Newly-excavated skeletons could help to reveal who wrote the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls: 'The high concentration of adult males of various ages buried at Qumran is similar to what has been found at cemeteries connected to Byzantine monasteries'.
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: madazzahatter

First, I apologize for any reddit rules I should know. I've done a search on this topic here and don't believe I'm violating anything with the question or am ill-prepared on easily-googled answers. Thanks in advance!
The Internet is quickly closing in on 1M IPv4 routes and is already over 100K IPv6 routes (~200K IPv4 slots) which means a lot of 1M and 1.3M platforms are going to be trash. We used to use Cisco 6500/3BXLs and briefly flirted with Sup2Ts but found (the hard way) that their TCAM usage does not scale predictably or really ever achieve their data sheet specs. They make a tiny note of this in the release docs, but ... well, you only find that out after you've migrated the whole network over.
So hey, there is all this wild and crazy new Open Source Hardware and Open Source Networking Software....
We were very excited about the massive routing potential of the Broadcom Qumran w/ extended TCAM and bought a few chassises and had to go with IPInFusion OcNOS because of MPLS support.
At first, IPI was very friendly if a bit slow at addressing bugs and things. They had promised that they had a lot of experience with large BGP views from multiple SPs, etc, but it quickly became apparent that a fully-meshed BGP network of routers with many full and partial peers and IPv4/IPv6 dual stack was beyond their experience. Ok, no big deal -- we knew what we were getting into, a little hair of the dog.
However, we have been informed that they no longer even have a plan to support BGP over tunnel... which kind of kills any hope of fully-meshed BGP networking over anything that a single data center. So much for being an up & coming option vs Cisco or Juniper.
The hardware from Broadcom (via Dell and Edgecore) is fantastic though.
One way to work around the limits of OcNOS... if one were to consider that an option, would be to put a L2 or L2 + tunneling platform or a non-fancy but fast L3 platform in front of the inter-facility connections and run tunnels or VXLans or MPLS Pseudowires to allow them to think they are directly connected even if they aren't. [Option 1]
Another option would be to throw them out and replace them with a single platform that has "reasonable" features. I think those include OSPFv2/OSPFv3 including full IPv4/IPv6 full stack capabilities], MPLS (including over OSPF), BFD, BGP (over 2M IPv4 routes or equivalent), some kind of tunneling between platforms (can be GRE, MPLS, Psuedowire, IPSec, whatever) will allow BGP to take a packet in and send it on to its exit router without worrying about the intervening hops, wire-speed 10G/40G/100G. [Option 2]
In 2021, I don't know that this is a crazy needs list or anything. Openswitch would be great if someone validated its MPLS support (I see a patch at the end of 2019 for L2 MPLS tunnels, but nothing much after that).
Having used Cisco for so long, the first idea was to go to the Cisco version of the Qumran chipset [aka the NCS] -- but the licensing/entitlement structure based on what I've read on the Cisco website is far from clear... it looks like you have to enable groups of 100G at a time, and then there are other features and other licenses that may need to be added. Utilizing a vendor or a Cisco rep for a small order is such a PIA, I'm here to avoid that pain and 3 week exercise to get bad answers. If this is a viable option, I'm sure someone has experience with it. The NCS does NOT seem to be well received and people seem to just go with the ASRs. I don't know which ASRs to look at. I'd like to pick up a couple of platforms on Ebay to test and prove out in the real world before getting burned again.
There is more I could talk about in terms of research into platforms, but I'm hoping someone will give me a quick spiritual kick to the head and point me in the right direction.
Is there a great platform that has sensible units on Ebay I can try out for this set of needs (equivalent to what the 6500 represented in its heyday -- just worked, maybe a few quirks, but rock solid after that) -- from anyone, Cisco/Juniper or even like an Arista or [long list of names that say they do BGP]
Is an open(er) soluton like Exaware an option?
Is there a dumb platform that would meet the requirements of Option 1 and we just do a two-layer solution?
Spiritual kicks welcome, thank you for your time!

Users regularly ask why Christians believe in God/Jesus. Sorry for the wall of text but these are my reasons to copy/paste when I’m on my mobile. I get they aren’t mic drop empirical evidence; they’re reasons.
1. Religiosity in humans is natural. Humans don't need convinced to be religious. Cognitive scientists are aware that metaphysical outlooks may be deeply ingrained in human thought processes. Religion is vastly more “natural” than the “sleep of reason” argument suggests. Why is Religion Natural?
I believe this is God’s “thumbprint” on man due to being made in the image of God.
2. I'm convinced evil exists and that we know it when we see it. If life and existence where solely the product of a natural mechanism, then "evil" is would just be an adjective; a subjective value we assigned to entirely natural actions and behaviors. The term “evil” isn’t in nature’s vocabulary. In solely natural world humans are simply biological creatures much like apes, ants and fungus. Intrinsic rights, both human and animal, don’t exist in nature. Nature is metal; not moral.
I find the argument, “But we’re social animals with empathy and …” to be lacking:
A. Morality and empathy should not be used interchangeably. You can’t assert a natural world in which all life is simply biological matter, and then turn around to assert humans are different than animals. To biologists – humans are animals. Period.
B. Empathy in social species is a subjective social construct built through subjective social interaction and differs between generations, cultures and societies. Very often in history human empathy produces social preferences that can in fact conflict with morality. For instance the Nazi’s empathized with the Arian race and acted accordingly. In a natural mechanism empathy is not a direct avenue to moral behavior. In fact it can interfere with moral decision-making by introducing partiality (aka discrimination and bias.) Empathy is not in our genes.
C. You could perhaps support that our brains are bigger, and as a result we have a relatively more powerful biological computer than other animals – but you cannot say our biological computer is different. At best you can perhaps say humans are social; cooperative animals have a sense of fairness. Even so, in a natural mechanism, our human sense of fairness is a highly subjective social construct too.
D. “But other primates are social and demonstrate empathy and fairness ….”

Chimps are highly social and are killers just like us. Chimps regularly kill other chimps for territory and natural resources, with entire chimp tribes going at it. In fact, female chimps practice infanticide and cannibalism. “… it's a common practice to kill and eat the babies of other females.
Dolphins are highly social too and among the smartest things on Earth. They share another characteristic with humans: they're the only other animal that will kill for fun.
Lions are highly social too. Here’s a male lion systematically killing the cubs sired by another male.

3. Personally I find atheism untenable. It’s not a belief system but a deficiency of belief due to a deficiency of evidence. Drawing a conclusion based on a lack of evidence makes no sense to me. It suits me better to hold a positive view supported by evidence.
4. I am not by any means anti science but relatively speaking I find the “but science …” replies lacking in a religious context. Here’s why:
A. Science isn’t in the business of proving or disproving gods. Science investigates the natural world, gathers data about the natural world, makes models and draws probable conclusions from them about the natural world.
B. Science doesn’t assert capital “T” truth. Many confuse the relationship between Truth and scientific consensus.
C. Science isn’t the only source of human knowledge or the only source to discern what should be believed. Claiming it is, is a philosophical position (aka scientism) that cannot be verified, or falsified, by science itself. It is, in a word, unscientific. – AAAS article What is scientism?
5. Historically Christianity focuses on concerns outside of the individual Christian, such as loving your neighbor, helping others and serving. Potentially self-sacrificing virtues such as forgiveness, love, and gratitude are typically highly valued within religious communities. When people become deeply involved in religious faith, they may be committing to a value system that may bring some costs to the self – albeit with the hope of benefiting others. Christianity is a major factor to alleviate poverty and suffering in our communities and around the world. In fact the role of Christianity in civilization has been instrumental in who we are today. The Christian church has been a major source of social services, education, literacy, science, philosophy and arts & culture.
I love history and am a lifelong student of history. I totally understand that Christianity has at times been an agent of great human tragedy but historically it’s been an agent of positive influence. It suits me to want to be a part of something bigger than me.
6. Jesus was a historical person. Credible secular and academic historians do not dispute that Jesus was a historical person. No one reasonably doubts Jesus was baptized, was a teacher with disciples and was killed for insurrection by the Roman authorities. "If you got a different opinion you better have pretty good piece of evidence yourself.” Bart Ehrman
7. Belief that Jesus rose from the dead was very early, and the “good news” spread relatively quickly. This shows the early Jesus followers were convinced and motivated to spread their message throughout the region. Within a few short decades their movement had effectively spread from Galilee into several cities, from Galatia, to Thessalonica, Corinth and Rome.
8. Paul was a historical person. We know Paul’s letters are among the most highly attested manuscripts in biblical and historical scholarship. Paul's testimony is unprecedented in history. We know: who he was, where he was, what time he lived and that he associated with the right people. This places Paul in a credible position to be right. Gary Habermas, UCSB
9. Paul’s letters were the first New Testament documents in final form and we know his letters were copied and collected very early during the lives of the apostles. Based on Paul’s writing style and arguments, scholars are convinced he was well-educated and of a first-rate philosophical mind. His written testimony is from primary sources and the provenance of
10. Paul is a credible witness who historically is in a good position to be right. Paul was entirely convinced that Jesus resurrected from the dead and that it “has not been done in a corner” (Acts 26:26).
11. We know from Paul’s letters that he returned to Jerusalem several times and interacted at length with Peter, James and other leaders. We know there are a series of texts in Paul’s letters in which he records the earliest creedal traditions of the earliest Jesus followers written a short time after Jesus’ death and resurrection. These Pre-Pauline Creeds of early Christian beliefs possibly date as early as 35-40 C.E or before.
12. There’s also evidence that there were written accounts about Jesus within the Apostolic Era. Luke’s gospel begins by saying, “In as much as many have undertaken to draw up a narration concerning the matters having been accomplished among us, as delivered to us they from the beginning eyewitnesses …”. (Luke is written to Theophilus who many believe was a Gentile convert and high ranking official of some sort. Luke refers to him as kratiste optime meaning "most excellent".) We find this title several times applied to high Roman officials, such as Felix and Festus (Acts 23:26; Acts 24:3; Acts 26:25).
13. Based on the findings at Qumran, it is highly probable that notebooks were used by the disciples of Jesus and by later adherents in the early church to assist in memory retention by functioning as an aide-mémoire.” – The Jesus Tradition and Notebooks
14. When I read the Gospels I can be confident to a high degree that they accurately convey his ministry and teaching. When I read them I can hear his voice and his words. Did Some Disciples Take Notes During Jesus’ Ministry?
15. We know from the writings of early Church fathers of the Patristic Era supported an early four-fold gospel canon consisting of: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Irenaeus (130-202AD): records that he listened to the sermons of Polycarp who was a disciple of John. (Jerome corroborates Polycarp was a disciple of the apostle John.) In his letter to Florinus Irenaeus writes, “I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse – his going out, too, and his coming in-his general mode of life and personal appearance, together with the discourses which he delivered to the people; also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; and how he would call their words to remembrance. Whatsoever things he had heard from them respecting the Lord, both with regard to His miracles and His teaching, Polycarp having thus received [information] from the eye-witnesses of the Word of life, would recount them all in harmony with the Scriptures. These things, through, God's mercy which was upon me, I then listened to attentively …”
In Against Heresies (180AD) Irenaeus provides the first explicit witness to a four-fold gospel canon listing the authors as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. He also testifies he had access to early copies of Revelation. Irenaeus also writes, “When the blessed apostles had founded and built up the Church, they handed over the ministry of the episcopate to Linus. Paul mentions this Linus in his Epistles to Timothy. Anencletus succeeded him. After him Clement received the lot of the episcopate in the third place from the apostles. He had seen the apostles and associated with them, and still had their preaching sounding in his ears and their tradition before his eyes -- and not he alone, for there were many still left in his time who had been taught by the apostles.”
Tertullian (197-220AD): in his Prescription against Heresy references “evidence traceable to apostolic sources”. He suggests that original New Testament manuscripts were still around when he was writing at the end of the second century. Chapter 35: “Our system is not behind any in date; on the contrary, it is earlier than all; and this fact will be the evidence of that truth which everywhere occupies the first place.” and chapter 36: “[*the apostolic churches] in which their own authentic writings are read uttering the voice and presenting the face of each of them severally.”
16. Historical criticism attempts to verify the historicity of and understand the meaning of an event that is reported to have taken place in the past. Textual criticism is a tool bible scholars use to discern the accuracy of the originals; the more manuscripts; the more accurate they are in reconstructing the originals. The New Testament accuracy in context of textual criticism is 99.5% accurate. The Reliability of the New Testament (Introduction)
17. In context of other ancient documents, the New Testament is by far the most widely attested. In the variants between existent copies: 75% are simply spelling errors, 15% are variations in Greek synonyms/transpositions, 9% are late changes and 1% does affect the meaning of the text. None of these variants actually challenge or affect essential Christian doctrines.
Disclaimer: Again, I am not claiming these are mic drop proofs. They’re the reasoning, reasons and evidence I find compelling and have merit. Faith isn’t unreasonable, it is not opposed by reason; it’s opposed by fanaticism, which is an abuse of reason.
edit; fixed links

The Gospels employ the Greek word proskyneo in reference to Jesus’ being worshiped on multiple occasions and for various purposes, here are some examples:
“Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, Wise-men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we saw his star in the east, and are come to worship him… And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search out exactly concerning the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word, that I also may come and worship him… And they came into the house and saw the young child with Mary his mother; and they fell down and worshipped him; and opening their treasures they offered unto him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.” Matthew 2:1-2, 8, 11 American Standard Version (ASV)
“While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.” Matthew 9:18 ASV
“And in the fourth watch of the night he came unto them, walking upon the sea. And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a ghost; and they cried out for fear. But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid. And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto the upon the waters. And he said, Come. And Peter went down from the boat, and walked upon the waters to come to Jesus. But when he saw the wind, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried out, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and took hold of him, and saith unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? And when they were gone up into the boat, the wind ceased. And they that were in the boat worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.” Matthew 14:25-33 ASV
“But she came and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.” Matthew 15:25
“Then came to him the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, worshipping him, and asking a certain thing of him.” Matthew 20:20 ASV
“And behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and took hold of his feet, and worshipped him… But the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him; but some doubted. And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the NAME (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” Matthew 28:9, 16-20 ASV
“And when he was come out of the boat, straightway there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, who had his dwelling in the tombs: and no man could any more bind him, no, not with a chain; because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been rent asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: and no man had strength to tame him. And always, night and day, in the tombs and in the mountains, he was crying out, and cutting himself with stones. And when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshipped him; and crying out with a loud voice, he saith, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the Most High God? I adjure thee by God, torment me not.” Mark 5:2-7 ASV
“And he led them out until they were over against Bethany: and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them. And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them, and was carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: and were continually in the temple, blessing God.” Luke 24:50-52 ASV
“Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and finding him, he said, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and he it is that speaketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.” John 9:35-38 ASV
In explaining away the fact that proskyneo is offered to Jesus according to the Greek Christian Scriptures, the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower Bible and Tract Society writes:
Be it noted, however, that there are other Greek words that the King James Version renders “worship,” but not a single one of these Greek verbs is directed to Jesus to show that such action was commanded to be performed or was performed toward him. Surely when Luke 14:10 (KJ) says, “Then shalt thou have worship [doʹxa] in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee,” Jesus did not mean that a human guest who was given a higher place at a Jewish meal would be worshiped, but it meant he would merely “have honor,” as the New World Translation renders the word (doʹxa). Thus we see that the Christian Greek Scriptures make a distinction between Jehovah God and his Son Jesus Christ, by reserving some words rendered “worship” for God, to the exclusion of Jesus.
When Satan the Devil tempted Jesus to try to have him worship the adversary, Jesus did not say to the Tempter, ‘Worship me,’ but said, “It is Jehovah your God you must worship [proskyneʹō], and it is to him alone you must render sacred service [latreuʹō].” (Matt. 4:10, NW; Luke 4:8) Jesus, speaking and including himself, said to the Samaritan woman: “You worship [proskyneʹō] what you do not know; we worship [proskyneʹō] what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews. . . . the genuine worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth. . . . God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.” (John 4:22-24, NW) Jesus, even after his glorification in heaven, did not change from directing worship to God his Father rather than to himself. In the Revelation, which God gave Jesus, the pure worship is shown as due to be given to the Most High God, Jehovah. (See Revelation 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 14:7; 15:4; 19:4, 10.) And when John fell down at the feet of the angel whom Jesus sent to deliver the revelation, the angel said to John: “Worship God.” (Rev. 19:10; 22:9) Thus the worship was to be rendered to Jehovah God, although blessing, glory and praise were to be ascribed to the glorified Jesus, the Lamb, as well as to God his Father.
At Hebrews 1:6 we read: “But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: ‘And let all God’s angels worship him.’” (NW) As the Greek verb here is proskyneʹō, it could also have been rendered “do obeisance to,” as in all the preceding cases having to do with Jesus when on earth as a man. This same word in Greek is used in addressing those who will become members of Christ’s glorified congregation or “bride,” in these words at Revelation 3:9 (NW): “Look! I will give those from the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and yet they are not but are lying—look! I will make them come and do obeisance [proskyneʹō] before your feet and make them know I have loved you.” They will not be worshiped.
Worship is not asked to be given to the anointed King whom Jehovah God sets upon his holy hill of Zion, namely, his Son Jesus Christ, but due submission and respect are asked of the kings and judges of the earth, in these words: “Serve Jehovah with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the son, lest he be angry, and ye perish in the way, for his wrath will soon be kindled.” (Ps. 2:11, 12, AS) This agrees with the recognition that the apostle Paul says must yet be given to the glorified Jesus BY ALL LIVING CREATION, at Philippians 2:9-11 (NW): “God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” The knee is bent in the name of Jesus as Lord and in worship to the Father as God, and the tongue confesses openly that Jesus Christ is Lord, but this is done to the glory of God the Father, all this showing the superiority of the Father. Thus, “all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father.”—John 5:22, 23, NW. (Questions From Readers: The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom—1954; capital emphasis mine)
It is ironic that the Society would admit that Paul in Philippians affirmed that Jesus shall be glorified by all living creation, since this affirms that Christ cannot be a mere creature. I will have more to say about this point later.
In this post I will show that Jesus receives the exact same worship which is given to Jehovah, and more specifically to God the Father.
CALLING ON HIS NAME
The Hebrew Bible portrays true believers as calling on the name of Jehovah in worship and for salvation from their sins, as well for the express purpose of entrusting their spirits to him. Jehovah is further shown to have priests that serve him:
“After that he planted a tamarisk tree at Beʹer-sheʹba, and there he called on the name of Jehovah, the everlasting God.” Genesis 21:33
“Moses and Aaron were among his priests, And Samuel was among those calling on his name. They would call to Jehovah, And he would answer them. He would speak to them from the pillar of cloud. They kept his reminders and the decree that he gave to them. O Jehovah our God, you answered them. You were a God who pardoned them, But you punished them for their sinful deeds.” Psalm 99:6-8
“I love Jehovah Because he hears my voice, my pleas for help. For he inclines his ear to me, And I will call on him as long as I live. The ropes of death encircled me; The Grave had me in its grip. I was overcome by distress and grief. But I called on the name of Jehovah: ‘O Jehovah, rescue me!’… I will take up the cup of salvation, And I will call on the name of Jehovah… I will offer to you the sacrifice of thanksgiving; I will call on the name of Jehovah.” Psalm 116:1-4, 13, 17
“Into your hand I entrust my spirit. You have redeemed me, O Jehovah, the God of truth.” Psalm 31:5
“As for you, you will be called the priests of Jehovah; They will call you the ministers of our God. You will eat the resources of the nations, And about their glory you will boast.” Isaiah 61:6
And yet astonishingly, in the New Testament Jesus is seen as having priests and followers that call upon his name and who entrust their spirits to him!
“As they were stoning Stephen, he made this appeal: ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.’” Acts 7:59
“However, I have written to you more outspokenly on some points, so as to give you another reminder, because of the undeserved kindness given to me from God for me to be a public servant of Christ Jesus to the nations. I am engaging in the holy work of the good news of God, so that these nations might be an acceptable offering, sanctified with holy spirit. So I have reason to exult in Christ Jesus over the things pertaining to God. For I will not presume to speak about anything except what Christ has done through me in order for the nations to be obedient, by my word and deed, with the power of signs and wonders, with the power of God’s spirit, so that from Jerusalem and in a circuit as far as Il·lyrʹi·cum I have thoroughly preached the good news about the Christ.” Romans 15:15-19
“Also greet the congregation that is in their house. Greet my beloved E·paeʹne·tus, who is a firstfruits of Asia for Christ.” Romans 16:5
“to the congregation of God that is in Corinth, to you who have been sanctified in union with Christ Jesus, called to be holy ones, together with all those everywhere who are calling on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours: May you have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father AND the Lord Jesus Christ.” 1 Corinthians 1:2-3
“Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years.” Revelation 20:6
Christ also shown to be the One who forgives the sins of those who look to him for their salvation:
“On one of those days while he was teaching, Pharisees and teachers of the Law who had come out of every village of Galʹi·lee and Ju·deʹa and from Jerusalem were sitting there; and Jehovah’s power was with him to do healing. And look! men were carrying a paralyzed man on a stretcher, and they were trying to bring him in and place him before Jesus. So not finding a way to bring him in because of the crowd, they climbed up to the roof, and they lowered him on the stretcher through the tiling, right among those in front of Jesus. When he saw their faith, he said: ‘Man, your sins are forgiven.’ Then the scribes and the Pharisees started to reason, saying: “Who is this who speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins except God alone?’ But Jesus, discerning their reasoning, said in answer to them: ‘What are you reasoning in your hearts? Which is easier, to say, “Your sins are forgiven,” or to say, “Get up and walk”? But in order for you to know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins—’ he said to the paralyzed man: ‘I say to you, Get up, pick up your stretcher, and go to your home.’ At that he stood up before them, picked up what he had been lying on, and went to his home, glorifying God. Then one and all were seized with amazement, and they began to glorify God, and they became filled with awe, saying: ‘We have seen wonderful things today!’” Luke 5:17-26
“Then he said to her: ‘Your sins are forgiven.’ Those reclining at the table with him started to say among themselves: ‘Who is this man who even forgives sins?’ But he said to the woman: ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace.’” Luke 7:48-50
DOXA GIVEN TO THE SON
Contrary to the Society’s express denial, Jesus does in fact receive doxa since doxologies are offered to him:
“I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom… From this time on, there is reserved for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will give me as a reward in that day, yet not to me only, but also to all those who have loved his manifestation… In my first defense no one came to my side, but they all forsook me—may they not be held accountable. But the Lord stood near me and infused power into me, so that through me the preaching might be fully accomplished and all the nations might hear it; and I was rescued from the lion’s mouth. The Lord will rescue me from every wicked work and will save me for his heavenly Kingdom. To him be the glory (doxa) forever and ever. Amen.” 2 Timothy 4:1, 8, 16-18
“No, but go on growing in the undeserved kindness and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory (doxa) both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.” 2 Peter 3:18
“and from Jesus Christ, ‘the Faithful Witness,’ ‘the firstborn from the dead,’ and ‘the Ruler of the kings of the earth.’ To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood—and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—yes, to him be the glory (doxa) and the might forever. Amen.” Revelation 1:5-6
ALL THE ANGELS WORSHIP THE SON AS JEHOVAH
What’s more, the angelic host give Jesus the exact same way worship that they give to Jehovah:
“And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” Hebrews 1:6 ASV
Astonishingly, the Hebrews has taken an OT text wherein Jehovah is worshiped by all of his angels and ascribed it to the risen Christ!
The inspired author has quoted the Greek version of either Deuteronomy 32:43,
Deuteronomy 32:43 is an unusual verse in view of its contents. As the list of variant readings shows, 4QDeut-supported by the Septuagint-differs markedly from the Masoretic Text and the Samaritan Pentateuch. For example, in the Qumran scroll it is “the heavens” which rejoice, not the nations; and God will avenge the blood of “his sons,” not “his servants.” Moreover, the mention of gods “bowing down to God” and “recompensing those who hate him” is absent from the Masoretic Text and the Samaritan Pentateuch. This very provides a striking example of the very different readings that sometimes appear in the Dead Sea Scrolls…
Rejoice, O heavens, together with him, and bow down to him all you gods, for he will avenge the blood of his sons, and will render vengeance to his enemies, and will recompense those who hate him and will atone for the land of his people. (The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible – The Oldest Known Bible Translated For The First Time Into English, translated and with commentary by Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint & Eugene Ulrich [HarperOne; 1 edition, November 17, 1999], pp. 192, 193; bold emphasis mine)
“Rejoice, ye heavens, with him, and let all the angels of God worship him; rejoice ye Gentiles, with his people, and let all the sons of God strengthen themselves in him; for he will avenge the blood of his sons, and he will render vengeance, and recompense justice to his enemies, and will reward them that hate him; and the Lord shall purge the land of his people.” LXX
Or of the following Psalm:
“Let all those serving any carved image be put to shame, Those who boast about their worthless gods. Bow down to him, all you gods.” Psalm 97:7
“Let all that worship graven images be ashamed, who boast of their idols; worship him, all ye his angels.” Psalm 96:7 LXX
In either case, Hebrews has taken the worship that the angels render to Jehovah and attributed to the Son, a fact that the Society itself admits even though it tries to explain it away (quite unsuccessfully I might way):
“… Here the apostle Paul quotes from Psalm 97:7, which, in the words of An American Translation, reads: ‘All who serve wrought images are put to shame, they who prided themselves on their nonentities. Worship him, all you gods!’ In the Greek Septuagint Version (LXX) these italicized words read: ‘Worship [pros·ky·neʹo] him, all ye his angels.’ (Bagster’s edition; also Thomson) The apostle may also have been quoting from the Septuagint Version of Deuteronomy 32:43, the opening part of which reads: “Rejoice, ye heavens, with him, and let all the angels of God worship him; rejoice ye Gentiles, with his people, and let all the sons of God strengthen themselves in him; . . .” (Bagster; similarly Thomson) By examining the context of both Psalm 97:7 and Deuteronomy 32:43 we note that the reference IS TO JEHOVAH GOD AS THE ONE TO BE WORSHIPED. Does this mean that Jesus is the same as Jehovah because of how the writer of Hebrews 1:6 applies the quotation?” (Questions From Readers The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom—1954 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1954369; bold and capital emphasis mine)
ALL LIVING CREATION WORSHIPS THE LAMB
Earlier I noted that the Society acknowledges that the following citation,
“For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend—of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground—and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” Philippians 2:9-11
Depicts all living creation glorifying Jesus. What the Society failed to mention is that Paul has attributed to the risen Christ the very worship which the prophet Isaiah proclaimed Jehovah would receive from all the ends of earth:
“Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, For I am God, and there is no one else. By myself I have sworn; The word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, And it will not return: To me every knee will bend, Every tongue will swear loyalty.” Isaiah 45:22-23
Paul wasn’t the only inspired writer to claim that all of creation shall glorify Christ:
“When he took the scroll, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, and each one had a harp and golden bowls that were full of incense. (The incense means the prayers of the holy ones.) And they sing a new song, saying: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.’ And I saw, and I heard a voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders, and the number of them was myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, and they were saying with a loud voice: ‘The Lamb who was slaughtered is worthy to receive the power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing.’ And I heard EVERY CREATURE in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and ALL THINGS IN THEM, saying: ‘To the One sitting on the throne AND TO THE LAMB be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.’ The four living creatures were saying: “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshipped.” Revelation 5:8-14
The Apostle John literally exhausts the language to show that every created thing in all of creation worships Christ in the exact same way and for the exact same duration that God is worshiped!
This affirms that Jesus is separate and distinct from the entire creation, and must therefore be uncreated by nature. It further shows that Jesus is essentially equal with God the Father, which is why he is worthy to receive the exact same honor that the Father receives:
“For the Father judges no one at all, but he has entrusted all the judging to the Son, so that all may honor the Son JUST AS they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.” John 5:22-23
Otherwise, it would be blatant idolatry to glorify Christ in the exact same that God is glorified.
Therefore, contrary to the Society’s denial the New Testament does depict Christ as receiving the exact same worship that God Almighty receives, obviously because Jesus is not a mere creature. Rather, the risen Lord is God Almighty that became flesh, being one with the Father and the Holy Spirit in essence, glory, power, honor and majesty!
Unless noted otherwise, all scriptural citations taken from New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition).

O community of Muslims, how is it that you seek wisdom from the people of the book? Your book, brought down upon his prophet—blessings and peace of God upon him—is the latest report about God. You read a book that has not been distorted, but the people of the book, as God related to you, exchanged that which God wrote, changing the book with their hands

As many Muslims claim, and as the Hadith says, the Bible meant something else differently but Jews and Christians changed it over time. But archaeologists have found the earliest copy of the Bible in what is known as the Dead Sea scrolls. What did they find?

While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants, the Qumran biblical discoveries have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around A.D. 100

That
1) The original Hebrew Old Testament/Tanakh was virtually identical to the modern one 2) The Old Testament/Tanakh wasn’t even compiled before Jesus 3) Nothing in the Dead Sea scrolls directly supports Islam, as Muhammed claimed the original bible would
So... why is it, that Islam’s reason for why the Bible and Quran contradict, that the original bible was different, seemingly contradicts historical evidence? Am I missing something or do the Dead Sea scrolls prove Muhammed wrong?

The book of Enoch(we are always talking about 1 Enoch) was written for sure before Christ came.
And it was discovered in Qumran and in the Dead sea scrolls(please correct me if i am wrong).
The questions that i have though is that is it scripture?
I am going to write down some of my personal thoughts and i want you to read them all before you answer.
We know that Jude in his epistle in verse 14 quotes something that Enoch had proffesiesed about
not necessarily from the book of Enoch but in meaning it is EXACTLY the same with Jude's(I know that the words might be a bit different but keep in mind we are looking at translations and the meaning is what truly matters). Now if someone comes here and says that Paul quotes pagan Greek poets, well, guess what, he doesn't approve of them he just quotes them, the bible quotes many things that man has said without approving them. And we can clearly see that Jude approves of the prophesy of Enoch otherwise he wouldn't quote a prophesy from a biblical character. So now the questions that comes to mind is that is book of Enoch scripture or not? Well the story about the angels which they descended to the Earth to take women is really unreal because angels have no need to multiply at all but then again how did it accurately quote a prophesy of Enoch that Jude quotes in his book, so where is Jude taking this prophesy from? Is it just a coincidence that The book of Enoch has the exact prophesy that Jude quotes aswell. So we have some options:
A)The book of Enoch is ALL real and true and should be scripture. It is also written by Enoch.(I do not agree with this theory)
B)The book of Enoch has some truth in it because Jude is quoting the prophesy AND APPROVING(that's what really matters that he quotes from it and approves it) of it. Therefore it has some of the true sayings of Enoch with some additional false stories and doctrines.
C)The book of Enoch is just completely false and we should not even read it.
Please explain your answer in detail, i am actually very serious about this.
Thanks for reading.

ELECTRONIC LITERATURE

Chainmail and Copypasta

Fanfiction

Legolas by Laura, one of the worst fanfictions of all time

Nonfiction

Dolphin Sex Guide (NSFW) (is this nonfiction???)
Golden_Corral.txt
The Porno Run

Original Fiction

a concert i went to
PREDATOR'S Manifesto (warning: highly NSFW and offensive) ***
The Great Scam by Nightfreeze **

Poetry

Misc

COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS

Forum Posts

IRC Logs

The death of Ripper ***

Usenet

MEDIA

Interactive Art

Webcomics

Jerkcity **

Zines

MISC

Activism

Blogs

The 5th Nail- A Serial Killer's Blog

Institutions/Organizations

Personal Pages

Porn and Fetish

Misc

In this thread I will be arguing that Genesis 6:1-5 shows divine beings having intercourse and producing offspring with human women. As I do this, I will be addressing two common alternate views, the Sethite interpretation and the polygamy interpretation. Both of these views interpret the intercourse in this passage as only being between humans. What I aim to demonstrate is that not only is the divine being interpretation better supported by the text in various ways, but also that the other views indeed have no good support and require some level of eisegesis (inserting one’s own view/ideas/etc into the text) rather than exegesis (extracting what the text itself is showing us).
Why this is important for Christian apologetics and this sub:
This is a passage that has some wildly different interpretations. It is important to discuss which is the best supported. Why? Because our interpretation of Scripture is what our apologetic arguments are based on. Just recently, this passage was used to argue against polygamy. I would actually use the passage to highlight the unique nature of the virgin birth. Others would use it to warn against marrying nonbelievers. But if our interpretations are wrong, then we shouldn’t be using Scripture incorrectly, even if the values we are teaching may be correct. In short, the goal of understanding the best interpretation(s) of Scripture go hand in hand with “good Christian apologetics.”
With that said, let’s take a look at the passage
Genesis 6:1-5 (ESV)
When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose. Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.” The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them*. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually*.
Looking at this passage, the key to understanding what is going on lies in identifying these two groups that have intercourse and bear offspring: (1) the sons of God and (2) the daughters of man
Part 1: The Divine Being View
The divine being view looks at the term “sons of God/ בְנֵי־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙,” and sees this as being a reference to divine beings. This is because, for one, in the Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament, the Hebrew term for sons of God, “benei HaElohim” refers to divine beings. See: Job 1:6, 2:1, variant of Psalm 29:1. There is already an established context to that phrase in the Hebrew Bible.
Likewise, the daughters of man/mankind means exactly what the text says: they are daughters of mankind. This is why verse 1 begins by introducing the daughters of man by saying “when man(kind) began to multiply and daughters (not children, not sons, this just focuses on daughters) were born to them.” Thus, the category of “daughters of man” means “female humans.”
Another reason for seeing this passage as showing intercourse between divine beings and human women is due to kind of offspring that are born. These were no ordinary humans. These offspring are recorded as being the “mighty men who were of old, men of renown.” Why would normal human intercourse produce a class of beings like this? Furthermore, we can be sure that these beings are not like normal humans because we see later in Numbers 13:33 that Nephilim and their descendants are described as giants. So the type of offspring produced are consistent with what one would expect from intercourse between divine beings and humans.
In addition to this, the divine being view also has support in the New Testament.
But before going into that, I should mention some intertestamental literature, mainly The Book of Watchers taken from the text of 1 Enoch. The entire book of 1 Enoch consists of different parts that have different dating depending on the section, but this section is certainly intertestamental and was also found within the documents at Qumran. Now, some may wonder if it is fair to bring intertestamental literature into the discussion. I can understand the need for cautious, but the good news here is that we need not go too far into the intertestamental text, but rather know what it is about and that in the New Testament, Peter and Jude cite this section of the Book of Enoch specifically in regard to divine beings having intercourse with human women.
In short, the Book of Watchers contains an extended story of Gen 6:1-5, one in which divine beings, with many specific names given, were attracted to human women, shared knowledge with humanity that humanity should not have learned (leading to immense evil/sin: see Gen 6:5), and ultimately had intercourse with women and produced offspring that were destroying the earth and thus God would send a great destruction by a flood. The divine beings that came to earth and had intercourse with women are bound up in punishment and awaiting an ultimate final punishment.
Now while we cannot simply take all of this story as being true, we can look at what Peter and Jude say about it:
Jude 1:6-7:
And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire*, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.*
Notice what Jude says here. For one, he clearly refers to an event of angels leaving their positions and dwellings. Second, their sin is compared to Sodom and Gomorrah in the sense that it was indulgence in “sexual immorality” and “unnatural desire.” Jude’s description of the punishment for these angels is also strikingly similar to that of 1 Enoch. On top of this, this story within 1 Enoch would have been known at that time, and Jude also references Enoch in verse 14. While we cannot say that Jude believed all of 1 Enoch was true, but we see that he certainly looks at angel-human sexual immorality as being a real event that he mentioned with other real-event examples.
Furthermore, let’s look at what Peter says:
2 Peter 2:4-5:
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of gloomy darkness to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly
Here we see Peter is making a reference to an event where angels sinned and were cast into hell to be kept until judgement. Peter actually lists three examples in this entire passage: The angels that sinned, Noah being rescued from the flood, and Lot being rescued from Sodom and Gomorrah, which are in chronological order. It’s interesting that Peter mentioned an act of angels sinning prior to Noah, but this would fit the divine being interpretation of Genesis 6:1-5, as that did indeed take place before the flood. Even more, Peter says these angels are in hell, but he uses the word “tartarosas,” from which we get Tartarus. This hell is not a permanent punishment but a place to be kept until a final judgement, which we can see as the angels are kept their until the judgement. Again, a clear parallel to the story of the punishment of the watchers in Enoch.
So to sum it up, while this is not exhaustive, there are a few reasons for why the divine being view is the best interpretation of Gen 6:1-5

Textually – the specific term "sons of God/benei HaElohim" refers to divine beings in the Old Testament
Narratively – the specific offspring of the intercourse in Gen 6:1-5 are giants and renown mighty hero type figures, something that is not a normal pattern from humans having intercourse with humans.
New Testament – This interpretation is cited as being an actual even by both Peter and Jude.

Now to further show the strength of this view, I’m going to compare it to the two most common views that interpret the intercourse in this passage as being between humans. These views will be called (1) the Sethite view, and (2) the polygamy view.
(continued in the comments)

Matthew 5 part II - verses 27-end

Adultery

“This unit contains only two verses … (see the fuller treatments in Matt 19:1-12; Mark 10:1-12; Luke 16:18). … ‘Divorce is to family life what civil war is to the state’ (Aristotle). …
“Source-critically we have here a Marcan-Q overlap; this early multiple attestation is a strong indication of early authentic Jesus material, reinforced by a parallel in 1 Cor [Corinthians] 7:10-16. There is in fact no historical doubt that Jesus held to a very high doctrine on marriage, viz. [to wit], its indissolubility, a position probably without parallel in the Judaism contemporary with him, though not without some prophetic precedent (Mal [Malachi] 2:13-16). Formally this unit represents a brief halakic decision in the form of a comment on a cited biblical text; the fuller version in 19:1-12 is a classic scholastic dialogue.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)

-27. “You heard that [כי, KeeY] it is said, ‘Do not adulter’,
-28. and I say to you that each [שכל, ShehKahL], the looker in a woman from within lust unto her,
already adulters her in his heart.

“Jewish law restricted the term adultery to sexual intercourse with the wife or the betrothed of a Jew. But in vs. [verse] 28 the term apparently denotes illicit intercourse with any woman. As in vs. 32, the man is thought of as the one directly responsible for the sin.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 297)
“Jesus’s words here are to be taken strictly in connection with adultery. They do not condemn any thinking about sexual matters such as would be involved in simple velleities^3… This teaches the truth of experience that when a person has seriously decided to commit wrong the moral evil is already present, even though it can be increased by further action.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)

-29. “If your eye, the right, trips you [תכשיל, ThahKhSheeYL],
pluck [נקר, NahQayR] her and send her forth from you,
for better [מוטב, MOoTahB] to you that lost is one of your organs [מאבריך, May’ayBahRehYKhah]
from that you be sent forth, all your body, to GaY-HeeNOM.
-30. And if your hand, the right, trips you,
chop [קצף, QahTsayPh] her and sent her forth from you,
for it is better to you that be lost one of your organs
than descend all your body to GaY-HeeNOM.”

“These verses parallel Mark 9:43-47 but are omitted by Luke, probably because they are liable to be misunderstood because of the Oriental hyperbolic mode in which they are expressed.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)

Banishment [גרוש, GeeROoSh]
(Matthew 19:9, Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18)

-31. “It is said, ‘A man, if [כי, KeeY] he sends forth [את, ’ehTh] his wife, is to give to her an account [of] cutting off [כריתות, KReeYThOoTh];
-32. and I say to you, every the banisher [את, ’ehTh] his wife,
outside from that upon word [of] fornication [זנות, ZeNOoTh],
makes of her an adulteress;
and the taker [את, ’ehTh] the banished to wife, an adulterer is he.”

“A similar saying is found in Luke 16:18. Both may come from Q… or, vss. 31-32 may be from M…

“The certificate of divorce, prescribed in Deut. 24:1, had the effect of clarifying the woman’s status; the husband had no further claim on her… While the woman could not divorce her husband, she could go before the court and compel him to divorce her if he had certain diseases, if he was engaged in certain obnoxious trades… According to the school of Hillel the husband could, theoretically, divorce his wife ‘for any cause’ (19:3) ... The school of Shammai regarded unchastity and perhaps immodesty as the only allowable causes for divorce.

“… The phrase except on the ground of unchastity is regarded by most modern critics as Matthew’s (or perhaps M’s) addition to the original tradition. Jesus originally made no exceptions… The word translated ‘unchastity’ is πορνεια [porneia “obscenity”] …” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 298-299)
“Jesus’ … intent was… a vision of marriage as a covenant of personal love between spouses which reflects the covenant relationship of God and his people.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)

Oath

-33. “More you have heard, for it is said to [the] firsts,
‘Do not swear to falsehood,
and pay to my Gods your vows [נדריך, NeDahRehYKhah].’

“This is not an exact citation of any O.T. passage, but a summary of the teachings of Lev. [Leviticus] 19:12; Exod. 20:7; Deut. 5:11; Num. 30:3; Deut. 23:22.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 299)

-34. “And I say to you that not to swear at all;

“The examples that follow in vv 34b, 35, 36 (citing Isa. 66:1 and Ps. 48:2) are oath formulas, which contain subterfuges for the divine name, which the devout tried to avoid pronouncing. But in employing subterfuges an element of untruthfulness was introduced which had as its intention the assurance of truth.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643)

not in skies (for chair [of] Gods are they),
-35. neither [אף, ’ahPh] in land (for footstool [הדום, HahDOM] [to] His legs is she),
and not in Jerusalem, (that see, [the] City of [the] king multitudinous is she).

“34-35. Instead of inculcating greater fidelity to oaths, Jesus sweeps away the whole mechanics of swearing. … If the divorce saying is taken as a law, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that this, and vss. 38-42, are also laws. Jesus’ Jewish hearers would have understood the saying in this way, since all types of oaths and vows were in the same legal classification.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 300)

-36. “Also in your head do not swear,
for you have not ability to change [להפך, LeHahPhoKh] hair one to white or to black.
-37. Rather [אך, ’ahKh], be your word [מלתכם, MeeLahThKhehM] yes, yes; no, no.
More than this from the evil is.”

“A simpler (and possibly more nearly original) form of the saying is found in Jas. 5:12. The doubled affirmative and negative (ignored in RSV [Revised Standard Version]) are merely for emphasis. Oaths result from the evil which is present in the world or perhaps from ‘the Evil One’ (cf. 6:13; 13:38). In the latter case, Matthew has probably added the phrase.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 300)
“According to b. Sanh. [Babylonian Sanhedrin] 36a yes and no become oaths when they are repeated, as Jesus does here … The Decalogue says ….’you shall not take the name of God in vain,’ and ‘you shall not bear false witness,’ … Jesus combines the two commandments by saying that you shall not swear by God’s name or any substitute for it and you shall speak the truth simply. Greek philosophical tradition from the Delphic oracle and the Pythagoreans to the Stoics of Jesus’ day moved in the same direction…” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643)

Measure as against measure
(Luke 6:29-30)

“RETALIATION (5:38-42). This and the next hyperthesis, on love of enemies, are closely related in subject matter, and their relationship to each other and to earlier tradition will be treated after v 48. This unit expands the Q saying (see Luke 6:29-30).” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643)

-38. “You heard that [כי, KeeY] it is said, ‘Eye under eye; tooth under tooth.’,

“The principle of retaliation is expressed in Exod. 21:24; Deut. 19:21; Lev. 24:20. It is as old as the Code of Hammurabi and can be paralleled in the Roman Law of the XII Tables and Aeschylus… It is possible, though not certain, that in Jesus’ time some rabbis permitted a monetary payment in lieu of this punishment.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 301)
“Though the rule sounds barbarous today, its original intention was humanitarian, to limit revenge… to an exact reciprocity. When first introduced it constituted genuine moral progress. … the principle of corresponding restitution remained dominant in legal thinking.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643)

-39. “and I say to you that not to rise up [להתקומם, LeHeeThQOMayM] upon a doer of the evil;
on the contrary [אדרבא, ’ahDRahBah’], the slapper [הסוטר, HahÇOTayR] to you upon cheek the right,
face unto him also [את, ’ehTh] the other.

“His point is that the mere fact that wrong has been done a man does not give him license to do wrong. Jesus’ followers must not retaliate and they must suffer the same injury again, simply because it is God’s will that their attitude and conduct should be of this kind.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 301)
“Our Lord’s meaning is, ‘Do not repel one outrage by another.’ He that does so, makes himself precisely what the other is, a wicked person.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 62)
“This leaves open the possibility of psychological or moral resistance, ‘media fighting,’ exemplified by Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King. The parallel in Rom 12:19-21, based on Prov [Proverbs] 25:21-22, is important is showing that Jesus’ teaching is a strategy for winning, not for passive resignation or indifference to evil. The goal is to shame the opponent into a change of heart. This presupposes the requisite dispositions in the opponent, which are not always present. In such difficult cases recourse to other biblical principles may be necessary…” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643-644)

-40. “Whoever that wants to sue [לתבע, LeeThBo`ah] you to judgment in order to take [את, ’ehTh] your shirt [כתנתך, KooThNahThKhah],
offer [הנח, HahNahH] to him also your coat [מעילך, Me`eeYLKhah].

“The coat (χιτων [khiton]; Hebrew kuttṓneth, Aramaic kittûā’) is the long undergarment made with sleeves; the cloak (ιματιον [imation]) was worn over it, and the poor used it as a coverlet at night (Exod. 22:26-27).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 301)

-41. “And whoever that forces [שמאלץ, ShehMe’ahLayTs] you to walk with him for a distance of mile [מיל, MeeYL] one,
walk with him two.

“Couriers could impress men or their property into service to carry the king’s messages. Here the word refers to any kind of forced labor, whether required by the government or by private persons. The Roman mile was a little shorter than the English mile.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 302)

-42. “Give to [the] seeker from you,
do not turn from the wanter to borrow [ללוות, LeeLVOTh] from you.”

“This does not fit well here, since it has nothing to do with force or retaliation. Matthew apparently includes it because it stood here in the Q sermon, as its position in Luke 6:29-30 shows. … the point simply is that a religious person will have generous impulses and will act upon them.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 302)
“That God, who makes use of the beggar’s hand to ask our charity, is the same from whom we ourselves beg our daily bread… if we cannot or will not relieve a poor man, let us never give him an ill word nor an ill look. If we do not relieve him, we have no right to insult him.
“… A rich man is one of God’s stewards. God has given him money for the poor, and he cannot deny it without an act of injustice.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 63)

Love to enemies (Luke 6:27-28, 32-36)

-43. “You heard that [כי, KeeY] it is said,
‘Love [את, ’ehTh] your neighbor and hate [את, ’ehTh] your enemy’.

“Lev. 19:16-18, which is quoted here, speaks of neighbor in the sense of ‘fellow Israelite.’ Jewish commentators correctly point out that the law never commanded the Jew to hate his enemy; but the O.T. represents many different stages of religious development, and alongside the friendliness toward aliens inculcated by books like Ruth there are many passages which permit, and even encourage, hostility and retaliation. In Semitic idiom, however, hate may mean no more than ‘love less’ or ‘not to love.’” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 302)

-44. “And I say to you, love [את, ’ehTh] your enemies and pray for [בעד, Be`ahD] your pursuers,

“Love your enemies] This is the most sublime piece of morality ever given to man. Has it appeared unreasonable and absurd to some? It has. And why? Because it is natural to man to avenge himself, and plague those who plague him; and he will ever find abundant excuse for his conduct in the repeated evils he receives from others; for men are naturally hostile to each other. Jesus Christ designs to make men happy. Now he is necessarily miserable who hates another. Our Lord prohibits that only, which, from its nature, is opposed to man’s happiness. This is therefore one of the most reasonable precepts in the universe. But who can obey it? None but he who has the mind of Christ. But I have it not. Seek it from God; it is that kingdom of heaven which Christ came to establish upon earth… Every false religion flatters man, and accommodates itself to his pride and his passions. None but God could have imposed a yoke as contrary to self-love; and nothing but the supreme eternal love can enable men to practice a precept so insupportable to corrupt nature.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 63)
“Jesus never deals with the responsibilities of free citizens in a democratic state. His teaching of course has political implications, but how it should be applied is one of the most difficult problems of Christian social ethics.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 303)

-45. “in order that you be sons to your father that is in [the] skies.
For He shines [מזריח, MahZReeY-ahH] his sun upon evil-ones and good-ones,
and showers rain upon righteous-ones and wicked-ones.

“Exod. 23:4-5 and numerous rabbinical sayings look in this direction, but the idea is never made a general maxim for conduct in Judaism. … those who imitate God become, or show themselves to be, his sons in the ethical sense (cf. on 5:9).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 303)

-46. “Lo, if you love [את, ’ehTh] your loved-ones, what is your reward?
Do not also the taxmen do that?

“The tax collectors of the Gospels are probably the Jewish employees of chief collectors. Poll taxes and land taxes levied in Judea must have been collected by government officials under the procurator … Export and import duties were, however, farmed out to a publicanus who contracted to furnish a fixed sum every year… his employees, the τελωναι [telonai] or tax collectors of the Gospels were probably Jews. In Galilee and Trans-Jordan the duties were collected for the tetrarch’s treasury, and even the publicanus may have been a Jew. The system made for inequality and oppression, and the Gospels usually couple tax collectors and sinners. Rabbinical writings pass the same unfavorable judgment, and the second-century satirist Lucian classes tax collectors with adulterers and brothel keepers.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 303-304)
“… these assisting in collecting the Roman tribute, were considered as betrayers of the liberties of their country, and abettors of those who enslaved it.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 64)
“Jesus befriends them but never approves of their sins (cf. Luke 19:1-10).” (Viviano, 1990, p. 643-644)

-47. “And if you ask after [תשאלו, TheeSh’ahLOo], in peace, your brethren only,
what is the special that you do?
Do not also the nations do this?
-48. Therefore be complete [שלמים, ShLayMeeYM],
as that your father, that is in [the] skies, complete is he.

“… be perfect: This verse comprises a complex fusion of two OT texts and Matthean reaction. Deut 18:13 reads tāmîm, ‘blameless,’ instead of ‘perfect’; Lev 19:2 has qēdōšîm, ‘holy,’ but Luke (6:36) reads ‘merciful.’ Teleios, ‘perfect,’ is a rare word in the Gospels (found only here and 19:21), though used by Paul and James. It is common in Gk thought, where it can mean conformity to the divine ideal. In QL [Qumran Literature] the perfect man is the one who observes the whole law. Luke’s version emphasizes covenant fidelity and steadfast love. These various accents could all be present in Matt, making the text rich and suggestive. Here it also forms an inclusio with 5:20.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 644)

FOOTNOTES
¹ Avoth – Short for Pirke Avoth “Ethics of the Fathers”, the second-to-last tractate in the order of Nezikin in the Mishnah, the ancient Jewish commentary on the Hebrew Bible - wikipedia
² Halakha is the collective body of Jewish religious laws derived from the Written and Oral Torah. It includes the 613 mitzvot [commandments], subsequent Talmudic and rabbinic law and the customs and traditions compiled in the Shulchan Aruch [“[the] Long Table”]. - wikipedia
³ velleity - a wish or inclination not strong enough to lead to action. An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

Matthew 5 part I - verses 1-26

“FIRST DISCOURSE, ADDRESSED TO THE DISCIPLES. THE NEW LAW, DESIGNED FOR THE COMMUNITY WHOSE MEMBERS WILL INHERIT THE KINGDOM (5:1-7:29)

“Matthew now introduces the most striking and characteristic feature of his entire Gospel. … his greatest interest is in the moral life of the Christian community. This discourse, which is put at the forefront of his Gospel, deals with the righteousness which exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees (5:20), and is appropriate for those who pray for the kingdom of heaven and will inherit it. This righteousness is prophetic rather than rabbinical… and it is worth noting that the last of the five discourses … concludes on the same exalted note of transcendent righteousness (25:31-46). Some of Matthew’s special material, which is often assigned to an M [Hypothetical source for Matthew] source, has an inverted rabbinical interest; i.e. [in other words], it is directed against the law as understood by the Pharisees. But the passages which are drawn from the sermon as it is found also in Luke (6:20-49), and also from other parts of Q [hypothetical source for the synoptics], deal with right action in the widest sense of the word. The Sermon on the Mount is a whole new Torah or teaching tradition and not merely a new halakha [ancient Jewish commentary] or lawbook.
“Jesus would not have given all this teaching on a single occasion. The sermon is made up of aphorism, maxims, and illustrations which were remembered and treasured out of many discourses.
…
“It is a curious fact that both Matthew (4:24-25) and Luke (6:17-19) begin their sermons after a summary of healings, and in each case the summary is based on Mark 3:7-12. Possibly Q introduced the sermon in a similar fashion. In any event, the sermon, like the preaching of John the Baptist in 3:1-12, is addressed to a group of people who have come away from their homes to hear the word.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 278-279)

Chapter Five – The Sermon upon the Mountain
-1. As he saw the throng [of] the people he ascended in [the] ascent of the mountain and sat. And his students approached unto him.

“He went up on the mountain as he did when he was transfigured (17:1) and when he gave his parting commandment (28:16), and as Moses did to receive the law (Exod. [Exodus] 19).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 279)
“The word μαθητης [mathytys] signifies literally a scholar.
“… the disciples form the corona fratrum [“ring of brethren”] (cf. [compare with] Neh [Nehemiah] 8:4), and the crowds the second concentric ring. the mountain: It is not named, but functionally it is a mount of revelation (as frequently in the Bible and in Matt [Matthew]), a symbolic Sinai … sitting: This is a posture of Oriental teachers.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)

-2. He opened his mouth to talk to them in his saying:

“A solemn introduction. The sermon is a Matthean construction, pieced together from material scattered in Q [Quelle - a hypothetical source] (cf. Luke 6:20-49), Mark, and other material… the sayings have undergone revision. …
“The Sermon on the Mount is the first of five major discourses in the Gospel … It is Matthew’s masterpiece and was early the most frequently cited section. Its literary genre remains disputed…The dominant themes of the sermon are the kingdom of God and justice. …
…
“… The sermon has been criticized as setting too high a standard, which remains unfulfillable (‘you cannot govern with the sermon’ [Bismarck]); but, understood against its Jewish background, it becomes a possible but still high standard of moral wisdom about life.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)

Fortunes ([compare with] Luke 6:20-23)

“BEATITUDES (5:3-12). Cf. Luke 6:20b-23. A comparison of the two versions shows that Luke has four … beatitudes and Matt eight… Probably only Luke’s first three are authentic; his fourth comes from the early church; Matthew’s additional beatitudes are his own expansion from the Psalms. The common source is Q, and beyond that Jesus’s use of Isa [Isaiah] 61:1-4. In form, a beatitude is an exclamation of congratulations that recognizes an existing state of happiness, beginning with the Hebr [Hebrew] noun ’ašrê or the Gk [Greek] adj. [adjective] makarios. Here the gospel begins with a cry of joy, based on the nearness of the kingdom of God. The original beatitudes about the ‘poor,’ the ‘mourners,’ and the ‘hungry’ express Jesus’ mission to the needy in Israel and the dawn of a new era of salvation history. … God was conceived of as an Oriental king, and a king’s duty was to protect the weak. The long last beatitude about the persecuted reflects the experience of martyrdom in the early church and is explicitly christological (vv [verses] 1-12). Matthew’s editorial additions may be seen in several places.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)

-3. “Fortunate are deprived of [אניי, ’ahNYaY] the spirit,

“Their poverty is real and economic, but with a spiritual dimension. In Matt the addition of ‘in spirit’ changes the emphasis from social-economic to personal-moral… In the Bible economic destitution is an evil to be corrected (Deut [Deuteronomy] 15:11), and wealth is not an evil in itself; indeed, it is a necessity for the well-being of the kingdom, but it risks neglect of God and of the poor. God’s first priority is the care of the poor.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)
“The Greek word rendered blessed is used in pagan literature to denote the highest stage of happiness and well-being, such as the gods enjoy. Here it stands for the Hebrew ’ashrê ‘how happy!’ as in Pss. [Psalms] 1:1; 32:1; 112:1. It is often used as a congratulatory salutation as in Luke 1:42; 11:27-28. … The poor, οι πτωχοι [oi ptokhoi], Hebrew ‘aniyyîm, primarily denotes their state of poverty, but they are the despised, oppressed, and pious poor of Pss. 9:18; 10:9; 12:5; 34:6; Jas. [James] 1:9; 2:5-6, who look to God for their vindication and for whom God cares. … they are afflicted in spirit (cf. Isa. 61:1) and ‘feel their spiritual need’ … The phrase in spirit, added by Matthew, is an accurate and happy gloss. (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 280-281)

“for to them is kingdom [of] the skies.
-4. Fortunate are the mourners [האבלים, Hah’ahBahLeeYM],
for they will be comforted.

“Some rabbis gave the name ‘Comforter’ to the Messiah.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 281)

-5. “Fortunate are the meek [הענוים, Vah'ahNahVeeYM], for they will inherit [את, ’ehTh], for they will inherit the land.

“Πραεις [“Praeis”] here means meek or humble-minded rather than gentle. It represents ‘the meek’ of Ps. [Psalm] 37:11, who are ‘the poor looked at from a different point of view. … The English word ‘meek’ now has unfortunate associations, but that was not always true: Moses was ‘very meek, above all men’ (Num. [Numbers] 12:3).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 282)
“For they shall inherit the earth.] Or, την γυν [tyn gun], the land. Under this expression, which was commonly used, by the prophets to signify the land of Canaan, in which all temporal good abounded, Judg. [Judges] xviii. 9, 10.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 52)

-6. “Fortunate are the hungry and the thirsty to righteousness,
for they will be satiated.

“… the word righteousness added …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 282)
“[Matthew] adds ‘justice’ in vv 6 and 10, both as a formal divider and as one of the great themes of his Gospel.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)

-7. “Fortunate are the compassionate,
for they will be compassioned.
-8. Fortunate are [the] pure of heart,
for they will see [את, ’ehTh] Gods.

“Such people will see God, not merely in the metaphorical sense of worshiping in his house (Ps. 42:2), nor in a purely mystical sense, but rather in the sense that God will reward them by permitting them to see him face to face in the age to come (Rev. [Revelation] 22:4). This beatitude of Jesus is distinctive and we know of no rabbinical saying like it.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 285)

-9. “Fortunate are pursuers of peace,
for sons of Gods they will be called.

“Hillel, Jesus’ contemporary, said, ‘Be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace’ (Aboth¹ 1:2). Such person will be called sons of God. In the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] the phrase ‘sons of God’ occasionally refers to angels or divine beings (Job 38:70, but it most often means the Hebrews whom God created (Deut. 32:6), who are the objects of God’s love and care and are under obligation to obey him. For example, Hos. [Hosea] 1:10 promises that the repentant Israelites, who have not been God’s people, will be called ‘sons of the living God’) see on 4:3). Vss. [verses] 44-45 furnish the best possible comment on this verse. Those who seek peace by loving their enemies are doing as God himself does, and are his true sons in every way.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 286)
“The Rabbis had democratized the royal ideology of the king as peacemaker and enjoined it on everyone. In Matt peace-making is closely related to the love of neighbor and hence to the beatitude of the merciful. Matthew thus transforms a short messianic manifesto into a program of life, a list of desirable qualities or virtues.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 640)

-10. “Fortunate are the pursued because of [בגלל, BeeGLahL] the righteous,
for to them is [the] kingdom of the skies.
-11. Fortunate are you if they revile and pursue you,
and libel [ויעלילו, VeYah`ahLeeYLOo] upon you because of me.

“Falsely is probably an unnecessary gloss; some Western authorities and the Sinaitic Syriac omit it, as does Luke.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 287)

-12. “Be happy and rejoice,
for your reward is multitudinous in skies;
see [הרי, HahRaY], thus they pursued [את, ’ehTh] the prophets that were before you.”

“… neither Jesus nor the rabbis hesitated to speak of reward, since God had promised it. … in the last analysis, it is a gracious gift, for ‘when you have done all that is prescribed for you, say, “We are mere slaves; we have only done what we ought”’ (Luke 17:10). … The O.T. tells how prophets like Amos and Jeremiah were persecuted. In the first century it was also believed that Isaiah had been martyred by being sawed in two …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 288)

Salt and light (Mark 9:50, Luke 14:34-35)

-13. “You are salt [of] the land;
and if is lost to salt its saltiness,
how [כיצד, KaYTsahD] will you return it?
Lo, it is not fit [יצלח, YeeTsLahH] anymore to any thing,
except [כי אם, KeeY ’eeM] to send it forth the outside to be trampled [מרמס, MeeRMahÇ], to legs of the people.

The only sensible explanation I’ve heard is that salt scraped from salt pans contained impurities, and once the sodium chloride was leached the remainder was discarded.

-14.“You are [the] light of the world.
A city dwelling upon a mountain is not able to be hidden.
-15. Also, no lighting a candelabra and putting it under a vessel;
rather [אלא, ’ayLah’] upon a stand [כן, KayN] put it,
and thus [אז, ’ahZ] light all comers [to] the house.

“A bushel (μοδιος [modios] is more nearly a ‘peck-measure’ …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 290)

-16. “Thus [כך, KahKh] light, if you please, your light before sons of ’ahDahM ["man", Adam],
so that [למען, LeMah`ahN] they see your deeds, the good,
and honor [את, ’ehTh] your father that is in skies.”

The Instruction and the Prophets

“These sayings, like 23:1-3, seem to teach a complete acceptance of the old religion, while in other passages the new and the old are sharply contrasted; see, e.g. [for example], 11:12-13 (=Luke 1:16); 15:11 (=Mark 7:15); Luke 13:10-17; Mark 3:1-6. The same apparent contradiction is found even in the sermon, for Jesus sweeps aside the law of oaths (vss. 33-37). … Jesus accepted the O.T. law in principle and assumed that it was the permanently binding revelation of God; but he made the ritual commandments subordinate to moral duties, opposed the development of purity laws, and went further than the Pharisees in relaxing the sabbath laws to meet human needs. In fact, his emphasis on the spirit of the law, and his occasional quoting of one passage against another, necessarily involved a new view of Torah.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 291)
“… (5:17-20). These verses give the basic legal principles of the sermon. They are the most controversial verses in Matt and there is no consensus on their interpretation. The interpreter must try to state the problem clearly and to provide a historically honest judgment, even at the price of theological tidiness. The problem arises because the plain sense of the words is that Jesus affirms the abiding validity of the Torah; but this contradicts Paul (e.g., Gal [Galatians] 2:15, 16; Rom [Romans] 3:21-31). Moreover, no major Christian church requires observance of all 613 precepts of the OT law, ethical and ceremonial, but only the ethical commands such as the Decalogue and the commands to love God and neighbor. Thus, there is a gap between the teaching here and the teaching and practice of the churches. The position adopted here is the following: (a) There are contradictions with the NT on penultimate matters… (b) Historically Matt (and James) inclined more to the Jewish-Christian side of early Christian polemic… There are two common exegetical strategies for evading the plain meaning (a) reinterpretation, esp. [especially] through v 18d; but cf. 23:23; (b) denial of authenticity. This latter approach contains much truth. Apart from v [verse]18, the verses are probably postpaschal and reflect the outlook of Jewish Christianity, which, as a separate movement, was eventually defeated by Paulinism and died out (perhaps to be reborn in a different form as Islam)… But denial of the authenticity of vv 17, 19, 20 does not make Jesus hold the same view as Paul.
“Law in Matt. Jesus probably did not break in principle with Torah but only with Pharisaic halaka^2. Yet he was a free spirit who directly confronted and resolved life situation in his healing and parables without carefully citing texts. Matthew remains in the same line of basic fidelity to Torah but with a concentration on the more important values (23:23) and with a lawyerly concern to provide textual support for innovations. Paul prefers an ethics of values like faith, hope, love, and walking in the Spirit to a legal ethics, but he does cite the Decalogue as applicable to Christians (Rom 13:8-1) even though the ceremonial laws do not bind Gentile converts according to his gospel. As far as most modern Christians are concerned, Paul won this fight and they follow him. But Matthew, by exerting a powerful influence on church life, has acted as a moderating influence on radical Paulinism, which can easily become libertinism and antinomianism.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)

-17. “Do not think that I came to stop [לבטל, LeBahTayL] [את, ’ehTh] the Instruction or [את, ’ehTh] the prophets;
I did not come to stop; rather to revive [לקים, LeQahYayM]!

“Jews, in their second-century controversies with Christians, quoted it thus: ‘I, the gospel, am not come to take away the Torah of Moses, but to add to it.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 291)
“Dot not imagine that I am come to violate the law – καταλυσαι [katalusai] from κατα and λυω, I loose, violate, or dissolve … But I am come, πλυρωσαι [plurosai] to complete …” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 55)
“In the background lies a pair of rabbinic expressions, qwm and bṭl. Qwm means to ‘confirm’ or ‘establish’ the law by putting it on a better exegetical footing… bṭl means to ‘void, abolish, suspend, neglect, cancel’ a law.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)

-18. “Truly [אמן, ’ahMayN] say I to you,
until pass the skies and the land,
even י [YooD] one or serif [תג, ThahG] one will not pass from the Instruction before revives the whole.
-19. Therefore [לכן, LahKhayN], any, the relaxer [of] one from the commandments the little the these and teaches thus [את, ’ehTh] the folks [הבריות, HahBReeYOTh],
little he will be called in kingdom of the skies.

“Whoever … relaxes …. refers to the rabbinical prerogative of declaring certain actions permitted or forbidden. One of the least of these commandments: The rabbis drew distinctions between ‘light’ and ‘heavy’ precepts … To teach men so is, if possible, worse than breaking the law oneself… The saying could easily have been used against Paul.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 292-293)

-20. “Say I to you, if will not be your righteousness multiple from [the] righteousness of the recounters and the PROoSheeYM [Pharisees “pure, abstemious”],
you will not enter into [the] kingdom of the skies.”

“There was no finer standard of righteousness in the ancient world than the Pharisaic, with its emphasis on personal holiness and social responsibility. But, like most systems of ethics, it was adjusted to the capabilities of mankind, and it made allowances for the weakness of human nature and the demands made on man by his environment… Jesus, on the contrary, would have men aspire, not to what is socially expedient, but to that righteousness which will be perfectly manifest in the kingdom of God. His disciples are, so far as possible, to live in this age as though they were already living in the age to come.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 293-294)
“This verse almost certainly comes from Matthew’s reaction and provides the thematic heading for the rest of the chapter, a ‘more abundant righteousness/justice.’ A sense of abundance (perisseuein) is characteristic of every level of early Christianity. For Matthew the essence of what Jesus brought is a superior ethic, a higher justice. His is a moral piety. His great opponents are the rabbinic heirs of the Pharisees at Jamnia. Note that he does not explicitly say that the Pharisees will not enter the kingdom. The verse is a warning to Christians.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)

Anger and reconciliation [והתפייסות, VeHeeThPahYaYÇOoTh]

“The first of six hypertheses. They are usually called antitheses, because interpreters were impressed by Jesus’ sovereign authority over the OT Torah and by the cases where his teaching seems to contradict the OT or be opposed to it, e.g., on divorce, which the OT presupposes and which Jesus prohibits (or restricts). The present interpretation emphasizes rather that Jesus seems to go beyond OT teaching by deepening and radicalizing it, by returning to the original will of God, but that he never moves in a lax direction, whence hyperthesis… Also to be noted is that the formula “It was said …, but I say’ is close to an exegetical formula common in the rabbinic schools: first a Bible quotation, then “You might think this means … but I say to you. …’ As a matter of fact, here in the sermon an OT text is followed by a false interpretation, which Jesus then corrects; see on 5:43. Yet the hypertheses, although exegetical in form, are materially revelation for Matthew.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 641)
“Contrasts … (vss. 21-26, 27-30, 33-37) are alike in that Jesus takes an O.T. maxim and surpasses it by forbidding not only the overt crime but the disposition behind it. But Contrasts … (vss. 31-32, 38-42, 43-47) are annulments of the existing code as it was popularly understood.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 294)

-21. “You have heard that [כי, KeeY] it is said to [the] firsts,
‘Do not murder.’ and ‘Every murderer is required to judgement.’

“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time] τοις αρχαιοις [tois arkhaiois] to or by the ancients. By the ancients, we may understand those who lived before the law, and those who lived under it…
“… Murder from the beginning has been punished with death; and it is, probably, the only crime that should be punished with death. There is much reason to doubt, whether the punishment of death, inflicted for any other crime, is not in itself murder, whatever the authority may be that has instituted it.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 57)
“Biblical law comes in two forms: apodictic and casuistic. Apodictic takes the ‘Thou shalt not’ form familiar from the Decalogue; casuistic takes the forms, ‘If anyone…’ or ‘Whoever …’ or ‘In the case that. …’ Here we have an apodictic command followed by case law.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)

-22. “And say I to you,
every the angry upon his brother is required to judgment;
the sayer to his brother ‘empty-head’ [ריק, RaYQ], is required to justice [of] the ÇahNHehDReeYN [Sanhedrin], and he who says ‘fool’ [אויל, ’ehVeeYL] is required to [the] fire of GaY-HeeNOM [“Valley of Henna”].

“Without a cause is not found in some of the best MSS [manuscripts] and earliest fathers. It is a gloss which seriously weakens Jesus’ teaching. …
“… A first-century rabbi is quoted as saying, ‘He who hates his neighbor, behold he is one who belongs to the shedders of blood.’ …
“… A talmudic passage, however, reads: ‘He who says ‘slave’ to his neighbor shall be excommunicated; he who says ‘bastard’ to him shall receive the forty [lashes]; he who says ‘godless’ to him, is a matter of his life.’ …
“Raca has often been identified with the rabbinical rēqa’, ‘good-for-nothing’ or ‘wretch,’ which would mean about the same as ‘fool.’ But a Greek insult ραχας [rakhas], of which racha is probably a vocative, has been discovered in a papyrus… Its exact meaning is unknown.
“By the first century A.D. many Jews believed in the hell (Gehenna) of fire as a place where sinners were tormented, either after the final judgment or in the intermediate period before the judgment. The name is derived from the gê Hinnôm or valley of Hinnom (Josh. [Joshua] 15:8), southwest of Jerusalem, where human sacrifices had been offered and refuse was still burned. When this allusion was combined with the ideas of Isa. 31:9; 66:24, the conception of a fiery hell resulted (Enoch 54:1-2; 56:3-4; II Baruch 59:10; 85:13). The older idea had been that good and bad alike went to Sheol, where there was no punishment and no joy.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 295-296)
“The council] Συνεδριον [Sunedrion], the famous council known among the Jews by the name of sanhedrin. It was composed of seventy-two elders, six chosen out of each tribe. This grand Sanhedrin not only received appeals from the inferior sanhedrins, or court of twenty three, … but could alone take cognizance, in the first instance, of the highest crimes, and alone inflict the punishment of stoning.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 57)

-23. “Therefore, if you bring [את, ’ehTh] your offering unto the altar,
and there remember that [כי, KeeY] to your brother is a word against you,
-24. leave [את, ’ehTh] your offering there before the altar,
and go commence [תחלה, TheHeeLaH] to make acceptables [להתרצות, LeHeeThRahTsOTh], to your brother,
and after that [כך, KahKh] come and approach [את, ’ehTh] your offering.

“This case presupposes the Temple standing and must stem from before AD 70. It also presupposes that Jesus approves of the Temple and the sacrificial system. After the crucifixion some Christians would regard the Temple system (or administration) as spiritually bankrupt, as did the Qumran community, although others would continue to worship there. first ... then: This priority of ethics over cult reflects OT prophetic teaching: there can be no true worship of God without justice, a doctrine called ethical monotheism for short and often considered the center of the OT. Since perfect justice eludes us until the kingdom comes, we must worship imperfectly, trusting in God’s mercy.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 642)
“As the Mishnah says, ‘The day of Atonement atones for offenses of man against God, but it does not atone for offenses against man’s neighbor, till he reconciles his neighbor’ (Yoma 8:9).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 296)
“The original word, δωρον [doron], which we translate gift, is used by the rabbins in Hebrew letters דורון doron, which signifies not only a gift, but a sacrifice offered to God.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 58)

-25. “Hasten to be reconciled with man, your contender while still you are [בעודך, Be`ODKhah] in [the] way with him,
lest he deliver you to justice,
and the judge deliver you to police,
and you are sent forth to house the enclosure [הסהר, HahÇoHahR, “prison”].

“Agree with thine adversary quickly] Adversary, αντιδικος [antidikos], properly a plaintiff in law …” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 58)

-26. “Truly, say I to you,
you will not go out from there until that you pay [את, ’ehTh] the pence [הפרוטה, HahPROoTaH] the last.”

“The uttermost farthing] Κοδραντην [Kodrantyn]. The rabbins have this Greek word corrupted into קרדיונטס kordiontes, and קינטריק kontarik [sic], and say, that two פרוטות prutoth, make a kontarik, which is exactly the same with those words in Mark xii. 42 … Hence it appears, that the λεπτον, lepton, was the same as the prutah. The weight of the prutah was half a barley corn, and it was the smallest coin among the Jews, as the kodrantes, or farthing, was the smallest coin among the Romans.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 59)

An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

I want to start by saying that I have essentially no knowledge of the Hebrew language whatsoever. So I apologize up front if I make a wildly incorrect assumption. I'm not even sure if this is the best sub or if there is a better sub for the following.
There's a linguistic aspect to this but also a biblical scholar aspect I think, so I'm hoping for any and all help.
I am interested in using a pictoral design that incorporates the Hebrew word for helpeazur-- the word used in
--Gen 2:19.
Now, from bible translations, I see that there are differences between the word as it appears in Gen 2:19 and how it appears in, for example
--Psalm 54:4
--Psalm 72:12
In the latter cases, it is referencing God as opposed to Eve.
1) Am I correct that the differences between the 2 are simply due to gender?

Additionally, I think I understand that there are several forms of written Hebrew through time. I think there is what is known as Early Hebrew, as well as Classical Hebrew and of course Modern.
2) Am I correct that Early Hebrew precedes any found biblical fragments, such as Dead Sea scrolls?
3) I know that the Dead Sea scrolls actually have several different language scripts, but the Hebrew used in say, 2QGen/2Q1 in Dead Sea scrolls, is in the form of "Classical Hebrew"?

I'm sorry for all the questions, but what I'm essentially most interested in is getting the image of the word "helpeazuezer" as it appeared in Genesis 2:19 in the earliest surviving manuscript that we have to date. I don't think we actually have that verse in the Qumran codex, just lots of fragments around that. But since we have fragments from Genesis in that codex,
4) I would love to have the word as it would've appeared in that form of Hebrew.
I hope that makes sense. Any help is appreciated.

Matthew Chapter Four - YayShOo`ah ["Savior", Jesus] stands in trial (compare with Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13)

“The temptation story is ‘double tradition’ (i.e. [in other words], it is found also in Luke, but not in Mark), and therefore it is usually supposed to be from Q [Quelle, a hypothesized proto-document of Jesus' sayings]. But its theology is not identical with that of other Q material, and some form of the incident is known to Mark… This highly stylized anecdote, in which each temptation is answered by a quotation from the LXX [The Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible], could easily be derived from Christian preaching. … Certainly the three temptations – to work miracles for the satisfaction of immediate need, to give a convincing sign, and to exercise political power – continually recurred in the course of his ministry.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 269)
“The temptation of Jesus (4:1-11). Mark relates this event in a mere two verses (1:12-13). He tells the fact of the temptation but not the details. This is important because it probably accurately reflects the situation of the disciples regarding this event: they knew that Jesus had been tempted (the historicity of the event need not be doubted), but since temptation is essentially a personal, inner experience they did not know exactly what had gone on in Jesus’ consciousness. The Q version in Matt [Matthew] and Luke thus represents a narrative midrash or interpretation of the event in such a way as to make it pastorally useful for believers. This is done by connecting the 40-day fast with Moses and Elijah in the desert and with the great temptation or trial of God’s patience by the people in the exodus who rebelled against the divine nourishment (the manna) and worshiped the golden calf; and by identifying Jesus as the Son of God (v [verse] 2), meaning Israel, the people of God… not the Messiah. All of Jesus’ answers to the tempter are quotations from Deut [Deuteronomy] 6-8.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 638)

-1. Then [אז, ’ahZ] led [הובילה, HOBeeYLaH], the spirit, [את, ’ehTh (indicator of direct object; no English equivalent)] YayShOo`ah unto the desert to be tried upon [the] hands of the adversary [השטן, HahSahTahN].

“Mark 1:12 gives a more lively picture of the Spirit’s activity: and the Gospel According to the Hebrews reads, ‘Just now my mother the Holy Spirit took me by one of my hairs and brought me up to the great mount Tabor’ (in Hebrew and Aramaic the word for ‘spirit’ is feminine) … The devil (ο διαβολος [o diabolos], the slanderer) is the term usually found in the later N.T. [New Testament] books. Paul and the earlier gospel pericopes call him ‘Satan’ (the ‘adversary’ or ‘accuser’; Zech. [Zechariah] 3:1-2; Job 1:6-9, etc.; Rev. [Revelation] 12:9-10.) The rabbis taught that Satan stirs up the yēçer hārā‘ or evil impulse in man, seduces him into sin, denounces him before God, and then punishes him with death.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 269-270)

-2. And after he had fasted forty day[s] and forty night[s] he was hungry.

“He was hungry might be translated as an inceptive aorist: ‘he got hungry.’” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 270)

-3. Approached [נגש, NeeGahSh] unto him, the tryer [המנסה, HahMeNahÇeH], and said,
“If son [of] the Gods you are,
command that these stones be to bread.”

“The name given to Satan… is very emphatic, ο πειραζων [o peirazon], the tempter, or trier, from πειρο [peiro], to pierce through. To this import of the name, there seems to be an allusion, Eph. [Ephesians] vi.16. The fiery DARTS of the wicked one. This is the precise idea of the word in Deut. viii. 2. To humble thee, and to prove thee, TO KNOW WHAT WAS IN THY HEART: לנסתך linesteca, πειρασε σε [peirase se], LXX. that he might bore thee through.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 46)
“If thou be the son of God] Or, a son of God, υιος του Θεου [uios tou Theou], Υιος [Uios] is here, and in Luke iv. 3. written without the article; and therefore should not be translated THE Son, as if it were ο υιος [o uios] …” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 44)
“The O.T [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] and Jewish literature apply the term Son of God to angels or divine beings (Gen. [Genesis] 6:2; Job 38:7), t the Israelite nation (Hos. 11:1), and occasionally to an anointed king (Ps. [Psalm] 2:7). In Semitic idiom it should mean ‘godlike’ or ‘especially related to God.’ … In Judaism it never became a standard messianic title, and it is applied to the Messiah in only a few apocalyptic books (Enoch 105:2; II Esdras 7:28-29; 13:32, 37, 52) and occasionally in a late rabbinical source. Christians used it very early to refer to Jesus. The term is found frequently in the letters of Paul (e.g. [for example], Rom. [Romans] 1:3-4) and the Gospel of Mark; and in John 1:1-18 it denotes the metaphysical relationship between God and his incarnate Logos. When Gentile converts first heard it used, they would naturally think of Jesus as a savior and healer like Asclepius, who had both human and divine traits, though they would understand that there was and could be only one Son of God … In this passage ‘Son of God’ calls attention to Jesus’ unique relation to God and his superhuman powers, and Matthew connects this sonship with the Virgin Birth.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 270-271)

-4. Responded, YayShOo`ah, and said,
“[It is] written,
‘Not upon the bread alone will live the ’ahDahM [“man”, Adam],
for upon all [that] goes out [from the] mouth of YHVH.’”

“by bread alone: Jesus’ reply comes from Deut 8:3. To grasp its full significance one must read the entire context in Deut 6-8. The word of God is made the chief nourishment.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 638)

-5. Took him, the adversary, unto City the Holy,
and stood him upon a corner of [the] roof [of] House the Holy.

“The holy city is Jerusalem. Maccabean coins bear the inscription ‘Jerusalem the Holy,’ and the Arabic name is El-Quds, ‘the holy.’” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 271)

-6. [He] said to him,
“If son [of] the Gods you are,
send forth yourself to below, that behold, [it is] written,
‘For his angels he will command to you,
upon palms he will carry you,
lest strike in stone your legs.’”

“He shall give his angels charge, &c.] This is a mutilated quotation of Psal. [Psalm] xci. 11. The clause, to keep thee in all thy ways, Satan chose to leave out, as quite unsuitable to his design…
“In their hands they shall bear thee up] This quotation from Psal. xci. 11. is a metaphor taken from a nurse’s management of her child: in teaching it to walk, she guides it along plain ground; but when stones or other obstacles occur, she lifts up the child, and carries it over them, and then sets it down to walk again. Thus she keeps it in all its ways, watching over, and guarding every step it takes. To this St. Paul seems also to allude, I Thess. [Thessalonians] ii. 7. We were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 45)

-7. Said to him, YayShOo`ah,
“More is written,
‘Do not try [את, ’ehTh] YHVH your Gods.’” [Deuteronomy 6:16]

“A rabbinical tradition reads, ‘When the King Messiah reveals himself, then he comes and stands on the roof of the Holy Place.’ … Matthew’s third temptation (vss. [verses] 8-10 is a more obvious climax, but this second one might well be the most subtle and dangerous to one who was spiritually sensitive. It is interesting that in Luke 4:9-11 it stands in third place.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 271)

-8. Took him, the adversary, to a mountain high very,
and showed to him [את, ’ehTh] all [the] kingdoms [of the] world [תבל, ThayBayL] and their honor.

“If the words, all the kingdoms of the world, be taken in a literal sense, then this must have been a visionary representation, as the highest mountain on the face of the globe could not suffice to make evident even one hemisphere of the earth, and the other must of necessity be in darkness.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 45)

-9. [He] said unto him,
“[את, ’ehTh] all these I will give to you if you fall upon your face and worship to me.”
-10. Responded to him, YayShOo’ah,
“Go away, The Adversary;
behold [it is] written,
‘To YHVH your Gods you will worship,
and him alone you will slave.’”

“Jesus’ reply comes from Deut 6:13, which summarizes the great OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] message of ethical monotheism.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 638)
“Matthew adds to the source Begone, Satan! In 16:23 (=Mark 8:33), Peter is addressed as Satan because he tempts Jesus.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 272)

-11. To after from this, left him, the adversary,
and angels approached to serve him.

“The angels serve him, in accordance with the promise of Ps. 91:11-14. Matthew now begins again to copy Mark (cf. [compare with] Mark 1:13).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 273)

YayShOo`ah begins [את, ’ehTh] his sendings forth in GahLeeYL [Galilee]
(Mark 1:14-15; Luke 4:14-15)

-12. As that heard, YayShOo`ah that [כי, KeeY] they had imprisoned [הסגירו, HeeÇGeeYROo] YO-HahNahN, he went out unto the GahLeeYL.

“The story is told in 14:3-12. Luke, for artistic reasons, mentions this before the baptism of Jesus (Luke 3:19-20). The Fourth Gospel assigns Jesus an extensive ministry before John’s arrest (see, e.g., John 3:22-30).” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 273)

-13. He left [את, ’ehTh] NahTsRahTh ["Overlook", Nazareth] and came to reside [לגר, LahGOoR] in KhePhahR NahHOoM [“Village of Comfort”, Capernaum], beside the sea, in [the] region of ZeBOoLOoN [“Fertile”, Zebulon] and NahPHThahLeeY [“Torturous”, Naphtali].

“Galilee was bounded by mount Lebanon on the north, by the river Jordan, and the sea of Galilee on the east, by Chison on the south, and by the Mediterranean on the west.
“Nazareth, a little city in the tribe of Zabulon, in lower Galilee, with Tabor on the West and Ptolemais on the east. It is supposed that this city was the usual residence of our Lord for the first thirty years of his life. …
“Capernaum, a city famous in the New Testament, but never mentioned in the Old. Probably it was one of those cities which the Jews built after their return from Babylon. It stood on the sea coast of Galilee, on the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim, as mentioned in the text. This was called his own city, ch. [chapter] ix. 1. &c. and here, as a citizen, he paid the half shekel, chap. [chapter] xvii. 24. Among the Jews, if a man became a resident in any city for twelve months, he thereby became a citizen, and paid his proportion of dues and taxes. …
“Zabulon, the country of this tribe, in which Nazareth and Capernaum were situated, bordered on the lake of Gennesareth, stretching to the frontiers of Sidon, Gen. clix. 13. Nephtalim was contiguous to it, and both were on the east side of Jordan [sic; Nazareth and Capernaum are both on the west side of the Jordan], Josh. xix. 35.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 46)

-14. In order to [למען, LeMah'ahN] realize the saying in [the] mouth of YeShah`-YahHOo ["Saved YHVH", Isaiah], the prophet:
-15. “Land of ZeBOoLOoN and land of NahPhThahLeeY, way [of] the sea, over [`ayBehR] the YahRDayN [“Descender”, the Jordan], GeLeeYL [of] the nations,

“The citation is based on the M.T. [Masoretic Text, the authorized version of the Hebrew Bible], but the first half is condensed so that only the geographic references are retained. These five references point to northern Galilee and Transjordan, which had fallen to the Assyrians in 734 BC … Isaiah’s promise of their liberation Matthew sees fulfilled by Jesus’ arrival. …
“Galilee was by Matthew’s day at least half Gentile in population, half pagan in cult (cf. the Venus of Dan), and bilingual (using Greek and Aramaic). These facts may have had some influence on Jesus and earliest Christianity, opening it to the Gentile mission often expressing itself in Greek, shaping its message, set in a Jewish matrix, in such a way as to be readily intelligible to Gentiles of good will. The atmosphere was different from Judean Judaism.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 638-639)
“Galilee of the Gentiles] Or of the nations. So called, because it was inhabited by Egyptians, Arabians, and Phœnicians, according to the testimony of Strabo and others. The Hebrew גוים goyim, and the Greek εθνων [ethnon], signify nations; and, in the Old and New Testaments, mean those people who were not descendants of any of the twelve tribes. The word Gentiles, from gens, a nation, signifies the same.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 46)
“The quotation differs from the LXX, and it may come from an independent Greek version or an oral Targum [ancient Jewish commentary on the Hebrew Bible] … Galilee’ means ‘circle’ or ‘region’; and Galilee of the Gentiles originally meant ‘region of non-Jews.’ Many of its residents were forcibly converted to Judaism in the Maccabean period.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 274)
To my ear there is a play on words; GeeL meaning “joy”, so “Joy of the Nations”.

-16. "The people, the walkers in darkness, see a light great, settlers in a land [of] Shadow-of-death, light shines upon them.” [Isaiah 8:23-9:1]

“Originally this referred to the oppressed Israelites… Light-darkness symbolism is not so frequent in Matt as in John, IQM [Milḥāmâ (War Scroll) from Qumran Cave 1], or the gnostic writings, but it is present here: Jesus’ preaching the kingdom is the light of consolation to the suffering people (cf. Luke 1:79).” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)
“Shadow of death] Σκια Θανατου [Skia Thanatou], used only here and in Luke i. 79. but often in the Old Covenant, where the Hebrew is צל מות tsal maveth. It is not easy to enter fully into the ideal meaning of this term. As in the former clause, Death is personified, so here. A shadow is that darkness cast upon a place by a body raised between it and the light or sun. Death is here represented as standing between the land abovementioned, and the light of life, or Sun of Righteousness…” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 47)

-17. From the time the that began, YayShOo`ah, to proclaim [להכריז, LeHahKhReeYZ] and to say:
“Return in thought

“The Greek word translated repent basically denotes ‘change of mind,’ but in the LXX it often stands for a Hebrew word meaning ‘to grieve for one’s sins.’ Repentance is one of the most important of all Jewish doctrines. It involves profound sorrow for sin, restitution so far as possible, and a steadfast resolution not to commit that particular sin again. Such repentance unfailingly brings divine forgiveness without the need of any mediation or ritual act. … There is a famous saying of R. [Rabbi] Aḥa (ca. [approximately] A.D. 320): ‘If the Israelites would repent for one day, the Messiah Son of David would come immediately.’ Jesus’ teaching on repentance builds on the foundation of the O.T. and Judaism.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 274)

“for near is [the] kingdom of skies.”

“The terms kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God are used interchangeably in the Synoptic Gospels. The former translates literally the rabbinical phrase malkûth shāmáyîm; ‘heaven’ is used partly to avoid mentioning the divine name… The O.T. thinks of this sovereignty as eternal because God created the world; his reign is present already in so far as he is king of Israel, and it will be manifested perfectly in the future age. Rabbinical thought develops this concept. Man rejected God’s kingship in the days of Noah, and thenceforth God was king only in heaven until Abraham, Moses, and the children of Israel accepted his sovereignty. … the reign of God is realized whenever a man consciously submits himself to God’s will, and an individual takes the ‘yoke of the kingdom’ upon himself by reciting the Shema (Deut. 6:4-9; 11:13-21; Num. [Numbers] 15:37-41). …
“The kingdom is central in Jesus’ teaching. He generally emphasizes its future and miraculous aspect; furthermore, it is at hand (literally ‘has drawn near’), and the faithful have not long to wait. … it is already beginning to manifest itself in the events connected with Jesus’ ministry (12:28=Luke 11:20; 11:12-13=Luke 16:16; 13:16-17=Luke 10:23-24), and it is in the disciples’ midst (Luke 17:20-21). In the Lord’s Prayer (6:9-13=Luke 11:2-4) the sanctification of God’s name is closely connected with the coming of the kingdom, and 6:10 equates the kingdom with the doing of God’s will on earth as it is in heaven. This sense of the dawning of the kingdom, the appearance of its first fruits, the combination of thanksgiving for present bliss with the most poignant expectation of glory in the near future – these features run through the whole N.T. and account for the special quality of it eschatology… Indeed, men can enter the kingdom now (5:20; 18:3; 20:1-16), and the Beatitudes (5:3-11) are intended to describe the character of its members. … There is a close relation between the kingdom and the group of disciples, and it is not surprising that Matthew tends to equate it with the church (13:47; 53; 16:18-19). … Jesus is the herald of the kingdom and he is intimately involved in its present manifestations. … There is no necessary logical connection between the kingdom of God and the Messiah or Son of man, but the two types of expectation are combined in the Gospels, as in some Jewish writings.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 274-275)
“The proclamation of the near arrival of God’s kingdom is the central message of Jesus and, along with the resurrection, the basis and object of Christian hope. Derived from the night vision of Daniel (7:13-14), it represents the future final salvation of all humanity socially, politically, and spiritually through an exercise of the sovereignty of God, establishing justice and peace on earth as well as in heaven (6:33; Rom [Romans] 14:17). In Dan [Daniel] 7:14-14 it is given to ‘one like a son of man,’ and Q and Matt identify this mysterious figure with Jesus coming again in glory. Thus, for Christians the kingdom hope includes faith in Christ as end-time savior. Since Christ has already come (in humility and suffering) we have a foretaste of the kingdom (12:28), esp. [especially] in his ministry of healing and feeding the multitude… Matthew avoids the direct mention of God out of reverence… as do the other Synoptics. The circumlocution is unfortunate because it misleads people into thinking that the kingdom is only in heaven and not to be on earth (6:10). The kingdom was also to be the content of the disciples’ preaching. (10:7).” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)

The call to four fishers
(Mark 1:16-20; Luke 5:1-11)

-18. As that he walked beside [the] sea [of] the GahLeeYL he saw two brothers, [את,* ’ehTh] *SheeM`ON** [Simon] (the called KaYPhah’ [Peter]) and [את, ’ehTh] ’ahNDRaY [Andrew] his brother, sending forth a net into the sea, because they were fishers.

“Matt anticipates Jesus’ later renaming of Simon …” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)
“Simon is a Greek name used in place of the Hebrew ‘Simeon.’ Peter (Πετρος [Petros “Rock”; Hebrew: כיפא KaYPha']) is his nickname …” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 275)
“Seminaries of learning, in the order of God’s providence and grace have great and important uses; and, in reference to such uses, they should be treated with great respect: but to make preachers of the Gospel, is a matter to which they are utterly inadequate; it is a prerogative that God never did, and never will, delegate to man.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 47)

-19. [He] said to them,
“Come after me and I will make you fishers of ’ahDahM.”
-20. Immediately they left [את, ’ehTh] the nets and went after him.
-21. In his going thence [הלאה, HahL’aH] he saw two brothers other,
Yah-`ahQoB ["YHVH Followed", Jacob], son of ZahBDah-eeY [“Endowed”, Zebedee], and YO-HahNahN, his brother, in a boat with ZahBDah-eeY their father, and they were repairing their nets.

“James and Jacob are variant English forms of the same Hebrew name.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 276)

He called to them 22. and immediately they left [את, ’ehTh] the boat and [את, ’ehTh] their father and went after him.

YayShOo`ah serves [את, ’ehTh] the throngs
(Luke 6:17-19)

“Matthew omits Mark 1:21, 23-28, 35-38, and postpones 1:22, 29-34. He now constructs an editorial summary out of Mark 1:39; 3:7-8, 10.” (Johnson, 1951, p. VII 277)

-23. He circulated in all the GahLeeYL as that he taught in houses of the assembly and proclaimed [את, ’ehTh] tidings of the kingdom and cured all sickness and all affliction [מדוה, MahDVeH] in people.

“Teaching in their synagogues] Synagogue, συναγωγη, from συν, together, and αγω, I bring, a public assembly of persons, or the place where such persons publicly assembled. Synagogues, among the Jews, were not probably older than the return from the Babylonish captivity.
…
“Synagogue, among the Jews, had often the same meaning as congregation among us, or place of judicature, see Jam. [James] ii. 2.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 48)
“gospel of the kingdom; This phrase is unique to Matt (three times: here, 9:35; 24:14). … healing every illness and every weakness: That Jesus was a healer was an embarrassment to later Christians; therefore, it is certainly historical. He was among other things an itinerant Galilean wonder-working prophet in the pattern of Elijah.” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)

-24. Hearing of him went out in all Syria,
and were brought unto him [את, ’ehTh] all the sick,
the burdened from sicknesses and hurts to their varieties,
and also persons seized by demons [שדים, ShayDeeYM], struck by [the] moon, and paralytics [ומשתקים, OoMeShooThahQeeYM];
and he healed them.

“All Syria probably denotes the region north of Galilee. … In the first century ‘Syria’ is sometimes used to include Palestine. Those which were lunatic (i.e., moon-struck) is a literal rendering of the Greek. In 17:15, and according to RSV [Revised Standard Version] here, this rare word is applied to epileptics… these are the demoniacs of the Gospel.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 277-278)
“Our common version, which renders the word, those possessed by devil, is not strictly correct; as the word devil, διαβολος [diabolos], is not found in the plural in any part of the Sacred Writings, when speaking of evil spirits: for though there are multitudes of demons, Mark v. 9. yet it appears there is but one DEVIL, who seems to be supreme, or head, over all the rest.” (Clarke, 1832, p. I 49)
“The Roman province of Syria included four parts (Strabo …): Commagene (Samosata), Seleucia (Antioch), Coele-Syria (Damascus), Phoenicia-Palestine. In Josephus Syria seems to include Galilee and the coast down to Gaza, but not Judea. It embraces Tyre, Sidon and Idumea (cf. Mar). the ‘all’ is plerophoric¹ .” (Viviano, 1990, p. 639)

-25. Throngs, throngs, walked after him from the GahLeeYL and from DayQahPOLeeYÇ [Decapolis],
From Jerusalem and Judea,
and from over the YahRDayN.

“The Decapolis (‘ten cities) was a league of Greek-speaking (and largely pagan) city-states. All the towns which Pliny mentions as forming the group were east of the Jordan except Scythopolis (Bethshan). Some of the best known were Damascus, Gadara, Pella, Gerasa, and Philadelphia (modern Amman). Here the term may include the territory surrounding them.” (Johnson, 1951, pp. VII 277-278)

FOOTNOTES
¹ plerophoric - I can’t find a definition for this word, apparently it means something like “generalization”. An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible

Qumran « See The Holy Land

what is the qumran

what is the qumran - win

Newly-excavated skeletons could help to reveal who wrote the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls - 'The high concentration of adult males of various ages buried at Qumran is similar to what has been found at cemeteries connected to Byzantine monasteries'

70 Years After Dead Sea Scrolls Were Found, New Discoveries Await: In 1947, or late 1946, the first batch of Dead Sea Scrolls was found in a cave located near the site of Qumran in what is now the West Bank. These bits of biblical history continue to perplex archaeologists to this day.

Newly-excavated skeletons could help to reveal who wrote the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls: 'The high concentration of adult males of various ages buried at Qumran is similar to what has been found at cemeteries connected to Byzantine monasteries'.

11-19 22:33 - 'Newly-excavated skeletons could help to reveal who wrote the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls: 'The high concentration of adult males of various ages buried at Qumran is similar to what has been found at...' (independent.co.uk) by /u/madazzahatter removed from /r/worldnews within 1080-1090min

Newly-excavated skeletons could help to reveal who wrote the ancient Dead Sea Scrolls: 'The high concentration of adult males of various ages buried at Qumran is similar to what has been found at cemeteries connected to Byzantine monasteries'.

BGP (1M routes and beyond) Hardware/Software recommendations (sensible at scale!) -- and a little rant about IPInfusion OcNOS

My reasons to believe (updated.)

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES’ REFUTED: WORSHIP JESUS AS GOD

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES’ REFUTED: WORSHIP JESUS AS GOD

Islam claims the Bible was corrupted away from its original meaning. The Dead Sea Scrolls prove this is impossible.

"Book of Enoch" questions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS: Hit The Character Limit Edition - Electronic Literature, Community Discussions, Media, & Misc

ELECTRONIC LITERATURE

COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS

MEDIA

MISC

Does Genesis 6:1-5 show divine beings having intercourse with human women? (Christians Only)

Matthew 5 part 2 - verses 27-end

Matthew 5:1-26; part one of the Sermon on the Mount

Translating Helper/Azur in a specific way.

Matthew 4 - the throngs

what is the qumran video

what is the qumran top