Gerasim Posted November 16, 2010 Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Any comment on verse Act 3:13 ? The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted November 16, 2010 Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Any comment on verse Act 3:13 ?The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.Yyyyyyes. That's a bad thing, that he was denied in the presence of Pilate when Pilate wanted to let him go?Okay, so my comment... 'That's a bad thing'.However, I would guess that you have a pretty specific reason for bringing up this particular verse. Care to elaborate on what you're looking for in this conversation so that you don't have twelve responses of, 'Bad.' 'Yep, that was bad.' 'Totally not good.' 'On a scale of one to ten, I'd say it was bad.'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted November 16, 2010 Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Sounds like he might be thinking that since we believe the God of Abraham and Isaac to have been Jehovah (Christ) that the scripture somehow contradicts this line of thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerasim Posted November 16, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Sounds like he might be thinking that since we believe the God of Abraham and Isaac to have been Jehovah (Christ) that the scripture somehow contradicts this line of thinking.You forget to add ''and of Jacob''. The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.OK. Tell me, do you realy see that the scripture somehow contradicts this line of thinking, as you have sad. Can you explain it ? Like to learn more ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmarch Posted November 16, 2010 Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Any comment on verse Act 3:13 ?The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.I'd hate to be on the recieving end of that verse....Without reading the surrounding verses that sounds like it was directed to the Jews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted November 16, 2010 Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Luke was a Gentile who joined the Church after the death of Christ. He is the author of Acts. It was very common for the Gentiles to directly and completely blame the Jews for Jesus' death, since it took the responsibility and blame off of the Romans (Gentiles). Remember, Luke was writing from second and third hand sources, including from Mark and Q. But he spun it in a way to interest his friend Greek friendTheophilus, to whom the history was written. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerasim Posted November 16, 2010 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2010 Reason I post verse is because some bible translations use word servant insted Son as it is in KJV Bible.Can some one tell me why is used in other bible translations word servant insted Son ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytebear Posted November 17, 2010 Report Share Posted November 17, 2010 (edited) Because the other translations are less accurate and there is no real English translation for the word which really means both son and servant. The word according to Strong's Concordance can mean either son or servant. But compare to Acts 4:27 and Acts 4:30 which refer to Jesus as the "Holy" Son/Servant. So, I don't think this verse is specifically about Jesus being the Son of God, but the later verses show a much stronger implication to using the word in conjunction with Jesus' divine nature. It is really about him being both the Son of God as well as the servant to mankind by using His name to heal the sick and bless the poor (See Acts 3:26).Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon Edited November 17, 2010 by bytebear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyTown Posted November 17, 2010 Report Share Posted November 17, 2010 Because the other translations are less accurate and there is no real English translation for the word which really means both son and servant. The word according to Strong's Concordance can mean either son or servant. But compare to Acts 4:27 and Acts 4:30 which refer to Jesus as the "Holy" Son/Servant. So, I don't think this verse is specifically about Jesus being the Son of God, but the later verses show a much stronger implication to using the word in conjunction with Jesus' divine nature. It is really about him being both the Son of God as well as the servant to mankind by using His name to heal the sick and bless the poor (See Acts 3:26).Blue Letter Bible - LexiconSee how much easier that was when you asked what you were actually thinking rather than simply saying, 'Here's a verse. Comment on it!' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted November 17, 2010 Report Share Posted November 17, 2010 The "Suffering Servant" was a Messianic theme that dated back to Isaiah (see ch 53 for an example). Messiah Ben Judah (Savior, son of Judah) was to come to earth and suffer for man's sins. Early Jews and Christians believed in the Divine Council of Heaven. This consisted of El Elyon/Elohim as the chief God, and his divine sons (bene 'elohim). The chief Son was Jehovah, who was given Israel as his nation to rule over as divine king, under Elohim's direction. Jehovah is directly tied to the Messiah role by Old Testament scholar Margaret Barker, who then equates Jehovah and Jesus Christ. So, Christ is both Suffering Servant AND obedient Son. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mordorbund Posted November 19, 2010 Report Share Posted November 19, 2010 The "Suffering Servant" was a Messianic theme that dated back to Isaiah (see ch 53 for an example). Messiah Ben Judah (Savior, son of Judah) was to come to earth and suffer for man's sins.You meant Messiah Ben Joseph, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheAngelPalmoni Posted November 20, 2010 Report Share Posted November 20, 2010 Interesting, I am going to ponder this one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted November 22, 2010 Report Share Posted November 22, 2010 No, I mean Messiah ben Judah. Messiah ben Joseph is considered to be an entirely different person by many. Messiah Son of Joseph would not apply to someone who was of the lineage of Judah. While Messiah ben Joseph also is considered a suffering servant, his main task is to restore that which is lost. Messiah ben Judah redeems from sin and suffering. Isaiah 53 speaks of the descendant of Judah, not of Joseph, as a suffering servant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerryShirts Posted November 25, 2010 Report Share Posted November 25, 2010 I also think the word "servant" is a decent one, because that is what the Son came to do is serve. I think the Jewish-Christians of this era were putting it all together concerning the Messiah, and as Rameumptom noted the tie with the OT prophecy Suffering Servant was a good one. There is an astoniishing enormous amount of materials on the Suffering Servant. I once began doing some research on it, and was very quickly overwhelmed. I think I shall continue on with it however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KerryShirts Posted November 26, 2010 Report Share Posted November 26, 2010 For an interesting short analysis of the original background to the Suffering Servant in Isaiah, Margaret Barker has this to offer. Intriguing to say the least!http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/FourthServantSong.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.