Because of modern alarmist reactions to the word “Palestine,” many non-Arabs and non-Muslims take offense when it is argued that Jesus was a Palestinian (peace be upon him). Jesus’ ethnicity, skin color, and culture often accompanies this conversation, but it is interesting how few people are willing to acknowledge the fact he was non-European. A simple stroll in the Christmas aisle of your local shopping store will show you the dominant representation of Jesus: a blonde-haired, blue-eyed, White man.

Islamophobia and anti-Arab propaganda have conditioned us to view Palestinians as nothing but heartless suicide bombers, terrorists, and enemies of freedom/democracy. Perpetual media vilification demonization of Palestinians, in contrast to the glorification of Israel, blinds us from seeing issues such as the Palestinian refugee crisis, the victims of Israel’s brutal attack on Gaza last winter, the tens of thousands of homeless Palestinians, and many other issues that are constantly addressed by human rights activists around the world. To speak from the perspective of the Palestinians, especially in casual non-Arab and non-Muslim settings, generates controversy because the minds of many already associate Palestinians with violent stereotypes. So, how could Jesus belong to a group of people that we’re taught to dehumanize?

When I’ve spoken to people about this, I’ve noticed the following responses: “No, Jesus was a Jew,” or “Jesus is not Muslim.” The mistake isn’t a surprise to me, but it certainly reveals how ignorant much of society still is. Being a Palestinian does not mean one is Muslim or vice versa. Prior to the creation of Israel, the term “Palestine” was a geographic term applied to Palestinian Muslims, Palestinian Christians, and Palestinian Jews. Although most Palestinians are Muslim today, there is a significant Palestinian Christian minority who are often overlooked, especially by the mainstream Western media because the agenda is to simplify the conflict as “Muslims versus Jews.” To learn about many Palestinian Christians opposing Israeli military occupation, as well as Jews who oppose to the occupation, is to reveal more sides to an immensely one-sided story. Professor Jack D. Forbes writes about Jesus’ multi-cultural and multi-ethnic environment:

When the Romans came to dominate the area, they used the name Palestine. Thus, when Yehoshu’a [Jesus] was born, he was born a Palestinian as were all of the inhabitants of the region, Jews and non-Jews. He was also a Nazarene (being born in Nazareth) and a Galilean (born in the region of Galilee)… At the time of Yehoshu’a’s birth, Palestine was inhabited by Jews—descendants of Hebrews, Canaanites, and many other Semitic peoples—and also by Phoenicians, Syrians, Greeks, and even Arabs.

Despite these facts, there are those who use the color-blind argument: “It does not matter what Jesus’ ethnicity or skin color was. It does not matter what language he spoke. Jesus is for all people, whether you’re Black, White, Brown, Yellow, etc.” While this is a well-intentioned expression of inclusiveness and universalism, it misses the point.

When you see so many depictions of Jesus as a Western White man with Euro-American features, the ethnocentrism and race-bending needs to be called out. No person is superior to another based on skin color, but to ignore the way Jesus’ Whiteness has been used to subjugate and discriminate against racial minorities in the West and many other countries is to overlook another important aspect of Jesus’ teachings: Love thy neighbor as thyself.

Malcolm X wrote about White supremacists and slaveholders using Christianity to justify their “moral” and “racial superiority” over Blacks. In Malcolm’s own words, “The Holy Bible in the White man’s hands and its interpretations of it have been the greatest single ideological weapon for enslaving millions of non-white human beings.” Throughout history, whether it was in Jerusalem, Spain, India, or Africa, so-called White “Christians” cultivated a twisted interpretation of religion that was compatible with their colonialist agenda. And racism was a key component of their atrocities.

And here we are in the 21st century where Islamophobia (also stemming from racism because Islam gets racialized) is on the rise; where people calling themselves “Christian” fear to have a Black president; where members of the KKK and anti-immigration movements behave as if Jesus was an intolerant White American racist who only spoke English despite being born in the Middle-East! It is astonishing how so-called “Christians” like Ann Coulter call Muslims “rag-heads” when in actuality, Jesus himself would fit the profile of a “rag-head,” too. As would Moses, Joseph, Abraham, and the rest of the Prophets (peace be upon them all). As William Rivers Pitt writes:

The ugly truth which never even occurs to most Americans is that Jesus looked a lot more like an Iraqi, like an Afghani, like a Palestinian, like an Arab, than any of the paintings which grace the walls of American churches from sea to shining sea. This was an uncomfortable fact before September 11. After the attack, it became almost a moral imperative to put as much distance between Americans and people from the Middle East as possible. Now, to suggest that Jesus shared a genealogical heritage and physical similarity to the people sitting in dog cages down in Guantanamo is to dance along the edge of treason.

Without acknowledging Jesus as a dark-skinned Middle-Eastern man — a Palestinian — who spoke Aramaic — a Semitic language that is ancestral to Arabic and Hebrew — the West will continue to view Islam as a “foreign religion.” Hate crimes and discriminatory acts against Muslims, Arabs, and others who are perceived to be Muslim will persist and they will still be treated as “cultural outsiders.” But what about Christianity and Judaism in America? Aren’t these religions “cultural outsiders” according to the racist logic of xenophobes and Islamophobes?

Jesus would not prefer one race or group of people over another, and I believe he would not encourage today’s demonization and dehumanization of the Palestinian people or the misrepresentations of him that only fuel ignorance and ethnocentrism. As a Muslim, I believe Jesus was a Prophet of God, and if I were to have any say about the Christmas spirit, it would be based on Jesus’ character: humility, compassion, and Love. A Love in which all people, regardless of ethnicity, race, culture, religion, gender, and sexual orientation are respected and appreciated.

And in that spirit, I wish you all a merry Christmas. Alaha Natarak (Aramaic: God be with you).

I’m having fun with the free Rosetta Stone lessons we can access through my school’s library.  I’ve always been good with languages and want to speak at least five when I die, and since I’m planning on dying before I hit fifty I figured I better get a move on!  Little known fact about me: when I was younger I wanted to be a spy like Jennifer Garner in Alias (mostly because I had a crush on Michael Vartan) but also because she got to kick ass and travel to all these crazy places and was able to blend in flawlessly (even when dressed in leather while sporting electric blue hair, but I digress…) Being that I am far too indiscreet to be a spy I figured the next best thing was to become a linguist in the US Marine Corps and work in intelligence.  Hence my experimentation with Rosetta Stone.   

German was pretty easy because it sounds like English with a ridiculous accent, not to mention that the alphabet is almost identical.  Hebrew was a bit harder but I picked up the gendered verb endings after a bit and you use the same parts of your mouth to form words as you would in Spanish.  The bitch from hell was Russian; my mouth was not made to make those sounds!  Craziness.  But I figure if I’m familiar with a Cyrillic language it might make Hungarian come a bit easier when I go to Budapest in the fall.

I remember the confusion I experienced understanding salvation when I first read the Bible. I had heard that whoever believes in Jesus was saved and forgiven for all their sins. But two passages of Scripture confused me as I made my way through the New Testament, the first concerned blaspheming the Holy Spirit, and the second addressed falling away.

I found this note in the Life Application Study Bible on 1John 1:9 very helpful:

1:9 Confession is supposed to free us to enjoy fellowship with Christ. It should ease our consciences and lighten our cares. But some Christians do not understand how it works. They feel so guilty that they confess the same sins over and over, and then they wonder if they might have forgotten something. Other Christians believe God forgives them when they confess, but if they died with unconfessed sins, they would be forever lost. These Christians do not understand that God wants to forgive us. He allowed his beloved Son to die just so he could pardon us. When we come to Christ, he forgives all the sins we have committed or will ever commit. We don’t need to fear that he will cast us out if we don’t keep our slate perfectly clean (John 6:37). Of course we want to continue to confess our sins, but not because we think failure to do so will make us lose our salvation. Our relationship with Christ is secure (John 6:47). Instead, we confess so we can enjoy maximum fellowship and joy with him.

True confession also involves a commitment not to continue in sin. We are not genuinely confessing our sins before God if we plan to commit the sin again and just want temporary forgiveness. We must pray for strength to defeat the temptation the next time it appears.

In addition, the following article from the Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible explains that God forgives all who repent for blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Indeed God forgives all people for all sin if they repent and believe in Jesus Christ (1John 1:7). And the subsequent excerpt from the section titled The Interpreter of John Bunyan’s The Pilgrim’s Progress, looks at falling away, and explains that it is only unrepentance that prevents people from receiving God’s forgiveness. Lastly, three passages from Holy Scripture close the article.

From the note on Mark 3:28,29 of the Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible:

3:28-29 This important saying of our Lord referring to the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit occurs also in Mt. 12:31,32 and Lk. 12:10. It speaks of God’s willingness and ability to forgive anyone of any sin and of all their sins put together. It is to be noted that these words of the Lord were spoken immediately after the accusation was made against Him that the works He was doing were done by the power of Beelzebul, the chief of the demons (see Mt. 12:22-30; Mk. 3:20-27). In Lk. 12:10 the Lord’s saying about the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is separated from the context of the discussion concerning Jesus and Beelzebul which is given in Lk. 11:14-23. The words of Christ become far more understandable if we examine what occasioned them. What the Lord wanted to teach after this discussion regarding the activity of the devil among men was this: The devil is really not the countertype of the Lord Jesus in the plan of man’s salvation, but he is the countertype of the Holy Spirit who’s function is to convict unto repentance or reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn.16:8-15). The devil counteracts this conviction. The verb that is translated as “convict” in Jn. 16:8 is elegxei which means “to bring under conviction.” The Holy Spirit here is presented as the one who brings judgment upon the devil. The two are counteracting each other. The first statement that is made by Christ is that each sin (hamartia, 266), all sins together (pasa, 3956) and blasphemy (blasphemia, 988) shall be forgiven. Mark 3:28, instead of saying every sin and blasphemy, says panta, “all sins,” the neuter plural of pas (3956). The word “blasphemies” means to say something which hurts a person. Hamartia is the inclusive name of all kinds of sins, missing the mark of any kind which God has set for man’s goal. What is stated in this first word is that God is both ready and able to forgive anything. In order to comprehend this, we must first understand the meaning of the word “forgiven,” (aphiemi, 863). It means to send away, to remove the sin from the sinner, so that he is free from it in order that the sin can never be found and charged against him before the judgment seat of God. It is not overlooking the sin, paresis(3929), but removing the sin from the sinner, aphesis (859). In this connection see note on Rom. 3:25. Secondly, observe that this verb is in the passive voice, which means any and all sins will be removed by God. God must be understood at the agent who removes the sin from the sinner. This is particularly the function of Jesus Christ who took upon Himself man’s sin. We must remember however, that no personality of the triune God acts independently, but always in complete and united agreement and cooperation with the other personalities of the Trinity. Thus the agent of “shall be forgiven,” (aphethesetai), must be understood to be God in general and Christ in particular. Thirdly, this verb “shall be forgiven” is in the punctiliar future which means that it will be taken away each time that it is necessary to do so, and it will be done repetitively. It indicates that the forgiveness which man experiences from God is available whenever man asks for it in true repentance. The objects of this forgiveness are “the sons of men” (Mk. 3:28), “men” (Mt. 12:31) and “him” (Lk. 12:10).

In Mk. 3:28 we have panta ta hamartemata, “all the sins.” The word for “sins” here is hamartemata (265) and not hamartia as in Mt. 12:31. Hamartema (singular), as all nouns ending in ma, indicates the result of an action. In this instance, hamartemata(plural) indicates sins as individual acts or the bad reputation resulting from them. The comprehensiveness of the forgiveness which God can give to the sinner is made very clear here. Not only all sin (hamartia) or sinfulness in itself, but also the individual acts of sin, as well as their ill repute brought upon the sinner, are removed. This forgiveness, however, we know from other Scriptures is not automatic, but depends on our true repentance. Every sin is forgiven by God consequent to man’s repentance, and man’s repentance is consequent to the activity of the Holy Spirit in a man’s life. If man resists that activity of the Holy Spirit, he will be unconvicted of either his sinfulness in general or his sin in particular and its ill repute; if man is unconvicted by the Holy Spirit, he will not repent. Consequently, God will not remove that sin or its effects.

Mark adds something which the other two evangelists do not in this first statement about God’s readiness and ability to forgive all sin and blasphemy: “Whatever blasphemies they may utter.” More literally this should be translated: “and blasphemies, (the reports that men will give which will hurt God’s reputation among men) whatever these blasphemies may be if they shall blaspheme.” The verb blasphemesosin, “will blaspheme,” is in the punctiliar future which means at one time and not continuously as a perpetual and uninterrupted mode of life. The Lord is here declaring that no matter how careful we are, we can never live in such a perfect way as to always cause others to believe all that they should about our God whom we represent among them. Our actions portray a different God than what our mouths proclaim. Many times we give the wrong impression to others about our Lord whom we profess to follow. These wrong reputations of God, blasphemiai, will be forgiven. We who love Him allow His Holy Spirit to convict us of our shortcomings in adequately representing God among others. As a result of that conviction, there is the removal of the harm which we have done to the testimony of God.

For a more complete understanding of what these blasphemies are which are generally spoken of by Mark, we must go to Mt. 12:32. Jesus said, “And whoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him.” The Son of Man here is Jesus Christ. In order for a sinner to appropriate Christ he must repent of his sin (Rom. 10:9; Jn 1:12). But, in order that we may be convicted of our sin, it is necessary for us to allow the Holy Spirit to work in us. In other words, any sin that we confess to the Lord Jesus Christ He will forgive, being able and ready to remove it from us. But, if an individual has not been convicted of sin, how can he confess Christ? And this is what makes the next statement of our Lord in Mt. 12:32 understandable: “But whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him.” In Mk. 3:29 is says, “But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness.” And in Lk. 12:10 we read, “But he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him.” The verb in Mt. 12:32 is eipe, the subjunctive aorist of lego (3004), which is, “to say at one particular time with full understanding of what one says.” In Mk. 3:29 it is blasphemese the aorist subjunctive of blasphemeo. In Lk. 12:10 it is blasphemesanti. This is a participial noun in the aorist, meaning the one having blasphemed in the past at one particular time or repetitively. It is used as a supposition, meaning that if at any time in the past he did blaspheme. Both words eipe, “say,” and blasphemesanti (being an aorist participle), “having blasphemed,” are indicative of the fact that this saying or blasphemy is a one-time blasphemy either once or on different occasions, and not a continuous life of blasphemy, i.e., constantly attacking the person and work of the Holy Spirit and His reputation among men. This refers first to the resistance against the Holy Spirit for His conviction unto salvation, the initial repentance of man. The declaration is that no one who resists the convicting power of the Holy Spirit can be saved. The secondary meaning is that no one, not even the believer, will be able to escape the consequence of his willful sin (hamartema) if he does not allow the Holy Spirit to convict him of these specific sins, or sinfulness in general, which has hurt God’s reputation among men (Heb. 10:26,27).

As to the relationship of the sin of blasphemy to the Holy Spirit in Mt. 12:32, we have it thus, “But whoever shall speak against (Kata, 2596) the Holy Spirit.” In Mark 3:29 we have, “But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit.” In Greek it does not say “against” but “unto” (eis, 1519), which means “unto or in the face of.” In Lk. 12:10 the same preposition is used. Actually the use of this preposition, eis, makes the blasphemy worse. With kata, “against,” we may understand that the blasphemy is spoken against the Holy Sprit to others, but with the prepositioneis we may understand that the blasphemy is hurled directly in the face of the Holy Spirit. It is as if man is defying the Holy Spirit and saying, “There is nothing you can do to divert me from my present sinful course. I am going to have my own way regardless of the shame brought upon the name of Christ.” The remarks of all three evangelists differ in the last statement concerning the impossibility of forgiveness here and in the hereafter in the absence of man’s acknowledgement of his sin, and consequent convicting of the Holy Spirit. Mt. 12:32 says, “It shall not be forgiven him, either in this age, or in the age to come.” The verbouk aphethesetai, translated “shall not be forgiven,” is in the passive punctiliar future, which means it shall not be forgiven by God, and in particular by Jesus Christ, at any specific time in the future. Matthew says, “shall not be forgiven him,” (auto), meaning, “will not be removed from him.” Put positively, it means it will be counted against him, either in hindering him from entrance into heaven if he only had a false repentance. Mk. 3:29 says, “never has forgiveness.” A more literal translation of the Greek text is, “does not have remission unto the aeon.” Luke simply says, “shall not be forgiven” (ouk aphethesetai). Matthew, however, is the most explicit in saying, “either in this age, or in the age to come.” This is proof that the fate of man as it is determined in this age cannot be altered in the next age. If one does not submit to the convicting power of the Holy Spirit and repent, in the future, God is not going to grant that person exemption from the consequences of his failure to repent during his earthly life. The bed that one makes in his life will be the one he must lie in for eternity!

Only Mark 3:29 has the concluding phrase, “But is guilty of an eternal sin.” The Greek text says, “But guilty is he of eternal judgment.” “Guilty” in Greek is enochos (1777), from the verbenecho and enechomai (1758), “to be held fast, bound, obligated.”

Therefore, enochos means guilty and deserving of the punishment to which he is subject, as also in Mt. 26:66; Mk. 3:29; 14:64. Observe that the verb estin (eimi, 1510) is in the present tense. He is guilty right now, not will be guilty. This guilt is always upon the man who does not recognize the Holy Spirit’s conviction. There is no chance of repenting in the hereafter. If he would recognize it and seek forgiveness here, then he would not be liable at the eternal judgment.

Eternal judgment is based upon the judgment of sin on this earth. In eternity God is going to respect our will which we have exercised in the here and now. If we chose to defy God here and the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, then God is going to defy us in eternity and let us reap the results of the choice which we made. The last phrase of Mk. 3:29 in the Textus Receptus isaionibu kriseos, “eternal judgment or condemnation.” In other manuscripts, instead of kriseos, “judgment,” we havehamartematos, “individual sin or the result of sin,” which agrees with hamartemata in v. 28 in the phrase “all sins…whatever blasphemies.” Both words, krisis and hamartema, would fit perfectly. If it is krisis (2920), it refers to the ultimate judgment of God which means separating or sifting the good from the evil (Mt. 13:41-43; 49-50), but it also includes the punishment for the evil. If we take it as hamartematos, it would refer to the consequence or the result of our unconfessed and unredeemed sin on earth. The adjective aioniou (166) refers to the eternal judgment, that judgment that will have an effect upon us in the future aeon, “generation” or “age.” Since Matthew speaks both of the present generation and the future generation, this must refer to the future generation when we will be judged as to whether we believed on the Lord unto salvation and also for our walk of the life of faith. The phrase aionios krisis, “eternal judgment,” never occurs anywhere else in the N.T. The closest to it we have is in II Thess. 1:9 where it speaks of “everlasting destruction” (olethron, 3639, aioniou); and in Jude 7, “the vengeance of eternal fire,” which in Greek is “of fire,” puros (4442), “eternal,” aioniou in the genitive, “vengeance or judgment,” diken (1349), as a synonym of krisis.

As far as aionion hamartema, “eternal result of sin,” we find it nowhere else in the N.T.

This excerpt is taken from John Bunyan’s legendary classic The Pilgrim’s Progress, from the chapter titled The Interpreter:

So he took him by the hand again, and led him into a very dark room, where there sat a man in an iron cage.

Now, the man seemed very sad to look on. He sat with his eyes looking down to the ground; his hands folded together; and he sighed as if he would break his heart. Then CHRISTIAN asked, “What does this mean?” At which the INTERPRETER bid him talk with the man.

Christian. Then CHRISTIAN said to the man, “What are you?”

Backslider. The man answered, “I am what I was not once.”

Chr. What were you once?

Back. The man said, “I was once a fair and flourishing professor, both in my own eyes and also in the eyes of others: I once was, as I thought, right for the Celestial City, and even had joy at the thought that I should get there.”

“But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away.” Luke 8:13

Chr. Well, but what are you now?

Back. I am now a man of despair, and am shut up in it, as in this iron cage. I cannot get out; oh now, I cannot!

Chr. But how did you come to be in this condition?

Back. I stopped watching over my soul; I laid the reins upon the neck of my lusts; I sinned against the Light of the World, and the goodness of God. I have grieved the Spirit, and he is gone. I tempted the devil, and he has come to me. I have provoked God to anger, and he has left me. I have so hardened my heart, that I cannot repent.

Then CHRISTIAN asked the INTERPRETER, “But is there no hope for such a man as this?” “Ask him,” said the INTERPRETER.

Chr. Then said CHRISTIAN, “Is there no hope. Must you be kept in the iron cage of despair?”

Back. No, none at all!

Chr. Why? The Son of the Blessed is very pitiful.

Back. I have crucified him to myself afresh;

“if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.” Hebrews 6:6
I have despised his person;

“But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We will not have this man to reign over us.’” Luke 19:14
I have despised his righteousness; I have counted his blood an unholy thing; I have done despite to the Spirit of grace:

“For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?” Hebrews 10:26-29
Therefore I have shut myself out of all the promises, and there now remains for me nothing but threatenings–dreadful threatenings –fearful threatenings, of certain judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour me as an adversary.

Chr. For what did you bring yourself into this condition?

Back. For the lusts, pleasures, and profits of this world; in the enjoyment of which I promised myself much delight; but now everyone of those things bites me and gnaws me like a burning worm.

Chr. But can’t you not now repent and turn?

Back. God has denied me repentance. His Word gives me no encouragement to believe: yes, he himself has shut me up in this iron cage; nor can all the men in the world let me out. Oh, eternity! eternity! how shall I grapple with the misery that I must meet with in eternity?

Inter. Then the INTERPRETER said to CHRISTIAN, “Let this man’s misery be remembered by you, and be an everlasting caution to you.”

Revelation 21:8 warns us, “But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

And Ezekiel 33:10-20 informs us concerning death:

10 “Therefore you, O son of man, say to the house of Israel: ‘Thus you say, “If our transgressions and our sins lie upon us, and we pine away in them, how can we then live?”’
11 “Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die, O house of Israel?’
12 “Therefore you, O son of man, say to the children of your people: ‘The righteousness of the righteous man shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression; as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall because of it in the day that he turns from his wickedness; nor shall the righteous be able to live because of his righteousness in the day that he sins.’
13 “When I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, but he trusts in his own righteousness and commits iniquity, none of his righteous works shall be remembered; but because of the iniquity that he has committed, he shall die.
14 “Again, when I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ if he turns from his sin and does what is lawful and right,
15 “if the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has stolen, and walks in the statutes of life without committing iniquity, he shall surely live; he shall not die.
16 “None of his sins which he has committed shall be remembered against him; he has done what is lawful and right; he shall surely live.
17 “Yet the children of your people say, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ But it is their way which is not fair!
18 “When the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, he shall die because of it.
19 “But when the wicked turns from his wickedness and does what is lawful and right, he shall live because of it.
20 “Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ O house of Israel, I will judge every one of you according to his own ways.”

Finally, 1John 1:7 blesses us with these words, “But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.”

I would like to share a testimony with you, I was asked to preach in a Dorset village called Lychett Maltravers. I had never been there before so I decided to visit the church the day before I was scheduled to preach. I found the church down a very narrow lane, I prayed to the Lord and said, “Lord, what word do you want me to preach to these people.” He told me in my mind to enter the church.

 On entering the church I met the cleaner, who told me that I was welcome to have a look around.  I walked over to the pulpit and noticed the communion rail, then the Lord began to speak to me again and said, “You see this communion rail,” I replied, “Yes, Lord.”

“Well, when you preach tomorrow, you must tell the people that many times in the past they have come to the communion rail to receive the bread and the wine, but this time they must come to receive Jesus as Lord and Saviour, publicly, for where two or three are gathered together in my name there I am in the midst,” saith the Lord.

Well, the following day I did as the Lord had said, I began to preach my sermon, then I remembered what the Lord had said, so I told them that Jesus is standing by this communion rail, and as they had received the bread and the wine in the past, today, they were to receive Jesus, fully into their lives.

I stood to one side of the rail, and we all began to sing Amazing Grace ! How sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me. I once was lost but now I’m found, was blind, but now I see. Then one lady who had been attending that church for many years came to the front and knelt down, and gave her life fully to Jesus. Praise God. It reminds me of a scripture, where Jesus said, “ I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons which need no repentance,” St Luke 15 v 7.

Now, for those who did not receive Jesus that day, they became very troubled. I received a letter from one of the Elders who could not understand how I could of heard Jesus speaking to me. He said, “Who do you think that you are? God doesn’t speak,” Obviously he was not listening to God’s word; I perceived that he to needed to come to Jesus. Another gentleman came to my home, and he was very troubled as well, he said,

“Now that this lady is saved, how are you going to disciple her? For we are not going to.” Well, I thought to myself, it is Jesus who saves, and it is Jesus who keeps us, for Jesus said, “That it is He who has begun a good work in us and it is He who will finish it.”

So I guess that this gentleman needed to receive Jesus as well. Maybe many others in that church should have responded to the altar call that day; my prayer is that they don’t leave it too late. But as for me, I’m going to rejoice with the angels in heaven over that one soul that was saved. Praise God.

Oh Jesus, Lord and Saviour, I give myself to Thee; For thou, in Thine atonement,

 Didst give thyself for me; I own no other Master, My heart shall be Thy throne,

 My life I give, henceforth to live, O Christ, for Thee alone.

.

In just a few days, the majority of the world will celebrate Christmas. On the 8th day following the day that is set aside to celebrate the birth of Jesus, the secular New Year will be observed.

In preparation for these worldwide celerbations, a local paper shared how to say Merriy Christmas and Happy New Year in 81 different languages.

Now, I don’t know about you. But whenever I see anything like this, I always look to see if we’ve been included.

I am happy to report that not just one but TWO of our languages were represented.

Now before you completely fly off the handle, you should remember that there are about 140,000 Christians who live in Israel. Most of them (about 120,000) are Christian Arabs. Although…I am wondering if Christian Arabs use Hebrew as their vernacular or Arabic. Given that they are living in a predominantly Hebrew-speaking country, it stands to reason that there would be an appropriate greeting in Hebrew.

That being said, this is what our local paper had listed:

Mo’adim Lesimkha and Shanah Tova.

Once I picked myself off of the floor, I remembered that the proper greeting for Christmas should have read:

Chag Molad Sameach. Happy Birth Festival.

The second Jewish language they included was Yiddish.

I have no answer for this one. Are there Yiddish-speakers who celebrate Christmas? Other than Colin Powell?

I found a book and CD’s that help me start to understand how to read Hebrew.  It is called, Teach Yourself to Read Hebrew.  The thing I don’t get in all of this is, from the get-go these texts just throw in the vowels below the consonants, but they don’t tell why the vowels are different, but sound the same.  Why are these dots and dashes added and look different, but for the beginner they sound EXACTLY the same.  I have asked several people to explain this to me and none of them can. It is like when I was learning boolean algebra in the Army [Boolean algebra (or Boolean logic) is a logical (illogical if you ask me), calculus of truth values, developed by George Boole in the 1840s. It resembles the algebra of real numbers, but with the numeric operations of multiplication xy, addition x + y, and negation −x replaced by the respective logical operations of conjunction x∧y, disjunction x∨y, and complement ¬x. The Boolean operations are these and all other operations that can be built from these, such as x∧(y∨z). These turn out to coincide with the set of all operations on the set {0,1} that take only finitely many arguments; there are 22n such operations when there are n arguments. The laws of Boolean algebra can be defined axiomatically as certain equations called axioms together with their logical consequences called theorems, or semantically as those equations that are true for every possible assignment of 0 or 1 to their variables. The axiomatic approach is sound and complete in the sense that it proves respectively neither more nor fewer laws than the semantic approach]. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH! See, that crap doesn’t make any sense to me either. I hated learning it, I didn’t understand why I had to learn it, and I have never used it sense.  I wonder about the same regarding those vowels and Hebrew. When I looked at the some of the prayers, I have no clue why even “Adonai” has different Hebrew letters and different vowels, when the standard template for all of our prayers have basically the same stuff up until “Olam.” When will this fall together for me?

Thus, God is proclaiming that there are principles in the heavens and that they govern life on earth. Furthermore, God is responsible for bringing forth the Mazzaroth in their seasons. Most Bibles avoid translating this sacred word, ‘Mazzaroth’, because it literally means, ‘the twelve signs of the zodiac’, in Hebrew. So, God created the zodiac and brings them forth in their seasons. He explains that heavenly constellations like the Pleiades and Orion have ‘influences’ that can be unleashed.

We don’t have to be afraid of signs from the heavens. God speaks through them. In Judges 5:20 it describes the ‘stars’ in battle, “They fought from the heaven. The stars in their courses fought against Ciceria.” In Jeremiah 10:2 it says, “…do not be dismayed by signs from heaven.” We need to be open to the realization of messages in the heavens. In Psalms 136:7-9, it says, “Who made the great lights? His love endures forever; the sun to govern the day, the moon and stars to govern the night.” In Psalms 147:3-4 it says, “God heals the broken-hearted and binds up their wounds. He determines the number of stars and calls them each by name.” The Hebrew word ‘shem’ means ‘name, a mark of character, individuality, honor and authority.’ Stars have all that, according to the Bible. Again, in Isaiah 40:26 we hear, “Lift your eyes on high and behold who has created these. He who brings forth the starry hosts by numbers one by one and calls them forth by character.”

Jesus embodied the Piscean archetype, linking the first sign Aries with the last sign Pisces, the alpha with the omega, starting not just one new age, but a whole cycle of twelve ages. People began spiritually cleansing themselves through the baptismal rites, as Pisces is a water element sign. Suddenly, water was sacred (as opposed to fire) and the fish became holy. Early Christians would identify themselves by drawing the sign of Pisces in the sand. Jesus spoke often of the age of his birth as a preparation age for the Age of Enlightenment to follow. He was referring to the Age of Aquarius that is symbolized by the cosmic man bearing the pitcher of the living waters of life, pouring it throughout the universe. At Jesus’ first Jupiter return (age 12) he began instructing the Priests at the temple, saying to his parents, “Let me be about my work.” After his first Saturn return (age 30) he became intensely devoted to teaching and demonstrating the way of unconditional love. He selected twelve disciples each with a character similar to one of the twelve signs. At the Last Supper Jesus washed the feet of the disciples. In astrology each sign governs a part of the body. Pisces symbolizes the feet.

  It is the grandest thought of Who You Are, your Highest Feeling and Greatest Word that you find Me.

We are here to evolve, we are made in the “image and likeness of God” The second coming isn’t one man, nor it is one anything.

The second coming is you and me, rising in consciousness of Christ. We are the Christed beings. Our awareness will raise in number to 144,000. These 144,000 will bring another 144,000 each to awareness. Globally we ascend to the city of light. This is our planetary goal. Our human divinity, as well as the greatest word, highest feeling, and grandest thought of Who We Really Are.

The Spiritual Revolution has begun.

With love, Rochelle author  The Stone People

www.rochellefoulk.wordpress.com

I recently met with Rabbi Ron Kronish, a noted educator, author and lecturer, who is the Director of the ICCI – the Interreligious Co-ordinating Council of Israel (icci.org.il).  The organisation was founded in 1991, and now has over 75 different local Christian, Muslim and Jewish organisations as members.  It was fascinating to learn about their international projects and the grass roots work they are doing in communities and schools.  I was especially interested in the schools programmes, but they are all in Hebrew or Arabic.  It is at times like that I realise that whilst most things I need to do here can be done in English, I really need the local language if I am to get deeper into understanding the society here.

Afrikaans :  Geseënde Kersfees

Afrikander :  Een Plesierige Kerfees

African/ Eritrean/ Tigrinja :  Rehus-Beal-Ledeats

Albanian : Gezur Krislinjden

Arabic :  Milad Majid

Argentine :  Feliz Navidad

Armenian :  Shenoraavor Nor Dari yev Pari Gaghand

Azeri :  Tezze Iliniz Yahsi Olsun

Bahasa Malaysia :  Selamat Hari Natal

Basque :  Zorionak eta Urte Berri On!

Bengali :  Shuvo Naba Barsha

Bohemian :  Vesele Vanoce

Brazilian :  Feliz Natal

Breton :  Nedeleg laouen na bloavezh mat

Bulgarian :  Tchestita Koleda; Tchestito Rojdestvo Hristovo

Catalan :  Bon Nadal i un Bon Any Nou!

Chile :  Feliz Navidad

Chinese :  (Cantonese) Gun Tso Sun Tan’Gung Haw Sun

Chinese :  (Mandarin) Kung His Hsin Nien bing Chu Shen Tan (Catonese) Gun Tso Sun Tan’Gung Haw Sun

Choctaw :  Yukpa, Nitak Hollo Chito

Columbia :  Feliz Navidad y Próspero Año Nuevo

Cornish :  Nadelik looan na looan blethen noweth

Corsian :  Pace e salute

Crazanian :  Rot Yikji Dol La Roo

Cree :  Mitho Makosi Kesikansi

Croatian :  Sretan Bozic

Czech :  Prejeme Vam Vesele Vanoce a stastny Novy Rok

Danish :  Glædelig Jul

Duri :  Christmas-e- Shoma Mobarak

Dutch :  Vrolijk Kerstfeest en een Gelukkig Nieuwjaar! or Zalig Kerstfeast

English :  Merry Christmas

Eskimo :  (inupik) Jutdlime pivdluarit ukiortame pivdluaritlo!

Esperanto :  Gajan Kristnaskon

Estonian :  Ruumsaid juulup|hi

Ethiopian :  (Amharic) Melkin Yelidet Beaal

Faeroese :  Gledhilig jol og eydnurikt nyggjar!

Farsi :  Cristmas-e-shoma mobarak bashad

Finnish :  Hyvaa joulua

Flemish :  Zalig Kerstfeest en Gelukkig nieuw jaar

French :  Joyeux Noel

Frisian :  Noflike Krystdagen en in protte Lok en Seine yn it Nije Jier!

Galician :  Bo Nada

Gaelic :  Nollaig chridheil agus Bliadhna mhath ùr!

German :  Fröhliche Weihnachten

Greek :  Kala Christouyenna!

Haiti :  (Creole) Jwaye Nowel or to Jesus Edo Bri’cho o Rish D’Shato Brichto

Hausa :  Barka da Kirsimatikuma Barka da Sabuwar Shekara!

Hawaiian :  Mele Kalikimaka

Hebrew :  Mo’adim Lesimkha. Chena tova

Hindi :  Shub Naya Baras

Hausa :  Barka da Kirsimatikuma Barka da Sabuwar Shekara!

Hawaian :  Mele Kalikimaka ame Hauoli Makahiki Hou!

Hungarian :  Kellemes Karacsonyi unnepeket

Icelandic :  Gledileg Jol

Indonesian :  Selamat Hari Natal

Iraqi :  Idah Saidan Wa Sanah Jadidah

Irish :  Nollaig Shona Dhuit, or Nodlaig mhaith chugnat

Iroquois :  Ojenyunyat Sungwiyadeson honungradon nagwutut. Ojenyunyat osrasay.

Italian :  Buone Feste Natalizie

Japanese :  Shinnen omedeto. Kurisumasu Omedeto

Jiberish :  Mithag Crithagsigathmithags

Korean :  Sung Tan Chuk Ha

Lao :  souksan van Christmas

Latin :  Natale hilare et Annum Faustum!

Latvian :  Prieci’gus Ziemsve’tkus un Laimi’gu Jauno Gadu!

Lausitzian : Wjesole hody a strowe nowe leto

Lettish :  Priecigus Ziemassvetkus

Lithuanian :  Linksmu Kaledu

Low Saxon :  Heughliche Winachten un ‘n moi Nijaar

Macedonian :  Sreken Bozhik

Maltese :  IL-Milied It-tajjeb

Manx :  Nollick ghennal as blein vie noa

Maori :  Meri Kirihimete

Marathi :  Shub Naya Varsh

Navajo :  Merry Keshmish

Norwegian :  God Jul, or Gledelig Jul

Occitan :  Pulit nadal e bona annado

Papiamento :  Bon Pasco

Papua New Guinea :  Bikpela hamamas blong dispela Krismas na Nupela yia i go long yu

Pennsylvania German :  En frehlicher Grischtdaag un en hallich Nei Yaahr!

Peru :  Feliz Navidad y un Venturoso Año Nuevo

Philipines :  Maligayan Pasko!

Polish :  Wesolych Swiat Bozego Narodzenia or Boze Narodzenie

Portuguese : Feliz Natal

Pushto :  Christmas Aao Ne-way Kaal Mo Mobarak Sha

Rapa-Nui (Easter Island): Mata-Ki-Te-Rangi. Te-Pito-O-Te-Henua

Rhetian :  Bellas festas da nadal e bun onn

Romanche :  (sursilvan dialect): Legreivlas fiastas da Nadal e bien niev onn!

Rumanian :  Sarbatori vesele or Craciun fericit

Russian :  Pozdrevlyayu s prazdnikom Rozhdestva is Novim Godom

Sami :  Buorrit Juovllat

Samoan :  La Maunia Le Kilisimasi Ma Le Tausaga Fou

Sardinian :  Bonu nadale e prosperu annu nou

Serbian :  Hristos se rodi

Slovakian: Sretan Bozic or Vesele vianoce

Sami: Buorrit Juovllat

Samoan :  La Maunia Le Kilisimasi Ma Le Tausaga Fou

Scots Gaelic :  Nollaig chridheil huibh

Serbian: Hristos se rodi.

Singhalese :  Subha nath thalak Vewa. Subha Aluth Awrudhak Vewa

Slovak :  Vesele Vianoce. A stastlivy Novy Rok

Slovene :  Vesele Bozicne Praznike Srecno Novo Leto or Vesel Bozic in srecno Novo leto

Spanish :  Feliz Navidad

Swedish :  God Jul and (Och) Ett Gott Nytt År

Tagalog : Maligayamg Pasko. Masaganang Bagong Taon

Tami :  Nathar Puthu Varuda Valthukkal

Trukeese: (Micronesian) Neekiriisimas annim oo iyer seefe feyiyeech!

Thai :  Sawadee Pee Mai or souksan wan Christmas

Turkish :  Noeliniz Ve Yeni Yiliniz Kutlu Olsun

Ukrainian :  Srozhdestvom Kristovym or Z RIZDVOM HRYSTOVYM

Urdu :  Naya Saal Mubarak Ho

Vietnamese :  Chuc Mung Giang Sinh

Welsh :  Nadolig Llawen

Yoruba :  E ku odun, e ku iye’dun!

*************************************

I searched and searched the internet with the hope to find something that I could begin to grasp in order to help Alex understand the breakdown of Hebrew. Of course all I could find were links from a Christian site. Still, it had the prayers that I was used to and a link to click on to hear the Hebrew, along with the actual Hebrew and transliteration. It is a great place to start online.  I can even carry it on my iPhone and use it when I am out and about.

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Blessings/blessings.html

I was heading into work this morning and wanted to make a quick stop into Starbucks for a medium Americano to help me wake up. (No, I don’t ask for a tall, grande or venti.) The location where I go, inside the lobby of Furnitureland South, sometimes has a small chalkboard next to the register with a Question of the Day written on it. Usually, it has spaces for two winners for a free coffee. This morning none had been entered yet.

The question was, “What language was the Old Testament written in?”

Knowing immediately that the Old Testament was actually written mostly in Hebrew and some in Aramaic, I wondered what answer she was looking for.

“The Old Testament was written mostly in Hebrew,” I said. “And some parts in Aramaic.”

“Nooo… Answer’s Greek. Sorry,” says the barista.

“Actually the Old Testament, which is Genesis through Malachi was written in Hebrew and Aramaic. The New Testament, which is Matthew through Revelation was written in Greek. Koine Greek, actually.”

“Oh,” she says quizzically. “I’ll have to change that. You know, I just finished a Religion class and we didn’t learn any of that.”

That made perfect sense to me. It was a religion class she took. Not a class on the Bible. Many religious teachings are based, not on the Bible, but on various traditions and philosophies.

“I remember the acronym H-A-G for Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek – the languages of the Bible and their order. I remember 88 keys on a piano and 66 books of the Bible. Things like that help me to remember facts,” I said trying to offset her embarrassment as she edited the question.

I wrote my name down on the winner #1 line of the board and walked away with a free coffee. I felt good that I didn’t have to pay for my coffee, but also had a kinda sad feeling. It made me feel like facts, especially when they are associated with the Bible, are dismissed as either unimportant or entirely debatable. There’s a reason why people have jokes about dusty Bibles.

Everyone has the freedom to believe what they want to about the Bible -the mostly widely produced and distributed and influential book of all time – but don’t try to come to class and do a book report on a book you haven’t even read.

That, my friends, is a fail for any book and for any season.

It seems that the default explanation for an unknown grammatical feature is to assume, often wrongly, that it is “emphatic.” Here are four examples, three from Hebrew (skip to them: one, two, three) and one from Greek (skip to it here).

The Examples

The Infix Nun

From time to time, a nun will appear between a verb and its pronominal objective ending. For example, in Psalm 72:15, we find y’varachenhu. Breaking down the verb form, we find the prefix y’- representing third-person singular future; the verb varach, “bless”; and the suffix -hu for “him.” So far, the verb means “he will bless him.” But there’s also an added -en- in the middle. That’s the infixed nun, commonly called the “nun emphatic.”

Because nuns are frequently replaced by a dagesh in Biblical Hebrew, it is more common to find the “nun emphatic” represented by nothing more than a dagesh. Probably the best known example is in the Priestly Benediction from Numbers 6:24-26. The last verb of Numbers 6:25 is vichuneka, with a dagesh in the final kaf representing the “nun empahtic” that dropped out.

But there is no evidence anywhere to suggest that this nun has emphatic force.

The Infinitive Absolute

A much more common Hebrew construction is the “infinitive absolute” in conjunction with a conjugated verb form. For example, in Genesis 2:17 we find mot tamut, which the KJV notes in a footnote is literally “dying thou shalt die.” Based on the (wrong) assumption that this doubling of verb forms is emphatic, the KJV translates “thou shalt surely die” here. (As it happens, this Hebraism is preserved in the LXX thanatu apothaneisthe, “by death die.”)

But not only is there no evidence that this construction is emphatic, there is evidence that it is not. In Genesis 3:4 the snake tries to convince the women to eat from the forbidden tree; he (it?) reassures her that lo mot t’mutun. Obviously this doesn’t mean “you will not surely die.” It just means “you will not die.”

The Lengthened Imperative

Frequently a verb form will have two imperatives: a shorter one, essentially the future without the prefix, and a longer one with an additional heh at the end. For example, from titen (“you will give”) we have both ten in Genesis 14:21 and t’nah in Genesis 30:26. Some grammars, such a Gesenius (wrongly, in my opinion), suggest that the latter is “give!” Again, there’s no evidence for an emphatic reading in these verb forms. (The forms are also not limited to the imperative, as we see in the continuation of Genesis 30:26, with elecha for elech.)

The Greek Emphatic Pronouns

The forth example comes from Greek, which has two sets of 1st- and 2nd-person pronouns. For example, “my” is either mou or emou. The latter form is called “emphatic” because it is widely assumed to convey particular emphasis. Once again, though, there is nothing to suggest that the longer forms are necessarily more emphatic than the shorter ones. (Bill Mounce has a post — also available here — where he similarly notes that sometimes the “emphatic forms [...] are significant, but when they are objects of prepositions, evidently not.” In other words, he notes a case where the “emphatic” forms are not emphatic.)

Summary

What all four of these cases have in common is that the supposedly emphatic forms are longer than the ordinary ones. I think there has been a general if misguided assumption that longer words are more emphatic that shorter ones. At one level, it seems reasonable. And there are even times when it’s true (I give some examples here). But it’s not a general principal.

I think we have to rethink all of these “emphatic” forms with an eye toward figuring out what they really represent.

Michael’s Grandma bought this toy when he was born. However, Michael has not been old enough to appreciate and enjoy it. NOW HE CAN!

This is the first of many that he will have. I am really glad to see that he likes it.

I received spam in Greek for the first time. I already received a lot of spam in Hebrew, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Hindi, Russian, Arabic, Farsi and Armenian. It’s a shame really – in the ancient times Greek was far more important. Χρόνια Πολλά – Καλές Γιορτές!

I use bit.ly to shorten links now and then, and when I logged in today I noticed one of the cute yet strange little puffer fish that are always in the upper right corner of the screen had Hebrew letters, a ש and a ה, on its sides.

It took me a while to figure out that the big fish thing was supposed to be a dreidel in the spirit of Hanukkah. This realization made me curious about why those particular letters are on dreidels, so I did some research. According to Wikipedia:

Each side of the dreidel bears a letter of the Hebrew alphabet: נ (Nun), ג (Gimel), ה (Hei), ש (Shin), which together form the acronym for “נס גדול היה שם” (Nes Gadol Haya Sham – “a great miracle happened there”).

In case you were wondering, puffer fish are not kosher.

And most important, despite moderate effort I can’t find out why bit.ly has associated itself with such a random yet adorable mascot.

The nuances of translating is difficult. One cannot directly translate word for word from one language to another.

For example, Origen’s command of Greek presupposed one understands the neo-platonic background that he wrote from. If one produces the translation in a literal fashion, it leaves severe literary gaps that assumes the reader understands the antecedents and the presuppositions.

Many would argue that the readers who have interest in Origen do not have such a background, and the literal translation becomes incomprehensible. Perhaps many would conclude that he was a mystical writer because of the cognitive dissonance.

As I read the Talmud Babli Megillah and compare it to the English translation, this text is even more difficult to translate than Origen. It is written in a shorthand type method and assumes the reader understands the antecedents of every discussion. A literal translation would almost make this text incomprehensible.

A danger exists in going into dynamic translation mode where it becomes more of the translator’s opinion than actual integrity to the text. This has been a serious problem with English Patristic texts. For example the translation of Origen’s Against Celsus goes way beyond the Greek in the reference to tongues and convinces the reader of non-existent facts. Augustine is also a great example, where his works have been annotated and abridged so frequently, that it leads the English reader to think he had little to say about tongues. The reality is, snippets of it was simply cut-out in the editorial process. Not that it was a conspiracy against tongues, but it just simply didn’t have value at that time to be part of the publication.

Years ago, a Wycliffe Bible translator gave a lecture on the difficulty of transferring Biblical texts to a certain Inuit group. He used the example “The Lord is my Shepherd”. The Inuit group have no concept of shepherding, so the translator changed it altogether to something about hunting and fishing. The literal commitment to the text was lost.

Over time, I think such loose translations become a problem as the readers become more literate on the subject matter. It can even invite skepticism and erode trust on the whole translation.

The challenge I am facing here with the tongues project is how far do I go with the translations? There have been too many dynamic translations that are misleading and are simply the translators opinion. Yet, if the text isn’t put into a dynamic form many readers will be lost.

I would like to take my Origen translations and move them to the next step of making them more dynamic. Instead of being committed to the literal text, I would take the thought behind his writing and put that into English.

Yet, I don’t feel this is right. I think the readers of my works are intelligent enough to pick these things up.

What have other translators done to be committed to the text, but yet make it fluid enough for the average reader to understand?

I tend to like the English translation done on the Talmud Bavli Megillah. It does make every attempt to make it more readable, and has conventions that alert the reader to the fact that a portion or piece of translation is indeed an English interpolation.

The Patristic translations are not so consistent or as good an example. The translator(s) do not alert the reader to when the transition from literal to dynamic has occurred.

For now, the methodology espoused by the Talmudic translators is the direction I am going to head in when translating the Patristic writers.

Psalm 119

9 BETH. Wherewithal shall a young man keep his way pure? By taking heed thereto according to Thy word.

10 With my whole heart have I sought Thee; O let me not err from Thy commandments.

11 Thy word have I laid up in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee.

12 Blessed art Thou, O HaShem; teach me Thy statutes.

13 With my lips have I told all the ordinances of Thy mouth.

14 I have rejoiced in the way of Thy testimonies, as much as in all riches.

15 I will meditate in Thy precepts, and have respect unto Thy ways.

16 I will delight myself in Thy statutes; I will not forget Thy word.

all about the letter bet/vet

From wikipedia:

This letter’s name means “house” in various Semitic languages (Hebrew: bayiṯ, Arabic bayt, Akkadian bītu, bētu, Phoenician byt etc.; ultimately all from Proto-Semitic *bayt-), and appears to derive from a Middle Bronze Age picture of a house by acrophony. The Phoenician letter gave rise to the Greek Beta, Latin B, and Cyrillic Б, В.

Bet is the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet and the number 2. See how to write it.

Some Hebrew words that start with bet: House – Beyt, School – Beyt-sefer, Morning – Bo-ker. In Israel we learned to say boker tov = good morning. The first word in the Tanakh is bereshit. It is a plosive sound with force and power that comes from the Aleph which sands silently behind it. Av is the word for Father, the One who creates the universe. Bet is a picture of Yeshua as Master of the House. If we combine the name for father – av – with the word for son – ben – we have the word – even – which means stone. The “Rejected Stone” pictures the LORD Yeshua as the One rejected by Israel during His first advent.

interesting – Hebrew first name meanings

If you read the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, you will come away thinking that the ancient Hebrews believed in unicorns.  This is understandable since there are nine verses referring to unicorns: Numbers 23:22, Numbers 24:8, Deuteronomy 33:17, Job 39:9 & 10, Psalms 22:22, Psalms 29:6, Psalms 92:10, and Isaiah 34:7,

Many atheists take potshots at Christian Biblical literalism by pointing out that taking the Bible literally would entail believing in ridiculously fantastic creatures such as unicorns.  Some Atheists get great joy out of showing Biblically naive believers that their beloved Bible has unicorns populating it.

However, examination of the Hebrew makes it clear that the KJV is just a mistranslation.  Wheew, Christians are off the hook on this one — not that there aren’t a lot more hooks out there waiting for them !

Here are the linguistic facts:

• The Hebrew word translated “unicorn” in the KJV is רְאֵ֖ם (re’em) which in the TaNaK (Hebrew Bible) actually means “wild bull” or “ram” and is translated correctly is most other Bibles.
• The Latin translation of the same word in the Vulgate is  “rhinocerotis”
• The Greek word in the Septuagint is μονοκέρωτος (monokέrōtoς) which means “one” (mono) “horn” (kerotos).  This mistranslation of re’em and may have caused of the misunderstanding.  You see, a “rhinocerotis” has one horn.

Anyway, please cut the Christians a break — except those who worship the KJV, of course!  There are a lot more substantive debates to be had.  And besides, approaching conversations about the Bible in this manner, disobeys what I call the Debator’s Golden Rule which calls for helping the other side present their strongest argument.  And more than all this, and the point of this post, is that keeping all the unicorn talk clear-headed allows us to save the unicorn for its most important task: debunking the burden of proof of fantastical notions (covered in another post).  For that purpose, Atheists have created the notion of the Invisible Pink Unicorn (Wiki) as well as the Flying-Spaghetti Monster (wiki) for which we are all deeply grateful.  We don’t want to confuse our conversations with Christians by discussing biblical unicorns when we have the much more useful invisible pink uniform waiting patiently in the forest ready to come to our rescue ! 

__________

Reference:  see this Bible side-by-side translation.

Prague is underneath the snow! Finally two days ago with more than a month delay Prague has covered itself in white and reveals its charm more than in any other season of the year…

Quite out of the blue suddenly I felt it again – the creative urge to take my camera and to go out and take pictures. So yesterday night I took my camera and went out - alone, just walked around downtown while sucking in the cleansing freezing night air and thinking about just how much I actually enjoy this and how much I love winter!

And thinking about it I decided to capture the moments I breathed in as well… So here it goes…. A small taste of what the atmosphere of nighttime Prague all covered in white feels like.

Hope you’ll enjoy!