Hot answers tagged

12

This answer draws on Michael J. Cahill, "Drinking Blood at a Kosher Eucharist? The Sound of Scholarly Silence", Biblical Theology Bulletin 32/4 (2002): 168-181. It should be consulted directly for full discussion and copious further references. OP: Wouldn't Jews be taken aback by the suggestion that they should drink blood? Yes, they would. OP: How ...


11

The word used in verses 14, 17, and 18 is bətûlîm, “evidence(s) of virginity.” This is from bətûlâ, “virgin”, which is used in verse 19 to describe a woman thus evidenced. It refers to the custom of retaining a blood-stained sheet or cloth from the bed where a marriage is consummated. The blood (dam betulim) is said to “prove” the bride’s virginity as it ...


11

The other two answers do a good job of answering the question, but I thought it was worth pointing out the actual ban and its explanation: Leviticus 17:10 Explicitly makes your point for you; those who consume the blood of animals are cut off from the Jews, but then verse 11 explains the reason for the ban on blood of animals; drinking blood takes upon ...


6

Jesus had aleady shocked his followers with references to drinking blood in John Chapter 6. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink" When leads to.. As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. I think we can infer that by the time of the Last Supper, any disciples who had a problem with ...


5

Commentators generally see this as a reference to the Mosaic laws forbidding blasphemy. For example, Barnes' Notes, the Pulpit Commentary, the Cambridge Bible and Ellicott's Commentary see it this way. Whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he ...


4

Leviticus 3 gives the details of the peace offering as it pertained to God, but not as it pertained to the priests. Leviticus 7 adds: And the priest shall burn the fat upon the altar: but the breast shall be Aaron's and his sons'. And the right shoulder shall ye give unto the priest for an heave offering of the sacrifices of your peace offerings. He ...


4

In John 1:17, the Greek text according to the Textus Receptus (Estienne, 1550) states, ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωσέως ἐδόθη ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο which is translated as, since the Law was given by Moses; grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. It would seem as though the author is contrasting the Law with grace and truth and ...


4

It is mostly irrelevant whether the perpetrator of a crime has one eye or two, because Exodus 21:23-25 are referring to monetary penalties, except in the case of murder. Here is the text from Exodus 21:23-25, all three verses of which are important in understanding the answer to your question: 23: אִם אָסוֹן יׅהְיֶה וְנָתַתָּה נֶפֶשׁ תַּחַת נָפֶשׁ 24: ...


4

Although Paul does not use the same word for 'abolish' as Jesus in Matthew 5:17, I think it helpful to bear that verse in mind, as Paul did not intend to contradict what Jesus says: 17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth ...


3

"μετατιθεμένης"(metatithemenes-being changed) is from "metatithemi" passive of an office the mode of conferring which is changed, Hebrews 7:12; 71 τί εἰς τί, to turn one thing into another (τινα εἰς πτηνην φύσιν,(from Thayer's Lexicon) This is Aorist passive; the Law itself has not changed, but the 'object of change'(High Priesthood of Christ) ...


3

This is a good question, and touches on a number of hermeneutical nuances. In order to bring out some of the subtleties which will underlie our answer, I'd like to begin by reviewing a number of key assumptions inherent in the question itself. Assumption 1: The disciples were Jews It is true that the disciples were of Israelite descent and had grown up ...


2

While the Bible does not proscribe how execution by stoning should be carried out in detail, later Jewish tradition does and may reflect how stoning was performed during Second Temple Judaism or earlier. The Jewish Encyclopedia summarizes the procedure: The convict having been placed on a platform twice his height, one of the witnesses throws him to ...


1

Not sure what commentaries you looked at. But you're in good company with Calvin, who seems to indicate a clear temporal sense in the phrase "from faith unto faith": The more our knowledge of true religion increases, we see the grace of God with greater clarity and more familiarity, as though He were coming nearer to us. ... [This phrase] marks the daily ...


1

To me, the Epistle to the Romans is a job application, albeit an unsolicited one. Paul spends the first chapter winning the trust of the Romans, assuring them that he would fit into their group. Paul begins with a lengthy opening address no doubt designed to impress the Roman Christians that he was, at the same time, sincere and unassuming, and that his ...


1

Translations always provide issues. What it says in a less directly-translated manner is "the Torah and commandment". Tracing back to the original: 'The Law' = תורה = 'the Torah' 'The Commandment' = מצוה = 'commandments' The meaning then is that all of the 613 commandments in the Torah (the Law), derive from the ten commandment in some manner, according ...


1

Clarifications The passage is not primarily referring to dedicating "oneself" (per the quote by Matthew Henry in the OPs original question), and so the musing why not just donate the money or equivalent to begin with instead of vowing oneself and then redeeming oneself is not primarily relevant (but more on that in a moment). Verse 2 makes this ...


1

Yes, the question is rhetorical, expecting the negative response, but no, this does not suggest Paul thinks that God is unconcerned about animals or that this Old Testament passage was originally about Apostles. Paul was attempting to draw the reader's attention to an Old Testament passage which clearly teaches the same principle Paul was trying to teach ...


1

Does this passage describe the crime of rape? Yes, Deuteronomy 22:28-29 describes what's known today as rape. If so, does this passage describe the all punishment the man will endure? Yes. The man just has to pay a fine to the virgins father for lowering her property value. She's now 'used goods'. If so, how does this represent justice for ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible