What's the word?

[savagewind]

History has proved there is a WORLD of difference between what they make the Ninth Commandment say and what I am certain it actually says.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Every Orthodox Jew needs to be committed to all 613 commandments and to be ready to fulfill them when they are applicable. So yes, they are all obeyed.

In all seriousness, aren't some of them ritual stuff that no longer applies?

A word is something that is spoken.

How so? There are other types of ways of communicating words. If a nonverbal person is pointing at labeled pictures on a card or board (or in the 21st century, an iPad or something), are they not conveying words?

I think that the person of Jesus, whether at the time real or not (He is real now) was born of the words God gave to the Hebrews. Is Hebrews in this context correct?
He would not come except through the law and the prophets. I suppose you can say that the law is his mother. God is his Father.

I can see that. It's not that Jesus is literally coming from God so much as he says he personifies the major gist of the law.

John said that in the beginning there was the word.

Maybe all this time he just meant "at the beginning of this story".

They say it was possible for him to have strayed, but I do not believe them.

Jesus broke a bunch of rules, though. He sinned all over the place, whether the authors want to admit or not.

I think that we Christians believe that the Creation has an intrinsic meaning, without which our existence would be meaningless.

It can be meaningless NOW. We assume we have this great purpose, yet Genesis (at least the GoE story) has us as nothing better than some garden maintenance people.

 

[Tumah]

In all seriousness, aren't some of them ritual stuff that no longer applies?

There's always commandments that dont always apply. Like honoring one's father doesn't apply to someone orphaned of their father. But we dont say the whole commandment is voided just because he can't fulfill it.

How so? There are other types of ways of communicating words. If a nonverbal person is pointing at labeled pictures on a card or board (or in the 21st century, an iPad or something), are they not conveying words?

That's true, but then the word needed to be written or typed.

Maybe all this time he just meant "at the beginning of this story".

I guess I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by assuming he's not completely crazy and meant something in those first few verses.

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
The "word" would refer to the "word of G-d". I don't know Hebrew, but I think the name for the 10 commandments of G-d, would be referred to as "words".

No, its the 10 speakings.

The "law and the testimonies" (Is 8:20) would be a totality of the "word". That Yeshua was the "word made flesh" would refer to Yeshua coming to fulfill the word,

Commandments are not prophecies. That's why we call them commandments and not prophecies. So this makes no sense. I'm going to go with Logos being a reference to Philo's philosophy as it seems to fit the best.

and he is the "light" that can be used to understand what is written in the "word". If one truly believes in the "law and the testimonies", and actually heeds them, then they will be able to understand (have insight) from Daniel 12:10. The "wicked" (Dan 12:10) will not understand. That pretty much excludes most of the "Christian" community which has nailed the testimony of Yeshua to a pagan cross, and much of Judah which has yet to turn from their "wickedness" (Ez 33:15). The day of Hosea 6:1 has yet to come, when "Ephraim" and the "house of Judah" "return to the Lord". The "shepherds" of the "house of Judah" are in for a big surprise. (Ez 34:7-10) Ez 34:7-10 would also apply to Sim bar Jonas, who was told to "shepherd my sheep" (John 21:17). The shepherds were too interested in what they had to eat, and "devoured the flesh of the fat sheep" (Zech 11:16), and did "not care for the perishing".

If you thought I'd read your sermon, you are grossly mistaken.

 

[Tumah]

The passage in written in Greek, and the word Logos is used, which can mean either Word literally or "reason" as in human intelligence. At least that was my understanding of how @lovemuffin explained it.

So "the intelligence was with god and the intelligence was god"? Doesn't seem like it makes so much sense. Someone mentioned Philo's Logos. I was surprised and recommend checking it out.

 

[2ndpillar]

No, its the 10 speakings.

Commandments are not prophecies. That's why we call them commandments and not prophecies. So this makes no sense. I'm going to go with Logos being a reference to Philo's philosophy as it seems to fit the best.


If you thought I'd read your sermon, you are grossly mistaken.

Tumah,
It is my understanding that the original 10 commandments were not "speakings", but they were words written by the finger of God. The idea of speaking to the Israelites through words written in stone might be an interpretation of the scribes.

As for the "testimonies", they would not be commandments written in stone, but they would be the "word of God".

New American Standard Bible (Ex 31:18)
When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
It is my understanding that the original 10 commandments were not "speakings", but they were words written by the finger of God. The idea of speaking to the Israelites through words written in stone might be an interpretation of the scribes.

You suggested that they are called 10 words. I told you thry are not.
They are called 10 speakings because G-d "spoke" them at Mt. Sinai. They were also inscribed in stone.

As for the "testimonies", they would not be commandments written in stone, but they would be the "word of God".

New American Standard Bible (Ex 31:18)
When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.

The two tablets of the testimony are the 10 commandments which were previously spoken at Mt Sinai. (Ex. 20:1, Deut.5:18).


I urge you to read here, with special attention to his views on the logos, for an uncanny resemblance to ideas in your NT.

 

[2ndpillar]

You suggested that they are called 10 words. I told you thry are not.
They are called 10 speakings because G-d "spoke" them at Mt. Sinai. They were also inscribed in stone.


The two tablets of the testimony are the 10 commandments which were previously spoken at Mt Sinai. (Ex. 20:1, Deut.5:18).


I urge you to read here, with special attention to his views on the logos, for an uncanny resemblance to ideas in your NT.

Tumah,
It would be a mistake for anyone to suggest that the 10 commandments were 10 words, for they definitely consisted of more than 10 words. I called them "words" written by the finger of God. The "words" spoken by the prophets would be considered "words" spoken by God through men. The commandments spoken by Moses (Ex 20:1) would be considered "words" spoken by a prophet, in the same category as any other "words" spoken by the other prophets. The Commandments written on stone, on the other hand, had no intermediary, and were written directly from the finger of God.

 

[2ndpillar]

I urge you to read here, with special attention to his views on the logos, for an uncanny resemblance to ideas in your NT.

Tumah,
The NT is not mine, and it is a product of the Roman church, which was instituted by the emperor Constantine, and that church is according to Rev 17:5, a daughter of the woman who sets on the beast with 7 heads, which is another viewpoint of the statue of Daniel 2. The mother Babylon (Rev 17:5), is the mother of the abominations of the earth. According to Yeshua, the NT is a mix of the good seed, which is the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:19), and the tare seed, which is the seed of lawlessness (Mt 13:41). Yeshua's message was to beware of the leaven of the Pharisee, and the "Christians" follow the guy who called himself the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul, who taught lawlessness (Romans 7:6) and hypocrisy (Romans 7:25), which is tied to "leaven".

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
It would be a mistake for anyone to suggest that the 10 commandments were 10 words, for they definitely consisted of more than 10 words. I called them "words" written by the finger of God. The "words" spoken by the prophets would be considered "words" spoken by God through men. The commandments spoken by Moses (Ex 20:1) would be considered "words" spoken by a prophet, in the same category as any other "words" spoken by the other prophets. The Commandments written on stone, on the other hand, had no intermediary, and were written directly from the finger of God.

They would be considered words because G-d spoke them to the prophet. And the Commandments were spoken to the Jews at Mt. Sinai.

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
The NT is not mine, and it is a product of the Roman church, which was instituted by the emperor Constantine, and that church is according to Rev 17:5, a daughter of the woman who sets on the beast with 7 heads, which is another viewpoint of the statue of Daniel 2. The mother Babylon (Rev 17:5), is the mother of the abominations of the earth. According to Yeshua, the NT is a mix of the good seed, which is the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:19), and the tare seed, which is the seed of lawlessness (Mt 13:41). Yeshua's message was to beware of the leaven of the Pharisee, and the "Christians" follow the guy who called himself the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul, who taught lawlessness (Romans 7:6) and hypocrisy (Romans 7:25), which is tied to "leaven".

This post is a mix of the good seed and the tare seed. What does any of this have to do with what I said?
And if your NT is meant to be a confused mess of good and bad, what in the world are you doing???

 

[lovemuffin]

So "the intelligence was with god and the intelligence was god"? Doesn't seem like it makes so much sense. Someone mentioned Philo's Logos. I was surprised and recommend checking it out.

It's hard to translate the philosophical significance of "logos" in Greek thought into English in a single word. I was also going to recommend Philo. I haven't really studied this in any depth but from a high level it seems like a situation where Greek-speaking Jews acquainted with Hellenistic culture drew connections between Greek concepts of Logos (especially from stoicism?), as something like a foundational principal of reality, and Jewish symbology of the word, as in Genesis or the Psalm's gloss of it: "by the word of the Lord the heavens were made." At least in early Christian texts, "logos" in this sense really only appears in John's gospel, I believe. It gain more importance over time in Greek Christianity.

 

[Tumah]

It's hard to translate the philosophical significance of "logos" in Greek thought into English in a single word. I was also going to recommend Philo. I haven't really studied this in any depth but from a high level it seems like a situation where Greek-speaking Jews acquainted with Hellenistic culture drew connections between Greek concepts of Logos (especially from stoicism?), as something like a foundational principal of reality, and Jewish symbology of the word, as in Genesis or the Psalm's gloss of it: "by the word of the Lord the heavens were made." At least in early Christian texts, "logos" in this sense really only appears in John's gospel, I believe. It gain more importance over time in Greek Christianity.

Yeah I found Philo to be an eye-opener. I think John was referring directly to Philo whose works were probably well known in Hellenized Jewish circles at the point in time that John may have written his work. Paul also might be referring to this in his description of Jesus as the first born of creation. I recall something about Jesus being a high priestlike Melchizedek as well.
The similarity is too great to ignore. But I wonder if later the church tried to move away from Philo and altered the concept.

 

[2ndpillar]

This post is a mix of the good seed and the tare seed. What does any of this have to do with what I said?
And if your NT is meant to be a confused mess of good and bad, what in the world are you doing???

Tumah,
You attributed the NT as being mine, which it is not. The basic books of the NT were canonized in 367 by the Roman Catholic bishop of Alexandria, a political animal who helped craft the abominations of the Roman church along with the Roman emperor Constantine. If you would read the testimony of Yeshua, you could find out that all this was foretold both in Daniel, with broad strokes concerning Constantine, as in "another" king, (Dan 7:24) and with particular with regards to what was documented in Matthew 13.

 

[2ndpillar]

They would be considered words because G-d spoke them to the prophet. And the Commandments were spoken to the Jews at Mt. Sinai.

Tumah,
The term "Jew" would apply to the house of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, and wouldn't apply until after the split. The whole tribe of Israel were at Mt Sinai. As to whether God spoke to Israel directly, could be argued. G-d said to Moses, "warn the people, lest they break through to the Lord to gaze and many of them perish. ...do not let the priest and the people break through to come up to the Lord, lest He break forth upon them." (Ex 19:23-24) They certainly did not gaze upon the Lord. The "commandments"/covenant, was placed inside of the ark of the covenant. The ordinances were not. (Dt 31:26) Per Isaiah 56:6, "foreigners who joint themselves to the Lord", are required to keep from profaning the Sabbath, and hold fast My covenant", which would relate to the tablets of stone inside of the ark of the covenant.


New American Standard Bible Ex 19:23-24
"Take this book of the law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may remain there as a witness against you.

New American Standard Bible (Ex 25:16)
"You shall put into the ark the testimony which I shall give you.

 

[John D. Brey]

The NT says that Jesus is the word made flesh. What's the word? And what's the purpose of pointing out that it was a word?

A Hebrew word for . . . uh . . . "word". . . is dabar דבר. Anyone who is worth their salt, so far as reading between the lines of scripture, is aware that unlike English, or Greek, Hebrew retains hieroglyphic power. Hebrew letters are still hiero-glyphs, sacred-symbols. Which means we can go deeper than the demotic meaning of the text, into the very sacred meaning of the text, simply by going to the hiero-glyphs. Speaking hieroglyphically, a dalet ד is a veil, or door, hiding, or veiling, what is on the other side of the door, or veil.

In this particular case, what's on the other side of the "door" or veil, is the "son" בר (as in bar-mitzvah). The Word (dabar) is, oddly, the hidden ד ---son בר . Dabar, speaks of a Word, that is the "son" hidden behind an intact veil, the closed mem-ם-brane (Ex. 13:2) of a virgin.

. . . Those of you familiar with (and I know you are Tumah) Rabbi Hirsch (and his Chumash) are aware that he found great significance in words that were hieroglyphically similar. Highlighting his great insight, Rabbi Hirsch realized that since Hebrew letters retain their sacred power, their hieroglyphic significance, words that look, or even sound, alike, have important relationships. The word for, well, "word," i.e., dabar (דבר), looks like another word: bekor בכר. Instead of a dalet ד we have a beit ב and instead of a beit ב we have a kaph כ. The word bekor בכר speaks of the "firstborn" who opens the womb (Ex. 13:2). And since in Christian parlance, the only Jewish firstborn who ever opened a closed mem-ם-brane is Jesus of Nazareth, known as the Living Word, it's not really a stretch to note that since the beit ב is known to represent (hell it mean "house") a "house," there's a meaningful linkage between the "door" ד of the house of the firstborn that hides the בר "son" (dabar), and the fact that the "house of the firstborn" בכר (bekor) is a "house" ב of a firstborn known as the "lamb" כר of God (ב–כר).

For those for whom Hebrew is their second language bekor בכר means the "house ב of the "lamb" כר. . . While dabar דבר is the door ד of the house behind which we find the "son," בר who is the firstborn lamb כר of God, the Word. . . .While those for whom Hebrew is their second language might be scratching their head, Rabbi Hirsch is smiling in his grave: someone paid attention to what he was getting on about all those years ago.

The Word, is the Lamb, is the Firstborn, is the Son.



John

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
The term "Jew" would apply to the house of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, and wouldn't apply until after the split.

Yes, and...?

The whole tribe of Israel were at Mt Sinai. As to whether God spoke to Israel directly, could be argued. G-d said to Moses, "warn the people, lest they break through to the Lord to gaze and many of them perish. ...do not let the priest and the people break through to come up to the Lord, lest He break forth upon them." (Ex 19:23-24) They certainly did not gaze upon the Lord. The "commandments"/covenant, was placed inside of the ark of the covenant. The ordinances were not. (Dt 31:26) Per Isaiah 56:6, "foreigners who joint themselves to the Lord", are required to keep from profaning the Sabbath, and hold fast My covenant", which would relate to the tablets of stone inside of the ark of the covenant.


New American Standard Bible Ex 19:23-24
"Take this book of the law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may remain there as a witness against you.

New American Standard Bible (Ex 25:16)
"You shall put into the ark the testimony which I shall give you.

Deut. 4:9-13

 

[Tumah]

Tumah,
You attributed the NT as being mine, which it is not. The basic books of the NT were canonized in 367 by the Roman Catholic bishop of Alexandria, a political animal who helped craft the abominations of the Roman church along with the Roman emperor Constantine. If you would read the testimony of Yeshua, you could find out that all this was foretold both in Daniel, with broad strokes concerning Constantine, as in "another" king, (Dan 7:24) and with particular with regards to what was documented in Matthew 13.

As a Christian, the NT is yours. As a Jew, the Tanach is mine. I didn't mean to say you own it, I meant to say it is a part of your religion.
Changing the name of the NT to some more Jewish sounding "testimony of Yeshua" doesn't make it less Christian. You can simply say, "my sect doesn't hold of the Gospel of John." And then I'd just say, "Ok, then why are you commenting in this thread about something in it?"

 

[roger1440]

So back to the original question about John...

If you were able to recite the entire Torah as one single word, what would the word mean?

 

[Tumah]

If you were able to recite the entire Torah as one single word, what would the word mean?

It would have no meaning.