & never lose their
voices. In a few cases the hollerin is not in fact every word but certain words like the way
this guy always yells the word GOD. When you see a news story or youtube forward
about an amazing boy preacher, the primary talent that the kid has developed is yelling in
the preaching cadence he has heard along with the gestures he has seen. Its so easy a child
can do it.
The Evangelistic Sermon
With the exception of televised prosperity preaching, more people outside the church walls
have heard this kind of sermon than any other, thanks largely to long time traveling
evangelistic preachers like Billy Graham. Back in the periods of Great Awakening in 18th
Century Europe & America, men like John Wesley, George Whitefield and later Charles
Finney travelled widely and preached to countless hordes of people in the open air. This
sermon does not merely include the basic Christian Gospel message, it preaches only this
message. That is, however it gets to it, it gets there fast. The text might be on anything from
Moses showdown with Pharaoh to Pauls instructions about elders, but the sermon will
really be the same thing each time: the sacrificially atoning death of Jesus for sin and his
resurrection, combined with the call to accept this as the basis for being made right with God
and becoming a follower of Christ, over against the warning of rejecting all of this at your
eternal peril. You could accuse evangelistic sermonizers of being one trick ponies but
unlike other single-issue preachers (whose only topic may be abortion or the modern state of
Israel or gay marriage), this is far more justifiable as a single issue, since it is the
theologically central and foundational message of the entire Christian system of belief.
Obviously missionaries in very un-Christianized places preach mostly these sermons, since
it is the heart of Christianity. It is the starting place and entry into the rest of what it means to
believe and live like a Christian. Since the aforementioned Awakenings these sermons
have most often ended with alter calls or invitations to public confession (or counseling,
prayer, etc.). The only downside for a congregation that hears only these sermons each
week and counts on the preaching alone to comprise their spiritual training is that they will
remain biblical and theological infants for life.
The Hipster Sermon
This would involve elements from some of the other kinds like comedy, contemporary

references to current events & entertainment, practical self-help advice but it would be
packaged better. The preacher is likely on the younger side, exuding the vibes of coolness.
His look is good, his dress is perfectly within the styleguide of this weeks fashions. He has
easy stage presence and connects well with the audience. And his physical surroundings no
doubt match up & help create the hipster atmosphere. Theres a good chance the church is a
fairly new plant. The very traditional church goer may even be inherently suspicious of
the level of cool permeating the experience. Youll probably hear the slang that is the native
tongue of 18 year-olds but a foreign dialect to people over 35. Its not likely there will be
depth or length to the message but it is not impossible. This sermonizer knows that attention
spans are short. He also knows how to use media to enhance the message in powerful ways.
Of course no style of church is so hip that it cant be parodied just like the rest on this list.
We at least have to laud this sermons appeal to outsiders and seekers. They will likely
listen, comprehend and engage with it. Hopefully its more than fluff and show.
The Right Wing Political Sermon
Since the modern era of the moral majority that came and went when I was too young to
understand it, there has been a regular diet of preaching the politically conservative gospel in
many socially and politically right wing circles. What started then has rolled on through
several phases, especially as the political polarization overall has increased. This kind of
sermon would provide a weekly update on the biggest issues that conservative Republicans
are addressing. No need to Tevo your favorite Fox News shows just go to church. Sermons
are most likely to focus on moral and social debates abortion, gay marriage, large vs. small
government, threats to religious freedom, the sound bytes surrounding whatever specific
thing is being fought over this week. This kind of sermon is also typically very patriotic
draped in the flag as they say.
The Left Wing Political Sermon
Political sermons arent just from the right. There exist more socially liberal congregations
regularly treated to sermons that are every bit as political in nature, only coming from the
opposite wing. An observer once described Obamas Chicago pastor Rev. Wright as the
liberal Falwell. I remember how on my commute I used to hear regular AM radio
broadcasts of a downtown mainline OKC church whose minister preached these kinds of
sermons. His voice was more measured and soft-spoken, but every message made the point
about how Bush & the evil Republicans (this was some years ago) were the Pharisees. They,
after all, talk about being religious, he would say, but it is mere hypocrisy, since they exploit
the poor, launch wars, are arrogant, & think they are better than others for racial reasons
(just like the Jewish elitists in the Gospels). This was his basic weekly sermon. Of course a
less extreme version of this can be seen in what some call today the Christian Left or Red
Letter Christians (since they emphasize the teachings of Jesus primarily). Some of it is a
reactionary movement by those rejecting the religious right of their upbringing. Others
simply wed Christian morality to social & political causes that they feel the political left
represent (income inequality, etc.).
So Which is the Right One?
Its not so easy to specify one of these to the exclusion of elements of all the others. Some of
what is represented in these descriptions should clearly be avoided. There should not be
rambling idiocy, manipulation, lame attempts at comedy, twisted theology, etc. But then
some of the other features in these different descriptions are vitally important. The text
should be handled well, studied with some depth, and taught at a level above 4th grade
Sunday School. This should quite naturally involve background, history, logical
connections, and theological/doctrinal truths as they appear.
I think some truths will be important enough to camp out on and defend (good arguments
made for them), hence some apologetics. In certain places there will be obvious connections
to current events as well as practical applications to lifes numerous questions and
challenges. Comedy is golden when used well, just like analogies and anecdotes are fabulous
tools in the hands of an effective communicator. And of course the central Christian Gospel

message is the theological True North that maintains the overall philosophical perspective
throughout.
Thats my take on it, anyway. You may disagree. You may argue that there are still too few
sermons, and that any sort of sermon is better than no sermon (or a lack of sermons). You
may think of kinds of sermons that I left off the list or important components of a good
sermon that I failed to emphasize in the preceding paragraph. If so your comments are
welcome. Now Ill conclude by saying Amen and allow you to sing your own benediction.

A comment: Not small number of sermons (written or broadcast) are easily found to be
frivolous, superficial, surplus, and irrevant to the Scriptural message. Some are given as an
entertainment with showmanship, or given to peddle the Bible, Jesus, Spirit and God to
collect money. Some are even satanic (i.e. contrary to Gods will and Scriptural teaching).
Everyone is born a sucker and some are willing to or sold to be.

How can we say, God is a person? God has a son? only begotten?
[What does it mean that someone IS a son? [See on the fundamental linguistic and
literary problem of the word IS See the file The nefarious IS in the Collections #1
for the Supplement III of IRENT.
If A is not B, that A is B is acceptable only (1) if the predicate is in ellipsis and
understood, and (2) it is meant to say A is as B. Animals are not man, but we can say
animals are as man, though the statement need to go on for further elaboration.
Does it make any sense to say God has a son, aside from mythological gods?
Linguistically at least, the Muslims sensitivity is quite understandable when they ask
how God can have a son.
When we say God is Father, it does not mean at all God is like a biological father in
a family and has a son even if the son is only. Most High Elohim relates to us as
Father as His Mashiah has revealed to us; not that He is Father.
Son of God does not mean that a son was born (begotten generated) of God. [See
elsewhere in this file that God is not a person Elohim is not a God] Even if the son
is said to be only one, it is correct to say that God does not have a son or God is
not a father. [See elsewhere also in BW #3 for Does God have a Son?] Various
literary divices of personification, figure of speech, and rhetoric, extensive
anthropomorphic language are seen employed in the Scripture. This forces the
translators to deal with difficulties for trans-cultural and translinguistic transfer.a For
the same reason, rendering the Greek monogens (only begotten KJV) as of the
only begotten Son should be scrutinized.
Mt 5: 9 Gods sons (hUOI QEOU - anarthrous) not confused with the expression the Son of
Elohim (>> the Son sof God), a title for the Mashiah in NT. [The phrase son(s) of~ is a Hebraic
idom to describe such charcter as befitting and belonging to ~. Cf. English word qua in the
character/capacity/role of; /
.]
[cf. Mt 27:54 //Mk 15:39 a gods son (vs. //Lk 23:47 a righteous one)]; /sons of God most,
NWT; /x: children of KJV, TNIV totally different concept.
Gk. *monogens (adj.) See Appendix for Jn 1.8 monogens theos
1. monos (sole, single; only; alone, by themselves)
2. ginomai (cause to be; generate; become) [not genna]
The word has been variously translated. /only - ESV, WNT, GNB, BBE, CEV, ERV; /one and
only NET, LEB; /xxx: unique - ISV; /only begotten KJV, DRB, EMTV, Geneva, Bishops;
/only-begotten NWT, Webster, Darby, MKJV; /only brought-forth ISR; /xx: only born
ABP;

It is one of issues which confront translation work of the Scripture into Arabic, in addition to
use of the Arabic word Allah for God.

(1) only begotten begotten is from male principle. The verb begeta is a typical KJV
English; now obsolete. The phrase only begotten is an anachronistic biblical jargon. What
does it mean to say God fathers someone in the divine realm, even with Trinity God? It is
an example par excellence of anthromorphism b , which may suffice much inadequate
Triniatarian idea of what and who God is. The word begetting brings up an imagery similar
to mythological gods which are generated from a supreme god from a goddess. [Identifying
the Logos as a god (that is, a mighty God below the Almighty God, Jehovah) in Jn 1:1 in
NWT is similar to this.]
(2) only treated same as the word monos, not much different from one and only
(emphatically only one?). It may be quite acceptable as a translation word when it means no
more than one and only child in a family e.g. Used substantively Lk 7:12 (a son); Lk 8:42
(a daughter); 9: 38 (a son), Heb 11:17 (the only son Yitshaq >Isaac). Not adequate for the
dynamic relationship (not just unity) the Son, the Logos of Elohim, and the Father, Most
High Elohim.
(3) /xx: unique; /xxx: uniquely born; /xx: uniquely begotten (Is it something of
uniqueness of the Son? What nuance of unique in Father and Son relationality?).
(4) only brought-forth (one) referring to Yeshua being the Son of Elohim. It is devoid of
non-Scriptural imagery inherent in such expressions (of born, begotten, generated)
contrary to dynamic relationality of YHWH Elohim and Yeshua the Mashiah in the
Scripture. It resonates with the phrase sent forth one into the world (Jn 3:17). Hardly can be
found an idea of adoption (human legalistic concept) to put on Elohim-Yeshua relation of
meeting divinity and humanity.
Jn 1:18 v.l. the only brought-forth Son [See further on the issue of textual
variants: the only begotten Son KJV; vs. the only begotten god - NWT]
Jn 3:16 His only brought-forth Son (his only begotten Son KJV)
Jn 3:18 the only brought-forth Son of Elohim);
1Jn 4:9 His only brought-forth Son).
[Also anarthous example Jn 1:14 (a fathers only brought-forth son)]
is begotten (KJV) in reference to Yeshua:

Act 13:33; Heb_5:5 (cf. 1:4) son I have begotten today

Jn 1:14 the only begotten of the Father,
Jn 1:18 the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,
Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,
Jn 3:18 not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Cf. Isaac for Abraham - Heb_11:17)
Act 13:33 have brought you forth /have revealed me to be father to you ARJ; /have
declared to be father to you ARJ; /have declared your sonship - S. H. Bess (- vide infra
for PDF) (=Heb 1:5; 5:5 from Ps 2:7)[declaring who He is the Son of God, not
making/adopting Him as a son same issue with the phrase Gods Son (both
be begotten (from Gk ginomai) (as from male principle, in contrast to be born as from female
principle). Not to be confused with a similar verb genna. The related verb is consistently
a

rendered in IRENT as bring forth instead of beget. E.g. Jn 3:9; 1Jn 4:9; 5:1, 18; Act
13:33; 1Co 4:15; Phm 1:10; Heb 1:5; 5:5; Rev 1:5. In Mt 1:2ff (/x: became father to
NWT; /x: was the father of). [Cf. anagenna 1Pe 1:3 regenerate; /x: born again]
Anthromophism to make God easy to put into ones theological frame of mind, God which human
can understand. There is a danger of slippery slope into images of a God of three-faced head; a
b

God of three-headed person - from three Gods for one Godhead; and finally into believing
God whose name is Jesus, and even Jesus = Yahweh.

anarthrous) in Mk 1:1 v.l.]; /have fathered - NET; /have begotten ALT, NASB, ESV,

REB, KJV+, NKJV, NAB; /??: have become your Father Cass, HCSB, NWT, JNT, NIV
trio, GW, CEV, ISV, Mft, NLT, WNT, AUV, TNT; /have brought you forth ISR; /?: have
given you being BBE; /?: My Son! My very own Son! Today I celebrate you! MSG!;

/[REC fn: His second birth at resurrection ]; [QQ Christologic concern at resurrection (Rm
1:4), rather than at incarnation (Lk 1:32). What was the context in Ps?]
[ http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/23aProphets/Text/Articles/Bess-SonOfGod-GTJ.pdf
p. 22 I have declared thy sonship. The word translated as begotten does not refer to
generation. As a translation word in reference to Yeshua, it brings unintended sense of beingborn akin to biological. Hence the un-biblical concepts of God the Son, His Son became
man, God-man, etc. (Act 13:33-34 refers it not to the incarnation, but to the resurrection of
Christ.)]

www.crosswalk.com/faith/bible-study/why-john-3-16-must-be-more-than-aslogan.html This intentional plan was the way God chose to love the world. To
let His Son become a man and die on the cross as an atoning sacrifice for all human
sin. Jesus carried in His body the sin of every human who ever had or would live, so
all who believe in Him could receive forgiveness, mercy and redemption ]
Yeshua was with his people as the Son of Elohim. Not God the Son became a
man Jesus.

*Atheism

Atheism (with an accent on A): not that they believe there is no god (
), but they do not acknowledge that they believe a god, for to deny a
god one has to know that god, but they know not about. However, the fact is,
they believe one god, their sacred self. Not believing no god, but not
believing in a god and for that matter dont care about all aside from the
question of what and who God is. It is different from anti-theism (belief and
ideology to stand against any God of others confessed).
twitter@rzimcanada Fascinating deconstruction of the "New Atheism" by Theodore
Dalyrymple ... at http://ow.ly/tXHd6 www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_oh_to_be.html
twitter@ounbbl Atheists do believe God. Just in different name, My Sacred Self.

*wing
The Hebrew word for WINGS is phonetically pronounced knf'. It means:
wing, extremity (like wings curtain wings of a stage), edge, winged, border,
corner, shirt, skirt, corner (of garment). Wings are actually a part of a garment
which goes from the arm to the garment itself! So that when the arms are
extended the wings appear or spread. The worldly and religious are responsible
for this fictional projection of image, esp. from medieval church traditions. The
word translated as angels are divine messengers, which appear in human
form, not as wingled angelic figures.

kherubim (> cherubim with a wrong image of cherub) - four-winged.

Sheraphim six wings.
*angels; *archangel
Angels galore! There are only two named 'angels' in the Bible (OT and NT) - Gabriel
(4x Dan 8:16; 9:21; Lk 1:19, 26) and Michael (- 5x Dan 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 1:9
(Michael the archangel); Rev 12:7 (Michael and his angels). [They are
traditionally labelled as archangel, but not in the Bible. The word archangel
(chief angel) by itself appears only once in the Bible (1Th 4:16) an archangels
shouting]. (Michael in Hebrew meaning who is like God. Cf. Isa 14:14 to be like
the Most High) [Cf. people named Michael in O.T. 10x] Ref.
www.whyangels.com/archangels_michael_gabriel.html
Cf. angel of YHWH a Hebraic phrase is used in IRENT, in place of the usual
angel of the Lord (LORD).
Jesus as Gods messenger (Gods agent) God has sent him on a mission
Jesus as an angel Cf. Jesus is an angel Jesus was Michael
*non-biblical angel Christology
*problem of the meaning, sense, and usage of the word angel other than of a
messenger.
(1) Jehovahs Witnesses; (Michael is Jesus)
(2) Spurgeon www.spurgeongems.org/vols13-15/chs842.pdf - [Sermon #842 The
Angelic Life] Michael is the Lord Jesus (p. 7).
(3) Matthew Henry Commentary
(4) some early Church Fathers
Ref www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/book/e/85/t/who-is-michael-thearchangel
http://earlychurch.org.uk/pdf/angel_juncker.pdf Christ as Angel
[Christ was always the Logos, the Messenger, and Revealer of the Father. we
should not say For John Christ was also God, which is a Trinitarian expression
with God applied to the Mashiah without clear meaning and usage of the word]

[Cf. non-canonical Jewish Gabriel, Michael, Raphael, Uriel, Raguel, Remiel and
Saraqael. Named angels in Jewish tradition, in Catholic tradition, and in Islamic
tradition.]

Many put Satan, Abaddon/Apollyon, Beelzebul/Beelzebub, (as appeared in N.T.) into

the category of angel - the names of 'angels', fallen angels. These are not 'names' but
'descriptors'. ['demons' are also fallen angels?]
Is an angel a person? What sort of person, if not human person? Divine person?
Spiritual person? Angelic person? What about fallen angels? What do we mean by
person? Having personhood (a legal term) or personality (a psychological term)? An
angel is not a person; then so what? How is it diffentiated from personification of
non-persons?
angels are not angels dependent on the context:
(1) Gods divine messenger in Gospels Acts, and Pauline epistles;
(2) fallen angels 2Pe 2:4; Jud 1:6;
(3) messenger of divine message Rev 1:31; 2:1- 3:14; and
(4) agents, of the Dragon Rev 12:7; of Satan 2Co 12:7.

*Shabbat; *sabbath; *Pesach (Passover) See BW #4.

On covenant
Meaning of the words (brit, chadash, renewed covenant) and Scriptural basis
of understanding the Covenannt:
New Covenant < Renewed Covenant in Mashiah
Brit Chadasha in Hebrew Jer 31:31.
H Kaine Diathk in Greek Lk 22:20; 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6; Heb 8:8; 9:15; 12:24;
[Cf. Heb 8:13]

Brit (cutting): cutting was part of the establishment of a covenant an

agreement between two individuals or parties. A great example of this covenant
cutting is seen as it takes place between Avraham and YHWH (Gen 15) when
the sacrifice was literally cut in half as YHWH passed between the cuttings.
[Judaic custom of brit milah (circumcision-rite) is performed when a Hebrew
child is 8 days old and he joins in the covenant made with Avraham.
This is where we get the term "cutting a deal". So, covenant is a good translation
of the word brit.
Chadasha doesnt it mean new? Well, not exactly. The word new is
fixatedly used as fixated by those who teach so-called Replacement Theology.
That is, The CHURCH has now replaced ISRAEL under the so called New
Covenant.

The word Chadasha (Chet-Dalet-Shin-Hey) and Chodesh (Kuf-Chet-Dalet-Shin)

share the same root word Chadash which means to make new or more
accurately to renew.
The Israelite people were told to celebrate/observe and keep the Rosh Chodesh.
It is translated as New Moon, but that is not the literal translation of these two
words. Rosh means beginning, but it also means head. This can be head as in
the first like Rosh Hashanah.
So "Rosh Chodesh" literally means Head of the Renewed. You see its not a
New moon You can tell just by looking at it with its craters that its the same
moon that has been there since YHWH created it as our celestial calendar (thats
where we get the word Month from -moonth). So, its the same moon, only its
light is renewed every month.
Furthemore the word new when used elsewhere in the New Testament does not
mean new as in never happened or never existed previously. Take, for
example, the Mashiahs teaching of the NEW commandment to love one another.
That commandment does not mean that all of the other previous commandments
of YHWH are now made obsolete or growing old and ready to disappear.
As the Apostle John teaches later, loving one another is really an old
commandment (Lev 19:18) as is the commandment to love your Elohim with all
your heart (Deu 6:5). Neither one of these commandments was new with the
coming of Messiah but because they had not been obeyed, they seemed NEW to
the brethren. In actuality, they too were being renewed.
Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old
commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment
is the word which you have heard. On the other hand, I am writing a new
commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is
passing away, and the true light is already shining. (1Jn 2:7-8)
The word we translate new means renewed or made fresh again. As previously
stated, the new moon is not a completely new heavenly body; it is the same
moon on a new cycle. This is the meaning of chadasha used by Jeremiah in
prophesying the New Covenant.
So, the New Covenant isnt something new as the Church would have people
believe. No, YHWH is renewing His covenant with us. The meaning of the
New Covenant can become clear only from within the Torah of TaNaKh (not Old
Testament), not from within the New Testament itself.
So going to the Ketuvim Netzarim (NT in Hebrew) the RENEWED Covenant
mentioned first by Messiah is in Lk 22:20.
And the cup in like manner after supper, saying,
This cup is the renewed covenant in my blood,
even that which is poured out for you

Did Messiah really say renewed here? Most English Bibles simply translates as
new (for which Greek word is neos). The Gospel writer used Gk word kainos to
translate the word Yeshua uttered in his language. [See below for *renewed vs.
new.]
The concept of renewed was well established in the TaNaKh, so we know that
when Messiah said these words (in Hebrew) His Talmidim (disciples) knew
exactly what He was making reference to. Nobody asks a single question this night
because these Hebrew men know about the Renewed Covenant that YHWH
promises in the TaNaKh. Only because of the conventional English translations,
we are led into poor understanding of what the Scripture says. As for those who
followed the Mashiah had heard from was only TaNaKh, not our New Testament.
Moreover, the Gospels themselves do not belong to the N.T. Dispensation, which
was ushered only after the coming of Gods spirit poured on during the Shavuot
(again, not Christian Pentecost) in Acts Ch. 2.
No place in the New Testament do we get an explanation as to WHAT the
Renewed Covenant actually is which is why Christians have ten thousand ideas
as to WHAT it is. The NT authors themselves presuppose that we understand the
concept by having studied the Torah and the Prophets. From the New Testament
we only see how it is accomplished and how it is mediated. Importantly it should
be understood that Torah does NOT mean Law. Torah is YHWHs Instructions
in the way of life in His Righteousness.
In the Torah we see the first mention of the Renewal of this coveanant. No,
we wont be going to Jeremiah just yet. Why? Because the RENEWAL of the
coveanant will first be foreshadowed at Sinai.
As you know, YHWH gave Mosheh the Covenant on tablets of stone at Sinai
but what most people miss is that YHWH provides the stone tablets on
which He (YHWH) write His Commandments with His own finger. Ok, so why
does it matter that YHWH provided the stones AND wrote on them?

In Exo 32:20 Mosheh destroy the golden calf and turn it to dust.
Mosheh then mixed the dust in water and made the children of Israel
drink it. Why? I believe this is yet another foreshadowing of The
Cup that Messiah would drink in our stead.
In Exodus 34:1 YHWH tells Mosheh:
Hew you two tables of stone like to the first: and I will write on these
tables the words that were in the first tables, which you broke
Jeremiah and Ezekiel to see exactly what this renewed covenant is all
about.

Jeremiah 31:31-40.
Now to focus on a few essential issues. First, this is a Brit Chadasha
literally a Renewed cutting or Renewed Covenant. Its not something
COMPLETELY different. We know this is the Renewed Covenant that
Messiah speaks of for so many reasons. Primarliy because its the only
Renewed Covenant promised in the TaNaKh. Yes, it is promised in
Ezekiel as well, but its the same promise (we will go there in a few
minutes). But the other reason we know this is the Renewed Covenant
spoken of in the New Testament is because Paul quotes this very
passage in Hebrews 8. (2nd Corinthians 3).
Heb 8:13
In His saying renewed, [8:8]
He has shown the former one as grown old.
Now what grows old and become aged is on its way of getting
out of the scene [to make room for the Renewed Covenant usher in].
What Ezekiel has to say about this renewal - Ezk 36:22-38
A new heart also will I give you, and a new Spirit will I put
within you: and I will take away the heart of stone out of your
flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My
Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye
shall keep my judgments, and do them.
He writes our names in His book, and His Torah on our hearts Thats
New Covenant!!
how can I know I am saved? Well, if they knew the Torah, they could
read 1Jn 3:34 and KNOW if they are saved:
Now he who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in
him. And by this we know that He abides in us, by the Spirit
whom He has given us.
Wow, John just nailed it he echoes the very words of both Jeremiah
and Ezekiel!! There is your "New Testament" confirmation of what was
established in the Torah.
For this is the love of Elohim, that we keep His commandments: and
His commandments are not a burden 1Jn 5:3.
Torah was given (a gift) so that we would know how to live a life of
righteousness, and a life that is pleasing to our Creator and Savior. We
cant walk with Him, if He is the only one walking:
The goal" of the Torah is to make us like our Messiah. He walked it

perfectly, and we are told to walk it just as He did:

He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked
1Jn 2:6.
A definition of sin
Whosoever lives out the [way of] sin are in fact being away fromGods
law;indeed, the sin is the living away from the Torah 1Jn 3:4 ( Gk.
anomia - not the transgression of the Law - KJV)
This is where the Luther indoctrinated Christian would cry out BUT
YOU ARE ADDING WORKS!!!
You see that a person is justified [before men] by works you do and
not by just having faith Jam 2:24
Extracted, copied, and edited from
www.koshermessiah.com/whatisthenewcovenant.htm
New vs. renewed:
*renewed vs. new;
Renewed Covenant > New Covenant;
adj. kainos

new
Mt 13:52 things new and old
Jn 19:41 new memorial-tomb
1Jn 2:7ff not new commandment, but an old commandment
Mt 9:17; //Lk 5:38 new wine (neos) in a new (kainos) wine skin-bag
for new (neos) wine; Cf. //Mk 2:21 new skin-bag (neos);
Rev 21:1 a new heaven and a new earth ~ the former (prtos) heaven
and the former earth
renewed (covenant),
Jer 31:31
Lk 22:20 //Mt 26:28 v.l. (not in //Mk 14:24); 1Co 11:25; 2Co 3:6; Heb 8:8;
9:15; 12:24; (Heb 8:12) >

renewed,
Eph 2:15; 4:24 a renewed man; Gal 6:14; 2Co 5:17 a renewed
creation
2Pe 3:13 renwed heaven and renewed earth
Danker p. 183
- 1. of recent orgin new
Mt 9:17; Mk 2:21: Lk 5:38; Jn 19:41;
- 2. different and superior in quality relaive to smeth. old new
Mt 26:28 v.l.; Lk 22:20; Eph 2:15; 2Pt 3:13; 1Jn 2:7ff; Rev 21:2, 5;
- 3. Unfamiliar, strange - Mk 1:27; Act 17:19 new teaching; Rev 2:17 a new name

Rev 21:5 kaina poi panta Im making all things new Cf. a verb to
renew anane Eph 4:23]
Adj. neos (new different) Mt 9:17; 1Co 5:7; Hb 12:24 (covenant); Col
3:10 (new person); Jn 21:18; Lk 15:12f; 1Ti 5:11; Tit 2:4; young; Act
5:6; 1Ti 5:1f; Tit 2:6; 1Pe 5:5; Lk 22:26
vs. palaios (old):
Cf. related word kainots (renewal renewed condition newness); Rm
6:4; 7:6]

on vs. upon
From: Bryan A. Garner: LawProse Lesson #171:
These prepositions are usually synonymous and used in virtually identical
ways. The distinctions are primarily in tone and connotation. On -- the shorter,
simpler, more direct word -- is generally preferable {the trial court's decision
was based on the parol-evidence rule} {service on a defendant} {the case
centers on a 2006 contract} {the burden is on the plaintiff}. Upon is
stylistically inferior when on will suffice -- if only because it tends to sound
stuffy.
Yet upon is preferable [< required] in one circumstance: when it introduces a
condition, occurrence, or event {upon a proper showing by the applicant, a
license will be granted} {upon being served with interrogatories, the plaintiff
called his lawyer} {he was arrested upon returning to the United States} {the
voter left upon being told the polls were closed}. The sense "with little or no
interval after" is often an important nuance of upon {the board may remove the
officers for good cause shown upon a petition, notice, and hearing}.
Upon is also imperative in stock phrases such as once upon a time and take it
upon yourself.
wordy, verbose, prolix, ;
"sesquipedalian"
*serpent; snake; viper; *beast

ophis snake - Mt 7:10; //Lk 11:11 (water-snake); Jn 3:14; Mt 10:16; 23:33; 1Co
10:9 ( Num 21:5-9);
ophis air Mk 16:18 v.l. (Cf. Act 28:3-5; Exo 4:3,4); pate ophis Lk 10:19 (//Ps
91:13); Cf. cult of snake-handlers.
Serpent (2Co 11:3; Rev 12:9, 14, 15); Rev 20:2 (the Old Serpent) when

allusion to Gen 3, it is rendered as Serpent (capitalized), otherwise as snake as

they have very different word picture and association.
echidna viper (Act 28:3) (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33 //Lk 3:7 brood of vipers in
Yeshuas denunciation of the people of religion in power.) [religious snakes;
dangerous; calculating] [capable of making decisions on how much venom to
inject.]
therion wild animal (Mk 1:13; Act 11:6); beast, wild beast (Heb 12:20; Jam
3:7; Rev 6:8; 13:1; Tit 1:12) (Act 28:4 ff for a viper)
cf. zon living creature (Heb 13:11; 2Pt 2:12; Jud 10; Rev 4:6ff)

snake, viper often used figuratively

serpent Not a reptile; but the word is used figuratively and symbolically for
deceiver https://youtu.be/m5iZmrocHDo [Cf. devil] - Gospels, Rev, Gen 3:1ff.

*slay, murder, sacrifice, slaughter, kill, put to death, execute

thuo (sacrifice) apokteino sphazo phoneuo (phonos) diacheirizomai anthrpoktonos

Greek words, grammar and usage

Ref: www.teknia.com/greek-dictionary (for glosses)

pro, pros, para; meta; sun
See IRENT G-Jn Appendix for [B-Greek] the use of in John, and others.

*receive (someone) vs. *welcome

dechomai
Receive psychological and social shareing space; acceptance
Welcome social as of hospitality.
Take in; not rejecting

immediately at once
Gk. euthus 59 times in the NT, 41x being in G-Mark, 11x of them in Chapter 1. Its

semantic range includes soon so so then.

*different vs. *another hetero vs. allo

Jn 14:16 another [i.e. in His place (1Jn 2:1 Yeshua haMashiah as ho
parakltos)]; /another most; /another ~ of the same kind as I am
Wuest;
1Tm 1:3 propounding different teaching \
(hETERODIDAKLEW - present different instruction Danker. [1Tim 6:3]);
/propounding strange teaching ARJ; /(desist from) propounding strange doctrine Cass;
/bringing up ~; /to stop inventing new doctrines PNT; /xx: charge some they teach no
other doctrine KJV++; /x:charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine, - ASV;
/stop teaching differently with different teaching/doctrine ARJ; /charge certain ones not
to be teaching things contrary to sound doctrine, - Wuest; /x: KRV;
/ ~ KKJV; /instruct certain people not spread false teachings NET;
/different doctrine ESV; /false doctrine TNIV, stange doctrines- NASB

[ALLOS BDAG p. 46 cf. hETEROS p. 399][syn. another vs. different:

another paraklete /x: different paraklete. The paraklete itself is used as
personified; the context should tell how to translate and to understand the
words.]

http://zondervanacademic.com/blog/etymologiesa-a-first-look-mondays-withmounce-9/ In classical Greek, where many of these finer distinctions were

maintained, heteros meant another of a different kind. allos meant another of
the same kind. If you had an apple and I asked for an allos, you would give me
another apple. But if I asked for a heteros, you might give me an orange. Another
of a different kind.
This distinction is not always maintained in the New Testament (see Galatians
1:6-7 and the discussion in my Expository Dictionary, pp. 490ff.). If the
distinction were intended here, Paul would be saying that the gospel preached
by the false teachers was essentially different from the gospel that Paul himself
preached. Can we read that etymological nuance into 1 Timothy 1:3?
In this context I think we can. It certain fits the context well, and it is precisely
the meaning of the same word in its other use in 1 Timothy 6. We can also see
other biblical passages where the classical distinction appears to be upheld (cf.
Luke 9:29; Romans 7:23; 1 Corinthians 15:40; James 2:25). This is why the
TNIV translates, false doctrine. In addition, it would be expected if Paul were
coining a word and therefore there had been no time for usage to have changed
the meaning of the word, that the meaning of the parts would still be reflected in
the meaning of the whole.

English words, grammar and usage

References and reading material

Oxford University Press, Garner's Usage Tip of the Day
(Bryan Garner, www.lawprose.org)

http://youtu.be/_TfkK2BhYXQ Better Grammar Part Four with Bryan A.

Garner
grammer - communicating clearly and effectively, not just to make
understanble also credible.
James Fernald, A Working Grammar of The English Language
T. M. Bernstein, Dos, donts &G Maybes of English Usage
Gould Brown, Grammar of English Grammars
Chicago Manual of Style - Ch. 5 (16 ed)
Garners Modern American Usage
Ref: English word frequency list

www.wordfrequency.info/

letter sign-offs,
Yours, Etc.: Origins and Uses of 8 Common Sign-Offs

gibberish, babelim, babbling; obfuscation

babelism - a confusion, as of ideas, speech, etc.
*due to
www.lawprose.org/ Law Pro Lession #195
*message
Message has to be timeless as well as timely.

*lest
www.lawprose.org/blog/ Gardners Usage Tip of the Day
lest (in fear of); cf. in case
Cf. or else because or
"Lest" is best followed by a verb in the subjunctive mood, not the indicative,
because "lest" points to something that is merely possible, not definite.
Idiomatically speaking, if a modal verb follows "lest," it should be "might" (or
perhaps "should"), not "will" or "would".
*which vs. that
www.lawprose.org/blog/?p=2134
three guidelines. First, if you cannot omit the clause without changing the basic
meaning, the clause is restrictive; use that without a comma. Second, if you
can omit the clause without changing the basic meaning, the clause is
nonrestrictive; use a comma plus which. Third, if you ever find yourself
using a which that doesnt follow a comma (or a preposition), it probably
needs to be a that.

*blame
Ref. www.academia.edu/5841703/Review_of_Blame_Its_Nature_and_Norms
On behalf of vs. in behalf of.
[because of for for the benefit of]

On behalf of stalwart stylists everywhere, I write in behalf of maintaining the traditional

distinction between these phrases.
Careful writers distinguish between them. To act or speak in behalf of someone is to
independently promote that person's interest, praise, or defense or to act on one's own
for that person's benefit {the employees picketed in behalf of the fired executive} {students
spoke in behalf of the professor at the retirement party} {fight in behalf of justice for the
wrongfully accused}.
By contrast, to act or speak on behalf of someone is to act as that person's agent or
representative {she accepted the award on behalf of the committee} {the lawyer acted on
behalf of her client when she signed the document} {on behalf of our board of directors, I
would like to thank the event's sponsors}.
As mentioned in the lesson about on vs. upon (LawProse Lesson #171), upon behalf of is
stylistically inferior to the simpler on behalf of {the motion was filed upon behalf of [read
on behalf of] Mr. Albright}.
And using a possessive instead of a bulkier of-phrase is likewise a stylistic improvement if
the word denoting the person or thing being acted for isn't impractically long. For instance,
in the above example, "the lawyer acted on her client's behalf" is superior to "on behalf of
her client." Yet "fight in behalf of justice for the wrongfully accused" is surely best left as
it is.
To avoid the issue altogether, in many instances you can replace on behalf of with for {the
president signed for the corporation} {the lawyer appeared in court for her client}.
What's really bad is this common airline announcement: "On behalf of myself and the rest
of the crew . . . ." It should be, "Along with the rest of the crew, I'd like to say . . ." or some
such wording. There's no behoof in speaking on your own behalf.
Cf. for owns behoof; in ones place
Cf. Yeshua died for ~: it is in behalf of, not on behalf of.
Cf. ESV, GNB, GW, ISV has none of in behalf of, but on behalf of in N.T.

'for (someone)' = in place of/as a substitute for, (as in sign for my

friend).
'on behalf of ' = as the agent of;. as in sign on behalf of the minor
child, (i.e. the implications will be as if he signs if he could and is
allowed.) She was authorized by the Commission to act on its behalf.
For and on behalf of the handicapped soldiers, I accept this award..
in behalf of = in the interest of; for the benefit of; (as in raised money
in behalf of the earthquake victims).

Word with w-; wh-clause

worship(p)ed; worship(p)ing; worship(p)er. The "-p-" spellings are the preferred

forms in American English; the "-pp-" forms appear in British English.

worth. When this word is used with an amount, the preceding term denoting the amount

should be possessive. E.g.: "He bought a few dollars' worth of golf tees."

worthwhile. single word.

-worthy. This combining form means (1) "fit or safe for" {a seaworthy vessel} {a
crashworthy minivan}; or (2) "deserving of" {a praiseworthy effort} {a creditworthy
loan applicant}. As in the preceding examples, the form is almost always closed up with
its root, not hyphenated. Only a few newfangled "-worthy" terms {an article-worthy
celebrity} have hyphens.

*wot (= to know) is an archaism that H.W. Fowler called a "Wardour Street" term, i.e.,
an "oddment" calculated to establish (in the eyes of some readers) the writer's claim to
be someone of taste and the source of beautiful English. Today, it's an affectation unless
ironic (and probably even then) -- e.g.: "News is now at hand that for reasons I wot [read
'know'] not, the White House kitchens will serve free-range chickens only." John Gould,
"Pent-Up Pullets and White House Fowl," Christian Science Monitor, 20 May 1994, at
17.

would. Writers often use "would" to condition statements that really ought to be
straightforward -- e.g.: "I would submit to you [read 'submit to you'] that very few
presentations end with the audience saying, 'Well, that presenter really beat our brains
out. He thrashed us good and proper.'" Ron Hoff, "I Can See You Naked" 58 (1992). (A
better revision: "Very few presentations end with the audience . . . .")

wreath; wreathe. "Wreath" is the noun {a Christmas wreath}, "wreathe" the verb {they plan
to wreathe the door in garlands}.
writ large. In this archaic clich and in Omar Khayyam's "The Moving Finger Writes" -- but
nowhere else -- "writ" (for "written") survives. E.g.: "Religion . . . is cheapened even more
when it is mixed with pre-game military exercises -- the baseball cap's 'God, Guns, and Guts'
message writ large." L.T. Anderson, "Public Prayer Needs Limits," Charleston Daily Mail
(W. Va.), 24 Sept. 1997, at C1.
wrong; wrongful. The distinction is important. "Wrong" = (1) incorrect; unsuitable {the
quoted figures were simply wrong} {it was wrong of us to expect them so soon}; or (2)
contrary to law or morality; wicked {cloning just to get human organs is wrong}.
"Wrongful" = (1) characterized by unfairness or injustice; contrary to law {Iraq's wrongful
aggression against Kuwait}; or (2) (of a person) not entitled to the position occupied {the
wrongful officeholder}.
wrongly; wrong, adv. Both are proper adverbs; "wrongly," which is less common, appears
before the verb modified {the suspects were wrongly detained}; "wrong" follows the noun
{he answered the question wrong}.
*wroth (= angry) is an archaism -- e.g.: "Ms. Eckert seemed to be quite wroth [read 'angry']
with me, though if her theory . . . is accurate, she should be delighted with my work." Jack
Kenny, "'Mean-Spirited Columnist' Hopes to Take Own Advice of Lightening Up," Union
Leader (Manchester, N.H.), 25 July 2001, at A4. The word is most often seen in the set
phrase "wax wroth" (= to become angry), which can be easily simplified -- e.g.: "Pfeiffer has
a ropy vein at her left temple that, when she waxes wroth [read 'gets angry'], throbs
noticeably." Leah Rozen, "Picks & Pans: Screen," People, 21 Oct. 2002, at 43. *Invariably
inferior form.

Problem with adjectives derived from noun

[see genitive problem]
E.g.
Of beauty vs. beautiful
Of nature vs. natural
Of devil vs. devilish
Of demon vs. demonic
Of satan vs. satanic someone is a satan is not same as someone is
satanic.
God, god, a god vs. divine godly is unrelated to God itself.
E.g. objective vs. subjective. A common phrase love of God (cf. Gods love)
is in the sense of love from/by God and also love for/to God. Sometimes the
context carries both senses.
being person personhood
A human being vs. a human person vs. being human
Someone is a divine person cannot logically stand if someone is referred to
God himself. Since God is God, it cannot be said He is divine. Note:
personality is a psychological term and has nothing to do with person,
personhood, or being a person.

Plural you in English;

thou, thy, thine (for singular) used in KJV, ASV, etc.; but now unfortunately
archaic. RSV retains the siglural form when it refers to God.
.
you all (Cf. ye for plural archaic) a regionalism in South and Southwest,
the uncontracted "you all" as the plural form of "you" is a convenient usage,
since "you" alone can be either singular or plural and therefore is sometimes
ambiguous. It shouldnt be easily dispossessed. It's handy, and it's less
susceptible to raised eyebrows than "y'all" (adapted from Garner's Usage
Tip of the Day). If used in IRENT, it has it as you all; cf. all of you - all
is emphatic.

In the midst of; in the middle of; among; in;

*midst ME meaing middle; a different nuance
*among One among robbers suggests that person is one of robbers.

arthrous and anarthrous nouns; countable and noncountable nouns

E.g. A Greek noun lacks definiteness when used anarthrous (i.e. without the
article). Unlike Greek which does not have an indefinite article, a or an is to be
supplied in English translation, unless the noun is as noncountable.
Anarthrous nouns may often carry adjectival sense. A noun may be used
either in a sense which is for a noncountable noun.

e.g.
water (substance)
a water, waters (in the sense of body of water)
the water [particularized]
e.g.
faith (relationship; trusting)
a faith, faiths (in the sense of religion)
the faith [particularized]
e.g.
spirit [noncountable e.g. Jn 4:24 Elohim is spirit (/x: a spirit; /x: a
Spirit)]
a spirit, spirits human spirits (1Co 12:10; 14:32; Heb 12:23; 1Jn 4:1). =
angels (Heb 1:7, 14). Unspecific Heb 12:9. seven spirits before Elohim
Rev 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6
the spirit
Cf. evil spirits (poneros), unclean spirits (akathartos), deceiving
spirits (1Ti 4:1). demonic spirits (pneumata daimo n) Rev 16:14; also
of those demon-afflicted (Mt 8:16). Unspecific 1Pe 3:19.
A countable noun may be used as a NOUN which suggests one of number
of. When used as the NOUN. Though it may be used in a fixed idiomatic
phrase, e.g. in the moring for English diction; often with additional
descriptors, e.g. in the beautiful moring. Howenver it may particularize it
especially so with the Gk article, which gives the sense between the and
that.
Often it is used without articles used (1) in a title, (2) as vocative, and
importantly (3) as adjectival, either as an adjective or as an adjectival noun.
This points is important when tranlationg anarthrous Gk. nouns it is not
always a SOMETHING. [see on the thelogically serious issue in rendering Jn
1:1c.]

No one ever thinks that something or someone is God, ever god or a god.
None can be so. When they say, it simply means something or someone is as
God (to them). Only the true God is God (YHWH Elohim).

Sure, someone IS my father. When we use the word, however, most often it
means someone as father, rather than someone to be a father (as if out of
many) or the father (as if particularized). Same for son. The phrase son of
something is a Hebrew idiom to tell ones character, not a son of something.
Same for president. To use the word saying Abraham Lincoln was a
president or the president is different from when it is used as in the phrase
President Lincoln. In the Greek, there is only article which is equivalent to
definite article in English and there is no indefinite article as such. Without the
article, it may mean, say, a city. But it may not mean a father, but a
descriptor of being as a father in character or like a father in general. In
IRENT when the text is not the son or a son, it renders son without any
article. (e.g. commonly in vocative, but also here Mt 4:3 ei huios ei tou theou
If youre Elohims son son of Elohim, not a son of or the son of.)
In Mt 1:2ff, the recurrent Gk. word egennse are rendered in various ways. E.g.
Abraham begat Isaac KJV. Some as begot (DRB); Abraham fathered,
became father to Isaac (NWT); was the father of Isaac (NET, ESV, GW);
the son of Abraham was Isaac (BBE); his ancestors were Abraham (CEV).
The word does not contain anything to suggest an idea of father, ancestor,
or son. The best rendering is brought forth (ISR, IRENT). Here, if the word
father is to be used, it should be father, not the father, nor a father. The
countable nouns in English do not always need the or a, just as uncountable
nouns can be in plural (e.g. waters) with different sense. Same for spirit, a
spirit, vs spirits.
This discussion is relevant to the infamous verse Jn 1:1c and the Word was
God most; Cf. and what God is, the Logos was IRENT; and what God
was, the Word was (NEB).
The Greek word for what God was in IRENT is theos (anarthrous), in
contrast to pros ton theon in which it is arthrous the God. Translational and
thological dilemma is actually non-existing, if the sense and usage of a noun
without the article (in Greek) and without the indefinite article (in English) is
fully appreciated. It cannot be a god as NWT renders when examined in the
Scriptural context. Neither the English adjectival phrase fully God (NET) or
adjective divine can carry all the sense and nuance. E.g. the Logos was
divine Moffatt. Note: throughout IRENT it consistently renders the arthrous
theos as Elohim, rather than the God which is beyond the usual English
convention where the capitalized word is used whether it is arthrous or
unarthrous in Gk text.

Examples of English words/phrases/vocabulary

Problem with articles in English vs. in Greek: [Cf. languages which do not
have well developed articles such as Korean]
E.g.

one man
a man (one of men)
man
the man
that man

Gk. anthrpos (man, or a man); ho anthrpos (the man, or the very

man); ho anthrpos ekeinos (that man) eis anthrpos (one man - Jn
11:50).
The arthrous Geek word, e.g. ho anthrpos, has the sense semantically inbetween the man and that man.
E.g. religion

religion
one religion, a religion, religions
the religion

E.g.
religion vs. a religion; science vs. a science; art vs. an art;
Religion vs. science needs rephrasing e.g. religious culture vs. scientific
culture. It is system, idealogy, and peole in power that religion stands vis-vis science.

/allowed; /allowable; /permitted; /permissible; /right (o.k.); /acceptable;

cf. /lawful; /legal;
Cf. judiciary vs. forensic (often used wrongly in place of judiciary).

*marvel; be taken aback, be amazed; be shocked;

*astonished; astounded; *surprised; *wonder; to ones surprise; awed; awestruck; trembling
*appalled; dismayed; offended; horrified; outraged; scandalized; shocked;

fear, fright, terror

anger, fury, wrath;

angry, furious, mad; wrathful;

*reveal; *manifest, *appear; show; unfold; unveil;

just as; as; like Gk. s
Problem texts for translation:
s kleptes en nukti 1Th 5:2, 4; 2Pe 3:10; Rev 3:3; 16:15 related to the coming of the Lord.
Most renders as like a thief in the night (KJV etc) or as a thief in the night (NET etc.) with a
strange word connection Lord and thief. The phrase should be rendered as a verbal phrase
just as a bandit (> thief) would come at night

fame, reputation (of honor), rumor, news, story, what people heard;
Of Yeshua Mt 4:24; //Mk 1:28; also Mt 14:1 (cf. Mt 9:31 - diaphemizo )
not ~ until vs. not ~ until after: Cf. Gk. hes;
e.g.
But Yosef knew here not until she had given birth to a son. (Mt 1:25)
For I tell you Ill not eat it until it is fulfilled in the Kingdom reign of
Elohim (Lk 22:16)
the weather will stay mild until the Thanksgiving.
the weather will be mild until even after ~
Until after the resurrection the disciples were unprepared to understand
the Cross; and apart from the Cross, they could not understand the real
nature of Yeshuas messian mission (Mt 16:21-28), as Markan scholars
often note. Keener, The Gospel of Mathew A Soica-Rhetorical
Commentary (p. 430).
hes - Danker p. 158
[complex origin] marker of limit
1. as temporal marker
-a. conjunctive use till, until Mt 2:9, 13; 12:20; 16:28; 24:39; Mk 6:10; Lk 9:27; 17:8; J 21:22; Act 2:35;
1Co 4:5; 2Th 2:7; 1Ti 4:13; Hb 1:13; 10:13; Js 5:7.
-b. as long as, while Mk 6:45; J 9:4; J 12:35 v.l.
2. as terminal marker, a usage (freq. funct. as prep. w. gen.), developed since Aristotle:
-a. of position or place as far as, to Mt 11:23; Lk 2:15; 4:29; 24:50 (with pros); Ac 1:8; 11:19, 22; 2 Cor
12:2. hes es <right into Mk 14:54; hes an <to the top/brim J 2:7; hes eis <close to Lk 24:50 v.l.;
hes ka <to bottom Mt 27:51. In extended scaled sense: apo mikrou hes megalou <from small to great
Hb 8:11; hes enos <as many as seven times Mt 18:2lf; hes hmisous < up to the half Mk 6:23; ouk
estin hes enos <there is not even one Ro 3:12; eate hes toutou <enough of this Lk 22:51.
-b. of time or calendric moment until Mt 27:64; Mk 14:25; Lk 1:80; 23:44; Ac 1:22; 19:9 v.l.; 1Cor1:8; 2
Cor 1:13; hes ou until Mt 18:34; Lk 13:21; 22:18; Ac 21:26; 25:21. Of a terminal point conceived
temporally hes therismou Mt 13:30; hes thanatou 26:38; Mk 14:34. Adv. phrase hes arti <until now

Mt 11:12; J 2:10; hes tou nun <until now Mt 24:21; hes pote <how long 17:17; J 10:24; Rv 6:10; hes
smeron <to this very day 2 Cor 3:15.-W. pronoun of pers. or proper name (up) to, until Mt 1:17; 11:13;
Lk 4:42.

my vs. of me; of mine

my follower a follower of me; a follower of mine (e.g. my plan); (one) of my
followers. be a follower of me vs. follow me
for
for our living; for our life (of);
learn vs. study vs. teach
wants to do, wish to do, likes to do, have to do.
get help from others have to help yourselves to receive help;

job, career; mission; vocation

apologetics (defend) vs. apology ( excuse, etc.)
Apology (1) as proof, (2) as defense, and (3) as challenge (> offense) [Cf. different nuances of
the word offense, offensive. [Ref. John Fram (2015), Apologetics: A Justification of
Christian Belief]

Trinitarian jargon and expressions

Trinity
Trinity God
The Holy Ghost (as a third person)
ontogolical, immanent, economical Trinity;
God the Son How come the Son of God is called God the Son?

A new math = 1+1+1 is not three but one

Godhead
God the Holy Ghost
Pre-existent Son; Pre-existent Son of God; Pre-existent God the Son,
God a person like human? a spirit? what is it? which God? who is God/
Holy Spirit baptism;
Holy Ghost; (Mr.) Holy Ghost Holy Ghost God God the Holy Ghost (
Ko.)
Trinity; Trinity God three-person God? Three-headed person? Three-faced
person? Three gods? Icons of three-person God; three-headed person;
three-faced head.
icon and painting of Jesus, a blue-eyed white man;

filled with the Holy Ghost and power

slain by Holy Ghost
spirit baptism
incarnate God; incarnate God the Son; God incarnate; incarnate Jesus - in
contrast to the biblical truth incarnate Logos of Elohim (Jn 1:1, 14)

The name of our God is Jesus; Our God is Jesus; (Jesus is Jehovah)

Jargon, penchant, and clich galore

Jargon and clich biblical jargon, Christian jargon, Church jargon, religious
jargon, theological jargon, christianese some are non-bilical, some are unbilical.
words, terms, phrases, expressions; penchants; fancied words, catch words,
mantra; out-dated terms; worn-out expressions;
[Cf. for the verses in the biblical text which are often used for proof-texting
Most of Bible reading and studying is in application mode, rather than
hearing what is being said in the text. Pick-and-choose proof-texting to suit for
the readers.]
[Take some hilarious - http://youtu.be/vFAax4qjTzY How to talk like a
Christian; http://youtu.be/PuK4sZdR36s Messy Mondays: The Top 15
Christian Clichs]

everlasting life [Cf. live forever Easy-to-Read Version]

gospel hymns
mystery often a theological mumbo-jumbo
Christian rock music Christian rock (not rock for Peter)
reader-friendly Bibles; easy-read versions
spiritualism; spirituality; Cosmic Christ; Christian mysticism;
Christian humanism
vision-casting purpose-driven
possibility thinking gospel; prosperity gospel (of health, wealth,
happiness, and prosperity)
God loves you, so do I (Yeah.) Robert H. Schuller
This is my Bible. I can do what it says I can do Joel Osteen
once saved always saved from ignorance what it is to be saved
from what to what. How can apostasies abound?
God spoke to me
televangelists showmanship and entertainment, excitement, enjoyment
for pleasure
Evangelicals
charismatics; speaking in tongues tongue-babbling (as in shamanism).
rapture, rapturism, left behind; millennials, millenialisms;
chalice (Catholic)
heaven and hell (cf. heaven and home)
go to heaven; go to hell (after death)
tabernacle
baptism by sprinkling
anoint ointment unction
total deprivation (unbiblical Calvinism) why then people should bother?
righteousness ever know what it means?
justification theological and biblical jargon even know what it means?
salvation ever know what it means?
all will be saved (unbiblical universalism)
born sinners nowhere in the Bible is there such an expression; no one
is born a sinner but born and become a sinner. [Related unbiblical
Calvinism pre-destination, total deprivation, etc.]
doctrine of the original sin - unbiblical
born again same as regenerate?
perverse generation generation of truth-perversion
*Easter (instead of Resurrection Day)
*Chrismas and its paraphenia Since Constantine Catholic Church
saints (in Catholic)
wage of sin is eternal torment
pope (catholic) Peter is the honorary or alledged first Pope? [who and
when the claim began?][[fist use Pope Damasus (366-384 AD)]
Father Catholic
Reverend used a title for mere mortals.
church your church? a building? a denomination? a religion (e.g.
Catholic Church)?
Christians people of Christian religions belonging to Chrisian churches;
and be expert to be seen as Christians. If some is a Christian, do I find a

reason not to be a Christian?

Eucharist;
Hallelujah Amen! what really is understood by HalleluYah?
young earth theory; gap theory
Christian passover; Christian Pentecost
saving faith; saving grace
pray over
preach Biblical jargon for proclaiming; the English word applies only
in a few places in N.T. (e.g. Yohanan the Baptizers).
universalism; ecumenism; tolerance (aka accommodation);
having mountain moving faith power of I AM Joel Osteen
http://youtu.be/kuY8UIuZBK0 (I am is nothing more than I am i.e.
ones one self which everyone utters.)
God told me
Mary, the Queen of Heaven - Catholic
Bless me Lord with this and with that rather than Have mercy.
I pray about it I pray over it; the Lord told me God said to me
inerrancy of Bible (cf. inerrancy of the Word of God in Scripture)
Doctrines, cathechisms, dogmas these are all man-made; the Scripture

does not give such things; it simply reveals, declares, and proclaims.

just pray this and be saved; sinners prayer;

(Westernized christianity, Americanized christianiy, cultural Christianity;
soul immortality a religious jargon from pagan and Greek origin; what
is soul? If soul immortal, why resurrection?
grace as free gift (given free, but receiving is free too?)
praise the Lord (which Lord?)
megachurch church growth revival revivalism church-building
Christian humanism; Christian hedonism
beatify - Catholic
seeker-sensitive an Envangelical church jargon. seeker-friendly to
cater for (church) seekers. A church growth movement associated with
purpose-driven church and megachurch phenomenon. (instead of the
corporate Body of Mashiah community of followers) [Ref. Should a

church be seeker sensitive? ]

I AM taken wrongly and blindly as Gods name itself, taken out of the
context, juxtaposing the misread phrase in Exo 3:14 combined with
every occurrence of Gk. phrase eg eimi (with eg functions simply as
emphasis), rather than a statement which is usually in a complete
predicate to make sense.
inspiration to inspire is not same as to give some inspirations.
Biblical inspiration
The End Time; these last days

Bible the word is a translation work into vernacular languages and

should not be confused with the Scripture of the original language. The
Bible per se is not Gods Word, which is to be heard in ones mind, not to
be read off from the printed pages. The Bible does not give authority; the
Biblical authority is the authority man finds in the Bible.
go to heaven or to hell; hell; hellfire preaching;

Jonathan Edwards (1974), Sinners in the hands of angry God

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=
etas
www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/618854-sinners-in-the-hands-of-anangry-god

Jargon non-religious
A few words are consistently used with a wrong sense.
*Personality is a psychological terma. Almost all instances (e.g. related to the
religion) where this term is used outside the field of psychology/psychiatry, it
should be replaced with a different term personhood.
*forensic (as in the phrases forensic case for forensic investigation for
forensic evidence with forensic pathology of forensic science).
Almost all theological and religious writings are found to misuse the term
forensic [esp. when dealing with the idea of justification], where judicial
is appropriate (which is related to atonement, salvation, etc.). The word
forensic has something to do with detection and investigation of crime. There
is hardly anything related to crimes in the Scriptural text. The word should
have no place in the field related to the Bible; even for discussing the
mechanism of death from crucifixion there is hardly anything of forensic
matter.
*legal; *judicial;

Word and Quotation of the Day:

religious indifferentism
Quotation of the Day: (From < Bryan Garners Usage Tip of the Day >)

"Prose is not necessarily good because it obeys the rules of syntax, but it
is fairly certain to be bad if it ignores them." Wilson Follett, Modern
American Usage: A Guide 22 (1966).

"If paragraphs come in their natural order, you will easily make them
follow one another smoothly. Your handling of the subject will show you
how to smooth the transition from one paragraph to the next." Eric
Partridge, English: A Course for Human Beings 147-48 (1949).

http://psychology.about.com/od/overviewofpersonality/a/persondef.htm
"Personality refers to individuals' characteristic patterns of thought, emotion, and behavior,
together with the psychological mechanisms -- hidden or not -- behind those patterns. This
definition means that among their colleagues in other subfields of psychology, those
psychologists who study personality have a unique mandate: to explain whole persons."
(Funder, D. C., 1997)
"Although no single definition is acceptable to all personality theorists, we can say that
personality is a pattern of relatively permanent traits and unique characteristics that give
both consistency and individuality to a person's behavior." (Feist and Feist, 2009)

"Of the language of art, it has been said, two things, apparently
contradictory, are plainly true: first, that there is no single way of
responding to its meaning; what one finds depends on what one brings.
And equally, what one finds is there already; the meaning is there in the
language." Hilda M. Hulme, Explorations in Shakespeare's Language 2
(1962).

"If you've written a paragraph that sounds heavy and tortured, put down
your pencil and ask yourself: 'If I were actually speaking these thoughts to
a friend, how would I probably say them?' Then go ahead and talk them
out loud, and when you're finished, write down as nearly as you can recall
what you said. The chances are good that many of your talked-out
sentences will be an improvement over the earlier, labored version of
them." John R. Trimble, Writing with Style 81-82 (1975).

[From http://rhetoric.byu.edu/ Chreia example:

In the following passage Cephalus addresses Socrates and Glaucon
regarding the apparent pains of old age: "How well I remember the aged
poet Sophocles, when in answer to the question, how does lovemaking suit
with old age, Sophocles, are you still the man you were? Peace, he
replied; most gladly have I escaped the thing of which you speak; I feel as
if I had escaped from a mad and furious master. His words have often
occurred to my mind since, and they seem as good to me now as at the
time when he uttered them. For certainly old age has a great sense of calm
and freedom; when the passions relax their hold, then, as Sophocles says,
we are freed from the grasp not of one mad master only, but of many."

Appendix
Appendix: Lk 23:43 *Paradise Commentaries on:
[paradise may be equivalent to the idea of heaven people say to go to heaven
after death.]
Various unbiblical fanciful commentaries:
SourceNT fn. p. 214 - paradeisis, commonly transliterated as paradise, a Persian
loan word meaning a garden of fruit trees (or orchard) which first occurs in Greek in
Xenophons Anabasis, 1.2.7. It appears commonly in the papyri and inscriptions in
the same meaning. See, for example, I.Tyre 1.108 (late Roman), I solemnly request
those who are going to acquire this orchard; P.Petr. i.16.2.7 (230 BC), the
produce of my orchards; P.Tebt 1.5.53 (118 BC), the tithes which they used to
receive from the holdings and the orchards. P.Lond 933.12 (CE 211) notes a
payment on account of an olive orchard. See also the Rosetta Stone (OGIS 90.15,
196 BC). It occurs frequently in the Septuagint as a garden, sometimes as the abode
of the blessed, see Cant. 5.13, Eccl. 2.5, and Neh. 2.8. The Midrash Haggadah
(Midrash means a verse-by-verse interpretation of Scripture, and Haggadah is an
interpretation and expansion of the non-legal portions of Scripture) describes
Paradise in detail, as far as giving specific dimensions and furnishings of the
chambers. The details are supposed to have supplied by individuals who visited
Paradise while alive. It states that nine mortals visited heaven while alive, and that
one of these is Enoch. Enoch 20:7-8 states Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is
over Paradise and the serpents and the Cherubim, and goes on to supply a
description of Paradise in Chapters 23-38. Ezekiels description of Paradise is
similar: a great mountain in the middle of the earth which has streams of water
flowing from under it. A palm tree grows in the middle of the center of the sacred
enclosure. Similar descriptions are to be found in other apocalypses (e.g. Apoc.
Baruch, 5; 2 Esd. 8.52). In Rabbinical literature the conception of paradise stands in
contradistinction to hell. Paradise is occasionally referred to as the world to come.
The word occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in 2Co 12:4 and Rev 2:7.

Alfords commentary (pp. 661-2)

[Note: This gives a good summary of a typical elaborate and fastidious
interpretation. Unfortunately, far too many exegetes like this decide first what they
think ought to be true and then mine the Bible for out-of-context nuggets (proof-text
fallacy) which confirm their presuppositions. ARJ]
v. 43. amen soi leg .
The Lord surpasses his supplication prayer in the answer; the amen soi leg,
smeron, is the reply to the uncertain hotan of the thief.
smeron this day: before the close of this natural day. The attempt to join it with soi

leg, considering that it not only violates common sense, but destroys the force of
our Lord's promise, is surely something worse than silly: see below.
met emou es can bear no other meaning than thou shalt be with Me, in the
ordinary sense of the words, 'I shall be in Paradise, and thou with Me.'
en t par. On these words rests the whole exegesis of the saying. What is this
PARADISE? The word is used of the garden of Eden by the LXX, Gen 2:8, &c., and
subsequently became, in the Jewish theology, the name for that part of Hades, the
abode of the dead, where the souls of the righteous await the resurrection. It was also
the name for a supernal or heavenly abode, see reff. N. T. The former of these is, I
believe, here primarily to be understood; but only as introductory, and that
immediately, to the latter. By the death of Christ only was Paradise first opened, in
the true sense of the word. He Himself, when speaking of Lazarus (Lk 16:22), does
not place him in Paradise, but in Abraham's bosom-in that place which the Jews
called Paradise, but by an anticipation which our Lord did not sanction. I believe the
matter to have been thus. Our Lord spoke (as Grotius has remarked) to the thief so as
He knew the thief would understand Him; but He spoke with a fuller and more
blessed meaning than he could understand them. For that day, on that very evening,
was 'Paradise' truly 'regained' opened by the death of Christ. We know (1Pe 3:18,
19, where see note; iv. 6) that our Lord went down into the depths of death,
announced His triumph (for His death was His triumph) to the imprisoned spirits,
and in that moment-for change of state, to the disembodied, is all that change of
place implies they perhaps were in the Paradise of God, in the blessed heavenly
place, implied by the word, 2Co 12. That this is not fullness of glory as yet, is
evident; for the glorified body is not yet joined to their spirits, they are not yet
perfect (Heb 11:40); but it is a degree of bliss compared to which their former degree
was but as imprisonment.
This work of the Lord I believe to have been accomplished on the instant of His
death, and the penitent to have followed Him at his death some little time after
into the Paradise of God. That our Lord returned to take his glorified Body, was in
accordance with His design, and He became therefore the first-fruits of the holy
dead, who shall like Him put on the body of the resurrection, and be translated from
disembodied and imperfect bliss in the Paradise of God, to the perfection of glorified
humanity in His glory, and with Him, not in Paradise, but at God's right hand.
Expansion on v. 43 in Expositors NT (2003, www.jsm.org ) gives a fanciful
interpretation.
(a statement of fact, and not a question, as some claim; however, his stay in Paradise would
be very short; some three days later, he would accompany Christ to Heaven, along with
every other person in Paradise, which included all the Old Testament Saints).

William MacDonald, Arthur Farstad (1995), Believers Bible Commetary

23:43
Jesus rewarded his faith with the promise that that very day, they would be together in
Paradise. Paradise is the same as the third heaven (2Co 12:2, 4), and means the dwelling
place of God. Today - what speed! With Me what company! In Paradise - what

happiness! Charles R. Erdman writes:

This story reveals the truth to us that salvation is conditioned upon repentance and faith.
However, it contains other important messages also. It declares that salvation is
independent of sacraments. The thief had never been baptized, nor had he partaken of
the Lord's Supper. . . . He did in fact boldly profess his faith in the presence of a hostile
crowd and amid the taunts and jeers of rulers and soldiers, yet he was saved without any
formal rites. It is further evident that salvation is independent of good works . . . . It is
also seen that there is no "sleep of the soul." The body may sleep, but consciousness
exists after death. Again it is evident that there is no purgatory." Out of a life of sin and
shame, the penitent robber passed immediately into a state of blessedness. Again it may
be remarked that salvation is not universal. There were two robbers; only one was
saved. Last of all it may be noted that the very essence of the joy which lies beyond
death consists in personal communion with Christ. The heart of the promise to the dying
thief was this: "Thou shalt be with me." This is our blessed assurance, that to depart is
"to be with Christ" which is "very far better."68
From Jesus Christ's side one person may go to heaven and another to hell. Which side of the
cross are you on?

Appendix: Franois Recanati (2004), Literal Meaning (pp. 5-6)

Franois Recanati (2004), Literal Meaning (pp. 5-6)

1 Two approaches to 'what is said'

1.1 The basic triad

1.2
Anyone who has reflected on the sentence meaning/speaker's meaning distinction knows that a
simple distinction is in fact insufficient. Two equally important distinctions must be made.
First, there is the distinction between the linguistic meaning of a sentence-type, and what is said
(the proposition expressed) by an utterance of the sentence. For example, the English sentence 'I
am French' has a certain meaning which, qua meaning of a sentence-type, is not affected by
changes in the context of utterance. This context-independent meaning contrasts with the contextdependent propositions which the sentence expresses with respect to particular contexts. Thus 'I am
French', said by me, expresses the proposition that I am French; if you utter the sentence, it
expresses a different proposition, even though its linguistic meaning remains the same across
contexts of use.
Second, there is a no less important distinction between what is actually said and what is merely
'conveyed' by the utterance. My utterance of 'I am French' expresses the proposition that I am
French, but there are contexts in which it conveys much more. Suppose that, having been asked
whether I can cook, I reply: 'I am French'. Clearly my utterance (in this context) provides an
affirmative answer to the question. The meaning of the utterance in such a case includes more than
what is literaily said; it also includes what the utterance 'implicates'.
'What is said' being a term common to both distinctions, we end up with a triad:

(4)
(5)
(6)

what is stated (> sentence meaning), vs.

what is said, vs.
what is implicated.

The distinguishing characteristic of sentence meaning (the linguistic meaning of the sentence type)
is that it is conventional and context-independent. Moreover, in general at least, it falls short of
constituting a complete proposition, that is, something truth-evaluable. In contrast, both 'what is
said' and 'what is implicated' are context-dependent and propositional. The difference between
what is said' and 'what is implicated' is that the former is constrained by sentence meaning in a
way in which the implicatures aren't. What is said results from fleshing out the meaning of the
sentence (which is like a semantic skeleton) so as to make it propositional. The propositions one
can arrive at through this process of contextual enrichment or 'fleshing out' are constrained by the
skeleton which serves as input to the process. Thus 'I am French' can express an indefinite number
of propositions, but the propositions in question all have to be compatible with the semantic
potential of the sentence; this is why the English sentence 'I am French' cannot express the
proposition that kangaroos have tails. There is no such constraint on the propositions which an
utterance of the sentence can communicate through the mechanism of implicature. Given enough
background, an utterance of 'I am French' might implicate that kangaroos have tails. What's
implicated is implicated by virtue of an inference, and the inference chain can (in principle) be as
long and involve as many background assumptions as one wishes.
The basic triad can be mapped back onto the simple sentence meaning/speaker's meaning
distinction by grouping together two of the three levels. There are two ways to do it, corresponding
to two interpretations for the triad. The 'minimalist' interpretation stresses the close connection
between sentence meaning and what is said; together, sentence meaning and what is said constitute
the literal meaning of the utterance as opposed to what the speaker means:

literal meaning
sentence meaning
what is said
Vs.
speaker's meaning
The other, 'non-minimalist' interpretation of the triad stresses the commonality
between what is said and what is implicated, both of which are taken to be
pragmatically determined:
sentence meaning
vs
speakers meanmg what is said
what is implicated
Essential to this interpretation is the claim that 'what is said', though constrained by the meaning of
the sentence, is not as tightly constrained as is traditionally thought and, in particular, does not obey
what I will refer to as the 'minimalist' constraint.

End

Note on word search in MS Word file or PDF files for IRENT work:
Words appearing in the files such as this and as others (footnotes or end-notes for
translation works) with an asterisk * indicate that they are entry words. If a reader
wants to search any occurrence of a word, simply typing a word (in whole or partial)
would work. However, since some may come up with many hits, search with a word
preceded by * would bring the entry words. E.g. Searching with the string of hou, for
example, did bring up 175 hits (all containing a string of hou, including hour, hours,
hour-period, etc.). If searched with the string of *hou, it did bring only one.

A review on Strongs Lexicon:

www.baptistboard.com/archive/index.php/t-69263.html
(1) It's 120 years old, for crying out loud! There have been many mss discovered since
then and tons of research done. So Strong's is totally out and a recent lexicon is a must for
the serious student.
(2) Since it is so old, Strong's depends more than it should on meanings from classical
Greek. The Koine Greek of the NT is quite different from most classical Greek
documents.
(3) It seldom gives definitions, only giving glosses. "Gloss" originally referred to a
marginal note giving a quick definition or explanation in an ancient mss but is often used
nowadays for a one word definition in another language. (Glossary--get it?) A gloss is
only a general guide, not usually a true definition.
(4) It gives no information about how the word is used in various contexts in the NT--a
must for proper semantic research.
(5) It gives no information about extra-Biblical usage of words.
(6) It gives non-students of Greek a dangerous feeling that they are being scholarly by
saying, "This word means ---- in the Greek."

Accuracy and Bias in translations It should be recognized that all translations are not
accurate or without bias, as they make claims.
3

Jason David BeDuhn has written a book, Truth in Translation Accuracy and Bias in English
Translations of the New Testament. (2003). It is not to be missed by anyone who is seriously
concerned with Bible translation, especially who is engaged in the translation work. Though the
topics in his book may not be accepted or agreed as he argues, each issue he discussed merits
serious consideration, except the Chapter 11 (on translation of Jn 1:1c), which is a dismal failure
and shows his lack of scholarship on the Greek and English grammar and sytax see Review on
His book.

A PDF file containing Introduction (pp. xiii xix) and the Content from the book is uploaded at
www.scribd.com/ounbbl . www.scribd.com/doc/180349339/Accuracy-and-Bias-in-English-NewTestament-Translation-pdf

anachronism not only something to do with different times, but also affecting the cultural and
linguistic aspects.
5

jargonism a neologism (not yet in OED). being fond of using jargon.

On archaic words:

Further affiant sayeth naught.

Many affidavits close with this classic legalese or some variation of it. Other than the
obvious questions ("What does it mean?" and "Is it necessary?"), this phrase gives rise
to two stylistic dilemmas.
First, is it sayeth or saith? Among American lawyers who use the phrase (British
lawyers don't), sayeth predominates. Up to the 17th century, the -eth suffix was merely
an alternative third-person singular inflection for an English verb (calleth, answereth,
witnesseth, etc.). Used primarily in southern England, it had become obsolete by the
end of the 17th century -- and rightly so.
Second, should it be naught or not? The predominant form is *Further affiant sayeth
not. But this is nonsense because it translates to "The affiant says not further" or "The
affiant does not say further." Does not say what? By contrast, Further affiant sayeth
naught makes literal sense: "The affiant says nothing further."
But here's the most important question of all: Is the phrase really needed at all? No. It's
an antiquarian superfluity. Think of translating it as "That's all, folks!" Truly, one
might simply take the sensible approach that when the affiant (uh-fye-uhnt) hath
nothing further to say, the affiant merely stoppeth.
Bryan Garner www.lawprose.org
For further reading, see Garner's Dictionary of Legal Usage 331, 383 (3d ed. 2011).
E.g. wrath instead of rage (cf. anger) Prob 15:1
Power of words Korean proverbs (1) One word can make your debt of thousand pounds of silver let go;
(2) (Know that) saying uh is as far from saying ah, etc. (e.g. freely without cost vs. freely with hesitant
to pick up a merchandise.)
7

From Garner's Usage Tip of the Day: social; societal; sociable.

Although "social" and "societal" overlap to some degree, they are

distinguishable. "Social" = (1) living in companies or organized communities
{man is a social animal}; (2) concerned with the mutual relations of (classes of)
human beings {the social compact}; or (3) of or in or toward society {social
intercourse} (The Concise Oxford Dictionary).
"Societal" has replaced *"societary" (now merely a needless variant) in the sense
"of, relating to, or dealing with society." E.g.:
o "Teenagers are more likely to have unprotected sex when they have been
drinking. And that can lead to other societal concerns." Ralph Hingson, "Tough
Laws, Enforcement Slow Teenage Drinking," Boston Globe, 5 Oct. 1997, at E1.
o "Experts point to parental and societal influences that portray violence as a way
to solve problems." Deborah Sharp, "Student Gun Violence Creeps into SmallCommunity Schools," USA Today, 3 Dec. 1997, at A2.
"Sociable" = ready for companionship; quick to unite with others; gregarious.
*Invariably inferior forms.

Cultural dislocation in translation an example:

An example in the Source New Testament by Ann Nyland (2004) translates the
well-known hyperbole easier for a camel go through the eye of a needle (Mt
19:24 KJV) as a pig might fly before a rich one enters the reign of God,
saddling itself with unconscionable errors in her effort of cultural transfer of the
idiom
(1) loss of the wordplay in the original where camel and rope similar words
in Aramaic; and,
(2) more importantly, the result of cultural insensitivity and disconnection when
we know well that pigs are considered unclean animal unfit for eating in their
society (cf. kosher in Jewish custom).

10

 two kinds of meanings that words have, the exact meaning of the word, its denotation; and the
accrued meanings of the word, its connotations.
words as divided into two classes, abstract and concrete; but the evidence shows that all words are
abstract on one level or another. [We need to] think of levels of abstraction
The "object" that we see, hear, and say about is a unique abstraction, created by a reaction between
your nervous system and the physical process.
words in themselves have no meanings at all. It takes a mind to develop a meaning by associating
a symbol with something else, and no two minds work in quite the same way. A word brings up its
meaning when the mind interprets with what we have experienced in life. What we think of lexical
meanings of a word is an artificial construct and is just potential, possible and feasible.
A meaning is formed in our mind differently associating a word to what stands for, each person
differently.
Meaning privacy, similarity, universality
But the word "meaning" itself poses difficult problems. What is the meaning of "meaning"? We all
recognize that language is a give-and-take of speech-signals, a series of stimuli by speakers and
responses by hearers; also that some non-linguistic stimuli produce linguistic responses, and vice
versa.
today they generally define meaning as simply the situation out of which language comes and the
response that it elicits.
If this is meaning, how does it change? It is clear that, for speakers of the same language, there must
be a large measure of consistency in the response to linguistic signals-otherwise, communication
would be impossible. Nevertheless, since no two situations can ever be exactly alike, there is always
some area of variation, and over a period of time the increment of slight variations will alter the
reference of the linguistic signal. Let us take an example. Since meaning involves both the situation
out of which a word comes (which makes the speaker say it) and the hearers response, every speech
situation is complex, with many components. But the relative prominence of these components will
not always be the same. When the word green is first said it ordinarily brings a response in terms of
color; but if the context concerns a fruit, this primary element of color may become associated with a
secondary element-unripeness. Repetition may then establish this association until the element of
unripeness becomes more prominent than that of color-so much so that it becomes possible to say,
without fear of misunderstanding, "Blackberries are red when they are green."
. Even though it is generally recognized that meanings change, many people still cling, curiously
enough, to the quite contradictory notion that words all have "true" meanings, that changes somehow
take us away from the "true" meaning, and that the way to find out what a word "really means" is to
find out what it once meant. This is particularly true in respect to borrowed words in English, the
belief evidently being that the meaning of the word in contemporary English and the meaning of the
Latin or Greek word from which the English word is derived must be one and the same. A little
reflection should show that an appeal to etymology in order to establish the present meaning of the
word is as untrustworthy as an appeal to spelling in order to establish its present pronunciation. And
for a reason that is almost exactly parallel: change of meaning is likely to have altered the
etymological sense, which is thereby rendered archaic or obsolete, just as change of sound is likely to
be unrecorded in the "antiquarian" spelling that so frequently characterizes Modern English. The
study of etymology has great value and interest ... but its usefulness in settling the question of what a
word means is subject to considerable qualification. Let us see what results when one ignores the idea

11

THEOLOGICAL LANGUAGE FALLACY

This is the error of substituting theological language for scriptural language as if it were in the
original and then demanding, as a test of fellowship, that others use the theological language
the same way we do. This can be done in four different ways. One is by outright substitution
teaching that an apparently simple word or phrase in a scripture passage really is the same as a
theological term for which the denomination has a separate (and not necessarily simple or
obvious) definition. This will commonly be followed by an insistence that, in discussing the
scripture at issue, the opaque theological term must be used instead of the simple scriptural one.
Church language can also be created by interpolation, such as when the terms translated
"persons" and "substance" were adopted from Latin legal terminology to describe the
relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The organized Church then imposed the
correct use of this non-scriptural terminology as a test of fellowship through adoption of creeds
which insisted that God is three "persons" who share the "same substance." A declaration that
the three "persons" share only "similar substance" a difference of one iota in the spelling of a
single Greek word was cause for excommunication.
Bible translators have also perpetuated some theological language for us. The work of
translation is a difficult and exacting labor, and each translator comes from a distinct
denominational background and will naturally tend to read the scriptures through the filter of
his or her own background. Moreover, Bible translation is almost always overseen by
committees of translators and denominational leaders who often represent a range of doctrinal
perspectives, and reaching consensus often requires translation of terms around which
controversies center into theological terms which each participating denomination is free to
define for itself. So I commend translators for the work they have done; I do not criticize them.
But readers should be aware of the perpetuation of theological language through translation.
Translators may perpetuate theological language by transliterating rather than translating Greek
or Hebrew terms, such as was done with the Greek word baptizo, which is uniformly
transliterated as "baptize" when it refers to the Holy Spirit or to rituals involving water, but is
translated in some other contexts. In Greek, the term means roughly to "bathe" or "dip," but
when transliterated as "baptize" it can be said to mean whatever the speaker's denomination
has decided it should mean.
Translators may also perpetuate theological language through selective translation that is,
translating the same Greek or Hebrew word as one theological term in one context, but as
another theological term or even a simple non-theological word or phrase in a different context,
depending on the translators' perception of the intended theological content of the context. An
outstanding example of this is provided by the treatment of the Greek word koinonia in the KJV
(and most other English translations). The root meaning of the word is "partnership," and it was
used in secular Greek to describe business partnerships indeed, in Luke 5:10, the fishing
company of Simon, James and John were described as koinonoi, "partners." The KJV usually
translates koinonia as "fellowship." "Fellowship" has since become a thoroughly theological term,

although it was a much more common secular term in 1611. However, in I Corinthians 10:16, the
KJV twice translates koinonia as "communion." The context in I Corinthians 10 is speaking of the
observance of the Lord's Supper, and it would appear that the translators wished to limit the
application of the passage strictly to the church communion ritual and didn't wish their readers to
form the impression that we are either "fellows" or "partners" in Christ's body and blood, though
that is what the Greek text otherwise might imply.
12

Franois Recanati (2004), Literal Meaning (pp. 5-6)

1 Two approaches to 'what is said'

1.1 The basic triad

1.2
Anyone who has reflected on the sentence meaning/speaker's meaning distinction knows that a simple
distinction is in fact insufficient. Two equally important distinctions must be made.
First, there is the distinction between the linguistic meaning of a sentence-type, and what is said (the
proposition expressed) by an utterance of the sentence. For example, the English sentence 'I am French'
has a certain meaning which, qua meaning of a sentence-type, is not affected by changes in the context
of utterance. This context-independent meaning contrasts with the context-dependent propositions which
the sentence expresses with respect to particular contexts. Thus 'I am French', said by me, expresses the
proposition that I am French; if you utter the sentence, it expresses a different proposition, even though
its linguistic meaning remains the same across contexts of use.
Second, there is a no less important distinction between what is actually said and what is merely
'conveyed' by the utterance. My utterance of 'I am French' expresses the proposition that I am French,
but there are contexts in which it conveys much more. Suppose that, having been asked whether I can
cook, I reply: 'I am French'. Clearly my utterance (in this context) provides an affirmative answer to the
question. The meaning of the utterance in such a case includes more than what is literaily said; it also
includes what the utterance 'implicates'.
'What is said' being a term common to both distinctions, we end up with a triad:

(1)
(2)
(3)

what is stated (> sentence meaning), vs.

what is said, vs.
what is implicated.

The distinguishing characteristic of sentence meaning (the linguistic meaning of the sentence type) is
that it is conventional and context-independent. Moreover, in general at least, it falls short of constituting
a complete proposition, that is, something truth-evaluable. In contrast, both 'what is said' and 'what is
implicated' are context-dependent and propositional. The difference between what is said' and 'what is
implicated' is that the former is constrained by sentence meaning in a way in which the implicatures
aren't. What is said results from fleshing out the meaning of the sentence (which is like a semantic
skeleton) so as to make it propositional. The propositions one can arrive at through this process of
contextual enrichment or 'fleshing out' are constrained by the skeleton which serves as input to the
process. Thus 'I am French' can express an indefinite number of propositions, but the propositions in
question all have to be compatible with the semantic potential of the sentence; this is why the English
sentence 'I am French' cannot express the proposition that kangaroos have tails. There is no such
constraint on the propositions which an utterance of the sentence can communicate through the
mechanism of implicature. Given enough background, an utterance of 'I am French' might implicate that
kangaroos have tails. What's implicated is implicated by virtue of an inference, and the inference chain
can (in principle) be as long and involve as many background assumptions as one wishes.
The basic triad can be mapped back onto the simple sentence meaning/speaker's meaning distinction by
grouping together two of the three levels. There are two ways to do it, corresponding to two
interpretations for the triad. The 'minimalist' interpretation stresses the close connection between
sentence meaning and what is said; together, sentence meaning and what is said constitute the literal
meaning of the utterance as opposed to what the speaker means:

literal meaning
sentence meaning
what is said
Vs.

13

Evangelicals with its root meaning of Gospel people, is an ambiguous moniker.

www.9marks.org/journal/who-exactly-are-evangelicals
www.gallup.com/poll/17041/who-evangelicals.aspx
Two Approaches to Defining Evangelicals
Broadly speaking, there are two basic ways to approach the objective of defining evangelicals:
(1) adherence to some specific belief or religious practice criteria The obvious problem
with any procedure that qualifies people as evangelical based on agreement with a set of
statements is the lack of consensus on what those statements should be. There are so many
different possible criteria, one could envision a series of 20 or more statements necessary for
individuals to agree with in order to be included under the "evangelical" umbrella. and
(2) self-definition (that is, just asking people whether they consider themselves evangelical).
This approach outlined is much simpler, focusing primarily on a simple self-definitional
question: "Would you describe yourself as a 'born again' or evangelical?" Further
Restrictions on Self-Definitional Criteria Some individuals who identify themselves as
evangelicals are members of subgroups that many informed observers would agree don't fit in
an evangelical category as conceived. These would include, in particular, people who are not
Christian (but who agree with the "born again or evangelical" criterion). Additionally, for
practical purposes, it is often reasonable to exclude nonwhites and Catholics from the
evangelical category. Evangelicals and Religiosity
Are these evangelicals (as defined) indeed more religious than average Americans -- as we
would expect?

14

Concordance study on the word religion itself as appearing in English Bible translations:

*religion
Almost all of Greek words which are translated as religion not uniformly in English
translation are best rendered differently, esp. since the word is now a highly technical
term in current English usage.
threskeia [thrskeu perform cultic service, religion as punctilious expression of
devotion to transcendent beings Danker p. 171]
Act 26:5 (/high doctrine Etheridge, Murdock); /religious tradition IRENT
(Paul was not using here a technical term religion as such.)
Jas 1:26, 27 (/worship Murdock; service Etheridge); /religious practice
IRENT;
Col 2:18 (~ of the angels): /cultic devotion IRENT; /x: religious worship
ALT, Diagl; /x: worship - most; /a form of worship NWT; /x: ritual CLV;
/xx: obsession (with angels) MSG; /
cf. threskos religious (- connotation of religiosity) < religiously observant JNT;
Jas 1:26;
Greek words translated inappropriately as religion by many Bibles.
deisidaimonia Act 25:19; (/worship Etheridge, Murdock)
eusebeia 1Ti 3:16; 4:8; 6:5, 6; 2Ti 3:5; Tit_1:1
cf. eusebe 1Ti 5:4;
ethelothreskeia (self-devised form of worship); Col 2:23; /
theosebeia 1Ti 2:10;
Greek words translated irresponsibly as religion in a few Bibles.
homologia Heb 3:1, 4:14 (GSNT)
diakonia 2Co 3:7, 8, 9 (GSNT)
latreia Heb 9:1 (Geneva)
he odos ts atheias 2Pe 2:2 (WNT)
odon Act 22:4; Way of religion (Mft)
bebelos 1Ti 1:9- ungodly; /xxx: have no religion (ERV); /
proselutos Act 13:43; converts to the Jewish religion ( ERV); /
Cf. Gal 1:13, 14; en t Ioudasm in the Judaic way of life - IRENT [Ioudaismos />
Pharisaic Judaism ARJ; /Yehudism; /x: *Judaism (problem of associating with
rabbinic Judaism developed in Diaspora); /x: Jewish religion GW] the concept is not
as a religion (such as rabbinic Judaism)

Frequency of the word religion in the Bible translation:

Most x5 KJV, NIV, ALT, ESV, NKJV, NASB. etc.
Act 25:19; 26:5; Jas 1:26, 27; Col 2:23;
NET
Act 25:19; 26:5; Jas 1:26, 27; 2Ti 3:5; 1Ti 3:16;
HCSB Act 25:19; 26:5; Jas 1:26, 27; 2Ti 3:5; 1Ti 5:4;
Mft x14; TCNT x15; GW x7; GNB x13; CEV x8; ERV x10 (+ 1); NLT x6; AUV x6 (+ 14 in
expansion notes); BBE x19;
In PNT the word religion is unnecessary in Gal 4:10; 2Th 2:4. GW, CEV, ERV, etc.
have many unnecessary ones
15

Various defintions and explanations of spirituality: random collections from the web.

D.A. Carson, When is spirituality spiritual? Reflections on some problems of definition; JETS
37/3 (September 1994) 381-394

(1) Sun Chae Hwang (2012), A Theological Analysis of the Non-Church Movement in Korea with a
Special Reference to the Formation of its Spirituality (a thesis paper for M.Ph.): p. 30 The
concept of spirituality is not limited to the Christian religion and is in fact increasingly being used
even beyond explicitly religious circles. When viewed in this broad sense, spirituality is used to depict
an element of human experience. Spirituality here refers to the authentic human search for ultimate
value, or the human persons striving to attain the highest ideal or goal. [Walter Principe, Toward
Defining Spirituality] Thus, in this sense of the term, spirituality involves a progressive, consciously
pursued, personal integration through self-transcendence within and toward the horizon of ultimate
concern. In Christianity, spirituality can be defined as a way of seeking God and responding to the
call to the holiness of life. It is the responsibility of a person to recognize, acknowledge, and respond
to Gods action in ones life. Spirituality is a stance (and state) out of which a person lives and acts
and prays. It is a way of expressing ones relationship to God, to others, and to the whole of creation,
including ones relationship to oneself

(2) James A. Wiseman, Spirituality and Mysticism - A Global View

The first certain appearance of this word in Christian literature dates from the fifth century, in a
letter that was once ascribed to St. Jerome but is now considered to have been written by someone
else. It is addressed to an adult who had recently been baptized and urges that person to live an
authentic Christian life, always moving forward, avoiding all lukewarmness. The author writes that
through the new grace received in baptism all cause for sorrow or tears has been removed. The
newly baptized is urged to act, be on guard, run, has- ten. Act in such a way that you progress in
spirituality (in spiritualitate), that is, in life according to the Spirit that was given in baptism. p. 2
(2) Philip Sheldrake, The Study of Spirtuality. [This article provides an excellent overview on the term
spirituality ARJ ]
In Christian terms, a working definition of 'spirituality' might be as follows. It describes the ways
that individuals and groups seek to enter into a conscious relationship with God, to worship, to
formulate their deepest values and to create appropriate lifestyles in dialogue with their beliefs about
God, the human person and creation. (p.2)
Sandra Schneiders, who notes in one of her numerous studies on the topic that the term
spirituality has three interrelated references: first, to a fundamental dimension of the human being;
second, to the lived experience that actualizes that dimension; and third, to the academic discipline
that studies the experience. Here she defines spirituality as the experience of consciously striving
to integrate ones life in terms not of isolation and self-absorption but of self-transcendence toward the
ultimate value one perceives. (p.4)
(3) Ronald Rolheiser (1999), The Holy Longing The Search for a Christian Spirtuality. p.7 fire
that burns with us. What we do with that fire, how we channel is our spirituality. [However, what he
offered is not a definition per se, but a description of praxis spirituality. ARJ]
(4) Peter Russell (www.peterrussell.com/) (of non-Christian New-ageism) writes the essence

of spirituality is the search to know our real self, to discover the true nature of
consciousness here again we dont see any reference to the concept of spirit. [He further
writes: I AM is the Name of God; Know Thyself to Know God Be still (let the mind be
still) And Know (as a direct experience) That I (your innermost essence) Is God. [It shows
it is alien to the Scripture exactly what the Serpent offered to Adam; the dominant religion
of the world I am God whether one is conscious or not. An easy fall out when the name of
the God of the Scripture, YHWH, is not remembered and revered among Christendom.
Here, when all is said, the definition of God for them is nothing other than (my own) self
glorified. In contrast, God of Trinitarians are actually undefined. It would be hard to find
the name YHWH in any Trinitarian article, and for that matter any Christian articles, other
than those dealing with the subject of the names of God itself. - ARJ]

*Consciousness http://youtu.be/y7RL__ZgdEw;
mind and body; spirit and soul; /

sentient
16

apistia *lack of faith; />>not trusting; /x: unbelief;

Danker p. 43 refusal to give credence to lack of faith, unbelief, of lack of willingness [or
ability] to respond positively to words or actions that invite belief or commitment Mt 13:58; Mk
6:6; 9:24; 16:14; Rm 3:3 (here with focus on commitment; 4:20; 11:20, 23; 1Ti 1:13; Heb 3:9;
kardia ponra apistias base unbelieving heart vs. 12.
Mk 9:24 help my lack of faith in you \ ; /x: unbelief. Gk. apistia
also in Mk 16:14] [problem of verb vs. noun believing, trusting, belief, faith, creed, etc.]; 1
(faith): /help my lack of faith Delitzsch; /Help what little faith I have ARJ; /> help me
where I need faith NWT; /x: strengthen my weak faith WNT(ko. ); /xx: help me
to have more faith AUV-NT; /x: help me where faith falls short NEB; /x: help my
weakness of faith AMP, Wuest; /xxx: (I do have faith, but not enough.) Help me have more!
- GNB 2 (/x: believing; belief): /x: help my unbelieving ARJ; /help thou my unbelief KJV;
/help my unbelief many; /help me overcome my unbelief NLT; /?: shake-off my unbeliefARJ ( ); 3 (trust): /help me such little trust I
had ARJ; /(I do trust!) I havent had trust, help me! ARJ; /help my lack of trust - JNT;
/x: help me trust more PNT, ERV; /xx: help me with my doubts MSG;

/x: help me ~ so-that and-then I believe?

I believe; help my unbelief(NIV). What a strange statement. Does it not contain what appears to
be a contradiction? Wayne Jackson
http://verticalviewer.wordpress.com/ (05 Nov)
17

pisteu eis (believe into)

NET tn On the use of the (pisteu + eis) construction in G-John: The verb
occurs 98 times in G-John (compared to 11 times in G-Mt 14 times in G-Mk [including the
longer ending], and 9 times in G-Lk).

[One of the unsolved mysteries is why the corresponding noun form (pistis) is
never used at all. Many have held the noun was in use in some pre-Gnostic sects and
this rendered it suspect for John. It might also be that for John, faith was an activity,
something that men do (cf. W. Turner, "Believing and Everlasting Life A Johannine
Inquiry," ExpTim 64 [1952/53]: 50-52). ]
G-John uses in 4 major ways: (1) of believing facts, reports, etc., 12 times; (2) of
believing people (or the scriptures), 19 times; (3) of believing "in" "Mashiah (>Christ)" (
+ + acc.), 36 times; (4) used absolutely without any person or object specified, 30 times (the
one remaining passage Isa_2:24, where Yeshua (> Jesus) refused to "trust" himself to certain
individuals).
Of these, the most significant is the use of with + accusative. It is not unlike the
Pauline (en Christ) formula. Some have argued that this points to a Hebrew (more
likely Aramaic) original behind the Fourth Gospel. But it probably indicates something else, as
C. H. Dodd observed: " with the dative so inevitably connoted simple credence, in the
sense of an intellectual judgment, that the moral element of personal trust or reliance inherent
in the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase an element integral to the primitive Christian conception
of faith in Christ needed to be otherwise expressed" (The Interpretation of the Fourth
Gospel, 183).
18

Christomonism

(Monism: reduction of all processes, structures, concepts, etc., to a single governing principle; the
theoretical explanation of everything in terms of one principle.)
[Ref. David Clines, Yahweh and the God of Christian Theology, Theology, Vol. 83 (1980) p. 328
Christomonism. http://online.sagepub.com/ http://tjx.sagepub.com/ ]
[Tim Shuttle writes on MacArthurs Christomonism a cultural accommodation of the Christian faith
based upon the exaggerated focus on the autonomous individuality of discrete human persons resulting
in a de facto denial of the Trinitarian [sic] nature of God as revealed in the Scripture and a reduction of
the gospel to a distorted Christological monism. [A simple phrase Jesus is God, common among
Evangelicals, reduces God in triune relationality (not Trinity God) to a single person.]

In his paper delivered to the Presbyterian network in 1999, Douglas John Hall asserts the danger of
Christomonism. What this means is that we take this little phrase Jesus is God and reduce our Triune
God to a single person. But in practice it has other implications for our understanding of humanity
and salvation, our practice of justice, etc., etc. Discovered just this past weekend, this paper helped me
see the connection of our simplistic Christology to our inability to embrace the other, a legacy of the
universalizing and colonialism of modernity. Hall asks how we continue to affirm a rich Christology
without embracing the Christonomism (Dorothy Sollee called it Christofascism) that has been so
popular in Christendom. He writes, I think that we can do so only if we recover a foundational
Theologya doctrine of Godthat is informed by a Judaic sense of the dialectic of divine distance and
proximity, otherness and sameness, transcendence and immanence. Christomonism and the exclusivity
that attends it represents, I believe, a failure of trinitarian theology. For a triune understanding of God,
the western tradition especially was always tempted to substitute an undialectical monotheism heavily
informed by a christology emphasizing the divinity principle and downplaying Jesus true humanity.
The result, in the hands of the simplifiers, is what H. Richard Niebuhr rightly named a new
unitarianism of the second person of the trinity or, in the plain and oft-repeated slogan of popular
evangelicalism, the simple declaration: Jesus is God. If all we can say of Jesus and of God is that
Jesus is God all the God of God there is then we have effectively ruled out all other attempts of the
human spirit to glimpse the mystery of the ultimate; and this is all the more conspicuously the case
when our understanding of Jesus, in the first place, is really a dogmatic reduction of his person, his
thou-ness, to the it-ness of christological propositions that, most of them, enshrine little more than
our own religious bid for authority.
from http://nextreformation.com/?p=2454#sthash.Xx3ZWSzX.dpuf
Nowhere Yeshua was called or described as the God (Elohim), nor the phrase Yeshua is God.

19

Human being vs. human person person vs. being; Person vs. person:
Ref. Adrian Thatcher, Truly a Person, Truly God (Ch. 7 Person, nature and Man, p. 80.)
the most contentious element of incarnational doctrine, viz. that Christ, the divine Person, had
a human nature but lacked, or was not, a human person. Rather he became man, but the
subject of his human nature, like that of his divine nature, was the divine Person of the Son.
God the Son is a metaphysical Person whose divine nature becomes perfectly united to a
human nature. There is one Person not two, and there are two natures, not one. In what sense,
then, is a Jesus a human person?

20

Eerdmans Bible Dictionary p. 747

Significance of Name: Because of the vitality ascribed to words, a name signifies first and foremost
existence. Everything and everyone has a name (Eccl 6:10), and the very naming brings them into
being (Isa 40:26; cf. Gen 2:19). The name represents the person (Num 1:2; cf. Act 1:15, KN; RSV
"persons") and the personality (e .g., Nabal, "fool"; 1Sam 25:25). Because a name is a social reality,
kept by memory and through posterity (cf. Ps 72: 17), to cut off a person's name means not only death
but the very obliteration of one's existence (e.g., 1Sam 24:21 [MT 22]; Ps 9:5 [MT 6]; 109:13).
The name conveys the authority of the person even when absent. To speak or act in another's name is
to participate in that person's authority (1Sam 17:45; 25 :9; Act 4:7). The principle is that of prophecy
and revelation (Exo 3:13-14; Deu 18:19; Jn 5:43) . God's name reveals his character and salvation in
which people may take refuge (Ps 20:1 [MT 2]; cf. Isa 25 :1; 56:6); to treat God's name as empty is
to despise his person (Exod. 20:7). Similarly, to act in the name of Christ is to participate in his
authority (Act 3:6; 1Co 5:4; 2The 3:6; Jas 5:14) as well as to share in his contempt (Lk 21 :12-19; Act
5:41). Elsewhere the name of Christ stands for the whole of his salvation (4:7; 1Co 6:11).
To bestow a name is an act of authority, denoting possession, responsibility, and protection
for some person or object (2Sam 12:28; Ps 49:11; Isa 4:1) . The naming of creation is thus
an exercise of dominion, part of the "image of God" (Gen 2: 19-20; cf. 1:28). Changes of
name confer new status, either greateror lesser (32:28; 2Kg 24: 17). Similarly, baptism into
(Gk. eis) Christ's name signifies a new status, from death into life (Rm 6:2ff.), and a new Lord
(1Co 1:2). Believers are not given a new name, but bear Christ's name (Act 11:26; 1Pe 4:16;
Rev 14:1); their names are known by God (13 :8).
21

Phrase and phrase-based format as adopted in IRENT translation work:

E.g.
I myself went to the library in the morning
of that memorable day.

This sentence may also be counted as two phrases:

I myself went to the library
in the morning of that memorable day.

A working on transtation faces a variety of long sentence, which may contain only independent
clauses (to make a compound sentence) or subordinate clauses (to make a complex sentences)
along with abundant modifiers . The above example in a translated text, the latter would make
more logical break to divide the sentence into two meaning-based groups. [Actual breath pause
Between two breath groups may be varied and even negligible. In the script for oral reading a
suitable unobtrusive editors marker for breath pause may be placed above the space, such as .
As might be employed in a free-form poem printed with visual effect, the space between two
may be more than a single space. E.g.

I myself went to the library

in the morning of that memorable day.

If a dash is in place,

I myself went to the library in the morning of that memorable day.

there would be not only a breath pause but also a momentary pause in the statement and in the
reader mind following through the statement. The phrase afte the dash is supplying additional
information not only as an after-thought, but also put a focus to bring the readers attention on
it.
22

Examples for rendering *imperatives in IRENT:

Lords command (in imperative) is not about do this and dont do this. It
is exhortation to become the kind of person who lives in Him transformational.

Do not worry (Cf. Dont be anxious) (Mt 6:25)

vs. Stop worrying
vs. (Do) not be worrying.
vs. Be you not worrying.

Judge not (Mt 7:1)

vs. Do not judgeDont judge Do not judge others
vs. Stop judgding
vs. Be not judges of others
vs. Do not pass [condemning] judgement [on other people]
vs. Be you not judging others Not be a judgemental person

Believe in me (Jn 14:1b)

vs. Be you believing in me
vs. Do believe in me

Love one another (Jn 15:12)

vs. Be you loving others

Obey your parents (Eph 6:1)

vs. Be obeying your parents
vs. Be you obeying your parents
vs. /x: Be you subject to the parents of you Diagl;

Do not worry (vs. Dont be anxious) (Mt 6:25)

vs. Stop worrying

vs. (do) not be worrying.

Judge not (Mt 7:1)

vs. Do not judgeDont judge Do not judge others
vs. Stop judgding
vs. Be not judges of others
vs. Do not pass [condemning] judgement [on other people]
vs. Be you not judging others Not be a judgemental person

Believe in me (Jn 14:1b)

vs. Be you believing in me
vs. Do believe in me

Love one another (Jn 15:12)

vs. Be you loving others

Obey your parents (Eph 6:1)

vs. Be obeying your parents
vs. Be you obeying your parents
vs. /x: Be you subject to the parents of you Diagl;
23

Salvation through Yeshua is effected so immediate, permanent, and free when anyone finds
Him in His grace because the costly divine love is so complete. The love is continuously and
unconditionally reaching out the creation from the beginning to the consummation. No laws,
traditions, or religions have any power over such outpouring love in His Spirit. It cannot be
blocked by powers in human authorities or powers that be in heaven, as they are being played in
the deceiving hands of the Satan. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the
message of truth, the Gospel of your salvation. When you came to believe, you were marked in
him with a seal, the promised holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until
the redemption of those who are Gods possessionto the praise of His glory (Eph 1:13-14)

24

Some notes on Catholic doctrine of justification:

Problematic statements: (1) to justify is to make righteous not accurate; it is to be taken as righteous.
Neither it is to be declared as if of something forensic [sic] (- incorrect term), judicial, legal. To be made
righteous or to become righteous is instead a process of regeneration (Rm 6:6-7; 17-18) and sanctification.
(2) When we are justified, we receive a righteousness that we did not have before. Namely, we receive the
righteousness of Christ or the righteousness of God. not accurate. We do not receive it. Righteousness is
not something Christ or God has and is willing to give to us. For Catholics, when God justifies us he
actually constitutes us in righteousness. He discharges our debt to the courts of heaven so that we are
restored to a state of righteousness. We are now innocent, our penalty having been paid by Christ, so that
we now no longer owe any debt to God's eternal justice. Jesus paid it all. There may still be temporal
factors to our sins that we have to deal with, but Christ fully paid the eternal price of our sins, and so we are
restored to righteousness before God. Actually it is forgiveness and salvation, rather than justification.
In the seventh chapter of the Trent's Decree is listed a number of different causes of justification the
formal cause, the final cause, the instrumental cause, the meritorious cause, and the efficient cause. All the
courtroom language would ask us to do is add one more: the forensic cause. Actually with the concept of
righteousness grasped, we dont need such elobarate theological expounding. It claims that Protestants
often say that we receive Christ's own personal righteousness when we are justified. Not all protestants
would say so; and there is no scriptural, biblical, theological basis for such.
25

tempt, temptation - From English dictionaries

temp

[Etym. ME: from OF tempter to test, from Latin temptare handle, test, try.]

entice or attempt to entice (someone) to do or acquire something that they find attractive
but know to be wrong or not beneficial. [Syn: entice, persuade, convince, inveigle,
induce, cajole, coax, woo] [Antonyms: discourage, deter]

have an urge or inclination to do something.

attract; allure [Syn: allure, attract, appeal to, whet the appetite of][Ant. repel, put off]
(archaic) risk provoking (a deity or abstract force), usually with undesirable
consequences.

temptation

26

act or state of tempting

act or state of or being tempted; a desire to do something, esp. something wrong or
unwise. [syn: desire, urge, itch, impulse, inclination]
a thing or course of action that attracts or tempts someone.[syn: lure, allurement,
enticement, seduction, attraction, draw, pull; siren song; allure, appeal, attraction,
fascination]
Temptation of Jesus - the tempting of Jesus by the Devil

be saved

Jn 3:16; Rm 10:9-10
From www.truthortradition.com/
How and why to get saved (born again) Rm 10:9-10
Oswald Chambers, from his daily devotional book My Utmost For His Highest on November 21,
Never build your preaching or forgiveness on the fact that God is our Father and that He will forgive
us because He loves us. It is untrue to Jesus Christs revelation of God. It makes the cross
unnecessary and the redemption much ado about nothing. If God does forgive sin, it is because of
the death of Christ.
That is exactly correct. God loves everybody, but He is not going to save everyone. (Rm 10:9-10)
Love does not save. Sin required a payment, and that payment was in the person of Jesus Christ, the
Lamb, the Passover, the one from among the flock, the Man who died instead of us so that we could
have everlasting life, so that we could have life in the age to come

27

Devil, falsehood, lies in Jn 8:44

Jn 8:44
a

Yo [in your conduct] are from out of your father, the very Devil,
and yo want to carry out the desire of this father of yo.
That one was a manslayer right from the start
and does not stand in the truth,
because there is no truth in him.

Whenever he utters all that which is false,

it is from his being what and who he is that he is speaking
because a deceiver [with falsehood] he really is!
indeed, [he is] the father of [all] the falsehood [out of mans mouth].

[Note: Devil a deceiver, not a liar; uttering always truths (but not the whole truth as he
does not possess) which are to mislead people so that they choose to get themselves deceived
except one lie which about who he is.] [Devil employs man as a liar. Man is who utters
lies, being deceived by Devil. Man is painted and made as stupid, silly, and sly by Devil
smelly too.] /the lie; /x: (the) lies;
28

Concordance list on demons related words and phrases

cast out demons (cf. exorcism)

Mt_7:22; 10:8; 12:24, 27, 28; Mk_1:39; 3:15; 16:17; 11:15, 18, 19, 20; 13:32;
/cast out demons most; /x: cast out devils KJV; /expel demons JNT; /drive out
demons HCSB, NIV trio, BBE, TCNT; /x: force out demons CEV; /x: force demons out of
people GW; /xx: banish demons MSG; /expel the demons WNT; /drive out demonic
spirits Cassirer; /

Beelzebul - Mt 12:27 (chief demon)

the evil spirit Act 19:15, 16;
the unclean spirit Mt 12:43; Mk 1:26; 9:25; Lk 8:29; 9:42; 11:24;
an unclean spirit Mk 1:23; 3:30; 5:2; 7:25;
every unclean spirit Rev 18:2;
unclean spirits Mt 10:1; Lk 6:18; Act 5:16; 8:7; Rev 16:13;
the unclean spirits Mk 1:27; 3:11; 5:13; 6:7; Lk 4:36;

a spirit of Python Act 16:16; Diagl; /a spirit of divination KJV, NASB, ESV trio; /a snakespirit JNT; /spirit of prediction HCSB; /x: a demon of divination NWT; /x: a spirit by which she
predicted the future NIV duo; /a divining spirit TCNT; /x: a spirit of fortune-telling ISV; /x: an
evil spirit that told fortunes GW; /x: a spirit in her that gave here the power to tell the future CEV;

demon-instigated (daimnids) (Jas 3:15) /is works of demons Cass; /from

demons Etheridge, Murdock;/> demoniacal- Webster, Rhm; /> demon-like- GSNT;
/demonic most; /x: devilish KJV+, ASV, MKJV, LITV, TCNT, Mft, Darby, (Bishops, Geneva);
/x: devilish (demoniacal) AMP; /x: comes from devil himself CEV; /is from the devil
ERV; /demonic [i.e., it is motivated by an evil spirit and not the Holy Spirit] - AUV; /devilish
conniving MSG (- baloney); /belongs to~ evil spirits WNT; /

demon-afflicted (> daimonizomai); (physically and mentally afflicted - demon

griping on a person is gripped by a demon, a personification) Mt 4:24; 8:16, 28,
33; 9:32; Mk 1:32; 5:15, 16, 18; Lk 8:36
/x: demon-possessed - most; /possessed with the devil KJV; /possessed of a demonic
spirit Cass; /possessed with a daemon Whiston; /possessed of a demon NWT;
/possessed by a demon GW, Mft, GSNT, Wuest;
/controlled by demon JNT; /demon-oppressed ESV; /dominated by an evil spirit AUV;
/demoniac RSV, CLV, WNT, Wesley; /x: being demonized Diagl; /x: demonized Rhm;
/x: with evil spirit BBE; /x: he had a demon - GNB; /x: a demon was in him CEV; /had a
demon inside him ERV; /xx: possessed by a devil PNT; /x: in who was a demon
Murdock; /(struck speechless) by evil spirit MSG;

[A problem of understanding the nature of such condition vis--vis the modern concept
of demon possession, which is observable phenomenon subject to study in sociocultural, psychological and neuropsychiatric, and religious aspects. Unless the word
possession; be possessed is clarified, (along with understanding of a religious practice of
exorcism, such demon-afflicted is preferred to a special jargon demon-possessed in
the translation work of the Scripture.]

29

A list of other translations with the phrase torture stake for stauros.

[As the main idea of the word is execution, however horrible it is, the point is not
torture (as pictured well in the prominent theme violence cruelty of the crucifixion
in Mel Gibsons movie, The Passion of Christ.)

Others English translations which uses phrase torture stake

30

Restoration Study Bible, [?] (2011) (x1 in Lk 9:23);

The Gospel of the Kingdom for Students A Harmony of the Four Gospels, Robert
ROBERG (2011) (e.g. Mk 8:34; 15:15,21; Lk 14:27);
The New Testament: Gods Message of Goodness, Ease and Well-Being Which Brings
Gods Gifts of His Spirit, His Life, His Grace, His Power, His Fairness, His Peace and His
Love Expanded, Amplified, Multiple Renderings, Jonathan P. MITCHELL (2010) - as
cross (torture stake) in Phi 2:8; (the original verson has also in Jn 19:17, 25, 31)
Hebraic Roots Bible: A Literal Translation, Don ESPOSITO (2009) (not passim, e.g. Mt
10:38; 16:24; 27:40, 42; Mk 8:34; 10:21; 15:30, 32; Lk 9:23; 14:27; Jn 19:25; 1Co 1:17,
18; Gal 5:11; 6:12, 14; Heb 12:2);
Kata Mattyah: According to Matthew, Jackson H. SNYDER (2008) (x1 Mt 16:24);
New Simplified Bible, James MADSEN (2005) (x1 1Co 2:2);
The Word of Yahweh (Assembly of Yahweh, ed. 2, 2003) (e.g. Mt 27:32,40,42; Lk
23:26; 1Co 1:17; Gal 5:11; 6:12; Eph 2:16; Phi 2:16; Heb 12:2);
The Living Destiny: The Man from Matthew Mark Luke and John, Marvin COLE (ed. 2,
1984) (e.g. Mt 10:38).

Greek text for the pertinent verses.

[Mt 12:8

31

KURIOS GAR ESTIN

hO hUIOS TOU ANQROWPOU [KAI] TOU SABBATOU]

[Lk 6:5

(hOTI) KURIOS ESTIN

hO hUIOS TOU ANQROWPOU

KAI TOU SABBATOU]

[Mk 2:28

hWSTE KURIOS

hO hUIOS TOU ANQROWPOU

KAI TOU SABBATOU]

ESTIN

Various renderings of the Gk. latreia in this verse:

Rm 12:1 sacred-service (Gk. latreia) 1 (as a noun): /sacred service ALT, EBTV, NLT,
Wuest; /service of worship NASB; /act of worship NIV duo; /act of (reasonable) worship
WNT; /worship most; /service KJV++; /Temple worship JNT; /divine service CLV, Rhm;
/religious service Diagl; /(cult) rite Mft; /Your reasonable ((rational, intelligent)) service and
spiritual worship - AMP;

2 (rephrased into a verbal phrase): /(Thats the most sensible way)

to serve God CEV; /(This offering of yourselves is the spiritual way for you) to worship
((serve)) God. ERV; [(this is the reasonable way for you) to worship. ISV; /(This is truly the
way) to worship Him. NLT; /( For this is a reasonable [or spiritual] way for you) to worship [or
serve] - AUV; /(When you offer your bodies to God,) you are worshiping him NIrV; /

3
(turned into baloney): /xx: (a new sentence of baloney) PNT; /xxx: (a baloney) Embracing
what God does for you is the best thing you can do for him MSG; /
32

Word study of related Greek words for service ministry:

latreia sacred service > worship

Danker p. 213 cultic devotion Jn 16:2; Rm 9:4; 12:1; Hb 9:1, 6)

latreu Rm 1:9 /serve most; /sacredly serve ALT; /render sacred service
NWT; /render spiritual service Cass; /xxx: offer the worship TCNT;

(Danker p. 213 1. carry out cultic activity, the strictly religious aspect
minister, serve Lk 2:37 etc. 2 be committed in homage and devoted
service beyond cultic activity, serve Mt 4:10 etc.) /

leitourgia [Danker p. 214 service, s. prec. a. in cultic matters Lk 1:23; Hb

8:6; 9:21; in ext. sense Phi 2:17. be in material matters, of aid rendered 2Co
9:12; Phi 2:30.]

Lk 1:23 /x: public service NWT; /x: ministration KJV, Diagl; /sacred
service ALT, /service NET, ESV trio, NIV trio; /priestly service NASB;
/xx: ministry HCSB; /divine service Cass; /

Heb 8:6; /x: work JNT, NIrV, ECW; /service MRC; /ministry KJV+,
NET, most, Wuest, PNT, Cass, ( - anachronistic); /sacred service ALT,
EBTV; /public service NWT; /service Diagl; /priestly work GW, GNB;
/appointed to serve CEV; / [priestly] ministry AMP; /divine service
Mft; /priestly service GSNT; /public ministry Rhm; /office Bishops;
Phi 2:17; /service most; /sacred service ALT; /x: (sacrificial) offering
ESV trio; /public service NWT, Diagl; /ministration CLV; /offered (as a
sacrifice) TCNT; /

Heb 9:21; /? ceremonies JNT, NIV duo; /ministry KJV, NASB;

/worship NET, ESV trio, HCSB, NIrV; /public service NWT; /public
worship TCNT; /priestly service GSNT; /(omit) PNT; /

33

Word study on priest high priest:

*priest, priests; *high priest, chief priest, chief priests; priesthood

vs. *kohen, *kohanim; kohen gadol; Kohen haGadol, *cohanim; *cohen; kehunnah

hiereus priest Heb 5:6; 7:17; Act 19:14; (Act 14:13; priest of Zeus)
archiereus chief priest/ high priest; /cohen gadol JNT; / Lk 3:2; Heb 5:10; 6:20;
Act 19:14
[Danker p. 56 /cohen gadol JNT;
- 1. high priest, chief priest Mk 2:26 al., of Christ Heb 2:17 al.
- 2. collectively, members of Sanhedrin who belong to high priestly families chief
priests Mt 2:4; Mk 8:31; Lk 23:13; Jn 7:45; Act 4:23 al.]

archieratikou of chief priest Act 4:6

Yeshua, the Gods apostle and Kohen haGadol Heb 3:1

NWT: inconsistent with high priest vs. chief priest:

the high priest x 49

the chief priest Mk 2:26 v.l.; Jn 18:19, 22; Act 4:6;

Concordant Word study with JNT

*cohen JNT x 72 - kohen

cohanim (x 26) kohanim
Mt 12:4, 5; Mk 2:26; Lk 1:9; 3:2; 6:4; 17:14; Jn 1:19; Act 4:1; 6:7;
Heb 7:5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 20, 23, 27, 28; 8:4; 9:6; 1Pe 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10;
20:6;
cohanim gdolim Lk 3:2 v.l. /the high priests KJV; /kohen gadol IRENT
taking v.l. singl.;
the cohen hagadol JNT x 37 - (Kohen haGadol note no additional the)
Mt 26:3, 51, 57, 58, 62, 63, 65; Mk 14:47, 53, 54, 60, 61, 63, 66;
Lk 22:50, 54; Jn 18:10, 15, 16, 19, 22, 24, 26;
Act 4:6; 5:17, 21, 27; 7:1; 9:1; 22:5; 23:2, 4, 5; 24:1; Heb 9:7, 25; 13:11;
cohen gadol JNT x 17 a chief priest kohen gadol
Mk 2:26 [v.l. the cohen hagadol]; Jn 11:49, 51; 18:13; Act 19:14;
Heb 2:17; 3:1; 4:14, 15; 5:1, 5, 10; 6:20; 7:26; 8:1, 3; 9:11;
head cohanim (x4) Lk 22:66; 24:20; Jn 18:35, 19:21; - chief kohanim
the head cohanim (x 60) the chief kohanim - IRENT
Mt 2:4; 16:21; 20:18; 21:15, 23, 45; 26:3, 14, 47,59; 27:1, 3, 6, 12, 20, 41, 62;
28:11; Mk 8:31; 10:33; 11:18, 11:27; 14:1, 10, 43, 53, 55; 15:1, 3, 10, 11, 31; Lk
9:22; 19:47; 20:1, 19; 22:2, 4, 52; 23:4, 10, 13;
Jn 7:32, 45; 11:47, 57; 12:10; 18:3; 19:6, 15; Act 4:23; 5:24; 9:14,21; 22:30;
23:14; 25:2, 15; 26:10, 12;

hierateia Heb 7:5; Lk 1:9 to ethos hierateiras according to custom of

/x: priesthood ALT, NET, ESV trio, HCSB, NIV duo, etc.
priests office KJV
priestly office NASB, NWT; /
kohens function IRENT; /

Heb 7:5; tn ierateian lamban; /became cohanim JNT; /became priests NIV
trio; /receive office of the priesthood KJV; /priestly office NET, ESV trio,
HCSB, NWT; /priesthood ALT; /priests office NASB; /

hiersun kehunnah />> priesthood: Heb 7:11, 12, 24; 1Pe 2:5, 9.
Heb 7:11, 12ff /system of cohanim JNT; /system of priest ERV; /priestly system
PNT; /priesthood most, Cass; /> priests BBE, CEV; /
Heb 7:24 /his position as cohen JNT; /priesthood most ;
Heb 7:14; hierosuns > hierosun kehuannah [v.l. hieren > hiereus kohanim
(coming from that tribe of Levi)]

hierourge - Rm 15:16 with the priestly duty JNT; /ministering KJV ;/in the
priestly service ESV trio; serve as a priest ALT, HCSB; /serve like a priest NET;
/engage in the holy work NWT;

hierateu Lk 1:8; -/officiate as priest; />> serve as priest;

[officiate - perform duties attached to a particular office, place or function cf.
prosech Heb 7:13]

34

The text is available online http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ ; an audio version

http://youtu.be/bbRdfMI5Y3I

Jonathan Edwards, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God A Sermon Preached at Enfield,
July 8th, 1741.
pp. 16-17
And consider here more particularly several Things concerning that Wrath that you are in
such Danger of.
1. Whose Wrath it is. It is the Wrath of the infinite GOD. If it were only the Wrath of
Man, tho it were of the most potent Prince, it would be comparatively little to be regarded.
The Wrath of Kings is very much dreaded, especially of absolute Monarchs that have the
Possessions and Lives of their Subjects wholly in their Power, to be disposed of at their
meer Will. Prov 20:2 The Fear of a King is as the Roaring of a Lion: whoso provoketh him
to Anger, sinneth against his own Soul. The Subject that very much enrages an arbitrary
Prince, is liable to suffer the most extream Torments, that human Art can invent or human
Power can inflict. But the greatest earthly Potentates, in their Majesty and Strength, and
when cloathed in their greatest Terrors, are but feeble despicable Worms of the Dust, in
Comparison of the great and almighty Creator and King of Heaven and Earth: It is but little
that they can do, when most enraged, and when they have exerted the utmost of their Fury.
All the Kings of the Earth before GOD are as Grasshoppers, they are nothing and less than
nothing: Both their Love and their Hatred is to be despised. The Wrath of the great King of
Kings is as much more terrible than theirs, as his Majesty is greater. Luke 12. 4, 5. And I
say unto you my Friends, be not afraid of them that kill the Body, and after that have no
more that they can do: But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear; fear him, which after he
hath killed, hath Power to cast into Hell; yea I say unto you, fear him.
2. Tis the Fierceness of his Wrath that you are exposed to.
3. The Misery you are exposed to is that which God will inflict to that End, that he might
shew what that Wrath of Jehovah is.

35

Gk words on repent
metanoe BDAG p. 640 1 change ones mind no NT citation. 2 feel remorse, repent, be
converted - many citations. ( ~ apo tinos) repent and turn away from someth.
Repent what?
Sin repent Lk 17:4;
~ ek Rev 2:21, 22; 9:20, 21; 16:11; ~ apo Act 8:22;
Repent and turn away/around cf. epistref turn back to (God) Act 3:19; 26:20; - BDAG p.
382
metanoia - prim. a change of mind repentence, turning about, conversion (many citations)
*metamelomai BDAG p. 639
1 to have regrets about someth., in the snse that one wishes it could be undone, be very
sorry, regret Mt 27:3; 2Co 7:8ab Mt 21:29, 32 prob. fit better under 2. 2 to change ones
mind about someth., without focus on regret, change ones mind, have second thoughts Mt
21:29, 32; Hb 7:21.

Baptism vs. immersion-rite: In Korean translations, (meaning washing-away

rite) vs. (immersion-rite). In Japanese Bible translations is the
transliterate of baptisma).]
36

Soul sleep controversial topic. a plethora of articles on this issue, pro and con. [Ref:
Justin Martyr, On the soul etc.]
37

Basic problem both sides have not made clear is what is meant by soul, which is an
anachronistic word used to translate Gk. psuche. To think it as a part of a person is as
comparable to see spirit as a part of a person. Soul is ones own being. Spirit is not a
substance or a component one has (as in a common idea of tripartite structure of human
being), but mans faculty which is to resonate with Gods spirit.
To be in sleep should be taken no more than of metaphor of being dead.

Related word: ekpsuch (soul losing? Act 5:5, 10; 12:23) vs. ekpne (breath out ones
last, expire Mk 15:37, 39; Lk 23:46 all Yeshuas); koima (fall into sleep; die); katheudo;
teleutao (Mt 2:19; 9:18); cf. appolumi (perish Mt 8:25); apothnesko (be dead Mt 26:35)

soul sleep (conditional immortality)

a person is described as sleeping in relation to death (Lk 8:52; 1Co 15:6) is a figure of
speech (not literal sleep), but it is not without pointing to a reality which is not
defined in the Scripture, since it has always with new life waiting forthem. It is not
about body in sleep to wake up on resurrection; that soul is in paradise or Hades
after death is a common unscriptural belief. (Phi 1:21-23; 2Co 5:6-8 - against the
idea of soul-sleep) Does the phrase in 1Th 4:13-18 fall asleep in the sense of to die
as a metaphor but the person not continue in sleep? The verb to sleep, koima, is
used of both natural sleep (Mt 28:13; Lk 22:45; Jn 11:12; Act 12:6), and of death, but
only of the death of the Christian ( - here anachronistic term) (here in vss. 13, 14, 15;
Mt 27:52; Jn. 11:11; Act 7:60; 1Co 7:39; 11:30; 15:6, 18, 51; 1h 4:13-15; 2Pe 3:4).
[In 1The 5:6, the word used for sleep is a different Greek word katheudo and in the
context refers, not to physical death, but to spiritual and moral complacency.But 1Th
5:10 and Eph 5:14 is same as to fall asleep in death Danker p. 182 Mt 13:25; 25:5;
etc. Mt 9:4; Mk 5:9, etc. ]
After death God receives ones spirit (Lk 23:46; Act 7:59) of the believers. Does it
mean that soul does not die; does it mean that soul does not sleep? Most confuses
spirit and soul, esp. in this phrase. How does Lk 15:10 (there is joy in the sight of
the angles of Elohim) suggest that a persons soul does not die?.
What about Enoch (Gen 5:24) and Eliyahu (2Kg 2:11) being taken up into heaven?
What about Eliyahu in the vision (Mt 17:1-4)?
1Th 4:14 sleep in Yeshua is it soul sleep, or a figurative idom?
Ps 9:17 does not talk about hell (- KJV language).

38

In Korean language, bread is , a loan word pronounced same as pain in French. Since this

refers to something eaten for a snack or a treat, it is unsuitable for a translation word for the
Bible. [Another related word in Korea, is made of rice and it is also only for a snack or treat.]
Same for (rice meal), (meal). For adequate trans-cultural transfer of the meaning, the
option is to use the word for the main dish () cooked rice. The example of bread in the
Pericope of Feeding Multitudes is best rendered as ; (> / /> ) (a ball/lump
of cooked rice).
39

Matzah (Unleavened Bread).

Cf. It was regular (leavened) bread, In the Lords Last Supper, not unleavened one. [Note: The
use of wafer of unleavened bread used in Eucharist for church liturgy as practiced in Christian
religions is a result from conflation of the Last Supper with matzah eating (for the Festival of
Matzah unleavened bread).]

40

romantic love vs. marriage

Quoting from
http://cosmostheinlost.com/2014/01/10/sexual-revolution-make-sex-legal-safe-rare/

The punishing denials of Romanticized all-transcending-love were already exposed by Denis de

Rougemonts Love in the Western World. The book should have been called Gettin no Love in the
Western World because he claimed, Love ceases to be a demon only when he ceases to be a god. Here is
how he connects idealization and ascesis: To love in the sense of passion-love is the contrary of to live. It
is an impoverishment of ones being, an askesis without sequel, an inability to enjoy the present without
imagining it as absent, a never-ending flight from possession.
He then makes an important distinction between Romantic love and marriage:

Romance feeds on obstacles, short excitations, and partings; marriage, on the contrary,
is made up of wont, daily propinquity, growing accustomed to one another. Romance
calls for the faraway love of the troubadours; marriage, for love of ones neighbor.
Where, then, a couple have married in obedience to a romance, it is natural that the first
time a conflict of temperament or of taste becomes manifest the parties should ask
themselves: Why did I marry? And it is no less natural that, obsessed by the universal
propaganda in favor of romance, each should seize the first occasion to fall in love with
somebody else.
41

On the term *homosexuality and *sexual perversion:

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders began its life in the 1950s as a
theoretical tome. Psychoanalysis still influenced psychiatry strongly, and early editions of the
book drew on Freudian theories such as castration anxiety (an unconscious fear supposedly
developed in early childhood) to explain sexual "deviance," as it was then called ..In 1973,
the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the DSM list of paraphilias
(sexual perversions). But psychiatrists replaced homosexuality in the DSM-III (1980) with
"ego-dystonic homosexuality," which was used to describe people who were distressed about
their homosexuality. Eventually, in 1986, that diagnosis was dropped, too.
The evolution of the paraphilias has in some ways echoed that of homosexuality. The
current edition, the DSM-IV-TR, Those paraphilias include pedophilia (attraction to
children), voyeurism (spying on others), exhibitionism (exposing oneself in public), frotteurism
(rubbing against a non-consenting person) and sadism (inflicting pain).
www.academia.edu/1824353/How_to_Be_a_Pervert_A_Modest_Philosophical_Critique_of_t
he_Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders
42

See EE for Greek synonyms of diastreph here.

[diastreph p. 93 Danker (dia, stref; distort twist) divert from proper behavior,
pervert, mistlead Lk 23:2; Ac 13:8. Aass. of pers. Mt 17:17; Lk 9:41; Phi 2:15; of
things taught Ac 20:30. d. tas hodous make crooked the ways 13:10.]

Mt 17:17; //Lk 9:41 genea apistos kai diestrammen (> diastreph)- people
of generation ~ perverting truth - IRENT; /perverse generation; /> perveted
generation;
Phi 2:15 mes geneas skolias kai diestrammens
in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation,
Act 13:10 to make crooked the straight ways (>> pervert the right ways KJV)
Act 20:30 uttering things of perverting truths

Cf. Lk 23:2, 14, apostreph (subvert); /x: pervert KJV

Cf. Tit 3:11 ekstreph (go wrong way)
Cf. Gal 1:7 metastreph to distort the Gospel; /x: pervert
Cf. Act 2:40 skolios apo ts geneas ts skolias tauts from this crooked
generation!"
Cf. Jud 1:4 metatithmi (turn the grace of our God into).
Cf. Jud 1:7 ekporneu kai apeltheousai (> aperchomai) opis sarkso heteras; /x:
indulge in fornication of sexual immorality and give themselves up to lust of flesh
against natural desire. /

atopos 2Th 3:2 [Danker p. 61 [deviant, wrong, Lk 23:41; Ac 25:5; 2Th 3:2; unusual, surpring
Act 28:6]; [Cf. pornros 2Th 3:2]

plans Rm 1:27 error

43

atom [of time]:

Gk. word atomos (English word atom is derived from it) would be an indivisible smallest
discrete unit of any concept. It was used to describe theoretically the smallest indivisible unit
of matter (Leucippus, 460 b.c.). It carries the idea of "indivisible," and the speaker/writer is
free to supply any category/object. This is a rather common characteristic of any language.
BDAG cites Aristotle, Physics 236a en atom as referring to an instant of time. Symmachus's
translation of Isa. 54:8 uses the same phrase to indicate an instant, but he's late 2nd century
CE. (from Webb Mealy)
1Co 15:52 en atom, en hrip ophthalmou in an atom of time, in a blink of an eye. KJV
and others translate the phrase as 'in a moment'.
There is no reason not to apply this word to time in addition to matter (down to atom
before its internal structure further became known nucleus and electrons, etc.), as the
concept of quantum for energy in modern physics. The term atom as an undivisible unit
of time, is comparable to quantum in modern physics parlance. A discrete smallest unit of
time which runs in succession, giving illusion of continuous and ever-flowing. In between
the atoms of time would be absolute void, emptiness, absence, (kanji mu);
(simplified Chinese, wu). See a futher development of the idea in this line in Ref. I. M.
History (1998), The Far Side of Armageddon. (ISBN: 5550116049)
[The philosopher Whitehead] suggests that all created entities are made up of drops of
experience, and that existence itself, life itself for us humans, is an ordered series of
extremely brief occasions of experience. Ref. Korsmeyer JD Evolution & Eden p. 97 (1998
Paulist Press). Prob. from Process and Reality (Alfred North Whitehead).

44

Immersion rite with fire

Mt 3:11 immersed with holy spirit, {even with fire} (~ ) { also in

Lk 3:16, but not in Mk. (taken as an example of hendiadys)}; /> spirit, {also with fire} ARJ;
/spirit, {yes, fire of spirit} ARJ; /x: with the Holy Spirit - most; [This promise fulfilled in the
Ch 1-2 of the sequel to G-Lk.] [dative EN parallel to with water, indicates medium, not agent
(like by h.s.)][Unconvincing is fn in Alford p .23 This was literally fulfilled at the Pentecost (Act
2). The end of baptism by water is METANOIA; the baptism by the Holy Ghost [sic]
sanctification, the entire aim and purpose mans creation and renewal - Origen and others wrongly
(why? ARJ) take this as baptism of the righteous by the Holy Spirit, and of the wicked by fire
apparently from v. 12.] [not holy spirit plus fire, nor holy spirit = fire as appositive, but
immersed in/with either holy spirit for eternal life, or with fire for eternal destruction: See REC fn
contra Alford. fire here is not the fire in Acts 2:3, which is related to holy spirit (not the Holy
Spirt REC and others; the Holy Ghost KJV), but is the same fire as in vv. 10 and 12, the fire
in the lake of fire (Rev 20:15).][cf. for the purpose of purifying rather than burning up - 1Co
3:13,15; Jer 23:29 my word like a fire; Zec 13:9 refine in fire (Zec 13:9; Ps 66:10; Job 23:10; Prov
17:3; Isa 48:10; Mal 3:2,3); trials (Jam 1:12); 1Pe 1:6] [cf. parallel passage in Jn 1:33; Act 1:5;
11:16 without PURI][note Act 1:5 was fulfilled in Act 2:4 with holy spirit in conjunction with
tongues of flame (> fire); in Ps 104:4 (103:4 LXX) spirits // flaming fire ][Fire as metonymic for
suffering - the only occasion where baptism + of fire occurs alone is a common English idiom
baptism by fire (firebaptism in Danish) {Oct 9, 2009 Re: [B-Greek] PNEUMA and PYR in
Matthew 3:11} Iver Larsen];

45

romantic love vs. marriage

Quoting from
http://cosmostheinlost.com/2014/01/10/sexual-revolution-make-sex-legal-safe-rare/

The punishing denials of Romanticized all-transcending-love were already exposed by Denis de

Rougemonts Love in the Western World. The book should have been called Gettin no Love in the
Western World because he claimed, Love ceases to be a demon only when he ceases to be a god. Here is
how he connects idealization and ascesis: To love in the sense of passion-love is the contrary of to live. It
is an impoverishment of ones being, an askesis without sequel, an inability to enjoy the present without
imagining it as absent, a never-ending flight from possession.
He then makes an important distinction between Romantic love and marriage:

Romance feeds on obstacles, short excitations, and partings; marriage, on the contrary,
is made up of wont, daily propinquity, growing accustomed to one another. Romance
calls for the faraway love of the troubadours; marriage, for love of ones neighbor.
Where, then, a couple have married in obedience to a romance, it is natural that the first
time a conflict of temperament or of taste becomes manifest the parties should ask
themselves: Why did I marry? And it is no less natural that, obsessed by the universal
propaganda in favor of romance, each should seize the first occasion to fall in love with
somebody else.