that there is no Hebrew word meaning "legalistic"... no term in Hebrew to convey the negative message of "legalism" or "legalistic" following of G-d's Torah. Someone who knows Hebrew better than I, help me out. Is this true?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
I have heard
- Thread starter ShirChadash
- Start date
VERY interesting question, Zem.
I don't have anything to offer in the way of an answer, but I will wait eagerly for input from some of the others.
Shade
I don't have anything to offer in the way of an answer, but I will wait eagerly for input from some of the others.
Shade
Upvote
0
Charlesinflorida mentioned here (post# 6)that there is no exact word in greek for legalism....... dunno about hebrew though
http://www.christianforums.com/t111670
but i think you prob would have read that already
http://www.christianforums.com/t111670
but i think you prob would have read that already
Upvote
0
Henaynei
Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Echud! Al pi Adonai...
- Sep 6, 2003
- 21,343
- 1,805
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Marital Status
- Widowed
- Politics
- US-Constitution
A quick look in my Bantam-Megiddo Hebrew&English Dictionary (I know.... world renowned authority, right?) shows that it has no word for legalism or legalistic.
Upvote
0
Zemirah,
According to the Hebrew bible there is no word translated or understood as a legalist approach to Torah as in the context of NT theological interpretation. There are 213 occurances of the word "Torah" in the TaNaKh. Literally the word means, instruction. Our understanding of the overzealous approach to those instructions as the sole means of appeasing G-d is where the term legalism has came to be used in the negative tense.
I'm not sure where you wanted to go with this question. The book of Malachi comes the closest to describing the slovenly approach to torah by the priesthood. Their hearts were not in it, they offered defiled sacrifices and so all they did was found unacceptable. The point of that book was that G-d wants our hearts to be found pure and when the heart is pure the sacrifice will be given with a pure heart and will be found acceptable.
If your looking into the legalism of the second temple era, then you may be referring to the "Pharisiacal legalism" that Yeshua condemned. In that circumstance, this is overzealous application of torah where the hedge around torah had become so large that the simple commands of torah were replaced with strict halachah that no one could carry. It became the laws of men vs the laws of G-d and this is where Yeshua condemned their hedges and taught the correct interpretation of torah.
The use of the term legalism today in the context of modern worship is one of negativity. It has become a curse word for those judged as too obedient. We have to be careful in condemning others if they don't live up to our standards or they appear slovenly to us. Legalism is not the sin, man made rules that replace the law is the sin.
Messianics are condemned as legalistic because we attempt to correctly obey torah according to scripture, yet those condemning us have created their own laws outside of G-d's instruction book with a strict code of law of their own.
I know I ramble a lot, but I hope some of it was found useful and helpful in answering your question. There is no Hebrew word for our interpretation of legalism in the TaNaKh.
Blessings,
torahlife
According to the Hebrew bible there is no word translated or understood as a legalist approach to Torah as in the context of NT theological interpretation. There are 213 occurances of the word "Torah" in the TaNaKh. Literally the word means, instruction. Our understanding of the overzealous approach to those instructions as the sole means of appeasing G-d is where the term legalism has came to be used in the negative tense.
I'm not sure where you wanted to go with this question. The book of Malachi comes the closest to describing the slovenly approach to torah by the priesthood. Their hearts were not in it, they offered defiled sacrifices and so all they did was found unacceptable. The point of that book was that G-d wants our hearts to be found pure and when the heart is pure the sacrifice will be given with a pure heart and will be found acceptable.
If your looking into the legalism of the second temple era, then you may be referring to the "Pharisiacal legalism" that Yeshua condemned. In that circumstance, this is overzealous application of torah where the hedge around torah had become so large that the simple commands of torah were replaced with strict halachah that no one could carry. It became the laws of men vs the laws of G-d and this is where Yeshua condemned their hedges and taught the correct interpretation of torah.
The use of the term legalism today in the context of modern worship is one of negativity. It has become a curse word for those judged as too obedient. We have to be careful in condemning others if they don't live up to our standards or they appear slovenly to us. Legalism is not the sin, man made rules that replace the law is the sin.
Messianics are condemned as legalistic because we attempt to correctly obey torah according to scripture, yet those condemning us have created their own laws outside of G-d's instruction book with a strict code of law of their own.
I know I ramble a lot, but I hope some of it was found useful and helpful in answering your question. There is no Hebrew word for our interpretation of legalism in the TaNaKh.
Blessings,
torahlife
Upvote
0
I am Messianic; I adhere to Torah to the best of my (limited but growing) understanding and ability to follow at this time, and am ever learning and intend to continue. I am anything but legalistic, however most would easily view me as such... a headcovering, Torah-loving, Yeshua-embracing, YHVH Elohim following believer.torahlife said:
Actually I was really just asking the question (no agenda) as I am well aware that following Torah is tremendous blessing not curse, and I echo Plan 9's comments on another thread here recently (I don't think it was this one...) that, basically, as long as one is following the Spirit of the "Law" there is no way one is being legalistic in following it as closely to the letter as one feels called and able. My basic stand is that, yep -- we are free in Yeshua... free to embrace and live to the fullest and the very utmost we possibly can... every single mitzvah and teaching of Torah.
Since I don't know Hebrew as well as I will hopefully one day, I was wondering if my brothers or sisters who know more than I might be able to speak to the issue of there not even being a Hebrew concept of/term for "legalism" as pertains to the following of Yeshua's Torah.
ps I am the typo-queen hereabouts for the time-being (as evidenced by my MANY edits for typos
Like... this one LOL.)
Upvote
0
Plan 9
Absolutely Elsewhere
- Jul 7, 2002
- 9,028
- 686
- 73
- Faith
- Methodist
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm most familiar with the term being applied to Christian individuals and groups who state that certain activities and/or temptations are such great sins that no one who is subject to them is truly saved...or else is considered 'nearly' unsaved, and is denied communion. Some examples
1. Smoking cigarettes.
2. Having unacted-upon homosexual or bisexual tendencies.
3. Not being a teetotaler
4. Having lunch in a bar, even though you are a teetotaler.
5. Listening to non-Christian rock music, like The Beatles.
6. Listening to Christian music by people ajudged as not being 'real' Christians (I was told this about Amy Grant, and the people who listen to her once).
7. Watching R rated, or sometimes, PG-13 rated films.
8. Spending fairly long periods of time with non-Christians who aren't your relatives.
I just realized that I'm at an age where this could be the list that never ends, so I think I'll stop there.
People who are suspected of these, and other, infractions, are often reported by other members of the congregation; sometimes during the church service, and sometimes privately to the pastor, but even then, some public humiliation is likely to result.
I find that constant exposure to people who make rules like this for others; ones which are alsways easy for them to obey, possibly has made me to open-minded about the behavior of others that my brains may fall out anytime, or worse; already have and I just can't tell.
1. Smoking cigarettes.
2. Having unacted-upon homosexual or bisexual tendencies.
3. Not being a teetotaler
4. Having lunch in a bar, even though you are a teetotaler.
5. Listening to non-Christian rock music, like The Beatles.
6. Listening to Christian music by people ajudged as not being 'real' Christians (I was told this about Amy Grant, and the people who listen to her once).
7. Watching R rated, or sometimes, PG-13 rated films.
8. Spending fairly long periods of time with non-Christians who aren't your relatives.
I just realized that I'm at an age where this could be the list that never ends, so I think I'll stop there.
People who are suspected of these, and other, infractions, are often reported by other members of the congregation; sometimes during the church service, and sometimes privately to the pastor, but even then, some public humiliation is likely to result.
I find that constant exposure to people who make rules like this for others; ones which are alsways easy for them to obey, possibly has made me to open-minded about the behavior of others that my brains may fall out anytime, or worse; already have and I just can't tell.
Upvote
0
Plan 9 said:
hm... my siggy down \/ there had not one thing to do witchu whatsoever Planny!
Upvote
0
David Stern has much to say on this topic in his commentary on Galations 2:15-16 (and elsewhere). In part this is what he says in case you don't have access to it:
"The Greek word "nomos" usually means law. It is also the normal NT word for Torah translated law or law of Moses. Most Christians therefore suppose that "ergo nomos" literally works of law must mean actions done in obedience to Torah. One of the best kept secrets about the NT is that when Paul writes "nomos" he frequently does not mean law but "legalism"....It will be well to bear in mind the fact that the Greek language of Paul's day possessed no word group corresponding to our "legalism" "legalist" and "legalistic"....
He of course does have much more to say on the subject.
In the Aramaic Peshitta of Galations 3:16 it would literally be "work of law" The verb for work is in an emphatic state with the common Aramaic word nomosa for law. I have 4 Hebrew translations of the NT (some are from Greek some from Aramaic) but in this particular case the translators chose a Hiphil masculine plural active participle in construct and Torah with a definite article. Literally "ones working the Torah".
"The Greek word "nomos" usually means law. It is also the normal NT word for Torah translated law or law of Moses. Most Christians therefore suppose that "ergo nomos" literally works of law must mean actions done in obedience to Torah. One of the best kept secrets about the NT is that when Paul writes "nomos" he frequently does not mean law but "legalism"....It will be well to bear in mind the fact that the Greek language of Paul's day possessed no word group corresponding to our "legalism" "legalist" and "legalistic"....
He of course does have much more to say on the subject.
In the Aramaic Peshitta of Galations 3:16 it would literally be "work of law" The verb for work is in an emphatic state with the common Aramaic word nomosa for law. I have 4 Hebrew translations of the NT (some are from Greek some from Aramaic) but in this particular case the translators chose a Hiphil masculine plural active participle in construct and Torah with a definite article. Literally "ones working the Torah".
Upvote
0
Similar threads
