And why did the Jews think Jesus was saying that he had seen Abraham when Jesus just spoke of Abraham seeing his day (and therefore him)?
John 8:56-57 (ESV)
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”
57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”
What is the logical progression here? Is there a translation issue?
I’m looking for how the Jews leaped to questioning that Jesus had seen Abraham rather than questioning how Abraham had seen this day. If you can show how they would be fine with the latter, you still need to solve why they think Jesus is claiming to have seen Abraham (and not the other way around). Or said differently, how did Abraham seeing Jesus’s day also mean or necessitate that Jesus had seen Abraham?
The main question remains how and/or when did Abraham see Jesus’ day, but I want to make sure your answer then informs our understanding of the Jew’s response.
Psalms 106:19 (NKJV)
19 They made a calf in Horeb, And worshiped the molded image.
Exodus 18:31 (NKJV)
18 And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He gave Moses two tablets of the Testim…
A very significant article showing that the dysfunctions of the under-class have a moral-spiritual root that cannot be addressed by secular welfare programs. Mexican…
The Bible has stood as a beacon of hope and light and comfort for many generations. It is a great joy to search and…
Who or What Is the Beast of Revelation? The world is nearing the “end of all things.” The book of Revelation speaks of a…
Mark 4:11-12, Luke 8:10 & Matt. 13:11-15 says that Christ spoke in parables so that the multitude in ‘seeing they would not see’ and ‘hearing they would not hear’, etc.
ESV (Mark 4:11-12) 11And he said to them, “To you has been given
the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is
in parables, 12 so that “they may indeed see but not perceive, and may
indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be
(Luke 8:10) he said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of
the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that
‘seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.’
(Matt. 13:11-15) 11And he answered them, “To you it has been given
to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not
been given. 12 For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will
have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will
be taken away. 13This is why I speak to them in parables, because
seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they
understand. 14Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is
fulfilled that says: “‘“You will indeed hear but never understand, and
you will indeed see but never perceive.” 15For this people’s heart
has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their
eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear
with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would
What does this mean? Why do people say Christ used parables to help the people understand clearly, when these passages seem to say he did not want them to understand clearly? Are the parables meant to be concealing yet revealing the truth completely at the same time?
The fact that Abraham came to be “God’s friend” — and that before
the ransom sacrifice was offered and accepted , mean, that He went to “heavenly life” before the faithful Christian Apostles?
AS REQUESTED QUESTION CLARIFICATION
Could anyone go to Heaven without the anointing with Holy Spirit Acts 2:33?
Could Abraham God’s friend, a non-Christian, expect to go to heaven when he died?
Could anyone go to Heaven before Jesus Christ?
In 1 John 5:6 John uses water and blood as symbolic short hand, clearly expecting his audience to know the meaning of these two liquids.
6 This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not
come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who
testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that
testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are
in agreement. 9 We accept human testimony, but God’s testimony is
greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about
At its most basic 1 John 5:6 operates as a counter claim to those who hold that Jesus Christ came in water but not in blood. John holds that Jesus Christ came by both water and blood. A counter group appears to believe He came only in water. The structure of this verse as an implicit rebuttal begs the question of what does it refute. What is the meaning of water and blood?
The Greek text of John 1:35 according to the Textus Receptus states,
ΛΕʹ Τῇ ἐπαύριον πάλιν εἱστήκει ὁ Ἰωάννης καὶ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ δύο TR, 1550
which is translated as,
35 On the day after, John, and two of his disciples, had been standing again,
Are these two disciples of John the Baptist ever identified?
In Eph. 1:10, the Greek text according to the Textus Receptus states,
Ιʹ εἰς οἰκονομίαν τοῦ πληρώματος τῶν καιρῶν ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι τὰ πάντα ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ τὰ τε ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς TR, 1550
According to my understanding, the idea is that everything in heaven and upon earth is recapitulated (from the lemma ἀνακεφαλαιῶ), that is, brought under a single head, “in Christ.” Although it has a few meanings, I understand “in Christ” here to mean, “by being a Christian and being incorporated into the body of Christ.” That being said, I can understand what “everything that/everyone who is upon the earth” («τὰ πάντα…τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς») refers to, which would be Christians alive on earth (i.e., the Church militant).
However, to what or whom does the phrase “everything that/everyone who is in heaven” («τὰ πάντα…τὰ…ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς») refer? Do the other verses in the epistle shed any light on its meaning or referent?