We are at mark 12:26. Jesus is speaking to the Sadducees who do not believe in resurrection. He gives them his reasoning as to why they are wrong: God told Moses, "I am the god of Abraham, the god of Isaac, and the god of Jacob." Since Jesus's god is the god of the living, those people must be alive. If they are alive they must have been resurrected. Ta da! Logic. Unless, somebody made the whole thing up. Oops.
Next we have a teacher of the law watching and listening in on the argument. He asks Jesus which is the most important commandment of all. Jesus's reply is a Jewish ritual saying called the shema: "Hear o Israel, the lord our god, the lord is one (not three, not three in one). Love the lord your god with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." The second greatest command is "love your neighbor as yourself." In Mark no one asks, "Who is my neighbor?" There also no story of the good Samaritan.
In verse thirty-five, Jesus is back in the temple courts teaching. He questions the teaching that the messiah/christ is the son of David. Jesus quotes Psalm 110, which was assumed to be the holy spirit speaking through David, about this messiah: The lord said to my lord: sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet." If the person being spoken about is David's lord, Jesus asks, how can he be David's son? Good question. Apparently no one had an answer. This is interesting because Jesus seems to be implying that the messiah would not necessarily be the son of David, a phrase meaning a descendant of David. Yet, both Matthew and Luke attempt to establish Jesus's lineage from David. No other New Testament writer does. Matthew uses the phrase many more times than any other book.
In verses 38-40, Jesus insults the teachers of the law as being self important and hypocritical. In verses 41- 43, he draws the disciples' attention to a poor widow who put all the money she had to live on into the temple offering. He praises her for giving out of her poverty, and contrasts her with those who gave a lot out of their wealth. While it is true that the widow's offering was far more sacrificial, I would say it was a shame and a waste. Gods do not need money at any time. Poor widows do. She probably went home and died from starvation. It was also a shame and a waste for the rich to be donating pots of money to a god who didn't need it, when there were poor people like the widow who had barely enough to survive. Why didn't Jesus see the woman in need and have pity on her? What kind of god would make giving up your livelihood a good thing?
We are now in chapter 13. Jesus and the disciples are leaving the temple and one exclaims at the magnificent stone construction. Jesus replies that all those stones will be thrown down. This appears to be a prophecy of the destruction of the temple. The temple was destroyed in 70CE. This makes it clear in my mind that the book of Mark must have written after that, more than 40 years after the events depicted, and even after Paul's preaching to the gentiles. Mark has put the words of already fulfilled prophecy in the mouth of Jesus.
They were sitting on the sitting on the Mount of Olives when Peter,James, John, and Andrew privately asked Jesus when the previously mentioned event (the destruction of the temple) would happen and what would signal the coming of that event. Then Jesus gives a long prophetic speech, which makes it even more clear that Mark was written after 70CE. This prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem is often taken out of context and used by christians to describe the last days. We will explore the speech next time.
Showing posts with label messiah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label messiah. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Tuesday, April 17, 2018
High priest Joshua, part 3
We left off in Zechariah chapter 2. This chapter does not mention the high priest Joshua, but I am doing a summary of Zechariah so we can see where Joshua fits in the book. Last time I mentioned I wanted to explore something about this particular chapter. I was confused at the way the angel's speech to Zechariah was worded in the NIV. It seemed as if there were two "Lords" speaking, the plain lord and the lord almighty. Plus, an angel was speaking on behalf of the lord, as though he was the lord. It was confusing and I needed to get it straight in my head. I'm still confused. In verses 8-13, all the words "lord" are from the word yahweh, but yahweh appears to be talking about himself in the third and first person at the same time. It is a grammatical horror. I decided to compare the Christian version of Zechariah 2 with the Jewish version. They are quite different in grammatical structure, but I am no more enlightened than I was before. So, we will move on to chapter three.
Zechariah is telling what else happened in his vision. The angel who was speaking to him showed him Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the lord. The angel of the lord in these kinds of situations usually appears to physically represent the lord and speak for him, almost as if he is the lord, but he is not. It can get confusing. This angel of the lord was thought to be the archangel Michael, as seen in Jude. Satan is standing at Joshua's right side to accuse him. This is not the Christian version of Satan, but the Jewish version. He is kind of like a prosecuting attorney, trying to prove the defendant guilty. The lord (actually the angel) said to Satan, "the lord rebuke you, Satan," then the angel requested that Joshua's filthy clothes, representing sin, be taken away, and rich garments be put on him. Zechariah told the angel to put a clean turban on Joshua's head, and it was done.
Next, the angel of the lord commissioned Joshua to govern the temple, if Joshua would walk in Yahweh's ways. Then he would be given a place among the angels. He told Joshua that he and his associates were symbolic of things to come. Yahweh was going to bring his servant, the Branch. This refers to prophecies in Ezekiel 17 and Isaiah 4, about Yahweh restoring Jerusalem,and maybe the monarchy, with a descendant of the old monarchy. My study bible calls it a messianic prophecy, but I think the author is just referring to the restoration of Jerusalem. The chapter goes on to predict an ideal future for the land. It should be noted that this was probably written before the Greeks and Romans came to conquer the holy land. There was no need for a savior. Things were going to be fixed. The Jews were migrating back to their homeland and rebuilding their city as well as their relationship with Yahweh. Later jews looking for a savior may have tried to find hope of a messiah in this passage, but I doubt that was the original purpose. Funny that the prophet Zechariah did not foresee the future conquests.
In chapter 4, the angel of the lord wakes Zechariah up, only to find himself in another symbolic vision with lamp stands, lights, olive trees, etc. this is supposed to represent the word of the lord about Zerubbabel laying the foundation of the temple and completing it. The two olives trees represent two who are anointed to serve the lord of all the earth. It could be the new king and the new high priest. My study bible says it could be another messianic vision of a future combination priest-king. However, these are two separate and distinct olive trees.
In chapter 5, Zechariah does a double take and sees a flying scroll. It is a curse against all thieves and liars. Then the angel draws his attention to a basket. It was a measuring basket, inside the basket was a woman. She represented wickedness. (Ugh, it would be a woman.) the basket has a lead cover which was pushed down over the top. It was lifted up by two other women with wings who carried it away to Babylon.
We will continue on next time.
Zechariah is telling what else happened in his vision. The angel who was speaking to him showed him Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the lord. The angel of the lord in these kinds of situations usually appears to physically represent the lord and speak for him, almost as if he is the lord, but he is not. It can get confusing. This angel of the lord was thought to be the archangel Michael, as seen in Jude. Satan is standing at Joshua's right side to accuse him. This is not the Christian version of Satan, but the Jewish version. He is kind of like a prosecuting attorney, trying to prove the defendant guilty. The lord (actually the angel) said to Satan, "the lord rebuke you, Satan," then the angel requested that Joshua's filthy clothes, representing sin, be taken away, and rich garments be put on him. Zechariah told the angel to put a clean turban on Joshua's head, and it was done.
Next, the angel of the lord commissioned Joshua to govern the temple, if Joshua would walk in Yahweh's ways. Then he would be given a place among the angels. He told Joshua that he and his associates were symbolic of things to come. Yahweh was going to bring his servant, the Branch. This refers to prophecies in Ezekiel 17 and Isaiah 4, about Yahweh restoring Jerusalem,and maybe the monarchy, with a descendant of the old monarchy. My study bible calls it a messianic prophecy, but I think the author is just referring to the restoration of Jerusalem. The chapter goes on to predict an ideal future for the land. It should be noted that this was probably written before the Greeks and Romans came to conquer the holy land. There was no need for a savior. Things were going to be fixed. The Jews were migrating back to their homeland and rebuilding their city as well as their relationship with Yahweh. Later jews looking for a savior may have tried to find hope of a messiah in this passage, but I doubt that was the original purpose. Funny that the prophet Zechariah did not foresee the future conquests.
In chapter 4, the angel of the lord wakes Zechariah up, only to find himself in another symbolic vision with lamp stands, lights, olive trees, etc. this is supposed to represent the word of the lord about Zerubbabel laying the foundation of the temple and completing it. The two olives trees represent two who are anointed to serve the lord of all the earth. It could be the new king and the new high priest. My study bible says it could be another messianic vision of a future combination priest-king. However, these are two separate and distinct olive trees.
In chapter 5, Zechariah does a double take and sees a flying scroll. It is a curse against all thieves and liars. Then the angel draws his attention to a basket. It was a measuring basket, inside the basket was a woman. She represented wickedness. (Ugh, it would be a woman.) the basket has a lead cover which was pushed down over the top. It was lifted up by two other women with wings who carried it away to Babylon.
We will continue on next time.
Saturday, November 26, 2016
Galatians chapter 1 part 2
*Verses 3-5 show us that Paul believed the messiah Jesus gave himself for the sins of the people to rescue them from the "present evil age." What were the sins of the people? What was different about that age that made it so evil? Nothing really, except that Paul was living in it and experiencing it first hand. The world for humans was carrying on pretty much the same it always had been for thousands of years, life and death, peace and war, conquest and revolution. Paul lived during the Pax Romana which was broken by the first Jewish-Roman war, aka the fall of Jerusalem, after he died. Of course, the Jews were uneasy under the yoke of Rome. Plus the Romans.were pagans and worshipped many other gods instead of yahweh. The Jews, and the newer christ followers, should have been used to that, having been surrounded by polytheists most of their existence.
(Many people, especially christians, consider this an especially evil age, maybe the most evil age ever, because they are so focused on the rise of secular society and the reduction of christian influence.)
*Verses 6-9 talk about "the gospel of Christ" without actually saying what that gospel is. Presumably the Galatians know what Paul is talking about because he also says he preached this gospel to them. The word gospel carries the connotation of a message or proclamation of good news. Paul is very concerned that the gospel he preached is being undermined and perverted, throwing the receivers of his message into confusion. Remember that this book is supposed to have been written between 47 and 60 C.E. That means that as little as 14-27 years after Jesus's estimated death (a very problematic 33C.E.) there were divisions among the believers or proponents of a gospel based on Jesus the messiah. Paul says the gospel he originally preached is the one and only true gospel and if anyone else, including himself, dares to change the message they will be eternally condemned, twice!
*In verse 10, Paul offers as proof of his sincerity, the fact that he is trying to please God, not men, otherwise he wouldn't be a servant of Jesus. The problem is all the sincerity in the world doesn't prove something is true.
(Many people, especially christians, consider this an especially evil age, maybe the most evil age ever, because they are so focused on the rise of secular society and the reduction of christian influence.)
*Verses 6-9 talk about "the gospel of Christ" without actually saying what that gospel is. Presumably the Galatians know what Paul is talking about because he also says he preached this gospel to them. The word gospel carries the connotation of a message or proclamation of good news. Paul is very concerned that the gospel he preached is being undermined and perverted, throwing the receivers of his message into confusion. Remember that this book is supposed to have been written between 47 and 60 C.E. That means that as little as 14-27 years after Jesus's estimated death (a very problematic 33C.E.) there were divisions among the believers or proponents of a gospel based on Jesus the messiah. Paul says the gospel he originally preached is the one and only true gospel and if anyone else, including himself, dares to change the message they will be eternally condemned, twice!
*In verse 10, Paul offers as proof of his sincerity, the fact that he is trying to please God, not men, otherwise he wouldn't be a servant of Jesus. The problem is all the sincerity in the world doesn't prove something is true.
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Galatians chapter 1 part 1
After reading chapter 1:
*The first five verses are the letter's greeting, telling who it is from and to whom it is written. Paul describes himself as an apostle, sent not from man nor by men but by Jesus christ and God the father. An apostle is someone who is sent, or a messenger, basically a missionary. Who sent Paul? He claims Jesus and God sent him. Let's be clear though, he is not talking about the living physical man Jesus. As far as the bible shows, Paul never encountered him. Paul is talking of a Christ (messiah) named Jesus (literally Joshua) who he believes is resurrected from the dead. How did he recieve this commission from a formerly dead person? We will find out later in this book.
*A common mistake some modern christians make is to assume that this kind of resurrected messiah talk was unusual in the first century. The truth is the Jews had and still have multiple messianic teachings, and arguments for and against them.. Plus, Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead.
Messiah ben Joseph (son of Joseph)
Messiah in Judaism
Menahem ben Hezekiah
Jewish Eschatology (scroll down to "messianism")
*From reading the above articles we can see that the idea of a messiah was multifaceted and complicated, with many schools of thought. The Old Testament prophetic writings were sometimes read as a code that needed to be deciphered, just as many christians treat the book of Revelation today. There was no overarching consensus about the who, how, where, and when of this messiah. Paul as a first century educated Pharisee, before the fall of Jerusalem, would have been steeped in the traditions, arguments,and teachings of his day. They were not confined to the biblical literature we now call scripture. There were intertestamental writings and the Jews had a rich oral tradition. These people weren't just looking for a messiah. They were willing to see it anywhere, just like christians of today who see the end times and parallels with Revelation in modern events, even stretching facts to make them fit.
*We can see that Paul lived in a world and among a people that expected a leader, one whose name might be recognized as one of the great Israelite heroes, a Moses, an Elijah, a Joseph, a David, or maybe even a Joshua? Maybe that person would be a reincarnation or resurrection of that hero of old. Maybe he would perform similar acts, in reality or symbolically. Paul also lived in a world that was familiar with Hellenic philosophy. He could have been aware of or influenced by the Platonists, the Stoics, the Epicureans, and more, including Hellenistic Jews like Philo of Alexandria. I included all this information because I think it is very important to remember that Paul did not live in a "biblical" bubble as we continue on.
*The first five verses are the letter's greeting, telling who it is from and to whom it is written. Paul describes himself as an apostle, sent not from man nor by men but by Jesus christ and God the father. An apostle is someone who is sent, or a messenger, basically a missionary. Who sent Paul? He claims Jesus and God sent him. Let's be clear though, he is not talking about the living physical man Jesus. As far as the bible shows, Paul never encountered him. Paul is talking of a Christ (messiah) named Jesus (literally Joshua) who he believes is resurrected from the dead. How did he recieve this commission from a formerly dead person? We will find out later in this book.
*A common mistake some modern christians make is to assume that this kind of resurrected messiah talk was unusual in the first century. The truth is the Jews had and still have multiple messianic teachings, and arguments for and against them.. Plus, Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead.
Messiah ben Joseph (son of Joseph)
Messiah in Judaism
Menahem ben Hezekiah
Jewish Eschatology (scroll down to "messianism")
*From reading the above articles we can see that the idea of a messiah was multifaceted and complicated, with many schools of thought. The Old Testament prophetic writings were sometimes read as a code that needed to be deciphered, just as many christians treat the book of Revelation today. There was no overarching consensus about the who, how, where, and when of this messiah. Paul as a first century educated Pharisee, before the fall of Jerusalem, would have been steeped in the traditions, arguments,and teachings of his day. They were not confined to the biblical literature we now call scripture. There were intertestamental writings and the Jews had a rich oral tradition. These people weren't just looking for a messiah. They were willing to see it anywhere, just like christians of today who see the end times and parallels with Revelation in modern events, even stretching facts to make them fit.
*We can see that Paul lived in a world and among a people that expected a leader, one whose name might be recognized as one of the great Israelite heroes, a Moses, an Elijah, a Joseph, a David, or maybe even a Joshua? Maybe that person would be a reincarnation or resurrection of that hero of old. Maybe he would perform similar acts, in reality or symbolically. Paul also lived in a world that was familiar with Hellenic philosophy. He could have been aware of or influenced by the Platonists, the Stoics, the Epicureans, and more, including Hellenistic Jews like Philo of Alexandria. I included all this information because I think it is very important to remember that Paul did not live in a "biblical" bubble as we continue on.
Thursday, November 17, 2016
James- wrap up
*After reading the book of James, I've come to the personal conclusion that it is a book by a Jew, possibly of the Pharisee sect, for Jews, possibly those in jewish communities scattered around the world after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. The first verse clearly gives that impression. Succeeding verses are addressed to "brothers" referring back to that first mention of the twelve tribes scattered among the nations. Also, we have no idea who this James is, and it is not likely that he was one of the Jameses mentioned in the gospel accounts. Significantly, his name is actually Jacob, the name of the founder of the 12 Israelite tribes. James does not claim to be writing the words of God or to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.
*There is nothing said in this book which would contradict a Jewish identity, except the two phrases mentioning the lord Jesus Christ, which easily could have been added. There is nothing in this book which would identify it as specifically christian, except those two phrases. There is no mention of Jesus as a person, his birth, life, ministry, words, death, or resurrection. There is no mention of any other New Testament characters. There is a mention of demons, but not Angels. There is a suggestion of eternal reward and punishment, but it is not specific. There is no hint of a trinitarian doctrine. There is a reference to the Jewish Shema that says the lord our God is one. There is a reference to meetings in a synagogue. There are multiple references to Old Testament people and scripture. There is no mention of a gospel or good news of salvation from sins, once and for all by a sacrifice of the life of a man/God. There is a reference about waiting for a messaiah. However, it does not indicate that the messiah has been here already and will return. The Jews of that day were waiting for a messiah. There is no reference to baptism. Sins are forgiven through prayer.
*In chapter 3 of the English NIV translation, the text mentions heaven, hell, and the devil. The phrase in greek translated "from heaven" is literally "from above." The phrase translated "of the devil" literally means "demonic," not referring to a specific being. It has the same root as the demons that shudder in James 2:19. The word hell is translated from gehenna.
*James's focus seemed to be on the Jews in the diaspora maintaining their faith and identity, and especially how they treated each other as a community. He stressed treating the poor among them with respect and dignity, in word and action. This was done by suggesting that the poor have an advantage over the wealthy in the virtue of faith. He stressed good deeds, self control of the tongue, and humility. He denigrated the desire for wealth. He vehemently denied that faith is enough to maintain a right standing with God.
*Next, I think I will tackle the book of Galatians as our introduction to Paul and his letters. We will probably compare and contrast the Paul in the epistles to the one in Acts. The epistles were most likely written before the gospels and the book of Acts. For now, I will leave you with an existential thought from James 4:14--"What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while then vanishes."
*There is nothing said in this book which would contradict a Jewish identity, except the two phrases mentioning the lord Jesus Christ, which easily could have been added. There is nothing in this book which would identify it as specifically christian, except those two phrases. There is no mention of Jesus as a person, his birth, life, ministry, words, death, or resurrection. There is no mention of any other New Testament characters. There is a mention of demons, but not Angels. There is a suggestion of eternal reward and punishment, but it is not specific. There is no hint of a trinitarian doctrine. There is a reference to the Jewish Shema that says the lord our God is one. There is a reference to meetings in a synagogue. There are multiple references to Old Testament people and scripture. There is no mention of a gospel or good news of salvation from sins, once and for all by a sacrifice of the life of a man/God. There is a reference about waiting for a messaiah. However, it does not indicate that the messiah has been here already and will return. The Jews of that day were waiting for a messiah. There is no reference to baptism. Sins are forgiven through prayer.
*In chapter 3 of the English NIV translation, the text mentions heaven, hell, and the devil. The phrase in greek translated "from heaven" is literally "from above." The phrase translated "of the devil" literally means "demonic," not referring to a specific being. It has the same root as the demons that shudder in James 2:19. The word hell is translated from gehenna.
*James's focus seemed to be on the Jews in the diaspora maintaining their faith and identity, and especially how they treated each other as a community. He stressed treating the poor among them with respect and dignity, in word and action. This was done by suggesting that the poor have an advantage over the wealthy in the virtue of faith. He stressed good deeds, self control of the tongue, and humility. He denigrated the desire for wealth. He vehemently denied that faith is enough to maintain a right standing with God.
*Next, I think I will tackle the book of Galatians as our introduction to Paul and his letters. We will probably compare and contrast the Paul in the epistles to the one in Acts. The epistles were most likely written before the gospels and the book of Acts. For now, I will leave you with an existential thought from James 4:14--"What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while then vanishes."
Saturday, November 12, 2016
James chapter 5 part 1
After reading chapter 5:
*Verses 1-6 are a warning to the rich. They will be sorry. Horrible things have happened to their wealth and possessions. The destruction will be a testimony against them, because they oppressed the poor and didn't pay the wages of those they hired. They lived in luxury and self indulgence. They condemned innocent people who were not opposing them. Sounds like Donald Trump. This passage says the cries of the oppressed have reached the ears of the lord. I'm guessing rich oppressors don't actually believe that or they wouldn't do what they do. Very rarely do they have to pay for the full extent of their crimes in this life, and never afterward. Job recognized that. Threats of eternal destruction slip off them like water off a duck's back. I'm not saying every rich person is an oppressor, but when the shoe fits...
*After the rant of the last few verses, James changes his tone. In fact, reading back over the text, the apocalyptic style rant seems out of place, and the continuity of the text would not be broken if it was removed. It would actually make more sense. Now James tells his fellow Jews to be patient until the lord's coming. Christians believe he is talking about the return of Jesus, but he very well could be talking about the Jewish expectation of the appearance of a messiah. James tells them to wait without grumbling against each other or judging each other. They are to take the example of the prophets' patience and Job's perserverence. Look what Job got after he persevered, everything that he had lost and more. That would certainly speak to displaced Jews.
*Verse 12 is another piece that feels out of place in the text. It is about taking oaths, swearing by heaven, earth, or anything else. They will be condemned if they do. This is one passage that gets ignored by many christians. Some, like the Quakers, have made a point of following it. One thing that makes this passage strange is that there was plenty of swearing in the Old Testament that was not condemned. Another thing is the phrase "above all." Surely James did not think this was the most important thing in his letter!"
*Verses 1-6 are a warning to the rich. They will be sorry. Horrible things have happened to their wealth and possessions. The destruction will be a testimony against them, because they oppressed the poor and didn't pay the wages of those they hired. They lived in luxury and self indulgence. They condemned innocent people who were not opposing them. Sounds like Donald Trump. This passage says the cries of the oppressed have reached the ears of the lord. I'm guessing rich oppressors don't actually believe that or they wouldn't do what they do. Very rarely do they have to pay for the full extent of their crimes in this life, and never afterward. Job recognized that. Threats of eternal destruction slip off them like water off a duck's back. I'm not saying every rich person is an oppressor, but when the shoe fits...
*After the rant of the last few verses, James changes his tone. In fact, reading back over the text, the apocalyptic style rant seems out of place, and the continuity of the text would not be broken if it was removed. It would actually make more sense. Now James tells his fellow Jews to be patient until the lord's coming. Christians believe he is talking about the return of Jesus, but he very well could be talking about the Jewish expectation of the appearance of a messiah. James tells them to wait without grumbling against each other or judging each other. They are to take the example of the prophets' patience and Job's perserverence. Look what Job got after he persevered, everything that he had lost and more. That would certainly speak to displaced Jews.
*Verse 12 is another piece that feels out of place in the text. It is about taking oaths, swearing by heaven, earth, or anything else. They will be condemned if they do. This is one passage that gets ignored by many christians. Some, like the Quakers, have made a point of following it. One thing that makes this passage strange is that there was plenty of swearing in the Old Testament that was not condemned. Another thing is the phrase "above all." Surely James did not think this was the most important thing in his letter!"
Monday, October 31, 2016
James chapter 1 part 1
After reading chapter 1:
*Verse one is the greeting of the letter, from James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. Who is this James? He could be any learned jewish man named James or he could be one of the
James mentioned in other parts of the New Testament.
1. James the brother of Jesus
2. James the son of Alpheus (possibly the same as James no. 1, but cousin instead of brother)
3. James the less (possibly the same James as no. 2.)
4. James the son of Zebedee
One problem with these particular Jameses is that they were probably common laborers or fishermen, not highly educated enough to produce this well written text in greek.
At any rate, there were two apostles named James. One the son of Zebedee, the other the son of Alpheus, who could also have been Jesus's cousin or brother. Clear as mud? We are not told which specific James wrote this letter, but lots of people like to believe it was the literal brother of Jesus. Another interesting tidbit, all of the "Jameses"are actually "Jacobs" in the original greek- iakobos.
Jesus's name in greek appears to be synonymous with Joshua.
The letter is written to "the twelve tribes scattered among the nations." Literal greek- the twelve tribes in the diaspora. Is this a reason to think the letter may have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E.? It was obviously written to Jews, not a group that had separated themselves from the Jewish faith. James seems to have believed that Jesus was the Jewish messiah or "christ." There are jews today that believe certain rabbis were the messiah. More about the messiah in Judaism.
Verse two says consider it pure joy brothers and sisters whenever you face trials of many kinds. Those "brothers and sisters" were Jews, as clearly shown in the greeting. James tells them in the first few verses that they should be glad they are having troubles. It is making them mature and complete, and producing perserverence. James appears to be trying to put a positive spin on a life which must have been pretty troublesome. This first section is packed with thoughts that many christians take very seriously:
1. God will give you wisdom if you ask for it.
2. When you ask of God, you must believe in order to receive.
3. The poor are in a higher spiritual position than the rich and should be proud of their poverty.
4. Endurance under trial gets you the grand prize, a crown of life promised by Jesus to those who love him.
5. God doesn't tempt people, their own evil desires do that. Desire leads to sin, sin leads to death.
6. All good things come from God.
7. God doesn't change.
8. We (the Jews or followers of Jesus?) are the first fruits of all God created.
It seems clear that James is trying to convince his readers that no matter how bad things get, they are really well off because of their special status by virtue of being poor and having a hard life. Wisdom and endurance may be very helpful, but I don't see any virtue in poverty. Anyone can be poor. It takes no effort. When you desire to not be poor, but you are because of circumstances beyond your control, James appears to be implying that that desire may be evil which will lead you to sin and ultimately death. But we are all going to die anyway, aren't we? What exactly is a crown of life?
*Verse one is the greeting of the letter, from James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. Who is this James? He could be any learned jewish man named James or he could be one of the
James mentioned in other parts of the New Testament.
1. James the brother of Jesus
2. James the son of Alpheus (possibly the same as James no. 1, but cousin instead of brother)
3. James the less (possibly the same James as no. 2.)
4. James the son of Zebedee
One problem with these particular Jameses is that they were probably common laborers or fishermen, not highly educated enough to produce this well written text in greek.
At any rate, there were two apostles named James. One the son of Zebedee, the other the son of Alpheus, who could also have been Jesus's cousin or brother. Clear as mud? We are not told which specific James wrote this letter, but lots of people like to believe it was the literal brother of Jesus. Another interesting tidbit, all of the "Jameses"are actually "Jacobs" in the original greek- iakobos.
Jesus's name in greek appears to be synonymous with Joshua.
The letter is written to "the twelve tribes scattered among the nations." Literal greek- the twelve tribes in the diaspora. Is this a reason to think the letter may have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E.? It was obviously written to Jews, not a group that had separated themselves from the Jewish faith. James seems to have believed that Jesus was the Jewish messiah or "christ." There are jews today that believe certain rabbis were the messiah. More about the messiah in Judaism.
Verse two says consider it pure joy brothers and sisters whenever you face trials of many kinds. Those "brothers and sisters" were Jews, as clearly shown in the greeting. James tells them in the first few verses that they should be glad they are having troubles. It is making them mature and complete, and producing perserverence. James appears to be trying to put a positive spin on a life which must have been pretty troublesome. This first section is packed with thoughts that many christians take very seriously:
1. God will give you wisdom if you ask for it.
2. When you ask of God, you must believe in order to receive.
3. The poor are in a higher spiritual position than the rich and should be proud of their poverty.
4. Endurance under trial gets you the grand prize, a crown of life promised by Jesus to those who love him.
5. God doesn't tempt people, their own evil desires do that. Desire leads to sin, sin leads to death.
6. All good things come from God.
7. God doesn't change.
8. We (the Jews or followers of Jesus?) are the first fruits of all God created.
It seems clear that James is trying to convince his readers that no matter how bad things get, they are really well off because of their special status by virtue of being poor and having a hard life. Wisdom and endurance may be very helpful, but I don't see any virtue in poverty. Anyone can be poor. It takes no effort. When you desire to not be poor, but you are because of circumstances beyond your control, James appears to be implying that that desire may be evil which will lead you to sin and ultimately death. But we are all going to die anyway, aren't we? What exactly is a crown of life?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)