For Such A Time As This

Christians’ reactions regarding emissaries from Israel, coming to strengthen the bond between us and the Jewish people, are certainly mixed. There are a broad variety of responses, from, “it’s prophecy, deal with it” to “the Jewish people get what they deserve.” Such dogmatic responses are troubling. The very dogmatism with which we judge the Jewish people is used to judge us. The former premise supports the idea that evil must not be opposed in the name of prophecy whereas the latter contains an element of vengeance. Jesus opposed such dogmatism in his opposition to religious folks. On one occasion, when he was accused of expelling evil spirits, from a suffering person, with the help of Satan, he responded “if I expel demons by the finger of God by whom do your sons (disciples) expel them?”

It is clear that he was aware of other devout Jewish miracle workers. Indeed the Talmud indicates that some of these pious sages came into conflict with the established religious authorities as Jesus did.  Many, ironically, were from Galilee, the province where Jesus’ ministry was based. A Christian theology professor once acknowledged that though the New Testament records such a phenomenon regarding Jewish exorcists, “I do not think that is possible without the Holy Spirit.” There are important implications in this statement. Did he mean they were expelling demons by the power of Satan? Didn’t Jesus dismiss this possibility saying such a claim was impossible since Satan’s kingdom would fall apart. (Mark 3:20-30) Did he professor intend to say it was not true because the Jewish exorcists lack the Holy Spirit? Isn’t such a claim based on a biased assumption? Could the Jewish exorcists also have the aid of the Holy Spirit? Jesus declares that such is precisely the case, as Satan would certainly not oppose his own work. Surely Christianity is not consumed with such prejudice and arrogance to think we have “cornered the market” on the Holy Spirit. It should not be surprising that the community who was responsible for the Dead Sea scrolls, wrote extensively about the Holy Spirit. They were contemporaries of the Jesus movement. Their literature predates that of the New Testament. Additionally, the writings of the sages reflect a deep understanding of the “Shekhinah” (Abiding Presence of the Creator), and acknowledge the echoing voice of the Holy Spirit (Bat Qol). Many times our assumptions separate us from our roots, which is tragic.

The celebration of Purim commemorates the time of the deliverance  of the Jewish people from annihilation at the hands of the Persians. Certainly, current affairs regarding Iran (Persia) and Israel have been the topic of discussion in light of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to the U.S. Congress, which was opposed by President Obama. The scroll of Esther (Megillat Ester) tells the story of how the courageous young Jewish woman usurped conventional protocol to reveal and thwart an evil plot against her people. Though the name of God is absent from the book, His presence is demonstrated throughout the story. The Holy Spirit revealed hidden plots to those who had been blind to the truth.  It is Jewish tradition to read the scroll of Esther at the beginning of Purim. Prurim will begin at twilight on March 4 this year.

The roots of faith between the Jewish people and Christianity are obvious to the careful observer. Moreover, the common persecution of our faiths is becoming a topic of discussion given the genocide which the Islamic State (ISIL) is carrying out against Christians. The only safe haven in the Middle East, for Christians, is Israel. Meanwhile, Iran declares themselves to be the Islamic Republic. What is not obvious to the casual observer is that these two claims to Islamic control are opposed to each other. One reflects the ideas of the Shia (Iran) whereas the other reflects that of the Sunna (ISIL). These sects of Islam are struggling for dominance, not only to be the voice of Islam, but to exert Allah’s influence over the entire world.

During this time of such radical upheaval, the United States is deeply divided along partisan lines. Once the beacon of hope in the world, she has become the object of scorn as loyalties to party have displaced devotion to the divine. Lust for power, wealth, and pleasure consumes the thoughts of her citizens, which create the demand for that which DC, Wall Street, and Hollywood are happy to satisfy.

Is there a way back to the blessing?  Perhaps through 2 Chronicles 7:14. Let us join our Jewish brothers and sisters in reading the book of Esther and celebrating God’s power to deliver His people.

NETANYAHU WARNS IRANIAN MESSIANIC APOCALYPTIC CULT MAY GET NUCLEAR WEAPONS: If U.S. doesn’t act, Israel will

Rosenberg’s analysis of Netanyahu’s insight is spot on. However I would caution the use of the term “apocalyptic” as it is often misused. Perhaps the term “eschatalogical” encapsulates the idea more efficiently. They mean to bring about the “final things” in regard to Islamic eschatology. Whereas the term apocalyptic has taken on a connotation of climactic end-time destruction,” the essence of the word has its roots in “unveiling” the divine mystery. Semantics aside, the analysis needs to be spread rapidly as high-speed internet can carry it to those who will listen.

Joel C. Rosenberg's Blog

(San Diego, CA) — Newly-inaugurated Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wasting no time in laying out the existential threats facing Western civilization. In his first speech to the nation, as well as in various media interviews, he warned that Iran’s messianic, apocalpytic cult leaders will get their hands on nuclear weapons soon, and that if the U.S. won’t act decisively to stop Iran, Israel will.

“The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu told The Atlantic. The Iranian drive for a nuclear weapon was a “hinge of history,” he said, emphasizing that all of “Western civilization” was responsible for preventing an Iranian bomb.

“You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” Netanyahu said of the Iranian regime. “When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the…

View original post 453 more words

The Son of Man: A Muslim Misconception

Overview

It is difficult for Muslims to comprehend theological concepts which Christians themselves have disputed over the centuries. Indeed from the Council of Nicaea (325) to the Council of Chalcedon (451) the Church struggled to define the nature(s) of Jesus to the satisfaction of many. It was not until 681 the second Council of Constantinople finally condemned Monotheletism (having a single will) and decreed that, in Christ, there were two wills.[1]  By then Islam engulfed the Arabian Peninsula and had spread westward throughout Egypt, north through Syria into Asia Minor, and east through Iraq and Iran into Afghanistan.[2] Islam became embroiled in a crisis of its own, from 680-692, when Al-Husayn was murdered, the son of Ali, along with his family at Karbala, which fueled the fire of the Shi’a and Sunni rift.[3]   

Modern Christians find it difficult to explain the Trinitarian doctrine adequately to which the nature of Christ is inextricably linked. No text records Jesus directly saying “I am God”. Indeed such a statement would have surely prompted the Jewish authorities to have him brought before the High Priest with an accusation of blasphemy, a crime of which he was eventually convicted:

“And the high priest said to Him, “I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God.” Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his robes, saying, “He has blasphemed! What further need do we have of witnesses? Behold, you have now heard the blasphemy!” (Matt. 26:62-65) [4]

Though he did not expressly say he was God this statement was close enough for the priestly authorities to consider such was his declaration.[5] Not only does this claim of divine prerogative include the Davidic title “Son of God” but also the apocalyptic appellation “Son of Man” which, ironically, infers more significant implications for his condemnation.[6] The preponderance of the evidence upon the lips of Jesus provides sufficient reason for Christians to affirm belief in the divine nature of Jesus. Muslims refute this claim, based on their understanding of the Qur’an: 

“And We sent not before you any messenger except that We revealed to him that, “There is no deity (god) except Me, so worship Me.” (Quran 21:25)[7]

            This ayah forms the basis of the Muslim proclamation of the first pillar of faith, the Shahada, much like the Shema (Dt. 6:4) for a Jewish person. There are good reasons to believe the Qur’anic texts, which refer to Christianity’s Trinitarian belief, reflect a misunderstanding of orthodox views of Christianity due, in part, to the diversity of the Church during that time period.[8] None the less the purpose of this very brief study is to examine selected texts from the Qur’an which appear to contradict Christian claim of Jesus’ divinity and determine if the differences are able to be reconciled.

Analysis

Whereas Islam confirms Jesus’ Messianic status, it is clear the transcendence of God is diminished by any claim of humanity, Messiah or not, which attempts to claim equality with the divine: 

“O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist – it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son…” (Quran 4:171)

However does the ayah accurately reflect Christian doctrine of the Trinity as it is reflected in the creeds of the era? The Council of Nicaea established consubstantiation:

“…true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father…”[9]

The creed was upheld during the time of the Muslim advance in 680, at Constantinople, as mentioned above. Though the Council of Nicaea determined that “begotten” does not imply he came into existence at birth[10] it appears the sura referenced above is directed at such a Christian creed. Michael Brown, in response to Jewish objections to Jesus’ claim of divine Son-ship retorts:

“Obviously, none of us believe that God had a son in the same way a human father would have a son. We are fully aware that the creator of the universe wasn’t married. What then do we mean when we say, “Jesus is the Son of God”?[11]

Brown mentions the Semitic meaning for the term “son” has a variety of applications not the least of which is to indicate metaphorical offspring.[12] Indeed the Messianic concept in the Hebrew Scriptures is that the earthly king, sitting on the earthly throne, is regarded as God’s son.^[13] This however does not indicate Jesus is equivalent to God which the Qur’an sternly warns against. God is so transcendent in Islam the doctrine of tawhid, singularity of God, must not be violated or the unforgivable sin will have been committed:

“Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly fabricated a tremendous sin.”(Quran 4:48)

The text seems to indicate shirk is committed when something or someone is placed on an equal status with God, which diminishes His transcendence a highly important concept in Islam.[14]  James White, having investigated the theological aspect of tawhid extensively, writes:

“Such a ‘partner’ could be a partner in lordship, worship, or attributes. In other words the essence of ‘shirk’ involves giving Allah’s rights to other than He.”[15]  

White speculates “partnership” may have stemmed from a misunderstanding, originally, of Mary being one of the “three” mentioned in the ayah above (4:171) as indicated in an ayah in the following surah::

“And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah?”(Qur’an 5:116)[16]

There is no indication in the Gospels or the Nicene Creed to indicate precisely what Christian doctrine the ayah is condemning. White contends, therefore, that no firsthand knowledge of Christian theology is indicated even in light of the unbiblical Catholic exaltation of Mary, though Rome denies having elevated her to divine status.[17] However following the Council of Chalcedon the creed incorporated a phrase venerating Mary as “the God-bearer”.[18] Some contend that Muhammad came into contact with oral accounts of the Gospel during the time he spent directing his uncle’s, and later Khadija’s, caravans to Syria.[19] It is not unthinkable some of these oral traditions or creeds, such as “the God-bearer”, created confusion in the Arabic oral transmission without someone keenly familiar with the doctrines to correct the mistakes.[20] In light of this evidence and given the idolatry which surrounded Muhammad in Mecca, especially his own clan who maintained the Ka’aba, it is not unreasonable to conclude Christians were mistakenly considered polytheists. Considering the legend of Mithras, “the god-man”, and that the Egyptian Pharaoh considered himself the embodiment of Ra it is conceivable all these factors gave rise to the stern warning against shirk.[21]

It is clear that Aaron’s sister Miriam was confused with the mother of Jesus which indicates at least some of the textual tradition was mistaken:

“Then she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, “O Mary, you have certainly done a thing unprecedented. O sister [i.e., descendant] of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste.” (Qur’an 19:27-28).

Riddell and Cotterell contend there is clear confusion here between the two women separated by more than a thousand years as clearly the sister of Aaron may have been spoke of negatively for her part in opposing Moses.[22] Having allowed this confusion to creep in to the Qur’anic text it seems reasonable to doubt the accuracy of the divine revelation which Gabriel is reported to have told Muhammad to recite:

     “Narrated by ‘Aisha ‘(the mother of the faithful believers) Al-Harith bin Hisham asked Allah’s Apostle “O Allah’s Apostle! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you?” Allah’s Apostle replied, “Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes ‘ off after I have grasped what is inspired. Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says.’ ‘Aisha added: Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the Sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).” (Bukhari Vol I, Book I, Number 2)[23]

We note that sometimes the angel Gabriel appears as a man, though the Islamic concept of angelic messengers is decidedly different from that of Christianity as inspiration does not come from angels who are mere messengers but from God’s Spirit.[24] Never the less the term used here in the hadith is inspiration, a favorite term in Christian tradition.[25] The Qur’an itself indicates God watches over his word:

“And recite, [O Muúammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord. There is no changer of His words, and never will you find in other than Him a refuge” (Qur’an 18:27)

Though some Muslim apologists contend this assurance extends only to the Qur’an, White argues, if God would allow what he has “sent down” and “revealed” in the Torah and Gospel, containing “guidance” and “light”, to become corrupt, what assurance is there the Qur’an would not suffer the same fate?[26] Though it is not the purpose of this study to disparage the Qur’an there are obvious reasons to consider revising how it is read and interpreted. Finally White quotes an early Islamic scholar Al-Kindi (632-732) who affirms the Torah and the Gospel in their extant forms but takes umbrage with Jews and Christians who leveled accusations the Qur’an has been corrupted.[27] Having received such affirmation from a Muslim scholar early in the Islamic era the accusation of textual corruption would not come util later. As most modern Muslims believe the actual Gospel text became corrupt, tarif al-fafz, no basis for this charge can be established and certainly not proven.[28] It would also follow that the doctrine of abrogation then would not apply to the earlier Hebrew Scriptures or the Greek New Testament given the early affirmation of the texts as the charge of corruption came much later as an unfounded attempt to marginalize what the Qur’an previously affirmed.[29]

Therefore what Jesus says in regard to himself is of paramount importance as it reflects his self awareness as to who he was. His response to the high priest was an unveiling of what had previously been a veiled circumlocution couched in Semitic word play. That is to say “Son of Man” can be used to refer to a person in general, a specific person, one’s self, and certainly the eschatological judge of all mankind (Dan. 7:13) who David calls my Lord (Ps. 110:1) , who is a Son begotten by the LORD God  (Ps 2:7, Jn. 3:16) and whose throne is eternal (Ps 45:7).[30]

Conclusion

As little time and space was available to properly address these important issues only an overview was provided regarding this important issue. David Goldmann appropriately summarizes in concluding comprehensive study of the issue:

“The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ was Immanuel, God with us, Jesus Christ, as eternal God, became human. God revealed His nature and essence in a way that could be seen and touched (Jn. 1:1 and 14)”[31]

Furthermore Goldmann, quotes 1 John 4:2-3 in contrast to the shirk principle:

 ^“By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.”

Former Shi’ite Muslim turned Christian Pastor, Reza Safa, tells of numerous Muslims that have put their faith in Christ because Jesus appeared to them, as he appeared to Paul.[32] Do we dare ask God to show us who Jesus really is? None the less further investigation is warranted and certainly Jesus and his true identity is the answer for all mankind.

[1] David F. Wright, “Councils and Creeds”, Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977), 178.

[2] Fred M. Donner, “Muhammad and the Caliphate”, The Oxford History of Islam, ed. John Esposito, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 19. 1-62.

[3] Donner, 17.

[4] Unless otherwise indicated all Biblical references are from the New American Standard Bible (NASB) (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).

[5] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983), 687. Erickson agrees that the reaction of the High Priest to Jesus’ claim is “instructive”.

[6] “Son of Man” is Jesus’ favorite self designation, as evidenced by his frequent use of the term, which he employs as an ambiguous linguistic aid to keep his critics off balance and yet reveal a higher meaning of Messiah, in the Jewish Apocalyptic tradition as seen in Daniel 7:13.

[7] Unless otherwise indicated all Quran Sura references are from “The Quran English Meanings and Notes” (Translated by Saheeh International) (Al-Muntada Al-Islami, 2011). The student used an electronic version which included Arabic parsing to help with some linguistic aspects from http://corpus.quran.com/wordmorphology. (No city is listed for publication.)

[8] Hans Kung, Islam, Past, Present, and Future, trans. John Bowden, (Oxford: One World Publications, 2007), 34-35. Kung demonstrates the penetration of six centuries of Christianity into the Arabian Peninsula prior to Islam and how loan words from Christian languages crept into the Qur’an demonstrate Christianity’s influence and holds that “Jewish-Christians” had the greatest impact on Muhammad.

[9] Wright, 169. The text was reproduced from the Nicene Creed.

[10] Wright, 159.

[11] Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections To Jesus, Volume 2 Theological Objections, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 2000), 38.

[12] Brown, 38-47. Brown argues Israel is described as God’s first born in Ex. 4:22-23 and also that it may indicate a being of the same class which angels are sometimes referred as in Job 1:6. Brown continues to build a strong case for the divine nature of the Messiah from the Hebrew Scriptures in light of Ps. 45 and Dan. 7:13 in addition to Ps. 2 and 110. It should be noted the Psalms are held in high regard by the Qur’an. (4:163)

[13] Sigmund Mowinckel, He That Cometh, trans. G.W. Anderson, (Bristol: Abbingdon Press, 1954), 76. Mowinckel refers to the royal Psalms of coronation, Ps. 2 & 110 primarily but also Ps. 18, 21, 65, 72, 101, and 104.

[14] The Arabic verb “يُشْرَكَ” , yushrakha means to “partner with” indicating co-equality. 

[15] James R. White, What Every Christian Needs to Know About The Qur’an, (Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2013), Kindle Electronic Edition: Chapter 3, Location 858.

[16] White, Chapter 4, Location 1255-271. White quotes Ibn Kathir a Muslim commentator who confirms the ayah (5:116) is referring to Mary as a deity which Christians worship.

[17] White, Chapter 4, Location 1312.

[18] Wright, 175. This is the Greek rendering of the Syriac “ܝܳܠܕܰܬ ܐܰܠܳܗܳܐ‎”, “yaldat alaha”, “bearer (feminine) of God”.

[19] Peter G. Riddell & Peter Cotterell. Islam In Context, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 66.

[20] Riddell & Cotterell. 66.

[21] Mowinckel, 34. The Egyptian Pharaoh was to be considered a god himself.

[22] Riddell and Cotterell, 77. Note the Sahih  translation, “descendant” for “sister” which strengthens Brown’s contention that these Semitic terms have variable meanings and then the concept of Son of God then should be given some consideration as not being offspring but being “like”. They also record that one commentator explains it is because Mary is of the Levite tribe she is then the “sister” of Aaron. However the Semitic root of “cousin” in the Lucan text may not necessarily indicate blood or marital relation as Luke seems to indicate passively that Mary hails from Judah.

[23] Unless otherwise indicated all Bukhari Hadith references are from Sahih International’s electronic version at http://sahih-bukhari.com.

[24] Beginning in Ex. 6:10, for example, the Lord speaks to Moses. To be fair on occasion the “Angel of the Lord” does communicate. This usually indicates a visible being as in Gen. 16:7.

[25] 2 Tim. 3:16 uses the term “θεόπνευστος”, indicating the unseen breath or Spirit of God motivates the person.

[26] White, Chapter 8, Location 2263.

[27] White, Chapter 8, Location 2354-2380.

[28] White, Chapter 8, Location 2276.

[29] Qur’an 5:44-47.

[30] Brown, 42-43.

[31] David Goldmann, Islam And The Bible, Why Two Faiths Collide, (Chicago: Moody Press, 2004), 151.

[32] Reza F. Safa, Inside Islam, (Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, 1996), 128.

Grace Like Rain!

“For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit upon your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants.” (Isa 44:3 ESV) In an agricultural society rain is that which sustains life. So the Spirit of the living God is compared to rain in this verse. As rainwater gives and sustains life so does the Holy Spirit. It was generally espoused that the Divine Presence departed from the Temple in Jerusalem during the time of the Babylonian siege and subsequent capture. The rabbinic literature expresses the disparity between the glory of the first Temple in comparison to the second. Though the second was majestic in architecture it lacked a fuller manifestation of the Divine Presence. In the departure from Egypt (the Exodus) the people of Israel could see the presence of the LORD going before them in the pillar of cloud and fire. In the Tabernacle and Temple the glory of the LORD was manifestly present. Yet as a nation the people sinned. Led by misguided leaders the people divided into two Kingdoms. Subsequently they were led into idolatry and corruption. Subsequently both Kingdoms eventually fell into captivity. The people of the northern kingdom intermarried and incorporated outside influences whereas the southern kingdom was carried away into exile. The land was left desolate and barren. They eventually returned and built another temple which was a shell of what had stood before. Later Herod rebuilt the second Temple into a wondrous edifice. Into this structure walked Jesus of Nazareth fulfilling the prophecy of Malachi 3:1 “‘Behold, I am going to send My messenger, and he will clear the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple; and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, He is coming,’ says the LORD of hosts.” Moreover the arrival of the Messiah would initiate this new era of this outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Note how Peter interprets Joel 2:28-32 in Acts 2:14-21, 38. “And in the last days it shall be, God declares,
that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh”…And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” This life giving force does not stop at regenerating one’s heart but also sanctifies, (Jer 31:31-33; Ezek 36:26-27) and also inspires one to speak forth in power (Joel 2:28-29) and advances the Kingdom of God with demonstrative powerful acts (1Cor 2:1-5). The Spirit of God, Divine Presence, is an integral part of a believer’s daily life.

Lord, Teach Us to Pray

TEACH US TO PRAY…

 Luke 11:1 It happened that while Jesus was praying in a certain place, after He had finished, one of His disciples said to Him, “Lord, teach us to pray just as John also taught his disciples.” Luke records the occasion for teaching his disciples to pray somewhat differently than does Matthew. Not that his disciples didn’t need a refresher course on prayer. I know I have. So he may have taught about it on several occasions. Jesus may well have taught his disciples by instruction and demonstration on prayer. Instruction in prayer was a Rabbi’s obligation. Jesus’ insight into prayer would prove to be just as powerful and authoritative as his instruction through parables. It was not that the craftsman from Nazareth used a new teaching device we call parables, it’s that this craftsman turned Rabbi used the rabbinical method with unparalleled authority. (Matt 7:29). Let’s hear the instruction of Jesus on the topic of prayer from the Hebraic perspective.

According to Matthew’s version, Matt. 6:9-13:

” Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

Translated into Hebrew via the Greek New Testament (GNT):

אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמַיִם יִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמך תָּבֹא מַלְכוּתךֶ יֵעָשֶׂה רְצוֹנךְ בָּאָרֶץ כַּאֲשֶׁר נַעֲשָׂה בַשָּׁמָיִם׃
תֶּן־לָנוּ הַיּוֹם לֶחֶם חֻקֵּנוּ  וּסְלַח־לָנוּ אֶת־אַשְׁמָתֵנוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר סֹלְחִים אֲנַחְנוּ לַאֲשֶׁר אָשְׁמוּ לָנוּ׃

וְאַל־תְּבִיאֵנוּ לִידֵי מַסָּה כִּי אִם־הַצִּילֵנוּ מִן־הָרָע כִּי להַמַּמְלָכָה וְהַגְּבוּרָה וְהַתִּפְאֶרֶת לְעוֹלְמֵי עוֹלָמִים אָמֵן׃

(The Hebrew New Testament is by the Society forDistributing Hebrew Scriptures.)In a transliteration its easy to hear the rhythm of the Semitic method even without understanding the ideas woven together in the passage.

aveynu sheva shamime,

yit qadesh shemkha, tavo malkutkha, ye-esay ratsonkha,

b’arets k-asher na-asa b shamime,

ten lanu ha-yom lekhem hokheynu, v slahh lanu et eshmateynu,

k-asher solhheem, anahhnu l-asher ashmu lanu,

v-al tavieynu l-day masa, key eem hatsleynu min ha ra,

kee lamamlakha, v-govera, v-hatiferet,

le olamy olameem, amen.

But did Jesus teach his disciples in Hebrew or Aramaic? Are there subtle nuances that are missing from the GNT version? And what does this mean and how is it applied in the life of Jesus disciples? Brad Young and Joachim Jeremias analyze this prayer from somewhat different perspectives.

Jeremias spends considerable time in his book, “The Prayers of Jesus”, establishing Jesus’ use of “Abba“, אבא, as a term of affectionate relationship diverging from the more universal, plural, “our father” , אָבִינוּ, as used by the Rabbinical sages. Note Matt. 6:9, renders Jesus’ words as “our Father” rather than “Father” in Luke 11:2. Although the Peshitta renders this in the plural possessive it is a clear gloss to reconcile Matthew 6:9 which reflects the Hebraic perspective. Luke reflects the Pauline perspective who wrote, “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father”. (Gal 4:6) Although Paul (Shaul) was a “Hebrew of Hebrews” (Phil. 3:5) he was the apostle to the Gentiles, and therefore his teachings seemed heretical to many of the Jews. None the less “Abba” was on Jesus’ lips when addressing The Almighty. (Mark 14:36).

Hanina ben Dosa and Hanan the Hidden, early Jewish miracle workers, also addressed God as “father”. Whereas he encourages his disciples to address God as “father” there is no doubt he understands his sonship to be unique. (Matt 11:27) A father wants to grant the wishes of his children as they do not request something that is harmful to them. (Lk 11:11-13)

 

“Hallowed be thy name”, as noted by Young parallels Ez. 36:23, “And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I [am] the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.”As Jeremias notes this also echoes the Kaddish (Holy, Sanctified) which is the Aramaic benediction in the synagogue:

 

Exalted and hallowed be his great name in the world which he created according to his will, May his kingdom rule in your lifetime and in your days and in the lifetime of the whole house of Israel, speedily and soon and to this say, amen.

 

Note these petitions find a place in the disciples’ prayer as well. Young puts it succinctly and straightforward, “to sanctify His name is to live a holy life”. I would add the latter two petitions in Matthew, “your kingdom come, your will be done” are not primarily eschatological as in the Kaddish but expresses the tension of the present kingdom in the preaching of Jesus.(Matt 12:28)(Lk 10:18) 1 Corinthians 16:22 does express a future hope preserved in Greek transliteration of the Aramaic Maranatha (our Lord come). This was probably not a formal prayer but a brief petition longing for His return. The early Church, as the Didache (8:3) records, repeated the Lord’s prayer three times daily during the appointed times.

“Your  kingdom come…” as previously noted above seems inconsistent with the kingdom having already arrived in the preaching and miracles of Jesus. However the kingdom does need to take new ground to expand it borders. Hence the tension is that God already reigns in some areas but his “yoke” has not been accepted in others. In rabbinic thought, no doubt on Jesus mind, those who recited the Shema (Dt 6:4) have taken on themselves the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven. (Rb Yehoshua ben Korcha). That is to say they have accepted God’s rule over them. Note that in Ex 15:8, “YHWH reigns” is rendered in the LXX with the present participle which gives the idea of repeated present action. Note that “your will be done…” naturally follows. If God is King and reigns over me then naturally, not my will, but his will be done. As Young rightly demonstrates this petition is not to seek his will as we have already accepted his reign but it is to “do” his will. There is a distinction from Greek to Hebrew as we transition from “may his will be” to “his will shall be done.”   

A Shameful Past!

SHAMEFUL PAST
What religion permitted the Jewish people to retain their form of worship from the 7th century until the 12th century in Spain? Islam. Between 1150 and 1492 the clash between Christians and Muslims proved harmful for the Jewish community. In 1481 the Great Inquisition began and culminated in a royal ultimatum of conversion or exile in 1492. What religion persecuted the Jewish community during that period in Spain? Christianity. Not only in Spain, but all of Europe, beginning with the crusades in 1096, Christianity persecuted the Jewish community relentlessly.

Indeed the Byzantine Christians persecuted the Jewish people until the empire was conquered by the Muslims. Jewish people welcomed Islamic rule, though they were required to pay the “jizyah” tax, as it proved more tolerable than Christian rule, initially. The Byzantine Christians also imposed a special tax on the Jewish people in certain geographical areas known as the “fiscus Judaicus” and were given freedom to worship and apply Torah legal rulings. However by 418, under Theodosius, Jewish legal code was restricted severely and the religion was merely tolerated. By 553 the Emperor Justinian severely restricted Judaism and made reading of the Mishnah unlawful and that the Torah was not to be read aloud in Hebrew. This set the stage for Muslim conquest in the following century as the orthodox Church proclaimed itself, “the Kingdom of God”. Byzantines were soundly defeated in 638 at the siege of Damascus by the Muslim invaders.

The Church has poorly represented the teachings of Jesus. How have the words, “those who live by the sword will die by the sword”, escaped the Church’s application?

Please like the facebook page and spread the word for more posts to follow.