Comments on: I need a Hebrew scholar to help me with a passage in Isaiah

By: Randall Hill

Randall Hill — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:13:58 +0000

The Talmud goes on to explain that God commanded Cyrus to rebuild the temple.However, he instead comissioned others to do it. Rashi believed that if he would have been obedient, that the temple would have never again be destroyed, and the HaMashiach would have come then.

By: Randall Hill

Randall Hill — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 02:53:58 +0000

to Garry,The first word in Hebrew is biyado [in his hand] the second word is meyadav [from his hands] this is congugated plural. Isaiah 45:4,5 Is God speaking through Isaiah to Cyrus about rebuilding the temple even though he does not know God. This is also referencing the HaMashiach [the Messiah] whom Israel will not recognize.This comes from the Tanach.

By: Garry Matheny

Garry Matheny — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:07:21 +0000

Dear Sir

In Ex. 32:15 is the word “hand” (singular) from Strong’s # 3027,
but in Ex. 32:19 is the word “hands” (plural) also Strong’s # 3027. So, how do they know if it is plural or singular is there a difference in the Hebrew or in the vowel pointing?
Thank you!
Garry

By: Neil Thomsen

Neil Thomsen — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:52:23 +0000

Judith, with respect, I refer you to Julian of Norwich.
She, like Jesus, seemed to have a view of sin that was different to the traditional religious/Church view of her time.
“And this was the beginning of the teaching revealed to me at this same time, through which I might come to know God’s attitude to us in our sin. And then I saw that only suffering blames and punishes, and our kind Lord comforts and grieves; he always considers the soul cheerfully lovingly and longing to bring us to bliss”. (The Long Text, 51).
This seems to confirm my original concept. For many years I saw my relationship with God framed in the context of separation and sin. Now I see my relationship with God in the context of love and mercy and union with God in contemplation. Sin is not the touchstone, God’s love is.
However, the searching for that relationship must be very devoted, as all the mystics that I have read thus far seem to indicate.
I agree with you “Seek diligently and you will find”.

By: judith collier

judith collier — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:27:11 +0000

That comment about mysticism notoriously lifting passages out of scripture. Does God do it or do we? I am going to put this one on the Lord as He is the only One that can make a word alive. And the gospel as far as I know is never compromised. Didn’t he say, “Seek me diligently and you will find me”.

By: Neil Thomsen

Neil Thomsen — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:08:50 +0000

I think that the key question is “How does God view humans?”

In reference to the issue of sinfulness, Church convention would teach that the world is totally depraved and hopelessly corrupt. Church (and I speak from experience in the Protestant tradition) has vested interest in propagating this view because sin is often used as part of the repertoire that demarcates who is inside and who is outside their particular club. Sin in this sense does not refer to missing the mark of God. It refers to who is good and who is not good, in Church terms.

However, I don’t think this is consistent with God’s view of us. God is actually searching for us like a lost sheep, a treasured coin or a much loved child (Luke 15). Focus on sin does not mirror Jesus Christ’s kind approach to sinners, to humans generally in the Gospels.

In the same way that we naturally love our own children, God loves what he has made in his image. Despite the failings of our own children our love for them overshadows the darkness of their errors. Similarly, sin can be seen in the context of God’s power to overcome it. We are who God sees. And God sees us, his children, with unwavering love, since this is part of his very nature. Creation is God made and speaks God’s voice (Psalm 19.1-6). Truth is available in many other places too. The problem? God calls, we humans are not good at doing our part, which is seeking.