Ou en Nuwe Testament verskil [Archive] - Wendag - Debating Christianity and Religion Forum
Wendag - Debating Christianity and Religion Forum > Boervolk Teologie > Besprekings > Ou en Nuwe Testament verskil
View Full Version : Ou en Nuwe Testament verskil
31st May 2011, 09:37
Ou en Nuwe Testament verskil
Volksblad (http://www.volksblad.com/MyVolksblad/Briewe/Ou-en-Nuwe-Testament-verskil-20110529): deur Pierre Louw 2011-05-29 21:50
Alwyn Hefer se brief (VB 27/5/11) verwys.
God het nie ’n verlosser beloof ná die sondeval nie. “Haar nageslag sal jou noodlottig tref teen die kop...” voorspel nie Jesus se oorwinning oor Satan nie.
Die skrywer poog om te verduidelik waarom slange mense pik en mense slange vrees en doodmaak – so eenvoudig soos dit.
Die verwagte messias van die Ou Testament verskil ook van Jesus as lydende messias.
Die Jode het ’n volkome mens-messias verwag – ’n koning wat die volk Israel sou bevry van verdrukking. ’n Koning, ’n seun van God, soos Dawid van ouds.
Die 300 Ou Testamentiese voorspellings wat Jesus, volgens Hefer, vervul het, word buite konteks op Jesus van toepassing gemaak.
Byvoorbeeld, die lydende kneg van Jesaja 53 verwys na ballingskaps-Israel; die “seun van ’n mens” van Daniël 7 verwys weer na ’n toekomstige Israel wat deur God met mag en aansien bekroon sal word.
Sekere verse van die Ou Testament is doelbewus verkeerd vertaal om sodoende na Jesus te verwys. Een voorbeeld hiervan is Psalm 22: 17: in plaas van “My hande en voete is vasgemaak” het Griekse vertalers dit verander na “Hulle deursteek my hande en voete”.
Die idee van ’n komende messias is ontwikkel alleenlik oor die rede dat Israel ’n verdrukte volk was wat gesmag het na verlossing. Daarom dat die meerderheid Jode tot vandag toe Jesus as messias verwerp.
Die kriteria van die verwagte messias, vir die Jode van vandag, is die volgende: (1) Hy moet die Jode van die diaspora terugbring Israel toe; (2) Hy moet die tempel in Jerusalem herbou, en (3) Hy moet ’n tydperk van universele vrede inlui.
“Ou Testament” beteken “ou verbond”. Om die “ou verbond” te verstaan moet ’n mens dit binne konteks lees, sonder om gedeeltes daarvan gedwonge op Jesus van toepassing te maak.
Al ís Jesus die messias – die “nuwe verbond” – bly die boodskap en beloftes van die Ou Testament anders as dié van die Nuwe Testament.
Die woorde in Ps 22:17 in Hebreeus is hiqif'veni (to strike with violence) k'ariy (like a lion) yadiy (my hand) v'regeliy (and my foot).
Vir die res kan ek maar net se: OI VEY!
http://cdn.24.com/files/RAP2/d/DefaultAvatar/Small.png Matt Heyns
The true rendering of the Scriptural words stauros and stauroo namely stake and impale should be used. The un-Scriptural cross and crucify should be eliminated. See Dr F.J. Dölger se bundel Antike und Christentum vol 2 pp 281.
"Die skrywer poog om te verduidelik waarom slange mense pik en mense slange vrees en doodmaak – so eenvoudig soos dit." Werklik? Waar pas Romeine 16:20 dan in? En wat van 1 Johannes 3:8? Die hele Bybel wys dat ons as God se kinders deur Jesus Christus die slang (duiwel) sal oorwin (Openbaring 12:11). Die Ou Testament is vol pragtige en diep paralelle wat met die Nuwe Testament getrek word.
Jesaja 53 verwys duidelik na Jesus Christus - enige een wat dit nie glo nie ken nie die Bybel nie.
Jy skryf: "Sekere verse van die Ou Testament is doelbewus verkeerd vertaal om sodoende na Jesus te verwys. Een voorbeeld hiervan is Psalm 22:17: in plaas van “My hande en voete is vasgemaak” het Griekse vertalers dit verander na “Hulle deursteek my hande en voete”." En waar kry jy dit vandaan? Het jy die Psalm gaan lees? Dit is 'n wonderlike profetiese psalm van David wat duidelik verwys na die lyding van die Messias. Selfs al is jou stelling korrek, hoe verklaar jy verse 1, 8, 14, 15, 17 en 18? Geinspireerd, is al wat ek kan sê.
Daar is baie waarskuwings in die Bybel oor verleiding ('deception') - die duiwel is baie besig om moderne 'kennis' te gebruik om twyfel te saai. Moenie enige twak wat jy oor God se Woord lees sommer net aanvaar en glo nie - glo eerder die God van die Bybel!
http://cdn.24.com/files/RAP2/d/12/bbdc1ec169e4450b878a5758f610a58e.jpg 100% Baster
Apollo se klein dogter se naam is Bybel/Venus.
1. The Almighty has turned and has given the Christian Church and Christian World up to worship the host of heaven because they would not abide by and remain faithful to the Covenant. The Church knows which elements in ancient pagan and sun worship were adopted into the Church.
2. Albeit, believers should rediscover the true faith and come out of the confusion left us by our ancestors. The seeker of Truth should return to the True Worship. The Gift of discerning of spirits must be prayed for in order to discern between the Spirit of Truth and the spirit of error.
3. For almost two thousand years the Church has been striving to get people to adhere to the ethical or social laws or the love towards our neighbor and fellow man. But what about the love towards Yahweh or the religious laws. These have been shockingly neglected, turned aside, done away with or ignored.
Ricus: Wat is die God van die Bybel se titel en naam?
Ek was onder die indruk dat Psalm 22 vers 17 moet lees "hulle het my hande en voete deur grawe" volgens die oorspronklike teks. Daar is duisende Circe/Kerke wat verskil van mekaar. Ek wonder dikwels waarom as die Gelowiges beweer daar is net een Almagtige Een.
1. The “Christ” written of by Paul was not a human Christ in the form of a human Jesus. Rather “the Christ” was the embodiment of the Divine come to tabernacle within mankind and bridge the gap from the Spirit realm to the realm of physical existence. This Logos and “the Christ” was an intermediary in non-human form that connects mankind to Elohim.
2. Coming to the understanding of the self knowledge, that Elohim dwelt within you, was explained to initiates who were coming to this understanding through an allegory based upon the history of Exodus. The “literal” history of Israel was expressed as an “allegory” and applied to a higher salvation experience in those coming to the knowledge of Elohim in centuries before and after the first century.
3. The old man of fleshly lusts was dying when coming to this “Gnosis” and being resurrected as a “new man” with a new spiritual revelation of Elohim within and the purpose of one’s existence above a life of sin. It was Elohim in Christ within mankind and that is it.
4. The Jews still looked, prayed and hoped for one to come in the power and Spirit of David but this “Messiah” within all mankind was not, as the whole narrative of the baptism, crucifixion and resurrection of “the Messiah” in the First New Covenant was only intended to be a parallel and allegory of what “physically” happened to Israel in the Old Covenant.
5. The principles in this story were “allegorized” by the earliest Christian Gnostics and Essenes-Therapeutae and applied to awaken of the Spirit within mankind and the liberation from darkness into the light of Elohim. Later Rome will come and re-interpret “the Christ” as if a “literal” incarnation of Elohim within a human as was thought of their Roman Emperors.
6. This “literalized” godman, in the form of the Roman historical Jesus, only gave sanction to the Emperor who was a self declared “literal god”. With the purge of Gnostic materials and the subsequent burning of the world’s libraries over the centuries the censorship of Rome was completed. The knowledge of “the Christ” that was to be understood only allegorically and which had been since Egypt was now lost to mankind or so they thought.
7. That is until the discovery of the Nag Hammadi library some sixty years ago. Sporadic voices were heard faintly as to this truth but today, with the aid of archeology and the proliferation once again of this knowledge, we can learn of this deception and restore the truth concerning the Christ of Elohim.
8. No longer must we be enslaved to a “literal” interpretation of “the Christ” as the Jesus of the New Covenant and be overtaken by idolatry and false worship since accepting these “literal” views of “the Christ”
Jesus/Yahshua, die held in die Exodus allegorie en Jesus/Yahshua, die held van die Evangelie mite, is dieselfde "persoon". Could it be remotely possible that the Jesus/Yahshua of the New Covenant is a mythic development of the Jesus/Yahshua of Exodus? This is not a coincidence because Yahshua and or Jesus mean "Saviour of the Almighty One". Moses was also "the Christ" of Yahweh. See Heb 11 and 1 Cor 10. Exodus should be understood "allegorically" says Paul with "Our ancestors passed through the Red Sea and so received baptism into the fellowship of Moses".
Daar is 'n tradisionele siening en 'n alternatiewe beskouing van die ontstaan van die Ou Verbond. Die verstaan van die Ou Verbond kan voor wetenskaplik of wetenskaplik wees.
Die problematiese aard van die tradisionele siening oor die kanonvorming word deur die resultate van die moderne navorsing uit gewys. Daar bestaan dus nie net een 'regte' manier van uitleg nie.
Pierre: Hoekom het soveel beloftes uit die Bybel (Ou Verbond) verdwyn?