Podcasts about njb

Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. 3:16 “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you” This is a PRESENT ACTIVE IMPERATIVE SECOND PERSON PLURAL. Notice that this dwelling is not automatic. Believers must co-operate in the Christian life as they do in salvation. The outlines of Eph. and Col. are very similar. The parallel to this verse in Eph. is 5:18! 3:16–17 There is a theological and structural parallel between Eph. 5:18–21 and Col. 3:16–17. In Eph. there is a PRESENT PASSIVE IMPERATIVE with the passive imperative our responsibility lies in being open to God's operation, the Spirit's working, and Christ's indwelling. Thus the passive imperative preserves in the grammar the most fundamental principle of God's economy, that is, that God is the One who operates in us and yet we are responsible to open to His operation, to allow Him to operate, and to cooperate with His operation. God is sovereign and we are responsible go hand in hand. “ever be filled,” while in Col. there is a Present Active Imperatives are commands that are expected to be followed not once, but as an ongoing process. “let the word of Christ dwell within you.” Also in Eph. the IMPERATIVE is followed by five PRESENT PARTICIPLES which describe the Spirit-filled life: This means, of course, the Word of God. The false teachers came to Colossae with man-made traditions, religious rules, and human philosophies. They tried to harmonize God's Word with their teachings, but they could not succeed. God's Word always magnifies Jesus Christ. It was not the word of false teachers that brought salvation to the Colossians; it was the Word of the truth of the Gospel (Col. 1:5). This same Word gives us life and sustains and strengthens us (1 Peter 1:22–2:3). The Word will transform our lives if we will but permit it to “dwell” in us richly. The word dwell means “to feel at home.” If we have experienced the grace and the peace of Christ, then the Word of Christ will feel at home in our hearts. We will discover how rich the Word is with spiritual treasures that give value to our lives. However, we must not think that Paul wrote this only to individual Christians; for he directed it to the entire church body. “Let the Word of Christ dwell among you” is a possible translation. As it dwells richly in each member of the church, it will dwell richly in the church fellowship. There is a danger today, as there was in Paul's day, that local churches minimize the Word of God. There seems to be a lack of simple Bible teaching in Sunday School classes and pulpits. Far more interest is shown in movies, musical performances, and various entertainments than in God's Word. Many saved people cannot honestly say that God's Word dwells in their hearts richly because they do not take time to read, study, and memorize it. There is (according to Paul) a definite relationship between our knowledge of the Bible and our expression of worship in song. One way we teach and encourage ourselves and others is through the singing of the Word of God. But if we do not know the Bible and understand it, we cannot honestly sing it from our hearts. Perhaps this “poverty of Scripture” in our churches is one cause of the abundance of unbiblical songs that we have today. A singer has no more right to sing a lie than a preacher has to preach a lie. The great songs of the faith were, for the most part, written by believers who knew the doctrines of the Word of God. Many so-called “Christian songs” today are written by people with little or no knowledge of the Word of God. It is a dangerous thing to separate the praise of God from the Word of God.[1] “with all wisdom” This is a play on the false teachers' overemphasis on human knowledge. The word of Christ (the Spirit-filled life) is true wisdom. Wisdom is a person (cf. Prov. 8:22–31) and a lifestyle, not isolated truth or creeds.  “with psalms” The NKJV and NASB translations imply “teaching with songs,” but the NRSV and NJB imply “teachers with songs in their hearts.” Psalms were, of course, the songs taken from the Old Testament. For centuries, the churches in the English-speaking world sang only musical versions of the Psalms. I am glad to see today a return to the singing of Scripture, especially the Psalms. Hymns were songs of praise to God written by believers but not taken from the Psalms. The church today has a rich heritage of hymnody which, I fear, is being neglected. Spiritual songs were expressions of Bible truth other than in psalms and hymns. When we sing a hymn, we address the Lord; when we sing a spiritual song, we address each other. Paul described a local church worship service (1 Cor. 14:26; Col. 3:16). Note that the believer sings to himself as well as to the other believers and to the Lord. Our singing must be from our hearts and not just our lips. But if the Word of God is not in our hearts, we cannot sing from our hearts. This shows how important it is to know the Word of God, for it enriches our public and private worship of God. Our singing must be with grace. This does not mean “singing in a gracious way,” but singing because we have God's grace in our hearts. It takes grace to sing when we are in pain, or when circumstances seem to be against us. It certainly took grace for Paul and Silas to sing in that Philippian prison (Acts 16:22–25). Our singing must not be a display of fleshly talent; it must be a demonstration of the grace of God in our hearts. Someone has said that a successful Christian life involves attention to three books: God's Book, the Bible; the pocketbook; and the hymn book. As a believer grows in his knowledge of the Word, he will want to grow in his expression of praise. He will learn to appreciate the great hymns of the church, the Gospel songs, and the spiritual songs that teach spiritual truths. To sing only the elementary songs of the faith is to rob himself of spiritual enrichment. Before we leave this section, we should notice an important parallel with Ephesians 5:18–6:9. In his Letter to the Ephesians, Paul emphasized being filled with the Spirit; in his Letter to the Colossians, he emphasized being filled with the Word. But the evidences of this spiritual fullness are the same! How can we tell if a believer is filled with the Spirit? He is joyful, thankful, and submissive (Eph. 5:19–21); all of this shows up in his relationships in the home and on the job (Eph. 5:22–6:9). How can we tell if a believer is filled with the Word of God? He is joyful, thankful, and submissive (Col. 3:16–4:1).[1] The Spirit-filled life is daily Christlikeness or allowing the word of Christ and the mind of Christ to guide in every area, especially interpersonal relationships. The key is the heart of the worshiper, not the form of the music (cf. 3:17). Col 3:17 And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. THE SERVICE OF LOVE: The work of Christ must be done in the manner of Christ. Believers are to live and act as those who bear his name and must do nothing that would make them ashamed to say that they are Christians. This is a principle to live by: ‘whatever you do' (v. 17), whether at home, at work, in the church, or out and about. This sense of duty must also be accompanied with a sense of gratitude and note of praise, ‘giving thanks to God the Father through him'. Giving thanks declares the gratitude of grace and the praise of peace. 3:17 “Whatever you do in word or deed” This is a major spiritual truth. Believers must relate all their motives and actions to God through Christ. Every aspect of our lives is “as unto the Lord.” Believers do not live for themselves (cf. v. 23; Rom. 14:7–9; 1 Cor. 10:31; 2 Cor. 5:15; Eph. 6:7; 1 Pet. 4:11). This truth could revolutionize the modern, western, individual-focused church[1] The Name of Christ (Col. 3:17) In modern society, we pay little attention to names. But the ancient world held a man's name to be of utmost importance. Often, during Old Testament days, God changed a person's name because of some important experience or some new development. As Christians, we bear the name of Christ. The word Christian is found only three times in the entire New Testament (Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16). The name was given originally as a term of contempt, but gradually it became a name of honor. The name of Christ, then, means identification: we belong to Jesus Christ. But His name also means authority. A man's name signed to a check authorizes the withdrawal of money from the bank. The President's name signed to a bill makes it a law. In the same way, it is in the name of Jesus Christ that we have the authority to pray (John 14:13–14; 16:23–26). Because Jesus Christ is God, and He has died for us, we have authority in His name. All that we say and do should be associated with the name of Jesus Christ. By our words and our works, we should glorify His name. If we permit anything into our lives that cannot be associated with the name of Jesus, then we are sinning. We must do and say everything on the authority of His name and for the honor of His name. Bearing the name of Jesus is a great privilege, but it is also a tremendous responsibility. We suffer persecution because we bear His name (John 15:20–21). [1] Note that Paul again mentioned thanksgiving in this Colossian letter. Whatever we do in the name of Christ ought to be joined with thanksgiving. If we cannot give thanks, then we had better not do it or say it! This is the fifth of six references in Colossians to thanksgiving (Col. 1:3, 12; 2:7; 3:15, 17; 4:2). When we remember that Paul was a Roman prisoner when he wrote this letter, it makes this emphasis on thanksgiving that much more wonderful. As we review these four spiritual motivations for godly living, we are impressed with the centrality of Jesus Christ. We forgive because Christ forgave us (Col. 3:13). It is the peace of Christ that should rule in our hearts (Col. 3:15). The Word of Christ should dwell in us richly (Col. 3:16). The name of Christ should be our identification and our authority. “Christ is all, and in all” (Col. 3:11). Since we are united with Christ through the indwelling Holy Spirit, we have all the resources we need for holy living. But we must be spiritually motivated. Because we have experienced the grace of Christ, we want to live for Him. Because we have enjoyed the peace of Christ, we want to obey Him. We have been enriched by the Word of Christ, and raised to the rank of nobility by the name of Christ; therefore, we want to honor and glorify Him. Can we desire any higher motivation?[1]        Mark 8:36 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?              John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. Have you trusted Him as your Savior? He can Save you if You ask Him based on His death, burial, and resurrection for your sins. Believe in Him for forgiveness of your sins today.               “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”  -John 8:32             Our mission is to spread the gospel and to go to the least of these with the life-changing message of Jesus Christ; We reach out to those the World has forgotten.              hisloveministries.podbean.com #HLMSocial hisloveministries.net https://www.instagram.com/hisloveministries1/?hl=en His Love Ministries on Itunes Don't go for all the gusto you can get, go for all the God (Jesus Christ) you can get. The gusto will get you, Jesus can save you. https://www.facebook.com/His-Love-Ministries-246606668725869/?tn-str=k*F             The world is trying to solve earthly problems that can only be solved with heavenly solutions    

Col 3:12 Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; 3:12 “chosen of God, holy and beloved” These terms were used to describe Israel (Exod. 19:5–6), but now they describe the church (cf. Gal. 6:16; 1 Pet. 2:5, 9; Rev. 1:6). Notice that the goal of the People of God is holiness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a privileged standing. Israel was chosen as a tool to reach all humans made in the image of God. Israel missed her evangelistic mandate (cf. Gen. 12:3; Exod. 19:5). The Church has clearly been given this assignment (cf. Matt. 28:19–20; Acts 1:8). Believers are called to holiness and to be witnesses. Christians are defined here as ‘the elect of God, holy and beloved'. This means that God has chosen them from eternity for salvation. Once saved, Christians are holy before God, being set apart in Christ by the Holy Spirit who indwells them. If we are saved we are highly loved by an act of divine love that flows from his heart (Rom. 9:13a)[1] Chosen by God, set apart for God, loved by God, and forgiven by God. They all add up to GRACE! Now, because of these gracious blessings, the Christian has some solemn responsibilities before God. He must put on the beautiful graces of the Christian life. Paul named eight graces.[1] “Put on the new man,” says Paul. “Put on mercy, kindness, and humility. Put on meekness, longsuffering, and love.” In short, put on Christ.[1]  “put on” This is an AORIST MIDDLE IMPERATIVE which indicates urgency. This is the continuing use of clothing as a symbol and mandate for the Christian life. It is even possible that this was baptismal terminology (cf. Gal. 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ). Put on …NASB “a heart of compassion” and indicates deep feelings[1] NKJV “tender mercies” TEV Today's English Version “compassion” NJB The New Jerusalem Bible “heartfelt compassion”                 This is literally “bowels of compassion” (cf. 2 Cor. 6:12; Phil. 1:8; 2:1; Philemon 7, 12, 20). The ancients believed the seat of emotion was located in the lower intestines (abdomen). Kindness, gentleness and patience are part of the fruit of the Spirit that Paul describes in his letter to the Galatians (Galatians 5:22). They help Christians live in harmony with one another. Compassion and humility may sound like weaknesses. But Jesus showed in his own life that compassion and humility are at the heart of God.[1] Put on … “kindness” is the desire for another's good, and shows sweetness of disposition. This should be the Christian's response to others (cf. Rom. 2:4; 9:23; 11:22; 2 Cor. 6:6; Gal. 5:22; Col. 3:12; Titus 3:4). Put on … “humility” Humility of mind' speaks of lowliness (Eph. 4:2; Phil. 2:3–5) and allows us to recognize that we have no reason or right to be self-confident.[1] This is a uniquely Christian virtue (cf. Eph. 4:2; Phil. 2:3). The Stoics viewed meekness (humbleness) as weakness and did not include it in their list of virtues. Only two people in the Bible are called humble, Moses (cf. Num. 12:3) and Jesus (cf. Matt. 11:29; Phil. 2:8). This becomes the will of God for every believer (cf. Matt. 18:4; 23:12; James 4:6, 10; 1 Pet. 5:5, 6). This term is used in a negative sense in 2:18, 23. The pagan world of Paul's day did not admire humility. Instead, they admired pride and domination. Jesus Christ is the greatest example of humbleness of mind (Phil. 2:1ff). Humility is not thinking poorly of oneself. Rather, it is having the proper estimate of oneself in the will of God (Rom. 12:3). The person with humbleness of mind thinks of others first and not of himself.[1] Put on … “gentleness or meekness” means Power under control. This originally referred to domesticated animals (horses, camels, donkeys) whose strength had been channeled for their master's purpose. God does not want to break us, but direct His giftedness to His glory. Paul often uses this metaphor for the Christian life (cf. 1 Cor. 4:21; 2 Cor. 10:1; Gal. 5:23; 6:1; Eph. 4:2; Col. 3:12; 1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:25).      Put on … ‘Meekness' is the opposite of self-interest and reveals itself in gentleness. It is a spirit of quiet submission, not weakness but rather a spirit of Christian courtesy. Thomas Watson once said, ‘Meekness is a grace whereby we are enabled by the Spirit of God to moderate our passions' (see 2 Cor. 10:1[1] Put on …Longsuffering or patience” This is often used of God's patience with people (cf. Rom. 2:4; 9:22; Titus 3:2, 1 Pet. 3:20) or Jesus' patience (cf. 1 Tim. 1:16; 2 Pet. 3:15). It is used to exhort believers in their treatment of one another (cf. 1 Cor. 13:4; Gal. 5:22; Eph. 4:2; 2 Tim. 4:2). This word is literally “long-temper.” The short-tempered person speaks and acts impulsively and lacks self-control. When a person is long-suffering, he can put up with provoking people or circumstances without retaliating. It is good to be able to get angry, for this is a sign of holy character. But it is wrong to get angry quickly at the wrong things and for the wrong reasons.[1]      Patience in the face of provocation and suffering. This is a divine attribute (Rom. 2:4; 9:22). It is the opposite of anger and ‘it is associated with mercy'. Kindness, gentleness and patience are part of the fruit of the Spirit that Paul describes in his letter to the Galatians (Galatians 5:22). They help Christians live in harmony with one another. Compassion and humility may sound like weaknesses. But Jesus showed in his own life that compassion and humility are at the heart of God.[1] Col 3:13 bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.  ASB, NKJV “bearing with one another” NJB “bear with one another” TEV “be tolerant with one another” Put on forbearance …bearing with one another is a PRESENT MIDDLE PARTICIPLE (used as an IMPERATIVE) which implies voluntary non-retaliation (cf. Eph. 4:2; Phil. 2:3–4). This word literally means “to hold up” or “to hold back.” God is forbearing toward sinners in that He holds back His judgment (Rom. 2:4; 3:25). Meekness, long-suffering, and forbearance go together.[1] Paul emphasizes forgiveness, as Jesus used to do. Forgiving one another and being forgiven by God belong closely together—indeed, they are inseparable (Matthew 6:14–15).[1] Put on forgiveness … “forgiving each other” This is a PRESENT MIDDLE (deponent) PARTICIPLE. It is from the same Greek root as grace, “freely forgive.” One sign of believers being forgiven is that they forgive others (cf. Matt. 5:7; 6:15; 18:22–35; Mark 11:25; Luke 6:36–38; James 2:13; 5:9). Forgiveness of others is not the basis of forgiveness, but it is its fruit. “whoever has a complaint” This is a THIRD CLASS CONDITIONAL SENTENCE which meant probable future action. There will be complaints! Christians will be at odds with other Christians, but Jesus' cross should put a stop to it (cf. Rom. 14:1–15:13).  “just as the Lord forgave you” This is the basis for believers' actions toward others (cf. Eph. 4:32; Rom. 15:7). The point here is that of keeping oneself in check even when irritated by others, and the forgetting of offences personally received. We have to do so looking to Christ as our example: ‘even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do'. Believers can, and must, be a forgiving people (Matt. 6:14–15). Peter was told to forgive up to seventy times seven (Matt. 18:22). Note that Paul is still discoursing on Christian freedom! The antinomians will not like this clear and indisputable call from Paul because they consider themselves not under the law of obedience. However, a forgiving attitude marks out a true Christian from a false one.[1] This is the logical result of all that Paul has written so far in this section. It is not enough that the Christian must endure grief and provocation, and refuse to retaliate; he must also forgive the troublemaker. If he does not, then feelings of malice will develop in the heart; and these can lead to greater sins.[1]        Mark 8:36 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?              John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. Have you trusted Him as your Savior? He can Save you if You ask Him based on His death, burial, and resurrection for your sins. Believe in Him for forgiveness of your sins today.               “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”  -John 8:32             Our mission is to spread the gospel and to go to the least of these with the life-changing message of Jesus Christ; We reach out to those the World has forgotten.              hisloveministries.podbean.com #HLMSocial hisloveministries.net https://www.instagram.com/hisloveministries1/?hl=en His Love Ministries on Itunes Don't go for all the gusto you can get, go for all the God (Jesus Christ) you can get. The gusto will get you, Jesus can save you. https://www.facebook.com/His-Love-Ministries-246606668725869/?tn-str=k*F             The world is trying to solve earthly problems that can only be solved with heavenly solutions

Comparing the Hebrew of Isaiah 9.6 to most popular English translations results in some serious questions. Why have our translations changed the tense of the verbs from past to future? Why is this child called “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father”? In this presentation I work through Isaiah 9.6 line by line to help you understand the Hebrew. Next I look at interpretive options for the child as well as his complicated name. Not only will this presentation strengthen your understanding of Isaiah 9.6, but it will also equip you to explain it to others. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts —— Links —— See my other articles here Check out my class: One God Over All Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read Sean’s bio here Below is the paper presented on October 18, 2024 in Little Rock, Arkansas at the 4th annual UCA Conference. Access this paper on Academia.edu to get the pdf. Full text is below, including bibliography and end notes. Abstract Working through the grammar and syntax, I present the case that Isaiah 9:6 is the birth announcement of a historical child. After carefully analyzing the name given to the child and the major interpretive options, I make a case that the name is theophoric. Like the named children of Isaiah 7 and 8, the sign-child of Isaiah 9 prophecies what God, not the child, will do. Although I argue for Hezekiah as the original fulfillment, I also see Isaiah 9:6 as a messianic prophecy of the true and better Hezekiah through whom God will bring eternal deliverance and peace. Introduction Paul D. Wegner called Isaiah 9:6[1] “one of the most difficult problems in the study of the Old Testament.”[2] To get an initial handle on the complexities of this text, let's begin briefly by comparing the Hebrew to a typical translation. Isaiah 9:6 (BHS[3]) כִּי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמ֑וֹ וַיִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ פֶּ֠לֶא יוֹעֵץ֙ אֵ֣ל גִּבּ֔וֹר אֲבִיעַ֖ד שַׂר־שָׁלֽוֹם׃ Isaiah 9:6 (ESV) For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Curiosities abound in the differences between these two. The first two clauses in English, “For to us a child is born” and “to us a son is given,” employ the present tense while the Hebrew uses the perfect tense, i.e. “to us a child has been born.”[4] This has a significant bearing on whether we take the prophecy as a statement about a child already born in Isaiah's time or someone yet to come (or both). The ESV renders the phrase,וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo), as “and his name shall be called,” but the words literally mean “and he called his name” where the “he” is unspecified. This leaves room for the possibility of identifying the subject of the verb in the subsequent phrase, i.e. “And the wonderful counselor, the mighty God called his name…” as many Jewish translations take it.  Questions further abound regardingאֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor), which finds translations as disparate as the traditional “Mighty God”[5] to “divine warrior”[6] to “in battle God-like”[7] to “Mighty chief”[8] to “Godlike hero,”[9] to Luther's truncated “Held.”[10]  Another phrase that elicits a multiplicity of translations is אֲבִיעַד (aviad). Although most versions read “Eternal Father,”[11] others render the word, “Father-Forever,”[12] “Father for all time,”[13] “Father of perpetuity,”[14] “Father of the Eternal Age,”[15] and “Father of Future.”[16] Translators from a range of backgrounds struggle with these two phrases. Some refuse to translate them at all, preferring clunky transliterations.[17] Still, as I will show below, there's a better way forward. If we understand that the child had a theophoric name—a name that is not about him, but about God—our problems dissipate like morning fog before the rising sun. Taking the four pairs of words this way yields a two-part sentence name. As we'll see this last approach is not only the best contextual option, but it also allows us to take the Hebrew vocabulary, grammar, and syntax at face value, rather than succumbing to strained translations and interpretational gymnastics. In the end, we're left with a text literally rendered and hermeneutically robust. Called or Will Call His Name? Nearly all the major Christian versions translate וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “he has called,” as “he will be called.” This takes an active past tense verb as a passive future tense.[18] What is going on here? Since parents typically give names at birth or shortly thereafter, it wouldn't make sense to suggest the child was already born (as the beginning of Isa 9:6 clearly states), but then say he was not yet named. Additionally, וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra) is a vav-conversive plus imperfect construction that continues the same timing sequence of the preceding perfect tense verbs.[19] If the word were passive (niphal binyan) we would read וַיִּקָּרֵא (vayikarey) instead of וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra). Although some have suggested an emendation of the Masoretic vowels to make this change, Hugh Williamson notes, “there is no overriding need to prefer it.”[20] Translators may justify rendering the perfect tense as imperfect due to the idiom called a prophetic past tense (perfectum propheticum). Wilhelm Gesenius notes the possibility that a prophet “so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him.”[21] Bruce Waltke recognizes the phenomenon, calling it an accidental perfective in which “a speaker vividly and dramatically represents a future situation both as complete and independent.”[22] Still, it's up to the interpreter to determine if Isaiah employs this idiom or not. The verbs of verse 6 seem quite clear: “a child has been born for us … and the government was on his shoulder … and he has called his name…” When Isaiah uttered this prophecy, the child had already been born and named and the government rested on his shoulders. This is the straightforward reading of the grammar and therefore should be our starting point.[23] Hezekiah as the Referent One of the generally accepted principles of hermeneutics is to first ask the question, “What did this text mean in its original context?” before asking, “What does this text mean to us today?” When we examine the immediate context of Isa 9:6, we move beyond the birth announcement of a child with an exalted name to a larger prophecy of breaking the yoke of an oppressor (v4) and the ushering in of a lasting peace for the throne of David (v7). Isaiah lived in a tumultuous time. He saw the northern kingdom—the nation of Israel—uprooted from her land and carried off by the powerful and cruel Assyrian Empire. He prophesied about a child whose birth had signaled the coming freedom God would bring from the yoke of Assyria. As Jewish interpreters have long pointed out, Hezekiah nicely fits this expectation.[24] In the shadow of this looming storm, Hezekiah became king and instituted major religious reforms,[25] removing idolatry and turning the people to Yahweh. The author of kings gave him high marks: “He trusted in Yahweh, the God of Israel. After him there was no one like him among all the kings of Judah nor among those who were before him” (2 Kgs 18:5).[26] Then, during Hezekiah's reign, Sennacherib sent a large army against Judea and laid siege to Jerusalem. Hezekiah appropriately responded to the threatening Assyrian army by tearing his clothes, covering himself with sackcloth, and entering the temple to pray (2 Kings 19:1). He sent word to Isaiah, requesting prayer for the dire situation. Ultimately God brought miraculous deliverance, killing 185,000 Assyrians, which precipitated a retreat. There had not been such an acute military deliverance since the destruction of Pharaoh's army in the sea. Indeed, Hezekiah's birth did signal God's coming deliverance. In opposition to Hezekiah as the referent for Isa 9:6, Christian interpreters have pointed out that Hezekiah did not fulfill this prophecy en toto. Specifically, Hezekiah did not usher in “an endless peace” with justice and righteousness “from this time onward and forevermore” (Isa. 9:7). But, as John Roberts points out, the problem only persists if we ignore prophetic hyperbole. Here's what he says: If Hezekiah was the new king idealized in this oracle, how could Isaiah claim he would reign forever? How could Isaiah so ignore Israel's long historical experience as to expect no new source of oppression would ever arise? The language, as is typical of royal ideology, is hyperbolic, and perhaps neither Isaiah nor his original audience would have pushed it to its limits, beyond its conventional frames of reference, but the language itself invites such exploitation. If one accepts God's providential direction of history, it is hard to complain about the exegetical development this exploitation produced.[27] Evangelical scholar Ben Witherington III likewise sees a reference to both Hezekiah and a future deliverer. He writes, “[T]he use of the deliberately hyperbolic language that the prophet knew would not be fulfilled in Hezekiah left open the door quite deliberately to look for an eschatological fulfillment later.”[28] Thus, even if Isaiah's prophecy had an original referent, it left the door open for a true and better Hezekiah, who would not just defeat Assyria, but all evil, and not just for a generation, but forever. For this reason, it makes sense to take a “both-and” approach to Isa 9:6. Who Called His Name? Before going on to consider the actual name given to the child, we must consider the subject of the word וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “and he called.” Jewish interpreters have and continue to take אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor), “Mighty God,” as the subject of this verb. Here are a few examples of this rendering: Targum Jonathan (2nd century) And his name has been called from before the One Who Causes Wonderful Counsel, God the Warrior, the Eternally Existing One—the Messiah who will increase peace upon us in his days.[29] Shlomo Yitzchaki (11th century) The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah's name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.[30] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi (16th century) “For a child is born to us.” A son will be born and this is Hezekiah. Though Ahaz is an evildoer, his son Hezekiah will be a righteous king. He will be strong in his service of the Holy One. He will study Torah and the Holy One will call him, “eternal father, peaceful ruler.” In his days there will be peace and truth.[31] The Stone Edition of the Tanach (20th century) The Wondrous Adviser, Mighty God, Eternal Father, called his name Sar-shalom [Prince of Peace][32] Although sometimes Christian commentators blithely accuse Jewish scholars of avoiding the implications of calling the child “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father,” the grammar does allow multiple options here. The main question is whether Isaiah specified the subject of the verb וַיִקְרָ (vayikra) or not. If he has, then the subject must be אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor). If he has not, then the subject must be indefinite (i.e. “he” or “one”). What's more, the Masoretic punctuation of the Hebrew suggests the translation, “and the Wonderful Adviser, the Mighty God called his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace'”[33] However, Keil and Delitzsch point out problems with this view on both grammatical and contextual grounds. They write: [I]t is impossible to conceive for what precise reason such a periphrastic description of God should be employed in connection with the naming of this child, as is not only altogether different from Isaiah's usual custom, but altogether unparalleled in itself, especially without the definite article. The names of God should at least have been defined thus, הַיּוֹעֵץ פֵּלֶא הַגִּבּוֹר, so as to distinguish them from the two names of the child.”[34] Thus, though the Masoretic markings favor the Jewish translation, the grammar doesn't favor taking “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God” as the subject. It's certainly not impossible, but it is a strained reading without parallels in Isaiah and without justification in the immediate context. Let's consider another possibility. His Name Has Been Called Instead of taking אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as the subject, we can posit an indefinite subject for וַיִקְרָ (vayikra): “one has called.” Examples of this outside of Isaiah 9:6 include Gen 11:9; 25:26; Exod 15:23; and 2 Sam 2:16. The phenomenon appears in Gesenius (§144d) and Joüon and Muraoka (§155e), both of which include our text as examples. However, the translation “one has called his name” is awkward in English due to our lack of a generic pronoun like on in French or man in German. Accordingly, most translations employ the passive construction: “his name has been called,” omitting the subject.[35] This is apparently also how those who produced the Septuagint (LXX) took the Hebrew text, employing a passive rather than an active verb.[36] In conclusion, the translation “his name has been called” works best in English. Mighty Hero Now we broach the question of how to render אֵל גִּבּוֹר el gibbor. As I've already noted, a few translations prefer “mighty hero.” But this reading is problematic since it takes the two words in reverse order. Although in English we typically put an adjective before the noun it modifies, in Hebrew the noun comes first and then any adjectives that act upon it. Taking the phrase as אֵל גִּבּוֹר (gibbor el) makes “mighty” the noun and “God” the adjective. Now since the inner meaning of אֵל (el) is “strong” or “mighty,” and גִּבּוֹר gibbor means “warrior” or “hero,” we can see how translators end up with “mighty warrior” or “divine hero.” Robert Alter offers the following explanation: The most challenging epithet in this sequence is ‘el gibor [sic], which appears to say “warrior-god.” The prophet would be violating all biblical usage if he called the Davidic king “God,” and that term is best construed here as some sort of intensifier. In fact, the two words could conceivably be a scribal reversal of gibor ‘el, in which case the second word would clearly function as a suffix of intensification as it occasionally does elsewhere in the Bible.[37] Please note that Alter's motive for reversing the two words is that the text, as it stands, would violate all biblical usage by calling the Davidic king “God.” But Alter is incorrect. We have another biblical usage calling the Davidic king “God” in Psalm 45:6. We must allow the text to determine interpretation. Changing translation for the sake of theology is allowing the tail to wag the dog. Another reason to doubt “divine warrior” as a translation is that “Wherever ʾēl gibbôr occurs elsewhere in the Bible there is no doubt that the term refers to God (10:21; cf. also Deut. 10:17; Jer. 32:18),” notes John Oswalt.[38] Keil and Delitzsch likewise see Isa 10:21 as the rock upon which these translations suffer shipwreck.[39] “A remnant will return,” says Isa 10:21, “the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.” The previous verse makes it clear that “mighty God” refers to none other than “Yahweh, the holy one of Israel.” Without counter examples elsewhere in the Bible, we lack the basis to defy the traditional ordering of “God” as the noun and “mighty” or “warrior” as the adjective.[40] Mighty God-Man Did Isaiah foresee a human child who would also be the mighty God? Did he suddenly get “a glimpse of the fact that in the fullness of the Godhead there is a plurality of Persons,” as Edward Young thought?[41] Although apologists seeking to prove the deity of Christ routinely push for this reading, other evangelical scholars have expressed doubts about such a bold interpretation.[42] Even Keil and Delitzsch, after zealously batting away Jewish alternatives, admit Isaiah's language would not have suggested an incarnate deity in its original context.[43] Still, it would not be anachronistic to regard a king as a deity in the context of the ancient Near East. We find such exalted language in parallels from Egypt and Assyria in their accession oracles (proclamations given at the time a new king ascends the throne). Taking their cue from the Egyptian practices of bestowing divine throne names upon the Pharaoh's accession to the throne, G. von Rad and A. Alt envisioned a similar practice in Jerusalem. Although quite influential, Wegner has pointed out several major problems with this way of looking at our text: (1) the announcement is to the people in Isa 9:6, not the king; (2) Isa 9:6 does not use adoption language nor call the child God's son; (3) יֶלֶד (yeled), “child,” is never used in accession oracles; (4) the Egyptian parallels have five titles not four as in Isa 9:6; (5) Egyptians employ a different structure for accession oracles than Isa 9:6; and (6) we have no evidence elsewhere that Judean kings imitated the Egyptian custom of bestowing divine titles.[44] Another possibility, argued by R. A. Carlson, is to see the names as anti-Assyrian polemic.[45] Keeping in mind that Assyria was constantly threatening Judah in the lifetime of Isaiah and that the child born was to signal deliverance, it would be no surprise that Isaiah would cast the child as a deliberate counter-Assyrian hero. Still, as Oswalt points out, “[T]he Hebrews did not believe this [that their kings were gods]. They denied that the king was anything more than the representative of God.”[46] Owing to a lack of parallels within Israel and Isaiah's own penchant for strict monotheism,[47] interpreting Isa 9:6 as presenting a God-man is ad hoc at best and outright eisegesis at worst. Furthermore, as I've already noted, the grammar of the passage indicates a historical child who was already born. Thus, if Isaiah meant to teach the deity of the child, we'd have two God-men: Hezekiah and Jesus. Far from a courtly scene of coronation, Wegner makes the case that our text is really a birth announcement in form. Birth announcements have (1) a declaration of the birth, (2) an announcement of the child's name, (3) an explanation of what the name means, and (4) a further prophecy about the child's future.[48] These elements are all present in Isa 9:6, making it a much better candidate for a birth announcement than an accession or coronation oracle. As a result, we should not expect divine titles given to the king like when the Pharaohs or Assyrian kings ascended the throne; instead, we ought to look for names that somehow relate to the child's career. We will delve more into this when we broach the topic of theophoric names. Mighty God's Agent Another possibility is to retain the traditional translation of “mighty God” and see the child as God's agent who bears the title. In fact, the Bible calls Moses[49] and the judges[50] of Israel אֱלֹהִים (elohim), “god(s),” due to their role in representing God. Likewise, as I've already mentioned, the court poet called the Davidic King “god” in Ps 45:6. Additionally, the word אֵל (el), “god,” refers to representatives of Yahweh whether divine (Ps 82:1, 6) or human (John 10.34ff).[51] Thus, Isa 9:6 could be another case in which a deputized human acting as God's agent is referred to as God. The NET nicely explains: [H]aving read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king's deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God's representative on earth. …When the king's enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself.[52] Raymond Brown admits that this “may have been looked on simply as a royal title.”[53] Likewise Williamson sees this possibility as “perfectly acceptable,” though he prefers the theophoric approach.[54] Even the incarnation-affirming Keil and Delitzsch recognize that calling the child אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) is “nothing further…than this, that the Messiah would be the image of God as no other man ever had been (cf., El, Ps. 82:1), and that He would have God dwelling within Him (cf., Jer. 33:16).”[55] Edward L. Curtis similarly points out that had Isaiah meant to teach that the child would be an incarnation of Yahweh, he would have “further unfolded and made central this thought” throughout his book.[56] He likewise sees Isa 9:6 not as teaching “the incarnation of a deity” but as a case “not foreign to Hebrew usage to apply divine names to men of exalted position,” citing Exod 21:6 and Ps 82:6 as parallels.[57] Notwithstanding the lexical and scholarly support for this view, not to mention my own previous position[58] on Isa 9:6, I'm no longer convinced that this is the best explanation. It's certainly possible to call people “Gods” because they are his agents, but it is also rare. We'll come to my current view shortly, but for now, let's approach the second controversial title. Eternal Father The word אֲבִיעַד (aviad), “Eternal Father,” is another recognizable appellative for Yahweh. As I mentioned in the introduction, translators have occasionally watered down the phrase, unwilling to accept that a human could receive such a title. But humans who pioneer an activity or invent something new are fathers.[59] Walking in someone's footsteps is metaphorically recognizing him as one's father.[60] Caring for others like a father is yet another way to think about it.[61] Perhaps the child is a father in one of these figurative senses. If we follow Jerome and translate אֲבִיעַד (aviad) as Pater futuri saeculi, “Father of the future age,” we can reconfigure the title, “Eternal Father,” from eternal without beginning to eternal with a beginning but without an end. However, notes Williamson, “There is no parallel to calling the king ‘Father,' rather the king is more usually designated as God's son.”[62] Although we find Yahweh referred to as “Father” twice in Isaiah (Isa 63:16; 64:7), and several more times throughout the Old Testament,[63] the Messiah is not so called. Even in the New Testament we don't see the title applied to Jesus. Although not impossible to be taken as Jesus's fatherly role to play in the age to come, the most natural way to take אֲבִיעַד (aviad) is as a reference to Yahweh. In conclusion, both “mighty God” and “eternal Father” most naturally refer to Yahweh and not the child. If this is so, why is the child named with such divine designations? A Theophoric Name Finally, we are ready to consider the solution to our translation and interpretation woes. Israelites were fond of naming their kids with theophoric names (names that “carry God”). William Holladay explains: Israelite personal names were in general of two sorts. Some of them were descriptive names… But most Israelite personal names were theophoric; that is, they involve a name or title or designation of God, with a verb or adjective or noun which expresses a theological affirmation. Thus “Hezekiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) is my strength,” and “Isaiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) has brought salvation.” It is obvious that Isaiah is not called “Yahweh”; he bears a name which says something about Yahweh.[64] As Holladay demonstrates, when translating a theophoric name, it is customary to supplement the literal phrase with the verb, “to be.” Hezekiah = “Yah (is) my strength”; Isaiah = “Yah (is) salvation.” Similarly, Elijah means “My God (is) Yah” and Eliab, “My God (is the) Father.” Theophoric names are not about the child; they are about the God of the parents. When we imagine Elijah's mother calling him for dinner, she's literally saying “My God (is) Yah(weh), it's time for dinner.” The child's name served to remind her who her God was. Similarly, these other names spoke of God's strength, salvation, and fatherhood. To interpret the named child of Isa 9:6 correctly, we must look at the previously named children in Isa 7 and 8. In chapter 7 the boy is called “Immanuel,” meaning “God (is) with us” (Isa 7:14). This was a historical child who signaled prophecy. Isaiah said, “For before the boy knows to reject evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be abandoned” (Isa 7:16). In Isa 8:1 we encounter “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz,” or “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.”[65] This child has a two-sentence name with an attached prophecy: “For before the boy calls, ‘my father' or ‘my mother,' the strength of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off before the king of Assyria” (Isa 8:4). Both children's sign names did not describe them nor what they would do, but what God would do for his people. Immanuel is a statement of faith. The name means God has not abandoned his people; they can confidently say, “God is with us” (Isa 8:10). Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz does not mean that the child would become a warrior to sack Damascus and seize her spoils, but that God would bring about the despoiling of Judah's enemy. When we encounter a third sign-named child in as many chapters, we are on solid contextual grounds to see this new, longer name in the same light. Isaiah prophecies that this child has the government upon his shoulder, sits on the throne of David, and will establish a lasting period of justice and righteousness (Isa 9:5, 7). This child bears the name “Pele-Yoets-El-Gibbor-Aviad-Sar-Shalom.” The name describes his parents' God, the mighty God, the eternal Father. Although this perspective has not yet won the day, it is well attested in a surprising breadth of resources. Already in 1867, Samuel David Luzzatto put forward this position.[66] The Jewish Publication Society concurred in their 2014 study Bible: Semitic names often consist of sentences that describe God … These names do not describe that person who holds them but the god whom the parents worship. Similarly, the name given to the child in this v. does not describe that child or attribute divinity to him, but describes God's actions.[67] The New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV) footnote on Isa. 9:6 says, “As in many Israelite personal names, the deity, not the person named, is being described.”[68] Additional scholars advocating the view also include Holladay (1978), Wegner (1992), Goldingay (1999, 2015), and Williamson (2018). Even so, Keil and Delitzsch eschew “such a sesquipedalian name,” calling it “unskillful,” and arguing that it would be impractical “to be uttered in one breath.”[69] But this is to take the idea too literally. No one is going to actually call the child by this name. John Goldingay helpfully explains: So he has that complicated name, “An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Father-is-an-officer-for-well-being.” Like earlier names in Isaiah (God-is-with-us, Remains-Will-Return, Plunder-hurries-loot-rushes), the name is a sentence. None of these names are the person's everyday name—as when the New Testament says that Jesus will be called Immanuel, “God [is] with us,” without meaning this expression is Jesus' name. Rather, the person somehow stands for whatever the “name” says. God gives him a sign of the truth of the expression attached to him. The names don't mean that the person is God with us, or is the remains, or is the plunder, and likewise this new name doesn't mean the child is what the name says. Rather he is a sign and guarantee of it. It's as if he goes around bearing a billboard with that message and with the reminder that God commissioned the billboard.[70] Still, there's the question of identifying Yahweh as שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom). Since most of our translations render the phrase “Prince of Peace,” and the common meaning of a prince is someone inferior to the king, we turn away from labeling God with this title. Although HALOT mentions “representative of the king, official” for the first definition their second is “person of note, commander.”[71] The BDB glosses “chieftain, chief, ruler, official, captain, prince” as their first entry.[72] Wegner adds: “The book of Isaiah also appears to use the word sar in the general sense of “ruler.””[73] Still, we must ask, is it reasonable to think of Yahweh as a שַׂר (sar)? We find the phrase שַׂר־הַצָּבָא (sar-hatsava), “prince of hosts,” in Daniel 8:11 and שַׂר־שָׂרִים (sar-sarim), “prince of princes,” in verse 25, where both refer to God.[74]  The UBS Translators' Handbook recommends “God, the chief of the heavenly army” for verse 11 and “the greatest of all kings” for verse 25.[75] The handbook discourages using “prince,” since “the English word ‘prince' does not mean the ruler himself but rather the son of the ruler, while the Hebrew term always designates a ruler, not at all implying son of a ruler.”[76] I suggest applying this same logic to Isa 9:6. Rather than translating שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom) as “Prince of Peace,” we can render it, “Ruler of Peace” or “Ruler who brings peace.” Translating the Name Sentences Now that I've laid out the case for the theophoric approach, let's consider translation possibilities. Wegner writes, “the whole name should be divided into two parallel units each containing one theophoric element.”[77] This makes sense considering the structure of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, which translates two parallel name sentences: “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.” Here are a few options for translating the name. Jewish Publication Society (1917) Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of peace[78] William Holladay (1978) Planner of wonders; God the war hero (is) Father forever; prince of well-being[79] New Jewish Publication Society (1985) The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler[80] John Goldingay (1999) One who plans a wonder is the warrior God; the father for ever is a commander who brings peace[81] John Goldingay (2015) An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Fathers-is-an-official-for-well-being[82] Hugh Williamson (2018) A Wonderful Planner is the Mighty God, An Eternal Father is the Prince of Peace[83] My Translation (2024) The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace[84] I prefer to translate אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as “warrior God” rather than “mighty God” because the context is martial, and  גִּבּוֹר(gibbor) often refers to those fighting in war.[85] “Mighty God” is ambiguous, and easily decontextualized from the setting of Isa 9:6. After all, Isa 9:4-5 tells a great victory “as on the day of Midian”—a victory so complete that they burn “all the boots of the tramping warriors” in the fire. The word פֶּלֶא (pele), though often translated “wonderful,” is actually the word for “miracle,” and יוֹעֵץ (yoets) is a participle meaning “adviser” or “planner.” Since the context is war, this “miracle of an adviser” or “miraculous planner” refers to military plans—what we call strategy, hence, “miraculous strategist.” Amazingly, the tactic God employed in the time of Hezekiah was to send out an angel during the night who “struck down one hundred eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians” (Isa 37:36). This was evidently the warrior God's miraculous plan to remove the threat of Assyria from Jerusalem's doorstep. Prophecies about the coming day of God when he sends Jesus Christ—the true and better Hezekiah—likewise foretell of an even greater victory over the nations.[86] In fact, just two chapters later we find a messianic prophecy of one who will “strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked” (Isa 11:4). The next phrase, “The eternal Father,” needs little comment since God's eternality and fatherhood are both noncontroversial and multiply attested. Literally translated, שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar-shalom) is “Ruler of peace,” but I take the word pair as a genitive of product.[87] Williamson unpacks this meaning as “the one who is able to initiate and maintain Peace.”[88] That his actions in the time of Hezekiah brought peace is a matter of history. After a huge portion of the Assyrian army died, King Sennacherib went back to Nineveh, where his sons murdered him (Isa 37:37-38). For decades, Judah continued to live in her homeland. Thus, this child's birth signaled the beginning of the end for Assyria. In fact, the empire itself eventually imploded, a fate that, at Hezekiah's birth, must have seemed utterly unthinkable. Of course, the ultimate peace God will bring through his Messiah will far outshine what Hezekiah achieved.[89] Conclusion We began by considering the phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo). We noted that the tense is perfect, which justifies a past-tense interpretation of the child who had already been born by the time of the birth announcement. I presented the case for Hezekiah as the initial referent of Isa 9:6 based on the fact that Hezekiah’s life overlapped with Isaiah’s, that he sat on the throne of David (v7), and that his reign saw the miraculous deliverance from Assyria's army. Furthermore, I noted that identifying the child of Isa 9:6 as Hezekiah does not preclude a true and better one to come. Although Isa 9:6 does not show up in the New Testament, I agree with the majority of Christians who recognize this text as a messianic prophecy, especially when combined with verse 7. Next we puzzled over the subject for phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo.) Two options are that the phrase פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר (pele yoets el gibbor) functions as the subject or else the subject is indefinite. Although the Jewish interpreters overwhelmingly favor the former, the lack of definite articles and parallel constructions in Isaiah make me think the latter is more likely. Still, the Jewish approach to translation is a legitimate possibility. I explained how a passive voice makes sense in English since it hides the subject, and settled on “his name has been called,” as the best translation. Then we looked at the phrase אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) and considered the option of switching the order of the words and taking the first as the modifier of the second as in “mighty hero” or “divine warrior.” We explored the possibility that Isaiah was ascribing deity to the newborn child. We looked at the idea of Isaiah calling the boy “Mighty God” because he represented God. In the end we concluded that these all are less likely than taking God as the referent, especially in light of the identical phrase in Isa 10:21 where it unambiguously refers to Yahweh. Moving on to אֲבִיעַד (aviad), we considered the possibility that “father” could refer to someone who started something significant and “eternal” could merely designate a coming age. Once again, though these are both possible readings, they are strained and ad hoc, lacking any indication in the text to signal a non-straightforward reading. So, as with “Mighty God,” I also take “Eternal Father” as simple references to God and not the child. Finally, we explored the notion of theophoric names. Leaning on two mainstream Bible translations and five scholars, from Luzzatto to Williamson, we saw that this lesser-known approach is quite attractive. Not only does it take the grammar at face value, it also explains how a human being could be named “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father.” The name describes God and not the child who bears it. Lastly, drawing on the work of the Jewish Publication Society, Goldingay, and Williamson, I proposed the translation: “The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace.” This rendering preserves the martial context of Isa 9:6 and glosses each word according to its most common definition. I added in the verb “is” twice as is customary when translating theophoric names. The result is a translation that recognizes God as the focus and not the child. This fits best in the immediate context, assuming Hezekiah is the original referent. After all, his greatest moment was not charging out ahead of a column of soldiers, but his entering the house of Yahweh and praying for salvation. God took care of everything else. Likewise, the ultimate Son of David will have God's spirit influencing him: a spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and fear of God (Isa 11:2). The eternal Father will so direct his anointed that he will “not judge by what his eyes see or decide by what his ears hear” (Isa 11:3). In his days God will bring about a shalom so deep that even the animals will become peaceful (Isa 11:6-8). An advantage of this reading of Isa 9:6 is that it is compatible with the full range of christological positions Christians hold. Secondly, this approach nicely fits with the original meaning in Isaiah’s day, and it works for the prophecy’s ultimate referent in Christ Jesus. Additionally, it is the interpretation with the least amount of special pleading. Finally, it puts everything into the correct order, allowing exegesis to drive theology rather than the other way around. Bibliography Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2012. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917. The Jewish Study Bible. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler. Second ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Net Bible, Full Notes Edition. Edited by W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer. 2nd ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019. The New Oxford Annotated Bible. Edited by Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins. Third ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. The Stone Edition of the Tanach. Edited by Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz. Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996. Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. 4th, Reprint. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985. Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan. Translated by Eidon Clem. Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015. Alter, Rober. The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im. Vol. 2. 3 vols. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019. Ashkenazi, Jacob ben Isaac. Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English. Translated by Morris M. Faierstein. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017. https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Baumgartner, Ludwig Koehler and Walter. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by M. E. J. Richardson. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Brown, Raymond E. Jesus: God and Man, edited by 3. New York: Macmillan, 1967. Carlson, R. A. “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974): 130-5. Curtis, Edward L. “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7.” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 336-41. Delitzsch, C. F. Keil and F. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Finnegan, Sean. “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity.” Paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA, 2008, https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. Goldingay, John. “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6).” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 239-44. Goldingay, John. Isaiah for Everyone. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015. Holladay, William L. Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978. III, Ben Witherington. Isaiah Old and New. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. Luzzatto, Samuel David. Shi’ur Komah. Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867. O’Connor, Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990. Ogden, Graham S., and Jan Sterk. A Handbook on Isaiah. Ubs Translator's Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies, 2011. Oswalt, John. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39. Nicot. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986. Péter-Contesse, René and John Ellington. A Handbook on Daniel. Ubs Translator’s Handbooks. New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993. Roberts, J. J. M. First Isaiah. Vol. 23A. Hermeneia, edited by Peter Machinist. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Walter Bauer, Frederick W. Danker, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Wegner, Paul D. “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103-12. Williamson, H. G. M. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27. Vol. 2. International Critical Commentary, edited by G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett. New York: Bloomsbury, 2018. Yitzchaki, Shlomo. Complete Tanach with Rashi. Translated by A. J. Rosenberg. Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Young, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965. End Notes [1] Throughout I'll refer to Isaiah 9:6 based on the versification used in English translations. Hebrew Bibles shift the count by one, so the same verse is Isaiah 9:5. [2] Paul D. Wegner, “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103. [3] BHS is the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the standard Hebrew text based on the Leningrad Codex, a medieval Masoretic text. [4] In Hebrew the perfect tense roughly maps onto English past tense and the imperfect tense to future tense. [5] See NRSVUE, ESV, NASB20, NIV, NET, LSB, NLT, NKJ, ASV, KJV. [6] See translations by Robert Alter, James Moffat, and Duncan Heaster.  Also see Westminster Commentary, Cambridge Bible Commentary, New Century Bible Commentary, and The Daily Study Bible. [7] See New English Bible. [8] See Ibn Ezra. [9] See An American Testament. [10] “Held” means “hero” in German. In the Luther Bible (1545), he translated the phrase as “und er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Kraft, Held, Ewig -Vater, Friedefürst,” separating power (Kraft = El) and hero (Held = Gibbor) whereas in the 1912 revision we read, “er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Held, Ewig-Vater Friedefürst,” which reduced el gibbor to “Held” (hero). [11] See fn 4 above. [12] See New American Bible Revised Edition and An American Testament. [13] See New English Bible and James Moffatt's translation. [14] See Ibn Ezra. [15] See Duncan Heaster's New European Version. [16] See Word Biblical Commentary. [17] See Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917, the Koren Jerusalem Bible, and the Complete Jewish Bible. [18] In the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1QIsaa 8.24 reads “וקרא,” the vav-conversed form of “קרא,” translated “he will call,” an active future tense. This reading is implausible considering the unambiguous past tense of the two initial clauses that began verse 6: “a child has been born…a son has been given.” [19] “Here the Hebrew begins to use imperfect verb forms with the conjunction often rendered “and.” These verbs continue the tense of the perfect verb forms used in the previous lines. They refer to a state or situation that now exists, so they may be rendered with the present tense in English. Some translations continue to use a perfect tense here (so NJB, NJPSV, FRCL), which is better.” Graham S. Ogden, and Jan Sterk, A Handbook on Isaiah, Ubs Translator's Handbooks (New York: United Bible Societies, 2011). [20] H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27, vol. 2, International Critical Commentary, ed. G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett (New York: Bloomsbury, 2018), 371. [21] Wilhelm Gesenius, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), §106n. [22] Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990), §30.5.1e. [23] John Goldingay takes a “both-and” position, recognizing that Isaiah was speaking by faith of what God would do in the future, but also seeing the birth of the son to the king as having already happened by the time of the prophecy. John Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015), 42. [24] Jewish authors include Rashi, A. E. Kimchi, Abravanel, Malbim, and Luzzatto. [25] See 2 Kings 18:3-7. [26] Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own. [27] J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, vol. 23A, Hermeneia, ed. Peter Machinist (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 153. [28] Ben Witherington III, Isaiah Old and New (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017), 95-6, 99-100. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. [29] Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan, trans. Eidon Clem (Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015). [30] Shlomo Yitzchaki, Complete Tanach with Rashi, trans. A. J. Rosenberg (Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998). https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [31] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi, Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English, trans. Morris M. Faierstein (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017). https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [32] Square brackets in original. The Stone Edition of the Tanach, ed. Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz (Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996). [33] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, ed. W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019), 1266. [34] C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 249-50. [35] As mentioned above, the Hebrew is not actually passive. [36] The LXX reads “καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ” (kai kaleitai to onoma autou), which means “and his name is called.” [37] Rober Alter, The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im, vol. 2, 3 vols. (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019), 651. [38] John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, Nicot (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 247. [39] Delitzsch, 252. [40] The אֵלֵי גִבּוֹרִים (eley gibborim) of Ezek 32.21 although morphologically suggestive of a plural form of el gibbor, is not a suitable parallel to Isa 9:6 since אֵלֵי (eley) is the plural of אַיִל (ayil), meaning “chief” not אֵל (el). Thus, the translation “mighty chiefs” or “warrior rulers” takes eley as the noun and gibborim as the adjective and does not actually reverse them. [41] Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965), 338. [42] Translator's note A on Isa 9:6 in the NET states, “[I]t is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way.” Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [43] “The Messiah is the corporeal presence of this mighty God; for He is with Him, He is in Him, and in Him He is with Israel. The expression did not preclude the fact that the Messiah would be God and man in one person; but it did not penetrate to this depth, so far as the Old Testament consciousness was concerned.” Delitzsch, 253. [44] See Wegner 104-5. [45] See R. A. Carlson, “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974). [46] Oswalt, 246. [47] Isa 43:10-11; 44:6, 8; 45:5-6, 18, 21-22; 46:9. Deut 17:14-20 lays out the expectations for an Israelite king, many of which limit his power and restrict his exaltation, making deification untenable. [48] Wegner 108. [49] See Exod 4:16; 7:1. The word “God” can apply to “any person characterized by greatness or power: mighty one, great one, judge,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament.. The BDAG concurs, adding that a God is “that which is nontranscendent but considered worthy of special reverence or respect… of humans θεοί (as אֱלֹהִים) J[ohn] 10:34f (Ps 81:6; humans are called θ. in the OT also Ex 7:1; 22:27,” s.v. “θεός” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. [50] See Exod 21.6; 22:8-9. The BDB includes the definition, “rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [51] Thayer points this out in his lexicon: “Hebraistically, equivalent to God’s representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges, John 10:34f after Ps. 81:6 (Ps. 82:6)” s.v. “θέος” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. [52] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [53] Raymond E. Brown, Jesus: God and Man, ed. 3 (New York: Macmillan, 1967), 25. [54] Williamson, 397. [55] Delitzsch, 253. See also fn 40 above. [56] Edward L. Curtis, “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7,” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 339. [57] Ibid. [58] Sean Finnegan, “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity” (paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA2008), https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. [59] Jabal was the father of those who live in tents and have livestock (Gen 4:20) and Jubal was the father of those who play the lyre and the pipe (Gen 4:21). [60] Jesus told his critics, “You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father's desires” (John 8:44). [61] Job called himself “a father to the needy” (Job 29:16) and Isaiah prophesied that Eliakim would be “a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (Isa 22:21). [62] Williamson, 397. [63] For references to Yahweh as father to the people see Deut 32:6; Ps 103:13; Prov 3:12; Jer 3:4; 31.9; Mal 1.6; 2:10. For Yahweh as father to the messiah see 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chron 7:13; 28:6; Ps 89:27. [64] William L. Holladay, Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978), 108. [65] See NRSVUE fn on Isa 8:1. [66] והנה המכוון במאמר פלא יועץ וגו’ הוא כי האל הגבור שהוא אבי עד ואדון השלום, הוא יועץ וגוזר לעשות פלא לישראל בזמן ממלכת הילד הנולד היום, ואח”כ מפרש למרבה המשרה וגו’. ולפי הפירוש הזה לא לחנם האריך כאן בתארי האל, כי כוונת הנביא לרמוז כי בבוא הפלא שהאל יועץ וגוזר עתה, יוודע שהוא אל גבור ובעל היכולת ושהוא אב לעד, ולא יפר בריתו עם בניו בני ישראל, ולא ישכח את ברית אבותם. ושהוא אדון השלום ואוהב השלום, ולא יאהב העריצים אשר כל חפצם לנתוש ולנתוץ ולהאביד ולהרוס, אבל הוא משפילם עד עפר, ונותן שלום בארץ, כמו שראינו בכל הדורות. Chat GPT translation: “And behold, the intention in the phrase ‘Wonderful Counselor’ and so on is that the mighty God, who is the Eternal Father and the Prince of Peace, is the Counselor and decrees to perform a wonder for Israel at the time of the reign of the child born today. Afterwards, it is explained as ‘to increase the dominion’ and so on. According to this interpretation, it is not in vain that the prophet elaborates on the attributes of God here, for the prophet’s intention is to hint that when the wonder that God now advises and decrees comes about, it will be known that He is the Mighty God and possesses the ability and that He is the Eternal Father. He will not break His covenant with His sons, the children of Israel, nor forget the covenant of their ancestors. He is the Prince of Peace and loves peace, and He will not favor the oppressors whose every desire is to tear apart, destroy, and obliterate, but He will humble them to the dust and grant peace to the land, as we have seen throughout the generations.” Samuel David Luzzatto, Shi’ur Komah (Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867). Accessible at Sefaria and the National Library of Israel. [67]The Jewish Study Bible, ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, Second ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 784. [68] The New Oxford Annotated Bible, ed. Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins, Third ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 991. [69] Delitzsch, 249. [70] Goldingay, 42-3. [71] Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. M. E. J. Richardson (Leiden: Brill, 2000). [72] See s.v. “שַׂר” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [73] Wegner 112. [74] Keil and Delitzsch say the sar of Dan 8:11 refers to “the God of heaven and the King of Israel, the Prince of princes, as He is called in v. 25,” Delitzsch, 297. [75] René and John Ellington Péter-Contesse, A Handbook on Daniel, Ubs Translator’s Handbooks (New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993). [76] Ibid. [77] Wegner 110-1. [78] The main text transliterates “Pele-joez-el-gibbor-/Abi-ad-sar-shalom,” while the footnote translates as indicated above. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917), 575. [79] Holladay, 109. [80] Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text (4th: repr., Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985), 634. [81] John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6),” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 243. [82] Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone, 40. [83] Williamson, 355. [84] An alternative is “The warrior God is planning a miracle; the eternal Father is the ruler of peace.” [85] For גִּבּוֹר in a military context, see 1 Sam 17:51; 2 Sam 20.7; 2 Kgs 24:16; Isa 21.17; Jer 48:41; Eze 39:20; and Joel 2:7; 3:9. [86] See 2 Thess 2:8 and Rev 19:11-21 (cp. Dan 7:13-14). [87] See Gesenius § 128q, which describes a genitive of “statements of the purpose for which something is intended.” [88] Williamson, 401. [89] Isaiah tells of a time when God will “judge between nations,” resulting in the conversion of the weapons of war into the tools of agriculture and a lasting era when “nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more” (Isa 2:4).

BenNny, NJB and Tyler talk about Smackdown Raw, MITB,Bloodline, Judgement day and so much more.Join InTheCorner for #WWE News, and share your views On WWE Storylines and much more.Listen to the show on #ApplePodcasts and #Spotifyand of course on @SJPWorldMediaContact the showInTheCornerWWE@gmail.comOr join the community on WhatsApphttps://chat.whatsapp.com/LJXhu7dCAX94KsSYg19RBs"Alex Productions - Chop Chops" is under a Creative Commons (BY 3.0) license:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...  / @alexproductionsnocopyright  Music powered by BreakingCopyright

BenNny and NJB talk The Bloodline, RAW and what they think will happen at MITB 2024Join InTheCorner for #WWE News, and share your views On WWE Storylines and much more.Listen to the show on #ApplePodcasts and #Spotifyand of course on @SJPWorldMediaContact the showInTheCornerWWE@gmail.comOr join the community on WhatsApphttps://chat.whatsapp.com/LJXhu7dCAX94KsSYg19RBs"Alex Productions - Chop Chops" is under a Creative Commons (BY 3.0) license:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...  / @alexproductionsnocopyright  Music powered by BreakingCopyright

BenNny is joined by an old voice Mr NJB is back to diphis toe into Monday Night RAW and IN THE CORNER PODCAST.The lads talk this weeks RAW possible MITB winners and has Drew Mcintyre really quit WWE?????Join InTheCorner for #WWE News, and share your views On WWE Storylines and much more.Listen to the show on #ApplePodcasts and #Spotifyand of course on @SJPWorldMediaContact the show InTheCornerWWE@gmail.com Or join the community on WhatsApphttps://chat.whatsapp.com/LJXhu7dCAX94KsSYg19RBs"Alex Productions - Chop Chops" is under a Creative Commons (BY 3.0) license:https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...  / @alexproductionsnocopyright  Music powered by BreakingCopyright

This is part 17 of the Read the Bible For Yourself. After reviewing the resources you can use to learn Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, we delve into the sources that translators use for their work. Next, we'll look at translation philosophies, including formal and dynamic equivalence. Lastly we'll cover the controversial issues of gender accuracy and translation bias. Over all, this episode should give you a nice introduction to a deep answer for what translations you should use and why. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsxuNfkTt-U&list=PLN9jFDsS3QV2TrdUEDtAipF3jy4qYspM_&index=18 —— Links —— See other episodes in Read the Bible For Yourself Other classes are available here, including How We Got the Bible, which explores the manuscript transmission and translation of the Bible Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here —— Notes —— 17 How to Choose a Bible Translation Translation basics Fee & Stuart: “Your Bible, whatever translation you use, which is your beginning point, is in fact the end result of much scholarly work. Translators are regularly called upon to make choices regarding meanings, and their choices are going to affect how you”[1] “Every translation is a commentary” -Lee Brice The Bible is in three languages. Hebrew: Old Testament except the Aramaic part Nearly 99% of the OT (22,945 of 23,213 verses) Aramaic: half of Daniel and two passages in Ezra Daniel 2.4b-7.28; Ezra 4.8-6.18; 7.12-26 About 1% of the OT (268 of 23,213 verses) Greek: New Testament (all 7,968 verses) How to begin learning Hebrew or Greek Immersion program in Israel or Greece Whole Word Institute offers a 9-month program. In-person college class (usually 2 semesters) Local colleges, RTS offers an 8-week summer program. In-person classes at a Jewish synagogue or Greek church or community center Online program with live instructor Biblical Language Center, Liberty University, etc. Digital program with pre-recordings Aleph with Beth (YouTube), Bill Mounce's DVD course, etc. How to improve your existing knowledge of Hebrew or Greek Reading group in-person or online Read a portion each week together. Daily dose of Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic Daily YouTube videos of one verse each (email list) Read every day. Read the Bible; read devotionals; read comic books (Glossa House produces great resources) Watch modern Hebrew and Greek shows. Izzy is like Netflix for Israel/Hebrew Greece has lots of channels streaming online. Translation process (1 Timothy 2:5 example) Greek New Testament (NA28)Εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς Literal translationOne for god, one and mediator of god and men,man Christ Jesus Finished translationFor (there is) one God, and (there is) one mediator between God and mankind, (the) man Christ Jesus. New Testament critical editions Nestle Aland 28th Edition (NA28) based on the Editio Critica Maior (ECM), which employs the coherence based genealogical method (CBGM) Tyndale House Greek New Testament (THGNT) prioritizes trusted physical manuscripts over the CBGM. Old Testament critical editions Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially completed Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ) print the Leningrad Codex in the main text, but include alternative readings in the footnotes. Hebrew Bible Critical Edition (HBCE) by Ronald Mendel is a project of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) to develop a critical edition. Resources to see decisions about alternative readings NET Bible (accessible here) New Testament Text and Commentary by Philip Comfort A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger Formal equivalence translation philosophy Fee & Strauss: “If the Greek or Hebrew text uses an infinitive, the English translation will use an infinitive. When the Greek or Hebrew has a prepositional phrase, so will the English…The goal of this translational theory is formal correspondence as much as possible.”[2] Ron Rhodes: “Formal equivalence translations can also be trusted not to mix too much commentary in with the text derived from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. To clarify, while all translation entails some interpretation, formal equivalence translations keep to a minimum in intermingling interpretive additives into the text.  As one scholar put it, ‘An essentially literal translation operates on the premise that a translator is a steward of what someone else has written, not an editor and exegete who needs to explain or correct what someone else has written.'”[3] Dynamic equivalence translation philosophy Ron Rhodes: “Dynamic equivalence translations generally use shorter words, shorter sentences, and shorter paragraphs. They use easy vocabulary and use simple substitutes for theological and cultural terminology.  They often convert culturally dependent figures of speech into easy, direct statements.  They seek to avoid ambiguity as well as biblical jargon in favor of a natural English style. Translators concentrate on transferring meaning rather than mere words from one language to another.”[4] Formal vs. dynamic comparison Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Formal Correspondence Functional Equivalence Word for Word Thought for Thought Literal Readable Transparent to Originals Replicates Experience Transfer Interpretation Interpretation Built In Accurate Easy to Understand Formal equivalence Bibles ESV: English Standard Version NASB: New American Standard Bible LSB: Legacy Standard Bible NRSV: New Revised Standard Version HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible Gender Accuracy[5] “Man” used to mean “men and women” “Men” used to mean “men and women” “he” used to mean “he or she” Translations are changing with the changes in the English language so that female readers recognize the relevance of scripture to them See Eph 4:28; Mat 11:15; etc. Combatting bias To combat bias, look at translations from different thought camps. Evangelical: NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, CSB, HCSB, LEB MSG, Passion, Amplified, LSB, CEV, TEV/GNT, NCV, NIrV Jewish: JPS, KJB, Stone, Robert Altar, Shocken Catholic: NABRE, NAB, RNJB, NJB, JB, Douay-Rheims Mainline: NRSV, NEB, RSV, ASV, KJV Unitarian: REV, NWT, Diaglott, KGV, Buzzard, NEV Review If you can, learn the biblical languages so you can read the actual words of scripture rather than depending on a translation. Translations of the New Testament depend on the Greek critical text known as the Nestle Aland 28th edition (NA28). Translations of the Old Testament depend on the Leningrad Codex, which is printed in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially complete Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ). In addition, translators of the Old Testament are expected to look through the footnotes and commentary in these resources to judge readings from other sources. Over generations, textual critics have developed strategies and computer tools to more closely approximate the original text. As a result, newer critical texts contain reconstructions of an older stage of the text. Translation is the art of rendering a source text into a receptor language accurately. Formal equivalence translations focus on transparency to the source text and a minimum of added interpretation. Dynamic equivalence translations focus on readability in the receptor language. They seek clarity over ambiguity. Formal equivalence translations are safer, because they leave it up to the reader to figure out what a text means. However, they can contain awkward English and be difficult to read. Gender accuracy refers to the translation practice of including the feminine when a hypothetical singular masculine pronoun can refer to either sex or when masculine plurals include both genders. Bias is intrinsic to translation, especially with reference to doctrines that are widely held by committee members. The best way to expose and combat bias is to check translations from different thought camps. Although evangelical translations are better known, checking Jewish, mainline, Catholic, and unitarian translations provides a helpful corrective. [1] Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 23. [2] Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), p. 26. [3] Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), p. 30.  Quotation from Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005), p. 27. [4] Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), pp. 32-33. [5] For a much deeper dive into this interesting topic, see session 15 from How We Got the Bible: Gender in Bible Translation, available on lhim.org or on YouTube.

17 How to Choose a Bible Translation – Notes Download Translation basics Fee & Stuart: “Your Bible, whatever translation you use, which is your beginning point, is in fact the end result of much scholarly work. Translators are regularly called upon to make choices regarding meanings, and their choices are going to affect how you”[[Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 23.]] “Every translation is a commentary” -Lee Brice The Bible is in three languages. Hebrew: Old Testament except the Aramaic part Nearly 99% of the OT (22,945 of 23,213 verses) Aramaic: half of Daniel and two passages in Ezra Daniel 2.4b-7.28; Ezra 4.8-6.18; 7.12-26 About 1% of the OT (268 of 23,213 verses) Greek: New Testament (all 7,968 verses) How to begin learning Hebrew or Greek Immersion program in Israel or Greece Whole Word Institute offers a 9-month program. In-person college class (usually 2 semesters) Local colleges, RTS offers an 8-week summer program. In-person classes at a Jewish synagogue or Greek church or community center Online program with live instructor Biblical Language Center, Liberty University, etc. Digital program with pre-recordings Aleph with Beth (YouTube), Bill Mounce's DVD course, etc. How to improve your existing knowledge of Hebrew or Greek Reading group in-person or online Read a portion each week together. Daily dose of Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic Daily YouTube videos of one verse each (email list) Read every day. Read the Bible; read devotionals; read comic books (Glossa House produces great resources) Watch modern Hebrew and Greek shows. Izzy is like Netflix for Israel/Hebrew Greece has lots of channels streaming online. Translation process (1 Timothy 2:5 example) Greek New Testament (NA28) Εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς Literal translation One for god, one and mediator of god and men, man Christ Jesus Finished translation For (there is) one God, and (there is) one mediator between God and mankind, (the) man Christ Jesus. New Testament critical editions Nestle Aland 28th Edition (NA28) based on the Editio Critica Maior (ECM), which employs the coherence based genealogical method (CBGM) Tyndale House Greek New Testament (THGNT) prioritizes trusted physical manuscripts over the CBGM. Old Testament critical editions Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially completed Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ) print the Leningrad Codex in the main text, but include alternative readings in the footnotes. Hebrew Bible Critical Edition (HBCE) by Ronald Mendel is a project of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) to develop a critical edition. Resources to see decisions about alternative readings NET Bible (accessible at org) New Testament Text and Commentary by Philip Comfort A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger Formal equivalence translation philosophy Fee & Strauss: “If the Greek or Hebrew text uses an infinitive, the English translation will use an infinitive. When the Greek or Hebrew has a prepositional phrase, so will the English…The goal of this translational theory is formal correspondence as much as possible.”[[Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss, How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), p. 26.]] Ron Rhodes: “Formal equivalence translations can also be trusted not to mix too much commentary in with the text derived from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. To clarify, while all translation entails some interpretation, formal equivalence translations keep to a minimum in intermingling interpretive additives into the text.  As one scholar put it, ‘An essentially literal translation operates on the premise that a translator is a steward of what someone else has written, not an editor and exegete who needs to explain or correct what someone else has written.'”[[Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), p. 30.  Quotation from Leland Ryken, Choosing a Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2005), p. 27.]] Dynamic equivalence translation philosophy Ron Rhodes: “Dynamic equivalence translations generally use shorter words, shorter sentences, and shorter paragraphs. They use easy vocabulary and use simple substitutes for theological and cultural terminology.  They often convert culturally dependent figures of speech into easy, direct statements.  They seek to avoid ambiguity as well as biblical jargon in favor of a natural English style. Translators concentrate on transferring meaning rather than mere words from one language to another.”[[Ron Rhodes, The Complete Guide to Bible Translations (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2009), pp. 32-33.]] Formal vs. dynamic comparison Formal Equivalence Dynamic Equivalence Formal Correspondence Functional Equivalence Word for Word Thought for Thought Literal Readable Transparent to Originals Replicates Experience Transfer Interpretation Interpretation Built In Accurate Easy to Understand Formal equivalence Bibles ESV: English Standard Version NASB: New American Standard Bible LSB: Legacy Standard Bible NRSV: New Revised Standard Version HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible Gender Accuracy[[For a much deeper dive into this interesting topic, see session 15 from How We Got the Bible: Gender in Bible Translation, available on lhim.org or on YouTube.]] “Man” used to mean “men and women” “Men” used to mean “men and women” “he” used to mean “he or she” Translations are changing with the changes in the English language so that female readers recognize the relevance of scripture to them See Eph 4:28; Mat 11:15; etc. Combatting bias To combat bias, look at translations from different thought camps. Evangelical: NIV, NLT, ESV, NASB, NET, CSB, HCSB, LEB MSG, Passion, Amplified, LSB, CEV, TEV/GNT, NCV, NIrV Jewish: JPS, KJB, Stone, Robert Altar, Shocken Catholic: NABRE, NAB, RNJB, NJB, JB, Douay-Rheims Mainline: NRSV, NEB, NKJ, RSV, ASV, KJV Unitarian: REV, NWT, Diaglott, KGV, Buzzard, NEV Review If you can, learn the biblical languages so you can read the actual words of scripture rather than depending on a translation. Translations of the New Testament depend on the Greek critical text known as the Nestle Aland 28th edition (NA28). Translations of the Old Testament depend on the Leningrad Codex, which is printed in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) and the partially complete Biblia Hebraica Quinta (BHQ). In addition, translators of the Old Testament are expected to look through the footnotes and commentary in these resources to judge readings from other sources. Over generations, textual critics have developed strategies and computer tools to more closely approximate the original text. As a result, newer critical texts contain reconstructions of an older stage of the text. Translation is the art of rendering a source text into a receptor language accurately. Formal equivalence translations focus on transparency to the source text and a minimum of added interpretation. Dynamic equivalence translations focus on readability in the receptor language. They seek clarity over ambiguity. Formal equivalence translations are safer, because they leave it up to the reader to figure out what a text means. However, they can contain awkward English and be difficult to read. Gender accuracy refers to the translation practice of including the feminine when a hypothetical singular masculine pronoun can refer to either sex or when masculine plurals include both genders. Bias is intrinsic to translation, especially with reference to doctrines that are widely held by committee members. The best way to expose and combat bias is to check translations from different thought camps. Although evangelical translations are better known, checking Jewish, mainline, Catholic, and unitarian translations provides a helpful corrective. The post 17: How to Choose a Bible Translation first appeared on Living Hope.

It occurred to us the other day that we have lived 10 years without owning a car. This didn't happen intentionally, we just moved to a walkable neighbourhood and living car-free just made the most sense. In this episode, I talk with Mrs. NJB about what it's been like to live without a car, how it made more sense for us even with two kids, and about why we'll likely never own one.Not Just Bikes: https://nebula.tv/notjustbikesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Our family has lived in the Netherlands for 5 years now. In this episode, I have a conversation with my wife, Mrs. NJB, about our experiences and how it compares to other places we've lived before.Listen to the next episode early on Nebula: https://nebula.tv/agendaNot Just Bikes: https://youtube.com/@notjustbikesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This short clip is from 2022, when BenNny & JackV wereJoind by NJB to talk about Halo Infinite.Did Jack finish Halo on the Hardest setting, you Decide..In This series we talk the Latest Tech and Game news, from new releases to Old favourites and everything in Between.Join @BenNnyMack & @Jackv327 as they discuss all things Gaming! LIVE on http://Twitch.Tv/BenNnyMackGaming & Gameplay Junkies | SpreakerEvery Sunday! 5:30pm UK 12:30 EST

BenNny is Joined by NJB to talk about Clash at the Castle, and give their thoughts and predictionsAlso some news about a star not renewing his contract with AEW. FOLLOW US!@InTheCornerWWE@SJPWORLDMEDIA@BenNnyMack

For additional notes and resources check out Douglas' website.7:1 After this Jesus went about in Galilee. He did not wish to go about in Judea because the Jews were looking for an opportunity to kill him. 2 Now the Jewish festival of Booths was near. 3 So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing; 4 for no one who wants to be widely known acts in secret. If you do these things, show yourself to the world.” 5 (For not even his brothers believed in him.)"The Jews" (the leaders, the authorities) want to kill Jesus.Jesus is avoiding the southern part of Israel (Judea), staying instead in the upper reaches (Galilee). His reputation has made his presence in the capital not only controversial but also dangerous.And yet one of the three annual mandatory trips to Jerusalem (in Judea) is near: the Feast of Tabernacles (v.2).The Feast of Tabernacles (or Booths) (v.2) was the most popular gathering at the Temple, according to 1st century Jewish historian Josephus (Jos. Ant. 8.100). Skēnopēgía comes from skēnē, tying in to 1:14: The Word eskēnōsen among us.Jesus' (four) brothers presume to advise him on how to be a successful Messiah (vv.3-4).Their advice is essentially the same as that of the Tempter (Matthew 4:5-7)!They neither understood his mission nor believed in him (v.5).And yet in the future, his brothers would play key roles in church leadership!The question is hanging: Will Jesus go back to Jerusalem, or not?6 Jesus said to them, “My time has not yet come, but your time is always here. 7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify against it that its works are evil. 8 Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come.” 9 After saying this, he remained in Galilee.As always throughout the gospel of John, Jesus is keenly aware of his divine timetable.The world accepts his family, since they are not (yet) on the side of truth. The hatred of a world opposed to the truth is a common theme in John. See the extended passage beginning in 15:18.Jesus rejects their immediate advice (v.9), and its bad timing (v.6ff). Jesus followed the Father's timing throughout his ministry.10 But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in secret. 11The Jews were looking for him at the festival and saying, “Where is he?” 12 And there was considerable complaining about him among the crowds. While some were saying, “He is a good man,” others were saying, “No, he is deceiving the crowd.” 13 Yet no one would speak openly about him for fear of the Jews.Later Jesus does go up to the Feast of Tabernacles (v.10), but cautiously and clandestinely.Public opinion is divided over who he is (vv.11-13). This makes for a potentially unstable situation.He makes his move halfway through the festival (v.14). According to Leviticus 23:34, the observance lasted seven days.14 About the middle of the festival Jesus went up into the temple and began to teach. 15 The Jews were astonished at it, saying, “How does this man have such learning, when he has never been taught?” 16Then Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine but his who sent me. 17 Anyone who resolves to do the will of God will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own. 18 Those who speak on their own seek their own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and there is nothing false in him. 19 “Did not Moses give you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why are you looking for an opportunity to kill me?”Jesus times his visit to Jerusalem for the middle of the Feast to Tabernacles.Once he begins to teach, people are amazed (v.15).Jesus always impressed the crowd with his content and delivery.Their amazement is because he had not been educated in their system, by a prominent rabbi.Moreover, he did not teach in the scribal manner ("Rabbi so-and-so taught, whereas Rabbi such-and-such believed...).That is, he did not appeal to the authority of rabbinical tradition.Christ was fully trained, and in time so would his apostles be. (In this regard, many totally misread Acts 4:13.)Jesus defends his message (v.16ff).His message is from God.Anyone receptive to the will of God will see that this is the case (v.17).He is not self-seeking (v.18).Their attacks on his righteous words show they are not true Jews (v.19).20 The crowd answered, “You have a demon! Who is trying to kill you?” 21 Jesus answered them, “I performed one work, and all of you are astonished. 22 Moses gave you circumcision (it is, of course, not from Moses, but from the patriarchs), and you circumcise a man on the sabbath. 23 If a man receives circumcision on the sabbath in order that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because I healed a man's whole body on the sabbath? 24 Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”As expected, this doesn't go down too well (v.20). The crowd reacts with extreme, black and white thinking.Rather than think through what Jesus is saying, some prefer to write him off as demon-possessed. The label, it would seem, is meant to absolve them of their responsibility to think objectively and fairly about Jesus' claims.Jesus reasons with them about the Sabbath, probably referring to the healing in chapter 5 (v.21ff). Jesus is saying, in effect, that their theology is inconsistent. He encourages them to judge correctly, not superficially (v.24).Here is the thinking in Jesus' response.The rabbis taught that the Sabbath could be contravened for the purpose of circumcision, a rite that affected only one part of the body.Jesus had healed the whole body (chapter 5).A fortiori, this infraction of the Sabbath tradition was certainly justified."Righteous judgment" (v.24), dikaia krisis, can be rendered upright, righteous, good, just, right, proper, fair, honest, innocent.There are multiple types of judging in the Bible. See my article "Judge Not!"25 Now some of the people of Jerusalem were saying, “Is not this the man whom they are trying to kill? 26 And here he is, speaking openly, but they say nothing to him! Can it be that the authorities really know that this is the Messiah? 27 Yet we know where this man is from; but when the Messiah comes, no one will know where he is from.” 28 Then Jesus cried out as he was teaching in the temple, “You know me, and you know where I am from. I have not come on my own. But the one who sent me is true, and you do not know him.It is publicly known that there is a bounty on Jesus' head (v.25). That he has not yet been arrested is interpreted by some to mean that they are uncertain as to whether he is a false Messiah or a true one (v.26).In verse 28, "in the temple" (en to[i] hieō[i]) is rendered various ways in the translations: "in the temple courts" (NIV), "in the temple area" (NAB), "in the temple complex" (HCSB), "in the temple" (NASB, NRSV, NKJV, NJB). The last rendering is the most literal.Yet since Jesus would have been teaching in the outer courts, and not in the sanctuary, there is justification for the periphrastic expansion.Thus we see that "the temple" is the structure itself or the entire temple complex. Context determines the exact meaning.Jesus is fully aware of God and his mission and obedience.He is equally aware that his opponents are not God's children. Silly statements like "Everyone is God's son or daughter, and they will all be okay at the end" must be rejected. This is worldly, channel-2-type thinking.Some comment that the origins of the true Messiah will be unknown, whereas Jesus' origins are known.Of course they are wrong in this assessment.Isaiah and Micah indicate that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem and minister in Galilee.29 I know him, because I am from him, and he sent me.” 30 Then they tried to arrest him, but no one laid hands on him, because his hour had not yet come. 31 Yet many in the crowd believed in him and were saying, “When the Messiah comes, will he do more signs than this man has done?"Jesus admits that they know his earthly origin (v.28), yet insists that he has come from God (v.29).Crowd reaction is divided.They try to seize him (v.30), but the time is too early.And yet some believe that he is indeed the Messiah, based on his miracles (v.31).

The SJP UK voice on all WWE, Mr BenNny Mack, is joined once again by the incredible NJB for a post Premium Event review!Our unmissable duo break down this past weekend's Summerslam, and talk all the WWE you want & need! Bought to SJP World Media Via BenNny Mack Productions!FOLLOW US!@SJPWORLDMEDIA@InTheCornerWWE@Jackv327@BenNnyMack

in the corner Summerslam 2022 predictions!NJB joins BenNny to predict what will happen on Saturday LIVE on PPV!.FOLLOW US!@SJPWORLDMEDIA@IntheCornerWWE@BenNnyMack

In this episode NJB is joined by others to talks about Mutual Aid. You can find the Plough and Stars on Twitter @ploughandstars. You can @ us, or send us a DM. We are also on twitter, and our handles are @nicejudeobolsh and @redbernarr. If you enjoy this show and would like to support us, you can find us on patreon at patreon.com/ploughandstars. We also have a redbubble where you can find Plough and Stars and RAS merch at redbubble.com/people/ploughandstars/shop. Finally, if you have an interest in the larger party we are affiliated with, the Party for Reclamation and Survival, you can contact us at reclamation (dot) and (dot) survival (at) protonmail (dot) com. RAS has an archive.org page set up where you can read various party publications. That site is archive.org/details/@reclaim_survive. Lastly, if you want to support the party overall, you can find our Ko-Fi account at ko-fi.com/rasredaid. In multiple locations across the country we have comrades out meeting with and feeding the masses, and doing the work. Speaking of which, while it is extremely important to learn the theory, that means nothing if you are not following through with the work. So we would encourage you to first reach out, get involved, and then come back and listen.End song is 'Colores' by Ska-P.Support the show

BenNny is joined by NJB as they go through their top 5 WWE Title Belts. 

On this debut episode, BenNny is Joined by NJB to breakdown an eventful Money In The Bank 2022 PPV with many talking points, good and bad!In The Corner with BenNny Mack is brought to you by SJP World Media & BenNny Mack ProductionsFOLLOW US!@SJPWORLDMEDIA@InTheCornerWWE@BenNnyMack

In this week's episode, Daniel and Harry are guestless as they unpack Paul Thomas Anderson's 2021 Oscar Nominated “Licorice Pizza,” starring Alana Haim and Cooper Hoffman.Listen in as they reminisce on Daniel's childhood in the San Fernando Valley, discuss the concept of the "Nice Jewish Boy" (NJB) and its presence in the film, and finally learn how to pronounce the director and star of "Yentl's" last name (Strei-SAND, like the ocean).Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofnXPwUPENo&ab_channel=MGMIMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11271038/

The schmuckgirls are back this week and are excited because chametz is back on the menu and they're bringing you the self-proclaimed Nicest Jewish Boy - Jake Offy. On this episode, Libby, Maxine, Marla, and Jake discuss how to be a NJB, whether nice guys really finish last, how to politely reject over the DMs, Jewish geography and more! And of course they end off with a fun game of "Cute" or "Cringe!"Like what you hear? Follow @schmuckboysofficial on Instagram and TikTok. Submit your questions, comments, concerns, crazy date stories, and advice requests to schmuckboysofficial@gmail.com

Friendships: It's so easy to form them when you're younger, right? It's like you don't have to even try. So, it's weird when you become an adult. We get to this point in our life where it's like how do we make new friends? How do we meet new people?  In this episode, I talk about the More Than Membership. The idea is self love, but it's so much more than that! I share how the Membership got started, and why I love this group of women so much!    What's in this episode: Craving real conversations during Covid.  Making connections/friends as an adult.  Why I started the More Than Membership.  What you'll get with the Membership.  Members share what they love about the group.    SAVE THE DATE More Than Membership opens Nov. 15th! To join, click here: https://www.nicolejboutique.com/products/morethanmembership   MEMBER TESTIMONIALS Lauren - “Nicole J is 100% More Than Clothes. This community of warm, kind, supportive women is exactly what I needed. Friendships I've formed in this group are EVERYTHING. I'm so grateful for this space. The bonus of first access can't be beat either.    Candace - “The community that Nicole created is so special. I met now one of my best friends through it. This group is so supportive whether it's to celebrate a win or a shoulder to lean on when times are hard.”    Jess - “Thank you Nicole for creating this group! This community of women constantly uplift and motivate each other. It is a safe space to share whatever is on your mind. I am so thankful to have met many new friends in this group in just a short time via monthly meetups, etc. First launch access is definitely a plus but such a small part of the amazing friendships, support and FUN times you get with this group! I would recommend it to anyone.”   Kelli - “Because I'm not a local gal, I initially joined for the perks of free shipping and first access. Needless to say, this group has grown to mean so much more than that. Being a part of this diverse community of women has made me feel like I'm never alone navigating the ups and downs of the rollercoaster of life. I always look forward to Nicole's weekly Facebook lives and they have become such a part of my wellness routine. I can't wait to one day meet the women in this community who I already feel like I know!”   Kristen - “From the first time I entered NJB I always felt SO welcome. Nicole had mentioned the Self Love Club a few months later and that it would be opening for new members, and I couldn't be happier that she did. I have met SO many amazing ladies and have such a welcoming space to share whatever is going on knowing I will be supported and with honest answers. This tribe of women is a force and one you want to be a part of. It's women supporting other women and it is just what I needed!”   Penne: “Nicole is one of a kind! You purchase from her boutique then you find out she also quickly becomes your friend. This membership has opened up a lifeline of friends, and a support group you didn't even know you needed. At any age, these women are a fabulous group to be a part of. Everyone needs more good people in their lives! Thank you Nikki and crew, you make everyday better.”   Patti - “I found the boutique through my daughter. I never thought I could shop there because of my age. I didn't want to look “silly” or that I was trying too hard. I am in my mid 50s and absolutely have fallen in love with NJB. Most of my closet is from there. When Niki announced the Self Love Club, I couldn't wait to sign up. My schedule doesn't allow me to attend all of the events. However, the online community is amazing! The early access is pretty cool, too!”

A Sermon for the Thirteenth Sunday after Trinity St. Luke 10:23-37 by William Klock Our Gospel this morning is another familiar parable.  And familiarity isn't always a good thing.  It can lead us to read the Bible out of its context and we can often end up assuming we already know what the parable is all about and we fail to let Jesus' stories speak to us in the way they were meant to.  A big part of that is that we read these parables as if Jesus spoke them directly to us, forgetting that he actually spoke them to very different people in a very different setting two millennia ago.  The parable of the Good Samaritan is a great example of all this.  Christians read it almost universally as a story meant to instruct us in morals, but in doing that we ignore not only the immediate context, but also the larger ministry of Jesus.  Jesus was not a moral teacher.  That's not to say that he didn't teach about morality and ethics, but when he did it was as part of his ministry as the Messiah and in the role of a prophet to the covenant people of God, to Israel.  It's important to remember the narrative, the big picture—the story of God and his people.  It's important to remember what Jesus said of himself in John 3: “I came not to condemn, but to redeem.”  This is where he came into conflict with people like the Pharisees.  They—and most of the rest of Israel—expected that when the Messiah came, he would bring history to its climax.  He would rain down the Lord's judgement on gentiles and sinners—on the nations—he would set righteous Israel on top of the heap where she belonged, and he would set this fallen world to rights as King.  He would usher in the long-awaited age to come.  And they were right.  This is what Jesus will do—more or less—at history's climax.  But what no one—or almost no one—had anticipated is that the Messiah would come in the middle of history to prepare the people for his eventual coming at the end—that he would come in the middle of history in order to bring redemption to sinners, in order to set his people to rights, so that they could avoid the coming day of judgement and know the life of the age to come.  That's what so many of these parables are about.  The people were looking forward to judgement coming on sinners, but Jesus was actually eating and drinking with sinners and told stories to remind the Pharisees that the Lord rejoices when the lost are found—and that they ought not only to be joyful when their lost brothers and sisters are found and reconciled to God, but that just maybe they ought to make assisting in that effort a priority themselves.  Shouldn't God's people be concerned about their own lost brothers and sisters?  If you're not, well, you've misunderstood what it means to be the people of God.  Not only that, but there's something wrong with your heart.  And since judgement was coming—Jesus' eschatological horizon was always the war with Rome and the destruction of Jerusalem that would come in about forty years—since judgement was coming, you'd better do something about this lest you find yourself on the wrong side of that judgement. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is one of these stories.  Now, unlike some other parables, it's hard here to avoid the immediate setting that prompts Jesus to tell this story.  This lawyer puts Jesus to the test.  On the one hand, he stands—a sign of respect—and he addresses Jesus as rabbi.  But he does this “to test him”, Luke says.  This lawyer, at least, has reservations about Jesus.  There really is something messianic about Jesus, but he was doing so many things wrong.  And he asks, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?”  He's not asking, “How do I go to heaven when I die.”  That's a question that just wasn't on the radar of any First Century Jew.  Again, think of the narrative.  The Messiah would usher in God's new age.  He would judge the nations and restore Israel to her rightful place.  Our common English translation “eternal life” obscures what the lawyer was getting at.  He's asking what a Jew must do to inherit, to have a place in the life of the age to come, in the messianic kingdom. Now, in a way it's a silly question and everyone already knew the answer.  You don't do anything to receive an inheritance.  Israel's inheritance was based on God's election of her as his people.  In the Old Testament they typically talked about this inheritance in terms of the land.  And they didn't do anything to get it.  It was the Lord who led them out of Egypt and into Canaan, and it was the Lord who vanquished the Canaanites.  They didn't do anything to possess it, but the way to keep it was faithfulness to their covenant with the Lord.  They didn't do anything to inherit it, but they could do something to lose it.  When they didn't keep their end of the covenant, when they disregarded the law and worshiped false gods, the Lord took it away.  The northern kingdom of Israel ceased to exist.  The souther kingdom, Judah, was defeated and the people exiled.  And note, it was the Lord who returned them to the land when they'd learned their lesson.  So for Israel to keep her inheritance meant faithfulness to torah, to the law.  And as time went on and the messianic hope grew, the inheritance of the land became the inheritance of the age to come.  And so we have someone like Hillel, a rabbi contemporary with Jesus, writing, “Who has gained for himself words of Torah has gained for himself the life of the world to come.”[1] But from the perspective of a lot of people, Jesus was messing this up.  They all knew that they would have a place in the age to come because they were faithful to the law.  Those who weren't faithful—people like the tax collectors and sinners—would lose their inheritance and be left outside, wailing and gnashing their teeth.  But then along came Jesus—whom his people said was the Messiah—and instead of sending sinners away, he was welcoming them.  And that's not how it was supposed to work.  That's what this lawyer's question is getting at.  He's asking, “Rabbi, is the torah and faithfulness to it not the marker of who is in and who is out?” And even though the lawyer didn't even mention the law, Jesus knows that this is what the question is really about, so he asks a question in return, “What is written in the law?  How do you read it?”  And the lawyer responds with those familiar words that we recite every Sunday after the kyrie: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.”  He gives a summary of the law drawn from Deuteronomy 6:5—“Love the Lord your God”—and Leviticus 19:18—“love your neighbour”.  The whole law can be distilled down to these two basic points.  And it's worth noting that love of God precedes love of neighbour, because at the end of the day, to love one's neighbour depends on and is an outgrowth of love for God.  There's nothing controversial here and I don't think the lawyer expected Jesus to argue with him on this point.  It just wasn't where he was expecting Jesus to go in response to his question.  Jesus himself taught the same thing.  Love for God is the key defining characteristic of the people of God.  And love for God was to manifest itself in Israel in things like loving one's neighbour and in being obedient to the Lord's commandments.  But, you see, where the lawyer and people like him were getting frustrated with Jesus was that he was welcoming people who didn't keep the Lord's commandments.  It kind of looked like Jesus was looking to some other marker to define the people of God—and if that was true, well, then Jesus was the unfaithful one.  But for now Jesus has side-stepped that issue.  The lawyer asked what it is that will mark out the faithful in Israel who will inherit the Lord's promised age to come and Jesus asked him what the torah says.  The lawyer has responded correctly, and now Jesus tells him: “You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live.” Well, now the lawyer is getting frustrated and probably annoyed.  He and Jesus agree that faithfulness to the law is what marks out the people of God.  But the lawyer still doesn't have an explanation or justification from Jesus as to why he seems to have such disregard for the law.  And so he asks, “But who is my neighbour?”  And this is where the problem arises.  The answer might seem obvious to us, but at the time it was debated.  Leviticus 19:17-18 equates one's brother and a “son of your own people” with one's neighbour.  Pharisees tended to see only other Pharisees as their neighbours.  One rabbinical saying ruled that “heretics, informers, and renegades should be pushed (into the ditch) and not pulled out”.[2]  Tax collectors and sinners, well, most people wouldn't consider them neighbours and there was no question about were gentiles stood. In response Jesus tells the story we know so well.  A man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho.  That 27 kilometres of road was notoriously dangerous.  The Roman army had to deal with robbers who at entrenched themselves along it.  A thousand years later the Crusaders had to build a fort mid-way along it to protect pilgrims.  And somewhere along the road this man is waylaid by robbers, beaten, and left for dead.  Everyone listening to Jesus would have assumed the man was Jewish, but being unconscious and having been stripped of any clothing that might have marked him out as a Jew, no one passing along the road would have a way of knowing that. Now, along comes a priest.  Priests, Levites, and a certain class of Jewish laymen travelled to Jerusalem to serve two-week stints in service at the temple.  This man is presumably on his way home.  Priests were at the top of society and so he was probably on horseback.  It might seem obvious to us that a priest should be the most likely person to stop and help.  He could easily carry the man on his horse to a place where he could get help.  But Jesus says that the priest passed by on the other side of the road, making as wide a berth as possible. We think, “What a horrible priest!”  But a lot of people listening—probably including the lawyer—would have applauded the priest for his actions.  After all, a priest had to be ritually pure.  Coming near a dead body would render the priest unclean, but so too did contact with a gentile.  Without getting close enough to risk defilement the priest couldn't tell if the man was dead and, with the man being naked, the priest couldn't even tell if he was a Jew or not.  Defilement meant buying a red heifer, burning it to ash, and returning to the temple to stand in shame with the unclean. The Pharisees stood in the same tradition of Jesus ben Sira, who wrote: Do good to a godly man, and you will be repaid…Give to the godly man, but do not help the sinner.  Do good to the humble, but do not give to the ungodly…For the Most High also hates sinners and will inflict punishment on the ungodly.  Give to the good man, but do not help the sinner.  (Sirach 12:2, 4, 6-7) So, you see, many people in that day would have applauded the priest for avoiding the man.  First, some people weren't your neighbour.  Some people shouldn't be helped.  In fact, to help them was thought to be thwarting God.  But, second, for the priest keeping his ritual purity was the highest priority.  He had to have that to serve both the Lord and the people, and since he couldn't know who this man was or his condition, well, it was sad he had to pass by, but it was the right—even the godly—thing to do. Not long after a Levite makes his way along the road.  He passes by as well, although the text seems to indicate that he got close enough to investigate, while not getting close enough to defile himself.  The Levite was probably on his way home after temple service, too.  Defilement was a problem for him as it would have been for the priest, but not nearly as drastic or potentially humiliating, but still, the big question: Is this man my neighbour?  The Levite couldn't tell, wasn't willing to risk defilement, and so he passed by.  And few people would have thought less of him for doing so. Now, it appears that Jesus is telling the story according to a common formula.  If I tell a story that involves a priest and a minister walking into a bar, before I say it, you know that they'll be followed by a rabbi.  That's the formula.  And the common formula in Jewish storytelling involved first a priest, then a levite, and then one of the Jewish laymen who served in the temple.  And so the people would be thinking, “The layman can help the man.  He can risk defilement.”  Remember, there actually was no source of defilement here.  The man isn't actually dead and is presumably a Jew.  It's just that no one could tell this without taking the risk.  But a layman could do that.  Hope isn't lost for this poor man.  But then Jesus breaks the formula.  The third man to come down the road is a Samaritan.  If there was anyone whom a Jew would know for absolute certain was not his neighbour, it was a Samaritan.  They were worse than gentiles.  They were their cousins who had remained in the land during the Babylonian exile.  They'd intermarried with gentiles and they'd corrupted the faith and the scriptures.  They even had their own rival temple.  They were compromisers and heretics of the worst kind and the Samaritans and the Jews absolutely hated each other.  Again, to quote Jesus ben Sira: “There are two nations that my soul detests, the third is not a nation at all: the inhabitants of Mount Seir, the Philistines, and the stupid people living at Shechem” (Sirach 50:25-26 NJB).  Those stupid people at Shechem, those are the Samaritans. Now, the Samaritan had the same concerns about defilement from a dead body.  And Samaritans were no more likely to consider a Jew to be his neigbour than a Jew was to consider a Samaritan to be his.  And yet this man stops to help the man.  He had compassion, Jesus says.  And that compassion put everything else: the law, defilement, race hatred, fear of robbers—it put everything else in perspective.  He treated them man's wounds with wine and oil and bound them up, then he put the man on his own animal and took him to an inn.  He risked the return of the robbers.  He risked the Jews of Jericho or whatever town he took the man to.  If anyone figured out the man on his horse was Jewish, they would have come after the Samaritan.  As if enough hadn't happened already to this man, contact with the Samaritan would have left him defiled—nevermind that without the Samaritan he would have died up on the road.  And the Samaritan risked being ripped off by the innkeeper—which was apparently a very common thing.  But without the innkeeper having been paid, the dying man would have been stuck with no way to pay and likely sold into slavery as a debtor.  And in conclusion Jesus asks the lawyer, “Who was this man's neighbour?” Now, if there was nothing more to this episode than just the parable, the lawyer probably would have told Jesus he was crazy or otherwise condemned him.  Jesus was speaking blasphemy.  But we can almost hear the lawyer's quiet humility in his response.  The parable at least gives him pause for reflection if it doesn't move him to actual repentance.  And it does that, because in telling the story Jesus draws on Israel's scripture and the lawyer—and most of the audience that day—knew their Bibles well enough to catch the references Jesus made. The imagery of Jesus' story is drawn from Hosea 6.  Hosea spoke words of warning spoken to the kings and people of Israel—otherwise known as Samaria—and of Judah.  Samaria had been unfaithful to the Lord and imminent judgement was coming if something didn't change.  And in the longer range, what was about to happen to the northern kingdom would happen to Judah, too.  Hosea writes: “Come, let us return to the Lord;          for he has torn us, that he may heal us;          he has struck us down, and he will bind us up. After two days he will revive us;          on the third day he will raise us up,          that we may live before him. Let us know; let us press on to know the Lord;          his going out is sure as the dawn; he will come to us as the showers,          as the spring rains that water the earth.” What shall I do with you, O Ephraim? (That's the northern kingdom)          What shall I do with you, O Judah? (That's the southern) Your love is like a morning cloud,          like the dew that goes early away. Therefore I have hewn them by the prophets;          I have slain them by the words of my mouth,          and my judgment goes forth as the light. For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice,          the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings. But like Adam they transgressed the covenant;          there they dealt faithlessly with me. Gilead (a prominent city in Samaria) is a city of evildoers,          tracked with blood. As robbers lie in wait for a man,          so the priests band together; they murder on the way to Shechem (the place of Samaria's rival and unsanctioned temple);          they commit villainy. In the house of Israel I have seen a horrible thing;          Ephraim's whoredom is there; Israel is defiled.   Jesus shifts the story of the northern kingdom's judgement and destruction into the present day and applies it to the imminent judgement awaiting Jerusalem.  As in verse 4, the people love the Lord, but their love is like a morning cloud, like the morning dew that evaporates so quickly.  They offer their sacrifices.  Like the priest and the levite in the story, they are committed to God's law, but they've missed the point.  They know that they are to love the Lord and to love their neighbours, but then they put all sorts of qualifications on who their neighbours are.  They've forgotten that the law was never an end in itself.  The reason the Lord had delivered Israel and made her his people was so that they in turn could reveal him to the nations.  They'd forgotten that.  In verse 6 the Lord reminds them that steadfast love, that mercy is more important than sacrifice and burnt offerings. And in verse 9 the Lord exposes the blood on the hands of Gilead, one of the chief cities of the kingdom.  And he condemns the priests, who lie in wait like robbers on the road to Shechem—the city where the northern kingdom's rival temple was.  Jesus simply shifts the location to the road to Jerusalem.  Judgement is coming.  That's the point of the parable and people like the lawyer need to amend their ways lest they find themselves destroyed as Samaria was. But I think Jesus, too, drawing on the same passage from Hosea gives hope and points to his own ministry.  The Lord has torn down, but the Lord will restore.  He will raise his people to live in his presence.  As the Samaritan did for the injured man, the Lord will bind up the wounds of his people.  It's hard to miss the reference to rising on the third day.  But, too, the fact that the rescuer in Jesus' parable is a Samaritan, points to his own ministry and the failure—even the refusal—of so many to receive him.  Rescue, deliverance, life is coming, but it's coming in an unexpected way.  The Lord has come to bind up his people's wounds, but to receive that mercy, they will need to set aside their prejudices and their wrong expectations.  But Jesus' key point here is that men and women like the lawyer need to rethink what it means to be God's people.  First it was the scribes and Pharisees rebuking Jesus for eating with sinners and Jesus had to remind them that heaven rejoices to see the lost restored, to see the sick healed.  And now we see the sick of Israel dying on the roadside while those who are well—or so they think—pass by on the other side—and they justify it by thinking that they're being faithful to the Lord.  They've misunderstood what it means to be the people of God and if they don't figure this out, if they don't get it right, well, judgement is coming and they'll be on the wrong side of it.  The age to come will arrive, but they will find themselves left out, wailing and gnashing their teeth. Now, what does this mean for you and I?  Jesus' eschatological horizon is long past.  The judgement on Jerusalem came and went.  And yet here we are, the covenant people of God, because in renewing the covenant and the covenant people, in rebuilding the covenant around himself, in fulfilling God's purpose for Israel as his means of revelation to the nations, we gentiles have been welcomed in.  We who are Lo-ammi—like Hosea's son with the prophetic name of judgement—we who were not the Lord's people, because of his compassion, have been made his people through the cross of Jesus.  For us the parable has been reversed.  We were the Samaritan dying on the roadside and Jesus, the one who took on himself the identity and mission of Israel, the Jew of Jews, has had compassion on us, has come near, and not with wine and oil, but with his own blood, has bound up and treated our wounds and has taken us not to an inn, but into his own household.  He has made us part of his family. The first gentile believers—fulfilling the Lord's promise to Abraham—were drawn to Jesus in faith, because in him they saw the faithfulness of the God of Israel.  And now you and I have known that faithfulness as he has welcomed us into his covenant family, a people now defined not by the law written on stone, but by the gift of God's own Spirit who writes his law of love on our hearts.  Jesus has resolved the heart problem that has plagued humanity since the fall and that plagues his people in the old covenant.  Our love for God—and flowing from that our love for our neighbour—is not rooted solely in what God has done for us, but flows from his Spirit who dwells within us and who renews the desires of our fallen, sinful, and selfish hearts. You might think the problem manifest in the parable of the Good Samaritan has been done away with forever, but as we all know so well, we continue to struggle.  The people of God are still prone to losing perspective.  Another day of judgement is coming and the Church of Jesus has a mission to accomplish—a mission to make him known to the nations.  And we know better than to narrow our definition of neighbour as the Jews did.  And yet, Brothers and Sisters, how often do we lose our perspective?  How often do we pass by the dying on the side of the road, when the duty of love tells us to stop and help, whether with physical acts of mercy or the proclamation of the good news about Jesus?  How often do we meet sinners, people in desperate need of the life in which Jesus has given us a share, and instead of sharing with them the redeeming message of the cross, we self-righteously heap condemnation on those who are already condemned?  Friends, we have known the grace of God made known in the forgiveness of our sins by Jesus.  We have known the grace of God made known in the gift of the Spirit.  We have known the grace of God that has made us inheritors of the life of the age to come.  If we truly understand that grace, we cannot help but be channels of it ourselves. Let us pray: Almighty and merciful God, by grace you have forgiven our sins and made us your own.  May we who know your grace be faithful in cultivating the life you have given, that your grace may spring up in us, overflowing into the world in our lives, in our deeds, in our prayers, in our proclamation, that all the world might know your grace as we have.  Through Jesus our Lord we pray.  Amen. [1] Pirke Aboth 2.8 [2] Joachim Jeremias The Parables of Jesus (New York: Scribners, 1972), 202.

The Jesus Saves Ministry 1007 W. Arlington Blvd Greenville, NC 27834 www.tjsm.org he E-Mail: gojesusnow@aol.com Church: 252-214.0799 Pastor, Apostle Lonnie Stocks   2 Chronicles 16:9 (NJB) 9  for Yahweh's eyes rove to and fro across the whole world to support those whose hearts are loyal to him. You have acted like a fool in this respect; hence, from now on you will have wars.'   

Sarah Hurwitz is a former speechwriter for some of the most prominent politicians in the United States—from Barack and Michelle Obama to Hillary Clinton to John Kerry. Over the past few years, however, her path has shifted, and her work has expanded to the Jewish community. Now, as a modern Jewish thinker and author of Here All Along: Finding Meaning, Spirituality, and a Deeper Connection to Life—in Judaism (After Finally Choosing to Look There), Sarah Hurwitz shows a journey through Judaism that deeply moving and far from linear. Learn about Sarah Hurwitz's work here: https://sarahhurwitz.net/ ~~~~ Unpacked is a division of OpenDor Media  

Shayna Weiss is a scholar of Judaism, gender, and Israeli culture at Brandeis University. She has entered the space of Jewish academia at the helm of a multi-dimensional renaissance. Women are playing a more prominent role in academia and the Jewish world than ever before; at the same time, the field of Jewish studies is at an inflection point. We sit down with Shayna Weiss, a leader in the field and a key figure in this shift. Needless to say, she is so much more than a Nice Jewish Girl. ~~ Learn more about Unpacked: https://jewishunpacked.com/about/ Visit Unpacked on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/unpacked  ~~~~ Learn about Shayna Weiss' work here: https://www.brandeis.edu/israel-center/news/newsletter-november-2018-meet-shayna.html  ~~~~ Unpacked is a division of OpenDor Media  

In de Rechtspraak-podcast ‘De Staat van het strafrecht' gaan strafrechter Jacco Janssen en wetgevingsadviseur en voormalig strafrechtadvocaat Margje van Weerden in op de laatste ontwikkelingen in het strafrecht. In deze aflevering staat de rol van het slachtoffer in het strafproces centraal. Daarbij wordt de vraag gesteld of die rol een hoofdrol is of een bijrol. Het antwoord op die vraag is nog niet gemakkelijk. Deze aflevering is opgenomen in de ‘nieuwe studio' in de kerker van het gebouw van de Raad voor de Rechtspraak aan de Kneuterdijk. Als actualiteiten komen de nieuwe rechtbank Amsterdam en strafbeschikkingen aan de orde. De luisteraarsvraag gaat dit keer over de openbaarheid van rechtspraak. Besproken informatie en links: J.H. Janssen & J. de Lange, ‘Spreekrecht. Een vanzelfsprekend recht van spreken?', NJB 2018/1425, afl. 28. Interviews over de verschijningsplicht: https://www.rechtspraak.nl/SiteCollectionDocuments/Rechtspraak-3-2018.pdf Online bezoek rechtbank voor schoolklassen: https://reserveren.prodemos.nl/schoolshop/rechtbanken

Jappy Jaw-er's you are in for QUITE the treat this week. On this lovely Thirsty Thursday, your favorite Jappy host is joined by TikTok star and influencer, Carly Weinstein. From discovering her TikTok's and the common theme of being 'Jappy,' it may seem like Lindsay has found a long-lost sister. Lindsay and Carly waste no time in diving deep in conversation about it all. Touching base on how Carly's TikTok fame came to be and her best advice for those (aka Lindsay) to up their game up, as well as talking about if you're really shadow banned or not. Bonding over the fact that their hometowns were not predominately Jewish, the two discuss how they faced the trials of being the very few of the Jews. Navigating through BBYO, David Yurman, camp, and more throughout the years. Also, who REALLY loves their NJB'S (nice Jewish boys) more. They also talk about how their astrological signs have come into play in their personalities and every day lives. Carly also gives great insight on how to better look at yourself, your life, and manifesting it all. We're all on the Pursuit of Jappiness this week, consider this Jappy Jaws 2.0. Happy listening! Make sure you follow Jappy Jaws and Lindsay on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/jappyjaws/ https://www.instagram.com/lindsayyanyaa/ Tik Tok: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMJvhfqHa/ Inquiries: jappyjaws@gmail.com Carly's Socials: msha.ke/carly_weinstein

'Tis the Season to be jolly with Two Kosh Girls! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanza, or all of the above, we're here to spice up your holiday season with our usual shenanigans. This episode, we talk about how we usher in the Festival of Lights, the best and worst Chanukah gifts from our childhoods, which celeb NJB we'd love to spend the next eight crazy nights with, and more. Don't miss out on our super engaging game of "Would You Rather", Chanukah Edition! Hit up the Maccabee Man in your life, whip up a warm batch of "latkes" and sufganiyot" together, and get as lit as the Menorah with us this year. Happy holidays y'all! --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/twokoshgirls/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/twokoshgirls/support

In this episode, I chat about my dislike for the Nice Jewish Girl and Nice Jewish Boy stereotype. Having these labels so present in Jewish culture creates a lot of negative impacts both on the personal level and communal level. The aspirational NJB or NJG title is a little arbitrary, can be used as a cover-up for unethical morals, and puts people on an unnecessary pedestal. We also celebrate a whole year of “That's so Kvetch!” episodes (the anniversary was November 15)! with a reflection on what I've learned over the year, both in dating and in life - most importantly, to never compromise yourself in dating. :) Cheers to an uplifting episode! (0:00-12:06) NJG and NJB stereotype (12:06-13:19) How to combat the stereotype (13:19-19:43 ) Lessons I've learned about dating and torah (19:43-20:34 ) Lessons about “everything in between” (20:34-22:11 ) Is it good to be a romantic? (22:11-end ) The things I'm still learning!

What did Martin Luther, the KJV, ASV, NJB, and others do with the Divine Name in their translations? What did the translators of the NT into Modern Hebrew do? When did the pronunciation Yahweh come into vogue? All this and more fascinating and surprising stuff in today's installment. Links promised: Vasileiadis's article Aspects of rendering the sacred Tetragrammaton in Greek The Divine Name in the Hebrew New Testament my books | free Scripture prayer apps | music | Hebrew | academic articles | facebook

Etter å ha bevilget oss en ekstra lang sommerferie er vi tilbake med en ny episode av MSGA. Vi snakker om samlokalisering av Rådhus, opptak av elever ved Sande VGS, utskiftninger i ledelsen og bading på NJB. Dessuten brainstormer vi positive ringvirkninger av sammenslåingen. Support the show (http://www.patreon.com/makesandegreitagain)

Last time we focused on the two main translation theories: formal and dynamic equivalence.  This time, we need to take a look at five major default decisions translation teams make at the outset. Units of Measurement and Currency Hebrew Idioms English Vocabulary Editorial Enhancements God’s Name By becoming familiar with these five topics, you’ll be Read more about 343 Bible 14 – Bible Translation Default Decisions[…]

Last time we focused on the two main translation theories: formal and dynamic equivalence.  This time, we need to take a look at five major default decisions translation teams make at the outset. Units of Measurement and Currency Hebrew Idioms English Vocabulary Editorial Enhancements God’s Name By becoming familiar with these five topics, you’ll be Read more about 343 Bible 14 – Bible Translation Default Decisions[…]

Happy Friday Everyone! Hope ye are all getting a taste of the normal life again, to a degree at least. Still doing the weekly Twitch Sessions, we are at Week 10 now, and no longer really in Lockdown I guess! So this week we are going to go back to where the sessions started with some Deep / Vocal & Oldskool House vibes for the evening, even some cheesy classics will be thrown in for good measure. Hope ye can join me at some stage on the usual Twitch Channel & streaming on Unknown.FM Unknown FM is a streaming radio station that exists as a single point of convergence for all who love listening, playing and enjoying music in all its forms. Unknown is a creative outlet; there are no filtering of genres here. All are welcome and welcome one and all. If you have a musical offering you'd like to base a show on or just enjoy getting down and shaking your rump, get in touch and join us on the voyage to the Unknown. Web: https://www.unknown.fm Apps: http://sounds.unknown.fm/ Tracklist [01] Franck Roger - Cotton Club [02] Maarten van der Vleuten - Deep Down (Inside Mix) [03] Alexander East - Werx Of Effection [04] UBQ Project - When I Fell In Love (Charles Webster Vocal Mix) [05] Moodymann - Long Hot Sex Nights (feat. NJB) [06] Ear Lotion - Untitled (The Fiasco Rubdown) [07] Community Recordings - Mountain Nights (Organic Soul Mix) [08] Jay Tripwire - In Your Mind [09] Pamela Fernandez - Kickin' In The Beat (Dubbin' In The Beat) [10] Franck Roger & DJ Deep - Running [11] Moodymann - The Dancer [12] Outdance - Pump The Jumpin' (Decò Style Mix) [13] Demarkus Lewis - Keep It Coming [14] Inner City - Big Fun (feat. Kevin Saunderson) [15] The Chameleon Project - Feel [16] Slam - Positive Education [17] D-Rail - Bring It On Down (feat. Randy B) [18] LaTour - Blue (Hermes Trance Mix) [19] Sunscreem - Walk On (D-Cubed) [20] Donna Summer - I Feel Love [21] Coco Steel And Lovebomb - Feel It (Original) [22] Wamdue Kids - Memory And Forgetting [23] Barbarella - My Name Is Barbarella (Casper Pound & Peter Smith Remix) [24] Playtime Toons - Shaker Song [25] Kym Sims - Too Blind To See It (Hurley's House Mix) [26] The Stickmen - Summer Of 87 [27] Miss Jones - The Traxx (Martini Traxx Mix) [28] React 2 Rhythm - Intoxication (Clubfield Mix) [29] Duprée - Brass Disk (Club Version) [30] Hustlers Convention - Uptown (The Bastard Offspring Mix) [31] Lil Louis & The World - Blackout (Phase 1) [32] Klaus - Break Not Down (Program 1) [33] Remake - Blade Runner [34] Gat Decor - Passion (Naked Mix) [35] My Friend Sam Feat. Viola Wills - It's My Pleasure (Club Mix) [36] MBG , Rame , Alkemy , DJ Uovo - Dynamic Seduction [37] Z-Formation - Hollow Cloud [38] Mato Grosso - Jungle (1993 Club Mix) [39] Tambourines - Hello Daddy [40] Mentally Stable - I Like [41] Smells Like Heaven - Rhythm De Londres [42] The Aztec Mystic - Jaguar

Mixed and saxed by Susanne Alt. Watch the video clip of Susanne's latest release "Time And Time Again" here: https://youtu.be/nJB_-e90jk8

Mixed and saxed by Susanne Alt. Watch the video clip of Susanne's latest release "Time And Time Again" here: https://youtu.be/nJB_-e90jk8

Mixed and saxed by Susanne Alt. Watch the video clip of Susanne's latest release "Time And Time Again" here: https://youtu.be/nJB_-e90jk8

In the sixth episode, PGP interviews a half Persian musician, Niki Black (link to her music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaBKvaiqKrQ); interview starts at 19:47. Topics discussed include marriages in the Persian community ending due to "bad sex"; once again, more annoying stereotypes and cliches on hinge; racism in the Persian community; courting stage when dating a Persian guy; intimidating girls who are "too smart" for guys; education; bisexuality and monogamy.

NABRE, NJB, RSV-CE, JB, Knox, Douay

NABRE, NJB, RSV-CE, JB, Knox, Douay

  The Jesus Saves Ministry 1007 W  Arlington Blvd Greenville NC 27834  www.tjsm.org  E-Mail: gojesusnow@aol.com Church:  252-689-6172 Cell: 252-214-0799 Audio Now: 1-605-781-9704 Overseer, Apostle Lonnie Stocks   Romans 4:16-18 (NJB) 16  That is why the promise is to faith, so that it comes as a free gift and is secure for all the descendants, not only those who rely on the Law but all those others who rely on the faith of Abraham, the ancestor of us all 17  (as scripture says: I have made you the father of many nations). Abraham is our father in the eyes of God, in whom he put his faith, and who brings the dead to life and calls into existence what does not yet exist. 18 Though there seemed no hope, he hoped and believed that he was to become father of many nations in fulfilment of the promise: Just so will your descendants be.      

There is a riot outside of Bette's museum that lands her and Candace (and some other lesbians) in the LA slammer! Marina is the WORST and actively pursues a girl Jenny is dating. Jenny meets an NJB even though her sexual orientation is “manatees”. Hannah Moskowitz wrote The Shape of Water! --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/alittletooharsh/support

nJB and Phil hit the studio for a Midweek Mallinder Madness podcast to discuss the outgoing DoR as well as catching up on some of the other news stories including the SRU buying Worcester, Faletau's injury and the Clermont team coming back to bite Saracens. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

  1 Corinthians 13:1-7 (NJB) 1  Though I command languages both human and angelic—if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing. 2  And though I have the power of prophecy, to penetrate all mysteries and knowledge, and though I have all the faith necessary to move mountains—if I am without love, I am nothing. 3  Though I should give away to the poor all that I possess, and even give up my body to be burned—if I am without love, it will do me no good whatever. 4  Love is always patient and kind; love is never jealous; love is not boastful or conceited, 5  it is never rude and never seeks its own advantage, it does not take offence or store up grievances. 6  Love does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but finds its joy in the truth. 7  It is always ready to make allowances, to trust, to hope and to endure whatever comes.   

*disclaimer- sorry for the less than stellar audio but I'm learning and growing so I appreciate all of you who are along for the ride :~)*This week our guest (F, 22, Manhattan, NYC) is an NYC-native and our first ~influencer~! We talk about her favorite NYC recs as a food instagrammer, why Brass Monkey aint it, date planning, finding an NJB (nice jewish boy), how to dress, app red flags, dating people of different political backgrounds, booty calling, women making the first move, nudes, and so. much. more.**If you are interested in meeting her- please DM @drinks.first on Instagram or email drinksfirstpodcast@gmail.com. Specific instructions on how to match is under our highlight "How to Slide" on instagram.**Any and all feedback is appreciated by contacting me through instagram, email, or my personal instagram @ariananathani28