![]() |
|
Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Printable Version +- SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum (http://www.seekgod.ca/forum) +-- Forum: Discussion Boards (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Messianic Judaism / Hebrew Roots or Hebraic Roots (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9) +--- Thread: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? (/showthread.php?tid=37) |
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-05-2011 05:46 PM Ben you said Quote:[Actually, I don't speak ivrit, my wife does though. I only read it.] and then you have the chutzpah to tell me that mechudeshet doesn't mean renewed and that it isn't an adjective. ![]() Quote:I suggest you look in a Hebrew dictionary such as rav milon, or the like, and you will confirm what I am saying. and I suggest a good properly accredited biblical hebrew course before trying to teach others hebrew grammar
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - sari83 - 05-05-2011 09:06 PM Quote Ner'arYah: So let’s stop right here because I would like to point something out. If the stranger dwelling among us becomes one of us are they still a stranger? If you adopt a child into your family do you then treat them differently? Hopefully, you’re a good and fair person that you wouldn’t, and neither would our Father. The stranger mentioned here is for the one that is “not a-part” of his people, those that are outside the covenant. Those who elected to not par-take in following Torah. In other words, this is not a separate law for Yahuah’s (God’s) people and the stranger that once was around them because they would partake in the law. We can battle about this all day, but you will find yourself falling short on nearly most of the old book with stories in reference to Passover in Exodus, and others like Ruth. And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God: (Ruth 1:16) My original comment on this point was that there is only one law for those that left Egypt. Moses didn’t go up once for the Yisra’elite (Israelite), and then again for the sojourner. The mere fact that you are trying to prove your point through the Torah tell you something… Hopefully you caught that…. You’re trying to use the law given to the children of Yisra’el to show me that there was a different law given to the gentile…. But you’re going to the law that was given to the Children of Yisra’el. It’s the same law, no matter how we cut it. The assembly is to have the same statute for both you and the foreign resident as a permanent statute throughout your generations. You and the foreigner will be alike before the LORD. 16 The same law and the same ordinance will apply to both you and the foreigner who resides with you." (Numbers 15:15) End Quote-- Sari83: It is correct to say that there was one and the same law for the Israelite and the sojourner (stranger) living among them. That's exactly what the Scriptures say in regards to the Passover, offerings, and even the Sabbath. [Exod 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: (KJV)] These verses are specifically in regards to the stranger within the gates. There are differences in the law for the stranger outside of Israel. RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-05-2011 09:11 PM Quote:Calling two texts 'equally authoritative' means that both say the same thing...otherwise, how is one to over ride the other, whether it be OT the NT, or the NT the OT?For me, calling two texts equally authoritative means that I regard them as both being Scripture and all in there is equally valid to me Paul said it very well 2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. I take both OT and NT to be Scripture. When you say otherwise how is one to over ride the other ,what exactly do you mean? In my view noone overrides the other.The NT is merely a continuation of the story as it were, in the OT.To us christians it is one Bible.Why has one got to override the other? RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-05-2011 09:37 PM Quote:These verses are specifically in regards to the stranger within the gates. There are differences in the law for the stranger outside of Israel.There seems to be a difference for strangers living within their gates too.Here is one Deu 14:21 Ye shall not eat of any thing that dieth of itself: thou shalt give it unto the stranger that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or thou mayest sell it unto an alien: for thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk. RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Benny - 05-05-2011 10:07 PM and then you have the chutzpah to tell me that mechudeshet doesn't mean renewed and that it isn't an adjective. ![]() Quote:I suggest you look in a Hebrew dictionary such as rav milon, or the like, and you will confirm what I am saying. and I suggest a good properly accredited biblical hebrew course before trying to teach others hebrew grammar ![]() [/quote] Rose, Since you know that mechudeshet is not an adjective, you want to me 'hit me below the belt' about Hebrew. I actually have been through a certified Hebrew Ulpan- I spent 6 months hardcore learning Hebrew in Israel, my friend. I have learned Gemara in Hebrew, with someone who spoke almost no English, in Israel. Consider learning a largely Aramaic text [which I knew little aramaic, I had to ask my chavruta for the Hebrew equivalent half the time] in Hebrew [which I could understand but not speak]. I don't practice speaking it, only reading it. It doesn't take speaking Hebrew to read it or to know the grammar. If you doubt what I say, check it out. I assume you are a guy, therefore...ka'asher ishty qarah teshuvot shelkha, hee omra, hu lo mevin ivrit. im atah lo maskim iti, yofi. Atah lo tsodek ldaber b'azut. That is not being a person of God. Atah baki b'ivrit , chavivi? There are better ways to prove a point, than to respond as you did. Every time something about Hebrew that you said was not grammatically, and I pointed it out, you come up with something 'new' that you hope proves your point. By the way, my wife is fluent in Hebrew, my friend, and she confirms every bit of what I said regarding the grammar. The exception is that mechudeshet would be more correctly termed an adverb, than a verb. But an adjective, certainly not. Let us be 'mentches'/proper people, and stick the topics. I will go another way to prove the point, that it isn't 'new' using context. Ezekiel 36 22 It is not for yours sake that I act, O house of Israel, but for my holy Name that you have desecrated among the nations where you came. 23 I will sanctify my great name that is desecrated among the nations, that you have desecrated among them; then the nations will know that I am Hashem...when I become sanctified through you before their eyes. 24 I will take you from among the nations and gather you from all the lands, and I will bring you to your own soil. 25 Then I will sprinkle pure water upon you, that you may become cleansed; I will cleanse you from all your contamination and from your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My spirit within you, and I will make it so that you will follow My decrees and guard my ordinances and fulfill them. 28 You will dwell in the land that I gave to your forefathers; you will be a people to me, and I will be a God to you. [then he proceeds to speak of the blessings, as written in the beginning Leviticus 26, and beginning of Deut 28.] 21 ...I am taking the Children of Israel from among the nations to which they have gone; I will gather them from all around and I will bring them to their soil; 22 I will make them into one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel, and one king will be a king for them all; they will no longer be two nations, and they will no longer be divided into two kingdoms, ever again. I will save them from all their dwelling places in which they had sinned, and I will purify them; they will be a nation to me, and I will be a God to them. 24 My servant David will be king over them, and there will be one shepherd for all of them; they will follow My ordinances and keep my decrees and fulfill them. 25 They will dwell on the land that I gave to My servant Jacob, within which your fathers dwelled; they and their children's children will dwell upon it forever; and my servant David will be a leader for them forever. 26 I will seal a covenant of peace with them; it will be an eternal covenant with them; and I will emplace them and increase them, and I will place My sanctuary among them forever. 27 My dwelling place will be among them; I will be a God to them and the will be a people to Me. 28 Then the nations will know that I am Hashem who sanctifies Israel, when my sanctuary will be among them forever. Likewise, there are many such places: shall I list them all? What is the new aspect? That it will be in spirit, not just in letter. What does this mean, seeing that it says they will follow my ordinances etc? ![]() derekh eretz kedmah latorah- remember this phrase in your responses. Be well. RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-05-2011 11:54 PM I am a woman not a man.Would a male have a nick such as Rose of Shushan? ![]() RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-06-2011 12:16 AM Quote:Rose,With all that learning under your belt perhaps you can explain to me why mechudeshet is not an adjective. Quote:It doesn't take speaking Hebrew to read it or to know the grammar. K basically it seems you are saying that your wife read my responses and said that I don't understand hebrew.Then for the benefit of readers who don't understand hebrew, you seemed to say that "if I don't agree that is great.And that I am not right to speak so boldly." Well maybe she can explain too why mechudeshet isnt an adjective since you are so emphatic about that. I am also curious why you would think I am a male and what relevance has my gender to what we are discussing? Quote:Let us be 'mentches'/proper people, and stick the topics. Where would you like us to stick them? Just kidding dont get your tzit tzit in a twist!
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Benny - 05-06-2011 07:59 AM Rose, Firstly, I apologize about thinking you were a guy. No excuses needed. I mess up, I fess up. Shall I explain why you thought chadesh was the word for 'renew' the adjective? You looked up in the concordance 'renew'. What passage did you find? Eichah/Lamentations 5.21 hashivenu Hashem elekha vnashuv [vnashuvah] chadesh yamenu k'kedem: I have said that mechadesh is the verb. Why then does it say here, chadesh, not mechadesh? I will give you a hint: medaber is the word we use to say in present, "I speak, you speak, etc." We don't say dober, we say medaber. However, if I tell someone 'speak with me' we say 'daber iti.' Thus, in this passage in eichah, it is the command form of mechadesh. likewise, we see in 1 samuel 11.14: vayomer shmuel el haam lekhu vnelkha hagilgal unchadesh sham hameluckah: And said Shmuel to the people, come [literally 'go', similar to Abram it says 'lekh', or to a woman you would say lekhi...modern hebrew 'boi'] and we will go to gilgal and we will renew there the kingdom. why unchadesh u- and nechadesh- we will renew, the verb mechadesh, the mem drops in favor of the nun for the 'we' person. Then, you jump to a modern hebrew dictionary: mechudeshet adj I say mechudeshet is a verb/adverb...and I use the premise that the form indicates such...and the example I give is 'at mekudeshet li' 'you are sanctified to me', which I would hope that you could see that sanctified, here, is not an adjective. mechudeshet has the same form [I know it is not the same word]. Thus, I draw the parallel. However, we look up this form in the dictionary, and it says adj. Why? I have a copy of the dictionary rav milon. It is great. It has sentences that use the word in it. However, the mechudeshet form isn't written in a sentence as an adj, but hamechudeshet. When one adds a heh before a word, almost any verb can technically become 'an adj.' Why? because the heh before a word can make it say, "One who does (fill in the blank)" thus when one adds it to another word, it technically becomes an adjective/modifier of the noun, even though the form isn't an adjective form. Anyway. We'll stick to the topics, and the contextual aspects. hehe Be well. RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Ne'arYah - 05-06-2011 03:21 PM Quote:Original: Mary So Mary, can you please give me one time where I have twisted scripture? If you want to send me a personal email or call me by phone instead of hammering this out here, then no problem. I have no problem speaking with you first hand. RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 05-06-2011 04:39 PM Quote:Shall I explain why you thought chadesh was the word for 'renew' the adjective?It doesn't seem to be your week eh, yet another messup. I don't use concordances and have a hard time working with one.Once people start talking Strong's numbers I break out into a sweat. Quote:I have said that mechadesh is the verb. Why then does it say here, chadesh, not mechadesh? No, what you said was Quote:Concerning mechudeshet...perhaps I am wrong, but I don't think that word means renewed as an adjective. As a verb, it is possible. The hebrew structure of mechudeshet is mem ched daleth shin...indicating a verb form. The Tav would be indicating the associated noun is a feminine.Then later on you change to it being an adverb Quote:The exception is that mechudeshet would be more correctly termed an adverb, than a verb. But an adjective, certainly not. I wish you would make your mind up, for the sake of anyone who might be following this thread.You mean to teach but you don't even know yourself what you think on the matter. Quote:I say mechudeshet is a verb/adverb...and I use the premise that the form indicates such...and the example I give is 'at mekudeshet li' 'you are sanctified to me', which I would hope that you could see that sanctified, here, is not an adjective.Because it is an adjective! Duh Its female form of mechudesh.And mechudeshet is not the same as mekudeshet.One is an adjective and the other verb. You see it ends the same way and has a mem at beginning and wrongly conclude its verb and not adjective. That seems to be your primitive way of looking at hebrew grammar to me. However on the other hand, as I look through this thread at your posts on the subject I think you do understand the concept of root words and your reasoning isnt so primitive when you referred to the chidushim of the pentecostals.There fore my only conclusion is that you're being deliberately obtuse in the matter in order to confuse and maybe give credibility to your claim that the covenant is renewed. If you wish to call adjectives adverbs,go ahead.If you want to ignore vowel pointings when it suits you and instead opt for an alternative interpretation, no-one is stopping you.Just don't go around arguing that your interpretation is correct and that the renderings we have in all our Bibles are incorrect especially when you have to twist the rules of grammar to do so.I have yet to see one real Bible ,by real I mean not the mutilations such as the ISR or Sterns, that used renewed in Jer 31 for hadashah. |