the definite article

[chrisg]

Wasn't sure where to put this, so it's here; if it's in the wrong place, please feel free to move it.

I have just been reading a discussion about knowing the difference when Paul is speaking of God's Law and the man made rules of the Pharisees. The author stated that for God's law, the definite article is used, but for Pharisaical laws, the definite article is omitted, but the translators did not make this distinction, which is why we have so much confusion. Is this right? I can't find anything that supports or denies this view.

[alon]

Apr 3, 2016 6:43:55 GMT -8 chrisg said:

Wasn't sure where to put this, so it's here; if it's in the wrong place, please feel free to move it.

I have just been reading a discussion about knowing the difference when Paul is speaking of God's Law and the man made rules of the Pharisees. The author stated that for God's law, the definite article is used, but for Pharisaical laws, the definite article is omitted, but the translators did not make this distinction, which is why we have so much confusion. Is this right? I can't find anything that supports or denies this view.

I have heard this, however not being a linguist or even very good with English, I usually just "defer to the experts" on such things. I do know , and I know Rav Sha'ul was a observant Jew. So using that as a guide, I am generally able to distinguish between the two.

This does fit my "template" of what I believe, so I can accept it ... however I cannot endorse it. Working from a belief template can be dangerous, as it is easy to accept things too readily. Ask yourself, do the people talking about this have the education and experience to authoritatively discuss it? Do they have an agenda? I guess I just wouldn't be comfortable arguing this as a reason Rav Sha'ul is difficult to understand unless I really understood it. You never know. I got into an argument with a person at one study group at an AoG church. It turned out she had until recently been with Wycliffe ... man was I glad I didn't go too far off the reservation! Besides that, I still have a lot of garbage to unlearn from my Hebrew Roots days, sifting through the net for answers before I found a group I could study with and this forum, where I can bring ideas and get honest, down to earth feedback. I don't need to work from my "template"; that is why I got all the bad ideas from anyway- them and church.

Ask for their sources. If they look good and you have the time condense it and bring the ideas back here. Maybe someone who as at least awake in their English classes can help. (I wasn't, so ...  ) 

Dan C

[chrisg]

Unfortunately it was an article and there was no way to question the author.

[chrisg]

This is the link to the facebook page that says the same thing; I have now asked for corroboration:

Moderator note: I removed the link because I recognized the name, and that group has some really bad teachings in it. This one, on cursory examination, did not seem to be too bad. So I have it copied and may repost the post- it is actually a facebook link. If any of you have already gone there, I advise you to be very careful. From what all I've seen of their stuff, these are the things that we warn about here all the time. But I'll need time to go through the article so stand by ...

[alon]

I am going to repost this in a condensed version because the guy isn’t too far off the mark. But mainly because he carries the anti-Semitical slant the church puts on scriptural exegesis. We can’t deal with anti-Semitism unless we can spot it, and this is subtle. Also his thinking on history reflects the lies told by the church fathers and now repeated as fact everywhere, even in some well-meaning Messianic congregations.

Did you notice sometimes Paul seems to be saying "the law" is bad:

Galatians 3:11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.”

Other times Paul says "The Law" is good:

Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

Confusing, to say the very least. And here is a verse that seems to say both good and bad in the same sentence and describing more than one law:

Romans 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

Have you found Paul to be very clear sometimes and other times about as clear as mud? You have to study the Greek to know just what Paul is actually saying.

Most Bible translators incorrectly translated the Greek text and unless you know the Greek then it is almost impossible to know that when Paul seems to speak against The Law he is actually speaking against the man made rules and regulations the Pharisees and scribes came up with that pervert God's Law, The . These man made false rules and regulation were taught in their schools and strict adherence to them was required even above God's Law. An example I like to use is one of the false Sabbath laws they made up is that if a person erases more than 2 marks on a piece of paper then they violate the Sabbath. That is completely absurd and not found in the Bible!

My favorite example of the absurdity of Talmud false laws is:

Writing, drawing, erasing, even tearing through letters on a package are avoided. Pens, pencils, erasers, etc., thus fall under the category of Muktzah.

How to approach it: Put away pencils, markers, pens, etc., so you won't come to use them. Any packages or bottle caps that are to be used on Shabbat should be pre-opened (or carefully opened on Shabbat), so as not to tear through any letters.

But you might favorite this one:

Toilet Paper

Things that are attached -- through glue, sewing, or even perforation -- cannot be unattached for a purpose on Shabbat. This would involve taking something in one form and carefully dividing it up into another for some use, thus creating something anew. Paper towels also fall into this category. How to approach it: Pre-tear toilet paper before Shabbat, or use tissues. For paper towels, pre-tear what you might need, or use paper napkins.

What if you don't tear enough toilet paper?

In the Greek text the word for law is nomos no matter what kind of law is being discussed. When referring to God's Law, the Greek uses the article word "ho" meaning "the" or ho nomos to reference YHVH God's Law. But when referring to a law that is not God's Law it does not use the article to declare it. Translators and Theologians came along and did not know what to make of this so they decided something was wrong with God's Law therefore they came up with all sorts of various ways for believers to not keep God's Law, especially His Sabbath.

Don't be deceived, keep God's Sabbath and all His Law and receive salvation:

Isaiah 56:6-8 6 “Also the sons of the Gentile
Who join themselves to YHVH, to serve Him,
And to love the name of YHVH, to be His servants—
Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath,
And holds fast My covenant—
7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain,
And make them joyful in My house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices
Will be accepted on My altar;
For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.”
8 YHVH GOD, who gathers the outcasts of Israel, says,
“Yet I will gather to him
Others besides those who are gathered to him.”

Let's start here:

"Most Bible translators incorrectly translated the Greek text and unless you know the Greek then it is almost impossible to know that when Paul seems to speak against The Law he is actually speaking against the man made rules and regulations the Pharisees and scribes came up with that pervert God's Law, The ."

He speaks with the church bias that it was all those evil Pharisees what done it, gosh-dawgit! In reality the people who were coming into the synagogues and perverting the truth were newer sects which were very strict and had a LOT of extrabiblical rules and teachings. Remember, Rav Sha'ul himself says "I AM a Pharisee," not I WAS a Pharisee.

Act 23:6 (KJV) But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.

So if Paul is our standard here, the Pharisees were not all bad. He also shows the typical Christian misunderstanding of what these extra rules were. They are halacha, the way a particular sect obeyed . The Jews revered , and nothing was done with, as is implied here, intent to destroy it. But many sects, including some of the Pharisees, did go overboard with their halacha. There were some false teachings, and these were again these newer, super-strict sects. The worst thing Rav Sha'ul and the other apostles saw was they were trying to say one had to convert to Judaism before you could be saved. This was seen as very dangerous to both Jews who joined the sect of the Nots'rim and to Gentile converts. No Pharisee ever taught that.

The author then goes on to cite some "Laws" he found in the Talmud (I am guessing he just heard of them somewhere) which he could use to embarrassingly illustrate Talmudic "Law." This was reflected in one disgusting comment which I did not repeat.

"These man made false rules and regulation were taught in their schools and strict adherence to them was required even above God's Law."

That is true these things were taught in some schools of some sects. But again, these were sects that made the Pharisees even of the school of Shammai seem tame! And "above God's Law" makes it sound like they were usurping God's commandments. The Talmud only explained . It did not replace it. These extrabiblical regulations can make observance a burden to all but the most devout Jew. That is one reason most Meshiachim do not follow any sect of Rabbinical Judaism. But we do not throw out everything they said either.

If you ever join a synagogue, or a large group of Messianic believers, you will probably voluntarily come under the authority of a Beit Din. They will make your halacha. Many try to say they don't need anyone to tell them how to live and follow . Fair enough, but that is basically what Chava told God when she partook of the fruit, so I hope that works out for you.

"In the Greek text the word for law is nomos no matter what kind of law is being discussed. When referring to God's Law, the Greek uses the article word "ho" meaning "the" or ho nomos to reference YHVH God's Law. But when referring to a law that is not God's Law it does not use the article to declare it. Translators and Theologians came along and did not know what to make of this so they decided something was wrong with God's Law therefore they came up with all sorts of various ways for believers to not keep God's Law, especially His Sabbath."

I can't speak to the accuracy of this. My take is still if you know , you won't have to rely on experts and internet chats to know what is right. is our base, and everything comes back there. Then the rest of the TNK, and only then the Kethuvai Shealiachim is interpreted against those. This especially includes the writings of Rav Sha'ul!

Dan C

[jimmie]

A few verses where it is plan the law of God is being spoken about with out the definite-article "the3588":

Luk 2:23 (As2531 it is written1125 in1722 the law3551 of the Lord,2962 Every3956 male730 that openeth1272 the womb3388 shall be called2564 holy40 to the3588 Lord;)2962
Luk 2:24 And2532 to offer1325 a sacrifice2378 according2596 to that which is said2046 in1722 the law3551 of the Lord,2962 A pair2201 of turtledoves,5167 or2228 two1417 young3502 pigeons.4058
Rom 3:20 Therefore1360 by1537 the deeds2041 of the law3551 there shall no3756, 3956 flesh4561 be justified1344 in his sight:1799, 846 for1063 by1223 the law3551 is the knowledge1922 of sin.266
Rom 7:25 I thank2168 God2316 through1223 Jesus2424 Christ5547 our2257 Lord.2962 So686 then3767 with the3588 mind3563 I1473 myself848, (3303) serve1398 the law3551 of God;2316 but1161 with the3588 flesh4561 the law3551 of sin.266
Rom 9:4 Who3748 are1526 Israelites;2475 to whom3739 pertaineth the3588 adoption,5206 and2532 the3588 glory,1391 and2532 the3588 covenants,1242 and2532 the3588 giving of the law,3548 and2532 the3588 service2999 of God, and2532 the3588 promises;1860
Gal 3:10 For1063 as many as3745 are1526 of1537 the works2041 of the law3551 are1526 under5259 the curse:2671 for1063 it is written,1125 Cursed1944 is every one3956 that3739 continueth1696 not3756 in1722 all things3956 which are written1125 in1722 the3588 book975 of the3588 law3551 to do4160 them.846
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever3956 committeth4160 sin266 transgresseth also the law:4160, 2532, 458 for2532 sin266 is2076 the3588 transgression of the law.458

A few with it:

Rom 8:7 Because1360 the3588 carnal4561 mind5427 is enmity2189 against1519 God:2316 for1063 it is not subject5293, 3756 to the3588 law3551 of God,2316 neither3761 indeed1063 can1410 be.
1Co 9:9 For1063 it is written1125 in1722 the3588 law3551 of Moses,3475 Thou shalt not3756 muzzle5392 the mouth of the ox1016 that treadeth out the corn.248 Doth(3361) God2316 take care3199 for oxen?1016
1Co 14:21 In1722 the3588 law3551 it is written,1125 With1722 men of other tongues2084 and2532 other(1722), 2087 lips5491 will I speak2980 unto this5129 people;2992 and2532 yet for all that3779 will they not3761 hear1522 me,3450 saith3004 the Lord.2962