January 15, 2007
-
What is Church?
Engaging and Authentic(Part 1) (Part 2) (Part 3) (Part 4) This is Part 5
Church is a community of people in dialog with each other about Jesus, about God, about the Bible, about life. Dialogs are conversations that are open…not closed. (engaging and authentic)
Jesus was a Hebrew, a Jewish Rabbi. The Scripture makes this very clear. It is not a fact that we can change….for…..it is a fact. One of the differences between Hebrew view of Scripture and Greek view of Scripture is that in the Greek way of thinking, which is what our culture by-in-large subscribes to, it is all about having the answers. It is all about having “figured it out”. Truth, in this way of thinking is static. In the Hebrew way of thinking, the way that Jesus thought, it is all about the questions, it is all about the contemplation. It is all about trying to understand….not having the answer…but seeking always. I will add that this is NOT relativism, and I am NOT describing the thought that each person has their own truth, that truth is relative. I am describing a seeking heart, a heart on a journey for truth.
It is impossible to dialog when both sides “have the answer”. We can easily find people who share our “answers”, but the true test of a man (or woman) is to be able to listen, to look at opposing thoughts, to allow the Holy Spirit to work in that. To seek the truth and wisdom of God……and never have the defining answer. Why, because Scripture is alive when read by God’s people.
When was the last time you talked about your anger and you contemplated with your friends what Jesus taught about the subject in your dialog? When was the last time you discussed God’s Words and you allowed the other person to present their thoughts while you presented yours…and there was no anger? True, someone may say things that you feel are outrageous and that you do not believe. But, by listening, by allowing them their belief, and by their then listening to yours…..there is room for growth and God can be in command of the conversation rather than us.
Indeed, just like Jesus and the ancient rabbi’s of His time, they discussed Scripture, not just listened to one man’s interpretation of Scripture. God’s Words are alive, He wants us to seek, He wants us to contemplate, He wants us to discover. None of this can be accomplished if we already know the answers. Or rather, I should say that none of this can be accomplished if our hearts are so hardened as to not allow others ownership of their thoughts, their journey, their understanding.Contemplate the story of Jesus as a twelve year old boy in the temple…. the broader context of this story is found in Luke 2: 41-52 (ESV). We will look closely at verses 46, 47 and 52:
46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.
52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.
Note that Jesus asked questions…and note that Jesus, at tweleve years old, also shared His understanding with the rabbi’s and others in the temple.
Please, please……tell me what you think….
Comments (37)
I just came by to say “Amen” to this post. It is true that we already have all the answers and if you don’t agree with my answers, we will split and go out separate ways…
ryc Katie: Thank you
Many times we have to struggle….however, we should even disagree in truth and love. This, of course, is easier said than done. There does come a time when maybe two people can’t come to a conclusion and therefore must “split and go out separate ways”, however, I would also sumbit that if we keep that “humble” attitude (the attitude that GOD knows all….WE are continuously seeking)…..we can usually agree to disagree and still enjoy each other in truth and love. This attitude leads to spiritual growth of all involved…..because it allows us to think rather than take sides…….we allow the Holy Spirit to work.
Thank you for your thoughts
God bless!
great post. It hurts a little as I become of my own hardened, judgemental heart…especially when it comes to the ideas of others.
ryc Wingfiea: Thank you for joining the conversation
Thank you for being so honest and humble. May we all continue on the journey of following Christ. God bless you!
Thanks Jan, that is a great reminder for me. I know I have a tendency to be judgemental – I try not to be. Being in education all my life you would think that I would be able to do what I encouraged my students to do – question and discuss! I suppose it’s the teacher syndrome! One thing about learning – it is a never ending process and the person who thinks they know it all, never does!
As I get older and understand more about what it means to be on a journey with Jesus, hopefully I will become more humble.
ryc intheson: It’s funny, in many ways…..we all have a tendancy to be judgmental…..we have to teach ourselves the ways of God. Just like we have a tendancy to sin…..we have to teach ourselves the ways of God. I agreee wholeheartedly…”One thing about learning – it is a never ending process and the person who thinks they know it all, never does!” God bless you my friend!
Thought you might be interested in this:
http://www.xanga.com/johnsjourney/563027708/documentaryproject-summary.html?nextdate=last
Very relevant to what we’re all discussing here.
Wonderful post.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head in regards to much of what goes on in “Christianity” today, at least here in America. We tend to think we have it all figured out and immediately disregard anyone who questions the “answers” we have already laid down. There seems to be such a fine line when passionately discussing spiritual things…
It’s nice to be able to come and read thoughtful, compassionate dialogue about topics such as this. I think if we were all more open to expressing our true hopes and desires for the Church, and working together in love toward that common goal, the result would be completely amazing.
THANKS for being here and for leading such awesome conversations!
Hey, do you mind if I re-post this segment on my site and provide a link to your discussion here? Just let me know if that would be okay. Thanks!
RYC: Thanks so much. I’m going to post it now.
ryc peacefulveganmom: Thank you for sharing the link, I will be spending time looking at this as it looks very relevant to our conversation. Thank you akso for your kind words and your openness. I pray that you get to feeling better on today, your birthday! Happy Birthday! Yes, you have my permission to share our conversation on your site. God bless!
A very thought provoking post. I think we become so obsessed with answers that we lose sight of things. For instance, is it really important why bad things happen? Isn’t it more important to respond to people when bad things happen? I think dialog is important, but ultimately it comes down to ministering to people. You can get trapped in searching for answers and dialog.
ryc RonLaw: I couldn’t agree more
God is God……no matter what we think. We can’t “think” Him into a loving God….we can’t “think” Him into a judgemental God…..but……we can listen to and apply His wisdom. I agree, ” I think dialog is important, but ultimately it comes down to ministering to people. You can get trapped in searching for answers and dialog.” God bless!
think i may have to spend some time here – tough to mete out the hours – my hope is to unite folks who question/believe more here
blessings,
frank
Pay no attention to most of what’s on my frontpage – links on the left bar w/ give you a quicker insight…
I will be back I have a lot of reading to do and i have no time tonight. So far impressive but nothing intelligent to say yet.
part of my dialogue is this. You said the scripyure makes it very clear that Jesus was a Rabbi. I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this. I guess I always assumed they just called him Rabbi because of the quality of his teachings. I am not saying he wasn’t one, I only question your statement that the scriptures are clear on this matter. Was there a formal school for Rabbi and what were the difference between Rabbi’s and Pharissees, and were they Rabbis? How do we know that Rabbi was not just like someone calling a Sunday school teacher, even though the Sunday School teacher wasn’t a licensed teacher with a former education and actually was a plumber, or carpenter by trade. Just wondering what the word Rabbi means.
I mean I thought Christ was a carpenter.
ryc pamilvr and trunthepaige: Thank you for visiting
God bless!
ryc Robert: There is much to say here about this and I will do my best to condense it yet make it clear
The Greek word for rabbi is interestingly enough, “Rhabbi”. This was a title used by Jews to address their teacher, as well as to honor them. The educational process that a young Jewish boy goes through is not found in the Bible, but is found in the Mishnah. The Mishna are the oral interpretations of the hebrew Scriptures. When we look at the Scriptures , we see that Jesus’ life closely followed these customs of the time and place in Palestine.
First, let’s look at what is gleaned from the Mishna about the educational process:
At five years old [one is fit] for the Scripture, at ten years the Mishnah (oral Torah, interpretations) at thirteen for the fulfilling of the commandments, at fifteen the Talmud (making Rabbinic interpretations), at eighteen the bride-chamber, at twenty pursuing a vocation, at thirty for authority (able to teach others)
If we look then at Jesus life as described in the Scriptures, we see that He paralled this education (as He was in fact Jewish):
Luke 2:52 tells us that Jesus “grew in wisdom”.
“And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man.” (ESV)
Luke 2:41-47 Jesus reached the “fullfilling” of the commandments at age twelve. Note verse 47…..He was an exceptional student!
41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. 43 And when the feast was ended, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, 44 but supposing him to be in the group they went a day’s journey, but then they began to search for him among their relatives and acquaintances, 45 and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem, searching for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers. (ESV)
Matthew 13:55 Jesus learned a trade with His father.
“Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?” (ESV)
John 3:22-26 and John 4:1-3 makes it clear that Jesus spent time with John the Baptist, a rabbi. The simple fact that Jesus and His disciples were baptizing suggest strongly that Jesus and John studied together or with the same teacher.
22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing. 23 John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because water was plentiful there, and people were coming and being baptized 24 (for John had not yet been put in prison).
25 Now a discussion arose between some of John’s disciples and a Jew over purification. 26 And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness–look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him.” (ESV)
John 4:1-3
1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples), 3 he left Judea and departed again for Galilee. (ESV)
Lastly, keeping clearly with what we have learned about the process of education in Galillee through the Mishnah………Jesus ministry, when He became “Rabbi” or “Teacher” was at about age 30.
Luke 3:23
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, (ESV)
I need to go to work right now and so, am running out of time. I promise I will also address your other questions, they are great questions! God bless!
Wow, we are talking about the mishna. Awesome.
I have thought a lot about church. I come out of an abusive Evangelical background and have many issues with ‘church’. I like this 5 part discussion, especially the points:
-’we need to meet people where they are at.’
-church as a gas station to refuel spirit
-as an hospital
-the ability to discuss and read scripture together and not dump anger when disagreement arises (which would happen often if people are being genuine)
Peace,
Troy
ryc chicken_pax: Thank you for joining the discussion. I would love to hear your thoughts. God bless!
ryc Robert: You asked, “Was there a formal school for Rabbi and what were the difference between Rabbi’s and Pharisees, and were they Rabbis? ” In Galilee, the schools were deeply associated with the local synagogue. The curriculum revolved around the Scriptures. The first level of school was Beth Sefer. Children in Beth Sefer started at 4-5 years of age and often memorized the complete Torah (the first five books of the Scriptures). Most kids left this school (around age 15). The best students continued on to Beth Midrash. They still continued to learn their family trade. memorization of Scripture was very important as there were few copies of the Scriptures available. At this point, these students would often memorize the rest of the Scriptures. The next level of education that was attained by only the best of the best students was Beth Talmid. At this point, they asked permission to continue on with a rabbi wanting to be like the rabbi, providing they were accepted to move on that this point. Eventually these students would pass on their passion to their own disciples as rabbi’s (Talmidim).
Rabbi’s: Master Jewish teachers and spiritual instructors
Pharisee: Jews were divided into basically three sects or schools , or you might call them parties (they were rather political in nature). The Pharisee’s followed the laws of Moses in minute detail. They were noted by their self-righteousness and pride. My understanding is that Pharisees were normally not rabbi’s and that rabbi’s avoided the term “pharisee”.
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
Rabbi’s: Master Jewish teachers and spiritual instructors
Pharisee: Jews were divided into basicly three sects or schools , or you might call them parties (they were rather political in nature). The Pharisee’s followed the laws of Moses in minute detail. They were noted by their self-righteousness and pride. My understanding is that Pharisees were normally not rabbi’s and that rabbi’s avoided the term “pharisee”.
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
You asked: “How do we know that Rabbi was not just like someone calling a Sunday school teacher, even though the Sunday School teacher wasn’t a licensed teacher with a former education and actually was a plumber, or carpenter by trade. ” Because in Jewish culture, they didn’t have “Sunday school teacher’s” Rabbi’s went through the process above, memorizing all of the Scriptures. Rabbi was a distinguished title afforded to spiritual and learned teachers.
Here are some additional Scriptures:
– Judas called Jesus “Rabbi” (Matthew 26:25)
25 Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.”
– Peter called Jesus “Rabbi” (Mark 9:5)
5 And Peter said to Jesus, “Rabbi, it is good that we are here.
(Mark 11:21)
21 And Peter remembered and said to him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree that you cursed has withered.”
– The blind man called Jesus “rabbi” (Mark 10:51)
51 ….And the blind man said to him, “Rabbi, let me recover my sight.”
– Two disciples called Jesus “rabbi” (John 1:37-39)
37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, “What are you seeking?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and you will see.”
– Nathanael called Jesus “rabbi” (John 1:49)
49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!”
– Nicodemus, the Pharisee, called Jesus “rabbi” (John 3:1-2)
1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus£ by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.”
– The disciples called Jesus “rabbi” (John 4:31)
31 Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, saying, “Rabbi, eat.
John 6:25
25 When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?
John 9:2
2 And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
John 11:8
8 The disciples said to him, “Rabbi, the Jews were just now seeking to stone you, and are you going there again?”
My conclusion is that Jesus was certainly a rabbi. Thank you for asking the questions
God bless you!
I think your misunderstanding what I am asking. I know in scripture people called him Rabbi. What was the context of the meaning of the word Rabbi. If I understand what you said correctly it wasn’t a formal education, all the jewish kids went through it. How do you know they were not calling him Rabbi out of respect of the quality of his teaching and the proof that God was with him by the miracles. I mean I know the pharisees would always “be amazed ” at the knowledge of scripture Christ had. When I read this it alway would seem to me that they were actually mocking him. It seems if he had a formal education they would have accepted him more. I’m just not so sure he was a Rabbi in the formal sense we think of today of someone having gone to seminary. Are you saying he was raised to be a Rabbi in a sense like some Levites were raised to be a synogogue cantor from avery young age?
Robert: First, yes in the Scripture, people called Jesus rabbi. I do not see the disciples or even the close twelve being called rabbi. I don’t know what else to say. All due respect, I believe you understand this incorrectly. A rabbi went through very formal training.
Beth Sefer : MOST young men stopped here, went home to their families, learned a trade and lived out their life.
Beth Midrash: Only the best moved on to level of school and teaching.
Beth Talmid: ONLY the best of the best attended this level of teaching under a rabbi. And only the best of the best of the best ever attained the title of “teacher”, or rabbi.
In all that I have studied, it was very unlike today where titles are thrown around and self applied.
I do not believe that the Pharisees were mocking him when the Scriptures tell us they were amazed. In the first place, we look at the word “amazed”. The Greek word used is “existemi“. This word conveys a feeling of being astounded, astonished, in wonderment. It’s in fact a very strong word. If they were to have mocked Jesus…..I believe the writers would have conveyed that thought.
Acceptance: When a man earned the title of rabbi, he was given the authority to interpret Scripture. This would be become what is called, his “Yoke”. Up to that point, they followed another rabbi or teacher and assumed their yoke. Jesus was not accepted by the Pharisees because He was interpreting Scripture (indeed, He WAS God’s word’s on earth as a man) in a way that challenged them and their culture of “priestly” things. Go tell your boss that He is to serve his employees rather than be served, most bosses will not take that well. This is just a light example of why Jesus was not accepted by the “powers” of the day (that’s the biggest clue to His lack of acceptance).
No matter whether we accept that Jesus went to “seminary” (which even today does not accurately portray the condition of your heart), the Pharisees, scribes and other teachers of the law identified Him as “teacher” or rabbi. Indeed the Words He spoke were the Words of God. They recognized that he was interpreting the Scripture (fulfilling the Scriptures) in a pure light and way. But it threatened what they though of themselves as “special” people, it threatened their hypocrisy. Yet….they were still “amazed”.
Thank you for your questions and for adding to this conversation. God bless you Robert.
Good answers, I need to now consider them…
I still do think they were mocking Christ when they were exclaiming how astonished they were.
Sorry I haven’t been by,Jan..you have such great topics.
I agree with the way you have described “church” as not NECESSARILY having ALL the answers. Again, I agree with Lewis that it is as if “One hungry man is telling another where food may be found”. I think it is important that you clarified that this is not relativism…God has an absolute standard, truth,reality; call it what you will; toward which we strive.
I think that the important thing is attitude. I remember reading about some of the Jewish traditions..in the rabbinical tradition, debate was to be animated, but without rancor…a group of scripture students/rabbis debating a point would have looked to an outsider like a melee without fisticuffs. It was considered each individual’s dity to passionately give his all to the point he was making…without animosity. When debate was done, it was done. I think we can even do this one better…we can learn to passionately discuss the truths we’ve discovered while still listening; simultaneously to the other(s) and to the Holy Spirit. Only in this way, I believe, can we gain everything God is putting before us to learn.
This is not to say that the “church” does not hold a body of valuable truth. However, in a way, I believe that in faith, to borrow a principle disproven in biology, ontogeny does, indeed, recapitulate phylogeny. That is to say, each of us, in a small way, must make the faith journey which the church has made over centuries; making each truth our own. We rediscover them in our own unique, wonderful individual lives. The church is there with a map, or a “triptik”, simplifying the discovery journey. Of course we don’t see everything the same: God is far too large for any individual to “wrap his brain around”. So we disagree..I was stunned some months ago upon hearing an interview with the world’s leading apologist for a particular doctrinal point of view (which I refuse to name here..too controversial, and would obscure my point). It was clear to me that he was making a critical mistake in his logic, and was missing, in my humble (ha,ha) opinion, God’s answer.
The reason I was “stunned” is that I had expected to be swayed by this man’s deep connection to God’s truth…and was startled to find him just a man..no less and no more. I have deep respect for his erudition, dedication and faith…but believe he also has something to learn…imagine that! I still think that even while disagreeing we should consider soberly the thought and opinions of the leaders in faith, but also look at each one in the whole, as a brother or sister on the journey to God who themselves are still learning. To do less belittles them and us. We don’t allow them the grace of our service to them in Christ if they are unreachable, immutable iconic…we make them idols.
The Talmud has a wonderful saying..”The wise man learns from every man; the fool from none.”
enough blather from me, gotta get ready for work.
be blessed, Jan…jim
ryc Robert: It is okay if we disagree
I would humbly ask what brings you to the conclusion that these men mocked Christ when the Scriptures tell us that they were astonished at His teachings? I accept that you may know something about the Greek or the text that I do not. Thank you.
ryc Jim: I too am getting ready for work and do not have the time at the moment to respond full. However, I must say that I am in agreement and appreciate fully your heart. I will reply fully soon. God bless!
Let us all seek together
ryc Jim: It IS important to clarify that what I am talking about is not relativsm. There is one truth, one standard, God is truth. The key is trying to seek His truth for our lives and not our truth. Much of what I am pointing out is that we must be strong enough to seek God’s truth, humble enough to allow others to seek their truth and wise enough to know that the Holy Spirit can impart truth much better than us. What I mean to say here is that we must be wise in seeking the answer, yet not allowing our ego to color someone elses seeking of the path by allowing anger or pride to place walls that will hide the truth.
I like very much how you described the rabbinical tradition of wrestling with Scripture, (we can learn to passionately discuss the truths we’ve discovered while still listening; simultaneously to the other(s) and to the Holy Spirit.) Discussing while still listening. Amen brother!
You said, “God is far too large for any individual to ‘wrap his brain around’.” When we all begin to humble ourselves to understand this, we might be able to really come closer to understanding. This is where my awe takes over at all that God IS and does in our lives.
Jim, Thank you for joining the discussion and adding to the conversation. May God bless you and your family!
RYC LaLeoCafe,
Read Matthew chapter 15:53-58. This chapter starts off with them all saying in what appears to be compliments, but, you find out later on at the beginning of verse 57 it concludes with “And they took offense with him.” Then comes the famous quote by Christ “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”
Read Matthew chapter 22:16. Here the pharisees are also complimenting Christ in order to trap him. They do not really believe what they are saying and they know Christ knows also. They are just mocking him with compliments and fluffy puffy words.
Let’s read it.
“Teacher,” they said, “we know you are a man of integrity and teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17 Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Ceaser or not?”
So they compliment Christ a lot even though they do not really believe it, they are mocking Christ. They say Christ is a man of great integrity and teaches the way of God, but they don’t believe it. They are cmplimenting Christ not because they believe it, but, to throw him off balance, to disarm him.
Which brings us to verse 22 when they walk away “amazed.” Do really believe they are “amazed?” I do not think so. I think the proper interpretation is that their amazed that Christ actually had the gull to say those things to them, to called them hypocrites to their faces, verse 18. They were not “amazed” because they thought Christ was wise or intelligent.
They were amazed at the ‘gull Christ had” to question and teach them, this teacher that dares to teach outside of the system, outside the temple, not under their authority. How dare this person teach outside the authority of the system, the seminaries, the church? Who did he think he was. Did he think he were John the Baptist or something?
We see the same thing in Mark chapter 6:1-4 Let’s look at some of the quotes. Here they are.
“What’s this wisdom that’s been given him, that he even does miracles?”
“Isn’t this the carpenter?” “Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?”
It then says: And they took offense at him.
Now I would also like to add a point here if I may. They didn’t call Christ a Rabbi, they called him a carpenter.
They obviously did not consider him a Rabbi for they never even mentioned it. There would be reason for them to mention it too if he were one. If they did call him Rabbi then that would be something they could strip him of, take away his privilage to be a Rabbi. So if he were one it is logical they would have called him that. If they acknowledged him being a Rabbi then it would be a win win situation for the Pharisees.
Now it is always possible they were not calling him Rabbi to insult him. For verse 2 says he was teaching in the synagogue.
We see Christ explain how they would give lip service and mock Christ while smiling. Read Mark 7:6. “These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me.” Christ was quoting the great prophet Isaiah.
Now in Mark 1:22 the people were amazed. Christ was teaching and healing in the synogogue. The people were amazed. Notice there is no mention of pharisees here. The way the word amazed is used here appears to be a good meaning, not mocking. They truly were.
Now when you read Mark chapter 2:1-12 we see two camps of people here. Those that follow and love Jesus and the miracles he is doing, and, those teachers that hate Christ and criticise him and do not like what he is doing, doing things that contradict the teacher’s sermons on the law. But notice at the end both were “amazed.” This can only mean one thing. The teachers of the law were amazed Christ had the gull to tell him his sins were forgiven. The other camp they were just amazed.
All words have more then one meaning. We need to read it in context of the situation. The teachers of the law were always smiling and complimenting and plotting how to stop Christ. It was all about money. Christ was a taking their parisheners away. Christ did not preach tithing, and this probably upset a lot of the teachers of the law that were doing nothing but collecting checks from the church. It is much easier to make up man’s rules then to try to determine truth in the bible, god’s truth. This is especially true if they do not really belive God’s words, the scrolls.
These Teachers of the law kept following Christ, following and smiling, trying to figure out how to put Christ under their authority, so Christ would have to do what they said, so they would control Christ and maybe even the purse Judas was carrying. I am sure they wanted a piece of that action too. The question is, if Christ were a Rabbi why would they not have repeatedly called him that. For surely it would have been to their advantage. If they called Christ Rabbi then they would have had authority over Christ. The whole time they were following Christ they were trying to bring him in the fold, to get authority over him. We see this elsewhere in Mark 3:21. Let’s take a look .
The pharisees were behind Christ’s family trying to rein them in. Read verse 21 and verse 31-34. We see Christ’s family showing up in verse 21 with Christ’s half brothers trying to get Christ to eat. Christ was an adult. Adults do not go tell other adults to go eat, unless they’re worried of something. I believe the teachers of the law were behind his family when they showed up here. I believe the pharisees, the same ones that were amazed, same ones that followed him everywhere, went to Christ’s family to manipulate, to rein Christ in, to bring Christ under the authority of the pastors and ministers of those days, the teachers of the law. These were the ones that always wanted to twist god’s words, with their hermeneutics manuals, their greek dictionaries, to twist God’s words to mean something God never intended.
It is interesting to note that these family members never followed Christ around and listened to any of Christ’s sermons. It is also interesting to note that Mary is not seen again until at the cross of Christ, without Christ’s halfbrothers or halfsisters. I have concluded hat this means they were of the other camp, the teachers of the law, the pharisees. They didn’t even know that Christ was the messiah. they thought, not necessarily Mary, that Christ was embarrassing them. They couldn’t understand why Christ would not put himself under the authority of the teachers of the law. We do not see them all together again unti the first chapter of Acts, all saved after Christ rose again and not before.
Amazing!
Ryc RobertLee: I am sure it is a typo, the verse you first mention is Matthew 13:53-58.
I have pointed out in earlier comments Scriptures that point to Jesus growing up and closely following the same progression of “education and growth” as a rabbi. I would agree that there is no proof that Jesus was “ordained” as a rabbi. But, what I see in the Gospels is evidence that He was accepted as a rabbi. Indeed, the Pharisee Nicodemus addresses Jesus clearly as “rabbi” in John 3:1-2, as well as the disciples and many others as noted in an earlier comment I made to this post.
Regarding Mark 6:1-4 (the complete context is found in Mark 6:1-6), I would point out that we know little of Jesus childhood and where he was during this period. But we do know that He left Nazareth…. and are shown here that He returned….accompanied by His disciples, returning as a Teacher (Rabbi) surrounded by His students. The purpose of this story is spelled out in verse 4. This same thing is often true today and speaks more of the journey one is on….as people often want to look at where we have been…..not who we are or where we are going (if that makes sense at all). My gosh, if I went home to my hometown as a minister….many people would say, who is he, that druggie that used to live here? Note that in verse 6, Jesus marvels and is amazed at their lack of faith. To me anyway, this strongly implies that He feels that, considering His upbringing, they should understand and have faith. This also implies to me that perhaps there was sense of jealously that the young man, the carpenter’s son that they knew has gone on to perform miracles and become quite a known and learned person….Jesus came into town (verse 1) with a following of disciples as a teacher (rabbi). They certainly recognize the wisdom of His teachings (we see that word, “explesso” again in verse 2) and the miracles. They do not question this at all…..they reaffirm this…..but they ask where it came from……..this sounds like jealousy to me…and again reaffirms his astonishment at their lack of faith in verse 6.
It is interesting that the Gospel writers all DID talk about people mocking Jesus. They used the Greek word “empaizo”.
Matthew used this word in 20:19, 27:29, 27:31, and 27:41
Mark used this word in 10:34, 15:20, and 15:31
Luke used this term in 14:29, 18:32, 22:63, 23:11, 23:36, and Acts 2:13 and 17:32
The Apostle Paul uses another similar Greek word, “mukterizo” in Galatians 6:7
The writer of Hebrews uses a derivative of “empaizo”, “empaigmos” in Hebrews 11:36
Yet, you would have us believe that these very same writers chose the Greek words “existemi” and “explesso” to convey the feeling of “mocking” Jesus. These words convey a feeling of being astounded, astonished, in wonderment. The word “existemi” even goes further in meaning to express a human reaction of astonishment to the wonderful acts of God, it’s in fact a very strong word.
It’s interesting that you believe that the Gospel writers would be so misleading in their thoughts and meanings, especially when they could have used terminology that would have better conveyed their thoughts (if it is as you say, they were actually mocking Jesus). After all, their purpose was to convey the story of Jesus as God to people. I believe that they wanted to be understood. Again, if they were to have mocked Jesus…..I believe the writers would have conveyed that thought using words that meant that.
Concerning your reading of Mark 2:1-12 and your point that “But notice at the end both were ‘amazed.’ This can only mean one thing. The teachers of the law were amazed Christ had the gull to tell him his sins were forgiven. The other camp they were just amazed.”
I am looking below at these verses:
Mark 2:8-12
8 And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they thus questioned within themselves, said to them, “Why do you question these things in your hearts? 9 Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise, take up your bed and walk’? 10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” –he said to the paralytic– 11 “I say to you, rise, pick up your bed, and go home.” 12 And he rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”
I humbly disagree……look again at verse 12….” And he [the paralytic who Jesus just healed] rose and immediately picked up his bed and went out before them all, so that they were all amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!”
I simply do not understand why the writer would not have said that some were amazed and some were not. What I do clearly see in all the Scriptures in which people who have a negative perception of Christ and what He taught……is that when Christ is afforded the opportunity to speak (even in response to their attempts to corner Him)…..he says things that are so wise, (always thwarting their attempts)…that the writers choose to use the words that convey “amazement” to describe the scene. In other words, they may be jealous of Jesus, they may consider Him a threat to their “position” in society, they may not want to believe His wisdom…..but they cannot truly dispute the wisdom that comes straight from God…they are “amazed”.
Robert, believe as you wish. May God bless you as you follow His path. I say this sincerely and not in any mocking way. I pray that the Holy Spirit will lead you as He leads me (I am not sure why he leads us two diametrically opposed places). Such is the wonderment of God. It is okay that we disagree J
Jan, This is your third sentence of this sermon you posted. These words below are your words not mine.
Jan’s Words
“Jesus was a Hebrew, a Jewish Rabbi. The Scripture makes this very clear. It is not a fact that we can change….for…..it is a fact.”
My 1st comment was this
“Part of my dialogue is this. You said the scripture makes it very clear that Jesus was a Rabbi. I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this. I guess I always assumed they just called him Rabbi because of the quality of his teachings. I am not saying he wasn’t one, I only question your statement that the scriptures are clear on this matter.”
Then you responded with this scathing remark
“Robert: First, yes in the Scripture, people called Jesus rabbi. I do not see the disciples or even the close twelve being called rabbi. I don’t know what else to say. All due respect, I believe you understand this incorrectly. A rabbi went through very formal training.”
& Some of your Scriptural Evidence Was this
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
Yet these scriptures say teacher and not Rabbi. I was shocked when I looked them up. This actually proves my point more then yours, that they used the term Rabbi as the same meaning as teacher. A general like meaning. Not the same today that we think of as “Rabbi.” A term of reverance, respect and indearment for the quality of his teaching. When his followers called him Rabbi, this term probably upset the pharisees, for the followers were putting his teachings equel to the pharisees teachings.
Rabbis or teachers were considered lower then the pharisees and their teachings were considered a lower level of truth then what the pharisees taught in the synagogues. A renegade Rabbi that would not come under the teachings of the pharisees like John the Baptist or Jesus were considered false rabbis or false prophets. If not why were they killed?
Jan, Now in the first paragraph of your last comment above you said this:
Jan’s last comment first paragraph
“I would agree that there is no proof that Jesus was “ordained” as a rabbi. But, what I see in the Gospels is evidence that He was accepted as a rabbi.”
This proves my original point. The scripture does not clearly say that. It gives evidence of it but does not clearly say that. Now I understand what your saying, may even agree with you in theory, but, I cannot agree with your first statement and here it is to remind you again:
Jan’s original post statement
“Jesus was a Hebrew, a Jewish Rabbi. The Scripture makes this very clear. It is not a fact that we can change….for…..it is a fact.”
Now which is it? Does the scripture make this very clear, or, do the scriptures say there is no proof he is a Rabbi? Frankly I do not have any problem with you believing that, but I do not accept your interpretation. I believe scripture teaches Christ was a carpenter and there is more evidence for that. I believe sometimes God does not give us all the answers on purpose.
My only problem was your statement. Scripture makes this very clear. Let’s look at it, here it is again:
Jan’s statement again
“Jesus was a Hebrew, a Jewish Rabbi. The Scripture makes this very clear. It is not a fact that we can change….for…..it is a fact.”
You stated that this is very clear. I do agree it is very clear if the reader understands that the definition of what we know of as Rabbi today is a very different meaning then Rabbi back then, in Jesus times. I was only trying to clarify what you were saying. I guess you didn’t like that though. But you didn’t mention anything about definitions, from what I could see.
You only mentioned it in a way as if it was a fact, that scripture was very clear on this, I do not think scripture was, but that was my view. I think to insinuate something is very clear when it is not neccesarily so and then to use evidence that says he was a Rabbi that when you look up clearly says he is a teacher is at the least, worrisome and at the best, a simple mistake. I thought we were all discussing or trying to determine truth. Maybe you used what someone else taught, someone elses sermon I don’t know. I am sure it was an innocent mistake. But there is one fact that is clear for sure and here it is:
Jan’s Quote From Above
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
When I looked these up it doesn’t say what you said it says Jan. All of these say teacher, not Rabbi. The others you said did say Rabbi to be fair, but these did not.
I think we need to be careful of our words and insinuations for really we are to teach only what God teaches us in scripture, nothing more, nothing less. Now I am not saying you were doing this on purpose Jan. I was only trying to clarify what you were saying and appearing to insinuate for those readers that might misunderstand and think Christ was just a great teacher or great Rabbi at a time in history that we needed a great teacher or great Rabbi. Christ was more then that. I think I know you didn’t mean this, I only wished to clarify it for others and then you seemed to get offended with what I was saying like I was challenging you in which I was not.
I think this is an appropriate place to quote the fourth last verse in the last bible and here it is:
Revelation 22:18-19
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them , God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the the holy city which is described in this book.
Also I forgot a definition in “Holman Quick Source Bible Dictionary”
Rabbi Title meaning, “My Master”, applied to teachers and others of an exalted position. During the new testament period the term “rabbi” came to be more narrowly applied to one learned in the law of Moses, without signifying an official office.
Now today the word Rabbi does signify an official office. It is a person with a Rabbi degree from a Rabbi seminary that awards him a PHD or Masters that allows him to lead a synagogue as a Rabbi. At least this is my understanding of it and I may be wrong.
ryc Robert: First, I apologize that you took my remark as “scathing”. Nothing could be further from the truth. From the content of your comment, I felt that you misunderstood the term “rabbi”.
I stand by my original statement. The Scriptures do clearly show that Jesus was a Rabbi, an exalted and revered religious teacher.
You point out in the “Holman Quick Source Bible Dictionary” that the word Rabbi means “My Master”, applied to teachers and others of an exalted position. This made my point Robert.
At this point I am unsure of your point. I never said, or even implied that Jesus was a modern day type of Rabbi. You said, “I was only trying to clarify what you were saying and appearing to insinuate for those readers that might misunderstand and think Christ was just a great teacher or great Rabbi at a time in history that we needed a great teacher or great Rabbi.“ Why did you not simply “clarify” that? I never said or implied that Jesus was “simply” a rabbi and nothing more. Jesus was so much more than simply a rabbi or teacher. He is God. I have never said or insinuated any less.
You said: “I believe scripture teaches Christ was a carpenter and there is more evidence for that. “ Would you please cite your evidence? (I certainly agree that Jesus was also a carpenter).
I would ask you to compare the evidence that I have cited demonstrating that Jesus was a rabbi to the evidence that Jesus was a carpenter.
I do strongly agree with your statement, “I think we need to be careful of our words and insinuations for really we are to teach only what God teaches us in scripture, nothing more, nothing less. “
I mean nothing negative nor personal here, I am only defending my statement against your allegations. May God continue to lead you and may we always have questions that will lead to deeper understanding.
My point is by you “not mentioning” the difference in the word Rabbi as “used today” and the word Rabbi as used during the time that Christ walked the earth came across as manipulative “by you” to prove your point in your sermon that Christ was a Rabbi. For some reason you want to call Jesus a Rabbi. This is okay but you must teach this scriture in the context of the times. If you do not do this you are manipulating the original intent of the writer of the gospel.
You implied that Jesus was a modern day Rabbi simply by the fact that you never mentioned the difference. I never thought you did this on purpose, I actually thought it was an oversight. I now think you did do it on purpose because after all of these posts you still have not acknowledged the truth.
You also did not mention the point that you said certain information was where the term Rabbi was mentioned yet the word teacher was used instead. You failed to acknowledge this point also. I will give it to you again and this is the last time I will give it to you.
Jan’s Quote From Above
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
Did you ever look up these scriptures Jan? They do not say Rabbi, but say Teacher. Did you do this sermon yourself Jan? If you did why are the scriptural quotes wrong? Why have you not acknowledged the fact that you made a mistake in these scriptural quotes? Maybe you think you never make mistakes. I have met many a pastors and teachers like that, ones that really are not pastors. Ones that scatter the sheep. This I am afraid is not a good characteristic of a leader within the church.
Oh, and also in response to your question as to why I did not simply just clarify it, I did, here’s the statement in my original first comment to your post.
My Original Post
“Part of my dialogue is this. You said the scripture makes it very clear that Jesus was a Rabbi. I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this. I guess I always assumed they just called him Rabbi because of the quality of his teachings. I am not saying he wasn’t one, I only question your statement that the scriptures are clear on this matter. Was there a formal school for Rabbi and what were the difference between Rabbi’s and Pharissees, and were they Rabbis? How do we know that Rabbi was not just like someone calling a Sunday school teacher, even though the Sunday School teacher wasn’t a licensed teacher with a former education and actually was a plumber, or carpenter by trade. Just wondering what the word Rabbi means.”
Now Jan I do not know how I could have made it more clear then this. I do not believe you really do want to discuss truth on this websight. I believe you just want people to agree with you. I have met many teachers like this that argue instead of discuss. Everybody wants to add words to prove their point. No one wants to just read the scriptures. As teachers we all must be careful of adding our ideas to scriptures. To insinuate a meaning is there that God never intended. Sometimes we lie by not mentioning certain things, by ignoring certain evidence. Many pastors do this with the Pauline Epistles by ignoring most of Pauls letters so they can teach tithing, mosaic law, to get more money from congregants.
I find your struggle peculiar to me. On the one hand you are inviting us all to your website to comment on what is church, to all freely comment, on what you stated, “That scripture clearly says that Christ was a Rabbi”, which, to be fair, it does say that in certain places. But what you failed to do is give the whole story which is that the word “Rabbi” today has a completely different meaning then the word “Rabbi” when Christ walked the earth. You withheld the critical information people needed to decide and decipher the truth. Then when I pointed this out to you you debated instead of considering what I said to you. Truth is not determined by who wins the debate. This is manipulative at least and lieing at worst. I cannot for the life of me figure out why you would do this. Maybe you are not used to someone challenging you. Or maybe you think you and only you have a monopoly on the truth.
You said: “I believe scripture teaches Christ was a carpenter and there is more evidence for that. “ Would you please cite your evidence? (I certainly agree that Jesus was also a carpenter).
I would ask you to compare the evidence that I have cited demonstrating that Jesus was a rabbi to the evidence that Jesus was a carpenter.
I would note sir that the questions you raise concerning the Scriptures using the word “teacher” are answered on this page at the link above (you obviously did not read it).
I find your alegations not only arogant, but at this point, moot. You challenged me, obviously with no intent of Godliness, and I responded. I withheld no information as you alledge, I have no problem with dialog (as evidenced by having dialogued with you). Sir, you should seek truth rather than be so puffed up and self righteous. Frankly, I rarely find the need to say such things to people……however, you should be exposed. I still pray for God’s guidance in your heart.
You still misunderstand me. It is not the “evidence” of Christ maybe being a Rabbi, or, the fact that your trying to teach your people that the evidence points to the fact that “Christ might have been” a Rabbi.
Frankly it is your lackadaisical approach to teaching the word of God that I am attempting to correct.
Here is your original comment in your teaching above. Let’s look at it again. here it is.
Jan’s 3rd sentence this article
“Jesus was a Hebrew, a Jewish Rabbi. The Scripture makes this very clear. It is not a fact that we can change….for…..it is a fact.”
Okay let me engage you stronger. You failed to include the “fact” that the word Rabbi had a very different meaning today then it did when Jesus walked the earth. It appears you knew this difference but ignored it, purposely. I am not sure why you did or why you would but you did.
Then in your evidence you cited examples to support your cause that said Christ was a Rabbi. After looking up your evidence it doesn’t say that though, what you said. Here it is, let’s look:
Jan’s Quote From Above
You stated, “I am aware that some in scripture called him Rabbi but I have not seen or heard anything else of this.” Let’s look at who recognized Jesus as a Rabbi:
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
Did you ever look up these scriptures Jan? They do not say Rabbi, but say Teacher. Did you do this sermon yourself Jan? If you did why are the scriptural quotes wrong? Why have you not acknowledged the fact that you made a mistake in these scriptural quotes?
You then gave me additional evidence and here are your words:
Let’s look at who in the Scriptures recognized Jesus as a Rabbi: (Remember that, according to the “Holman Quick Source Bible Dictionary” that the word Rabbi means “My Master”, applied to teachers and others of an exalted position.
– The Disciples (Luke 7:40)
– Lawyers (Matthew 22:35-36)
– Ordinary people (Luke 12:13)
– The rich (Matthew 19:16)
– Pharisees (Luke 19:39)
– Sadducees (Luke 20:27-28)
This issue is now over. It is all overdone. I cannot give you more evidence then the scripture itself that you quoted and said each of these quotes said “Rabbi.”
All of creation fell because Eve was adding words to God’s words.
When we study what the scriptures tell us about what happened in the beginning with Adam & Eve, God & Satan, we can learn about ourselves. When we study what the scriptures tell us it is almost like mankind is looking into a mirror that God is holding up so we may see our reflection of who we are, and it is sad.
Man is told in Genesis 2:16 as follows. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” 18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”
Genesis 3:1-2 tells us what Satan and Eve tell us right before the fall in the Garden of Eden. Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” 2The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat from the trees in the garden, 3but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’ “
3″You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5″For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and eat it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
This fall of creation was because Eve added around six words to God’s words.
Jan, you keep changing God’s words from teacher to Rabbi. Why are you doing this? There is a term that I think is appropriate here. It is called replacement theology. This is a heresy in which a pastor or church leader says this word is the same meaning as this word so it is alright to replace this word with that word because they are the same meaning. Some pastors said this about Israel. They would say, “Whenever you see the word “Israel”, in the old testament it really means church, or christianity , or you. These blessings are meant for you, a believer, church, if you follow these laws and these things. This is heresy and is not from God. You also cannot say because teacher and Rabbi are a similar meaning you can replace the word teacher with the word Rabbi, for it is the same thing.
This is called replacement theology and is heresy, heretical teaching in the church today.
I ASK AGAIN: You said: “I believe scripture teaches Christ was a carpenter and there is more evidence for that. “ Would you please cite your evidence? (I certainly agree that Jesus was also a carpenter).
I would ask you to compare the evidence that I have cited demonstrating that Jesus was a rabbi to the evidence that Jesus was a carpenter.
I am anxiously awaiting your response to this question.
Ahhh, you change the sublect instead of dealing with the real matter at hand, the questions I asked you that you never answered!