Washington Business and Technology Institute Journal
http://wbti.wordpress.com/category/mike-h-lei-editor/JUST-PRAY
http://www.just-pray.com/
The Idea behind this website~{!-~}
~{!0~}Just Pray~{!1~} was the last words my brother John gave to me on 3/21/2008, the day before he went to be with his Maker.
I hope this website will become a place where people can request prayer, experience Him, and pray for others.
May people come to know His love and receive eternal life through JC.
Here are some words from the Bible~{!-~}
~{!0~}For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.~{!1~}
~{!0~}Until now you have not asked for anything in My name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.~{!1~}
~{!0~}But God demonstrates His own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.~{!1~}
~{!0~}That if you confess with your mouth, ~{!0~}Jesus is Lord,~{!1~} and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.~{!1~}
May He bless you!
Contact Information
Email :
info@just-pray.com
Published in: Mike H. Lei, Editoron April 13, 2009 at 10:30 am Comments (0)
THE MEANING OF ~{!0~}COVENANT~{!1~} IN HEBREWS 9:16-17
THE MEANING OF ~{!0~}COVENANT~{!1~} IN HEBREWS 9:16-17
___________________
A Paper
Presented to
Dr. Stanley Toussaint
Dallas Theological Seminary
___________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Course
BE107 Hebrews, General Epistles, and Revelation
___________________
by
Mike H. Lei
February, 2009
This paper will discuss the meaning of diatheke in Hebrews 9:16-17. This word can be translated as ~{!0~}covenant~{!1~} or ~{!0~}will~{!1~}. The paper will first present the arguments for ~{!0~}will~{!1~} and then the arguments for ~{!0~}covenant~{!1~}. Then it will conclude with my own position.
NIV translates diatheke as ~{!0~}will~{!1~} in Hebrews 9:16-17: ~{!0~}In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living.~{!1~}[1] The word diatheke usually mean ~{!0~}will~{!1~} or ~{!0~}testament~{!1~} in secular Greek. The Jews choose this word for ~{!0~}covenant~{!1~} (berit) in the Septuagint because it means an arrangement given by a superior party to an inferior party who can accept or reject it.[2] Thus, the secular use of the word diatheke as ~{!0~}will~{!1~} is used in these verses as an analogy to the Mosaic covenant. A testator must die before his will can take effect just as the sacrificial animal~{!/~}s death represents the atonement of Christ.[3] Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary sees the technical legal term for ~{!0~}will~{!1~} points to the necessity of Christ~{!/~}s death to bring into force a new covenant.[4]
NASB translates diatheke as ~{!0~}covenant~{!1~} in Hebrews 9:16-17: ~{!0~}For where a covenant is, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. For a covenant is valid only when men are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives.~{!1~}[5] W.L. Lane points out ~{!0~}for~{!1~} in vs. 16 and ~{!0~}therefore~{!1~} in vs. 18 ties vs. 16-17 to the preceding and following verses about covenant. Lane calls vs. 16-17 ~{!0~}a general principle based on the procedure for the ratification of a covenant~{!1~}. [6] Lane points to vs. 18-22 which connects covenant to death. The covenant is ratified by the death of the covenant-victim. Lane sees these verses focusing on Christ~{!/~}s death as the priestly mediator, not as the death leading to inheritance. [7] Lane explains vs. 16b by pointing to covenant ratification in the OT by the deaths of sacrificial animals. The ratifying party invokes a curse upon himself by the symbolism of the animal sacrifices. If the ratifying party breaks the terms of the covenant he will suffer the violent death like the animals in the sacrifice. Thus, Lane explains ~{!0~}For the ratification of a covenant it was necessary for the death of the ratifier to be represented symbolically.~{!1~}[8] The Expositor~{!/~}s Bible Commentary notes that Lane~{!/~}s view is different from most recent commentators.[9] However, Vine~{!/~}s Complete Expositor Dictionary supports the common use of diatheke as ~{!0~}covenant~{!1~} and does not see sufficient reason to use it otherwise.[10]
The author of Hebrews appears to understand the double meaning of this word and used the word diatheke to describe how a new covenant is like a will. A will is enacted on the death of the person who wrote the will. It can~{!/~}t be in effect before the person dies. In the same way, the writer of Hebrews sees Christ~{!/~}s death as a necessity to the ratification of the New Covenant, which is in His blood. Just like a will, Christ has to die before the New Covenant can be put into effect. I would agree with the NIV translation of ~{!0~}will~{!1~} in Hebrews 9:16-17.
Bibliography
Barker, Kenneth L. and John Kohlenberger III. Consulting eds. Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, vol. 2: New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Elwell, Walter A. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
Lane, William L. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 47: Hebrews 9-13. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.
Longman, Tremper III and David E. Garland. Gen. eds. The Expositor~{!/~}s Bible Commentary. Rev. ed., 13: Hebrews~~Revelation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.
New American Standard Bible. Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1997.
New International Version. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%209:16-17;&version=31;
Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr. Vine~{!/~}s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1996.
[1] Hebrews 9:16-17, NIV.
[2] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 300.
[3] Ibid., 300.
[4] Kenneth L. Barker and John Kohlenberger III, consulting eds., Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, vol 2: New Testament (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1994), 981.
[5] Hebrews 9:16-17, NASB.
[6] William L. Lane, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 47, Hebrews 9-13 (Dallas,TX: Word Books, 1991), 242.
[7] Ibid., 242.
[8] Ibid., 243.
[9] Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland, gen. eds., The Expositor~{!/~}s Bible Commentary, rev. ed., 13, Hebrews~~Revelation (Grand Rapid: Zondervan, 2006), 122.
[10] W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White, Jr., Vine~{!/~}s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1
996), 135.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published in: Mike H. Lei, Editoron at 10:12 am Comments (0)
04/09/2009 Home Bible Study, LV,NV
Rev.19:11-21:8. We see how Jesus will come to earth with His heavenly army - consisting of angels and resurrected believers who have died. The word of Jesus will defeat the beast and false prophet and the armies of the earth that came to fight against Him. The beast and false prophet will be thrown into the lake of fire. Then Satan will be bound for 1000 years. During the millenium, the kingdom of Christ will be on earth and He will reign with resurrected saints. There will be believers who survived the Tribulation on earth and they will have children. After 1000 years, Satan will be realeased from his prison for a short time and he will try to gather a huge army of unbelievers to attack the kingdom of Christ. They will be defeated by fire from heaven and the devil will be thrown into the lake of fire. Then all the dead will be judged and those not in the book of life will be judged according to what they have done and thrown into the lake of fire. Then there will be a new heaven and new earth. God will wipe away every tear and there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain. And God said, ~{!0~}I am making everything new!~{!1~}.
Published in: Mike H. Lei, Editoron April 9, 2009 at 8:22 pm Comments (0)
04/08/2009 Prayer Journal -Mike
Dear Lord, Thank You for the message from Chuck Swindoll yesterday on ~{!0~}lust~{!1~}. Help me remember to fear You and keep You in my mind at all times. Grant me good friends to hold me accountable. Thank You for the paper on 1 John 5:16 to teach me to be mindful how to pray for others. Thank You for the time with my parents and their love for me. Please continue to guide me in the job search. May Your will be done in my life. In Jesus name, Amen.
Published in: Mike H. Lei, Editoron April 8, 2009 at 7:40 am Comments (1)
THE MEANING OF ~{!0~}INTERPRETATION~{!1~} IN 2 PETER 1:20
THE MEANING OF ~{!0~}INTERPRETATION~{!1~} IN 2 PETER 1:20
___________________
A Paper
Presented to
Dr. Stanley Toussaint
Dallas Theological Seminary
___________________
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Course
BE107 Hebrews, General Epistles, and Revelation
___________________
by
Mike H. Lei
February 26, 2009
This paper will look at the meaning of ~{!0~}interpretation~{!1~} in 2 Peter 1:20. The two main views are 1) it is dealing with the interpretation of scripture; and 2) it is dealing with the origin of scripture. We will first look at the views supporting ~{!0~}interpretation~{!1~} and then the views supporting ~{!0~}origin~{!1~}. Finally, this paper will try to show that the best view is that this verse is dealing with the origin of scripture, rather than the interpretation of scripture.
The two different interpretations of 2 Peter 1:20 give two different renderings of this verse. The NIV, NET, and NLT see this verse is talking about the origin of scripture.[1] The NIV reads 2 Peter 1:20, ~{!0~}Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet~{!/~}s own interpretation~{!1~}. The ESV, NKJV, NRSV, and NASB see this verse is talking about the interpretation of scripture.[2] The NASB reads 2 Peter 1:20, ~{!0~}But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one~{!/~}s own interpretation~{!1~}.
The proponents of the ~{!0~}interpretation~{!1~} view of 2 Peter 1:20 see this verse is defending the interpretation of the OT by the apostles and is related to 2 Peter 3:16, where it addresses the issue of false teachers distorting scripture. Schreiner writes, ~{!0~}Peter~{!/~}s argument, then, is that the readers must pay attention to the prophetic word as it is interpreted by the apostles, for the Old Testament prophecies are not a matter of personal interpretation but have been authoritatively interpreted by the apostles.~{!1~}[3] Other interpretations of the ~{!0~}interpretation~{!1~} view are that since no prophecy is a matter of one~{!/~}s own interpretation, it should be interpreted by the church, by the intention of the Holy Spirit, or by the intention of the analogy of faith.[4]
The proponents of the ~{!0~}origin~{!1~} view of 2 Peter 1:20 argue from the context of the passage and the grammar of the verse. Davids sees ~{!0~}no place in the discussion surrounding our verse does the interpretation of Scripture/a prophetic word come into the discussion.~{!1~}[5] MacArthur sees this verse is not about how to interpret Scripture, but the origin and source of Scripture.[6] Green sees ~{!0~}a contrast is set up~{!1~} in 1:20 and 1:21 between a prophet~{!/~}s own interpretation of the divine will over against prophecy as a result of God~{!/~}s activity in him.[7]
Looking at the grammar, the key words in 2 Peter 1:20 are idias epiluseos (of private interpretation) and ginetai (comes into being, occurs, arises).[8] The term idias can refer to the prophet~{!/~}s own interpretation or to the contemporary reader~{!/~}s own interpretation.[9] Davids sees from Greek writings idias can support both of these meanings. [10] Thus, the word ginetai gives a stronger argument for the ~{!0~}origin~{!1~} view. The natural meaning of the verb ginetai supports the meaning that prophecy did not arise ~{!0~}from private interpretation~{!1~}.
In conclusion, the ~{!0~}origin~{!1~} view of 2 Peter 1:20 is preferred because the immediate context of the passage deals with the source and origin of Scripture and the grammar of the passage suggests that Scripture does not come from a prophet~{!/~}s own interpretation but by the moving of the Holy Spirit.
Bibliography
Davids, Peter H. The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. D. A. Carson, Gen. Ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006.
Gaebelein, Frank E. Gen. Ed. J. D. Douglas. Assoc. Ed. The Expositor~{!/~}s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 (Hebrews-Revelation). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.
Green, Gene L. Jude and 2 Peter. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008.
Hiebert, D. Edmond. Second Peter and Jude: An Expositional Commentary. Greenville, South Carolina: Unusual Publications, 1989.
MacAruthur, John. The MacArthur Bible Commentary. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2005.
Mounce, William D and Robert H. Mounce. Gen. Eds. Greek and English Interlinear New Testament (NASB/NIV). Grand Rapids: MI: Zondervan, 2008.
Schreiner, Thomas R. 1, 2 Peter, Jude. The New American Commentary: Volume 37. E. Ray Clendenen. Gen. Ed. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1,2 Peter, Jude, The New American Commentary: Volume 37, E. Ray Clendenen, Gen. Ed. (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 322.
[2] Ibid., 323.
[3] Ibid., 323.
[4] Frank E. Gaebelein, Gen. Ed., J.D. Douglas, Assoc. Ed., The Expositor~{!/~}s Bible Commentary: Volume 12 (Hebrews-Revelation) (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 275.
[5] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, D.A. Carson, Gen. Ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 212.
[6] John MacArthur, The MacArthur Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2005), 1932.
[7] Gene L. Green, Jude and 2 Peter (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 232.
[8] D. Edmond Hiebert, Second Peter and Jude: An Expositional Commentary (Greenville, South Carolina: Unusual Publications, 1989), 81.
[9] Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, 210.
[10] Ibid., 211.
[11] Hiebert, Second Peter and Jude, 82.
Published in: Mike H. Lei, Editoron at 7:36 am Comments (1)
