The great commission to make disciples under Rabbi Jesus.
Ephesian 4:20-21 (KJV):
But ye have not so learned Christ;
If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the
truth is in Jesus:
It is not imperative that any one person does the water dunking.
Jesus came and proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom. And the ‘great. Commission’ was given to the disciples to go forth and proclaim this. This included being baptised into this Kingdom.
MAT 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, [snip]
But we need to disseminate this carefully. The commission was to reach the Jews, who had disseminated ...
How do we reconcile Matthew 28:19 and 1 Corinthians 1:17 on Paul's baptizing people?
This can be best explained by Paul's words in Romans 12:4-5
4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
If we take another look at the ...
1 Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John— 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples.
Jesus was a teacher and not a baptizer.
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of ...
Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.
Jesus prophesied his laying down his life for his friends on the cross.
Did Jesus die for his enemies as well as his friends?
Right on the cross, Jesus prayed in
34a Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
These were his ...
You state the passages you quote “point to the end times”. However you really can’t ‘lump’ these together - Yes they are about end times, but, actually very different ‘times’ in the end times. We need to see where these two, the Matthew passages and the Daniel passage fit.
And, as anything that is eschatological, there are going to be differing views, ...
People regarded Zacchaeus as a sinner and enemy. Jesus bestowed friendship on him. Jesus saw him as a friend, and Zacchaeus believed in him. Jesus wants us to do likewise.
If we forgive our brother, we will be able to lay our lives down. Otherwise not.
This verse, if inflected correctly, makes perfect sense. However, if ‘reasoned’ out, it easy to come to very incorrect conclusions….
GEN 6:6 And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.
God created man. Now here’s the pivotal ‘key’. He loved man. He was going to send his son to die on man’s behalf, so as to save ...
Was Christ referring to a particular sin in Matthew 7:3?
No, Jesus was not referring to any particular sin, he was pointing to our ability to judge our brothers properly. We are all imperfect, and should not overreact, to rush and help a brother to remove a minor flaw a "speck" from his figurative spiritual vision so that it will help him ...
Challenges to answering this question
Parables have a main central point and aren't intended for us to interpret as an allegory.
I will concentrate on what the parable is saying but this question is loaded with theology.
This is a parable in Matt. 22:1-10 about the Kingdom of God. Matthew used Kingdom of Heaven to avoid using God, an indication that his ...
Douay-Rheims Bible Matthew 11:
7 And when they went their way, Jesus began to say to the multitudes concerning John: What went you out into the desert to see? a reed shaken with the wind? 8But what went you out to see? a man clothed in soft garments? Behold they that are clothed in soft garments, are in the houses of kings. 9But what went you out to see? a ...
The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth. How can a father regret begetting his own children?
Polyhat has given a wonderful insight into the word usually translated as "regretted" or "repented".
Further, this whole verse gives us better insight into Jehovah God's feelings towards us, his children. The topic "...
And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it
grieved him at his heart. (Genesis 6:6, KJV)
וַיִּנָּ֣חֶם יְהוָ֔ה כִּֽי־עָשָׂ֥ה אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֖ם בָּאָ֑רֶץ
וַיִּתְעַצֵּ֖ב אֶל־לִבֹּֽו׃ (TR)
This Hebrew word וַיִּנָּ֣חֶם (way·yin·nā·ḥem / H5162) is a difficult one to properly translate. It is in the Hebrew Niphal/Nifal form, which happens to ...
9 He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.
The word "many" is a relative term. Here it is contrasted ...
I would say it's because the term "angels" does not always refer to Holy or "Good" spiritual beings. Also there are specific scriptures that reference spiritual angels leaving their heavenly domain and doing evil things God had not ordained them to do. These beings essentially then became what we would call "fallen angels" or &...
If Jesus did not specify heavenly angels, his meaning would have been far more ambiguous. The word "angel" means "messenger." It does not always refer to heavenly beings, but can refer to humans as well.
And Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother unto the land
of Seir, the country of Edom. (Genesis 32:2, KJV)
Sin? Jesus wasn’t talking about ‘sin’. He was talking about Judging - judging yourself. And that certainly is not (a) sin. The context is clear. We see it in the previous verse.
MAT 7:1 Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
I appreciate ...
1And again Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying, 2“The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son, 3and sent his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding feast,
Who does the calling?
The king does the calling using his servants. The king here is God.
but they would not come.
These choose ...
Yes, it is a particular sin. The warning here is for hypocrisy, which God takes a hard stance on.
Proverbs 11:1 (KJV):
A false balance is abomination to the Lord: but a just weight is his
In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say ...
Christ was Speaking about, The passing of Judgment
And with Christs Words we see the emphasis of Maturity as a a requirement for Sound Judgement.
This the Apostle Paul expounds more here.
Gal 6:1 BSB Brothers, if someone is caught in a trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him with a spirit of gentleness. But watch yourself, or you also may be ...
There are aorist infinitives and imperatives that do not imply temporality at all. For example, the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 uses the aorist imperative in "Give (δός dós) us this day our daily bread", in contrast to the analogous passage in Luke 11:3, which uses the imperfective aspect, implying ...
3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?
In the above text was Christ warning one never to try rebuke a brother whilst doing the same particular sin or just any ...
Too long for a comment:
Non-indicative forms of the aorist [...] are usually purely aspectual [...]
There are aorist infinitives and imperatives that do not imply temporality at all.
For example, the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 uses the aorist imperative in Give (δός dós) us this day our daily bread, in contrast to the analogous passage in Luke 11:3, ...
This is a mute issue because, unless your are one of the few with the view that Jesus taught in Greek, these passages are a translation of Jesus' discourse in Hebrew/Aramaic.
imperatives in Hebrew/Aramaic don't have tense. Hebrew has perfect tense (completed action) and imperfect (incomplete action), but these tenses don't carry over to the imperative.
Jesus' two most common titles in the NT are:
The Son of Man, Matt 11:19, 24:30, Mark 14:21, Luke 9:26, etc
The Son of God,
The Son of Man
The title "The Son of Man" serves several functions -
it is an allusion to Jesus full humanity (and ultimately mortality) as per the Hebrew idiom in places like Eze 21:19, 28:2, 33:2, 12, 37:16, 43:7, etc
OP, you asked:
But, whereas Adam was the Father of all mankind, why then is Jesus never called our Father? Why do the Scriptures consistently refer to him as "the Son"?
First, God is the “father” of all by virtue of the fact that he is the Creator of the human family. Humanity was fashioned in his very image (Genesis 1:26-27)
Do we not all have ...
That's multiple questions wrapped up together!
There is actually some ambiguity as to what the exact distinctions between these verb forms might be, but I'll give you my understanding.
The first point to consider is that an "imperative" word is a command. In Hebrew, the jussive form (command), when used to address God, is usually assumed to ...
In the New Testament ἔθνος means gentiles more often than nations. From the standpoint of a Jew, nations and gentiles are equal. However, considering Peter's vision in Acts 10, apparently the disciples initially took it to mean the dysphoria (the Jews scattered in those nations). It took Peter's vision and the Damascus rood (Paul) to change things.
Does the translation of "nations" to "gentiles" work?
Technically, yes, but note two explanations.
The study note for Matthew 28:19 gives an interesting explanation:
people of all the nations: A literal translation reads “all nations,” but the context indicates that this term refers to individuals out of all nations, since the Greek ...
The original word in Greek that is translated here as "nations" is the word "ethnos." That is the same word from which we derive the word "ethnic" in English. It refers to different races.
The word "Gentile" refers to non-Jews, and hints more at religion as its basis for distinction. The Jews are, however, an ethnic ...
New International Version
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Good News Translation
Go, then, to all peoples everywhere and make them my disciples: baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,
Literal Emphasis Translation
What, then, is the significance of the "Second Adam" being "the Son of Man" not "Father of Man"?
The topic "Son of Man" in the Insight of the Scriptures brings out how this applies to Jesus Christi:
Christ Jesus, “the Son of Man.” In the Gospel accounts the expression is found nearly 80 times, applying in every case ...
According to Isaiah 9:6, one of the titles of the Messiah (the Christ) is "Everlasting Father". He is also called "the Mighty God" as is Yahweh in Isaiah 10:21. Herein lies the significance of the last Adam (not 'the second Adam' as you state). Herein lies the uncrossable chasm between the first man Adam being created by God out of dust, ...
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
Eve is called the mother of all the living but Adam is never called the Father of all mankind in the Bible.
OP: Adam was not a son, but the father of all mankind:
In fact, Adam is called the son of God in Luke 3:
the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of ...
Verb - Aorist Infinitive Active
Strong's 4352: From pros and a probable derivative of kuon; to fawn or crouch to, i.e. prostrate oneself in homage. (from Bible Hub)
Jesus did not reject obeissance (worship) because he was not worshipped as God. He was heir to the throne of David, he was David's lord, the messiah. The word worship ...
The Bible teaches that only God may be worshiped (Exo 34:14; Deut 8:19; Matt 4:10; Luke 4:8; Rev 14:7). Peter, Paul and the angel that gave the Book of Revelation to John all prevented people from worshiping them (Acts 14:14–15; 10:25–26; Rev 19:10; 22:9).
Yet, in the King James translation, in 13 verses, Jesus was worshiped. For example, when the magi from ...
Here are some of my rough ideas to add to what has been brought up.
Some scholars believe that Luke composed his Gospel in a truncated manner because he was not aware of the wise men story & flight to Egypt.
However, it is difficult to tell Luke’s intent as εὐθεωσ (eutheōs, immediately) is not used. Luke uses the same words to transition from Luke 23:25 ...
The appendix below shows the various ways that "right" as opposed to "left" is used in the NT. BDAG provides a little more detail where we find the following helpful remarks (excepts)
the right eye (Matt 5:29) was especially valuable because its loss would be a handicap to the warrior
it is better to suffer the loss of the right eye ...
Left vs Right
This is the Biblical pattern:
The left-hand is symbolic of flesh/curse/destruction.
The right-hand of Spirit/blessing/authority.
Psalm 110:1,5 (KJV):
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.
In Luke 6:29 & Matthew 5:39, Jesus seems to apply [Lamentations 3:30-35] out of context stating if your [Right] "Cheek" gets slapped, then offer the other cheek. - to remove vengeful behavior (Matthew 5:38) in an effort to stop humans executing physical abuse in the form of Reciprocal Justice - yet forgets to mention the monetary reward ...
Where is the Father’s kingdom’s final location?
matthew prophecy heaven kingdom-of-god
“I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”” Matthew 26:29
Where will this kingdom be situated geographically speaking? In the heavens or on earth? New or old?
I think ...
Matthew describes only two possibilities. For or against. If you are neutral, you are against. Mark seems to leave open a 3rd possibility. If you are not against, even if you are neutral, you are for. So now let’s look at the context to see if Jesus is really allowing a neutral possibility.
38John said to Him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in
Proverbs 15:3 (ESV):
The eyes of the Lord are in every place,
keeping watch on the evil and the good.
There is evil, and there is good. The Bible does not offer a third moral category.
Romans 6:18 (ESV):
and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of
A person is either a slave of sin or a slave of righteousness.
Joshua 24:14 (ESV)...
King James Bible
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
"Whale" is incorrect. It is corrected in the new version.
New King James Version
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man ...
That is a metaphoric language, in fact, the "hand of God" (cf. Isaiah 64:8) or "finger of God" (cf. Psalm 8:3) is a fixed metaphor for that, through which God creates universe, the entire created order of things, and therefore, the "hand" or "finger" of God cannot in principle be a created thing, unless we go to a ...
The difference is due to manuscript variations.
Westcott and Hort / [NA27 variants]
Καὶ ἐλθόντος αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ πέραν εἰς τὴν χώραν τῶν Γαδαρηνῶν [Gadarenes]
Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
Καὶ ἐλθόντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ πέραν εἰς τὴν χώραν τῶν Γεργεσηνῶν [Gergesenes]
Are Gergesenes and Gadarenes different spellings of the same place?
(1.) Gadara ...
Did Jesus say the great fish that swallowed Jonah was a whale?
In order to answer the question, we must look at the original Greek word.
The word "whale" in the KJV is kétos (κῆτος G2785). It is defined as:
a sea monster
huge sea fish
How does the KJV compare with the LXX?
It seems that the KJV has translated the original Greek word to ...
He that is not with me is against me;
and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
It is a synonymous parallelism. Let me concentrate on the first half,
He that is not with me is against me;
Let W = he is not with me.
A = he is against me.
In terms of first-order logic, Matthew 12:30a says: ¬...
Just wondering how certain we can be with our dating of Matthew vs Luke, inclusive the theory of who copied whom, and what might have been the actual words of Jesus - as this relates to a quotation of a direct speech of Jesus - so wondering what was actually happening, whether there were different oral traditions circulating or if one of the writers would ...