Need Bible help....again

[woolybear]

This morning in class we were reading Rev.11 verse 11 about the two witness' coming back to life. The book I'm using referred us to Matthew Chapter 27 and I started with verse 50 ( I hate starting in the middle of things with a reference.) In verse 50 "50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit." Everything that I've looked at on the internet all says the same thing "he gave up his spirit"  BUT in every bible that we looked in today it said when he died he was "resurrected"  not the "gave up his spirit"  King James, NIV,  and a couple of others I can't remember the names of. 
 My question is.... why the difference in the wording? What changed between when these bibles were published and what is showing on the internet today?
 We tried asking the pastor this morning when our class was done and before church but his only reply was "copy the verse and I'll translate it from the Greek" Umm shouldn't this be something you would already know about??
  Ok question number 2.   Verses 51-53 "The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people."   So these holy people rise up out of their tombs and go into town and are seen by many people. Why is that kind of "glossed over" when talking about the death of Jesus?  Should that not be an important event, to be given recognition and discussed in church? It's my understanding that if an event is important it's written about in the Bible. Would this be something like a last miracle that Jesus would have performed as a man before his resurrection from the tomb?  None of the 4 of us in class even remembered about the holy people coming out of their tombs. The one lady in class asked why that was never shown in all the movies that have been done about the Crucifixion, why was this important passage ignored?  
 We had a very interesting class today with a travel down the rabbit hole from Revelations to Matthew. 

[wildhorseluvr]

woolybear, I’d never read anything other than He gave up his spirit or ghost. Not sure if I’m saying this correctly but as I understand it, Jesus was not put to death, He willingly gave up his life. Some commentaries say He “dismissed” his spirit. 

“Giving up his spirit” wouldn’t seem to be interchangeable with “resurrected”. 😕 🤷🏻‍♀️

[farmrbrown]

Nov 13, 2022 21:55:56 GMT woolybear said:

This morning in class we were reading Rev.11 verse 11 about the two witness' coming back to life. The book I'm using referred us to Matthew Chapter 27 and I started with verse 50 ( I hate starting in the middle of things with a reference.) In verse 50 "50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit." Everything that I've looked at on the internet all says the same thing "he gave up his spirit"  BUT in every bible that we looked in today it said when he died he was "resurrected"  not the "gave up his spirit"  King James, NIV,  and a couple of others I can't remember the names of. 
 My question is.... why the difference in the wording? What changed between when these bibles were published and what is showing on the internet today?
 We tried asking the pastor this morning when our class was done and before church but his only reply was "copy the verse and I'll translate it from the Greek" Umm shouldn't this be something you would already know about??
  Ok question number 2.   Verses 51-53 "The earth shook, the rocks split 52 and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people."   So these holy people rise up out of their tombs and go into town and are seen by many people. Why is that kind of "glossed over" when talking about the death of Jesus?  Should that not be an important event, to be given recognition and discussed in church? It's my understanding that if an event is important it's written about in the Bible. Would this be something like a last miracle that Jesus would have performed as a man before his resurrection from the tomb?  None of the 4 of us in class even remembered about the holy people coming out of their tombs. The one lady in class asked why that was never shown in all the movies that have been done about the Crucifixion, why was this important passage ignored?  
 We had a very interesting class today with a travel down the rabbit hole from Revelations to Matthew. 

We touched on that incident briefly as well in our study today (the tombs opening and people being seen).
Funny how that happens all the time, something we'll be talking about earlier that day or week and lo and behold, the answer will appear in scripture a few hours later.

Your questions are good, and I don't know how well I'll do with the answers, but I'll try. lol


In verse 50 "50 And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit." Everything that I've looked at on the internet all says the same thing "he gave up his spirit" BUT in every bible that we looked in today it said when he died he was "resurrected" not the "gave up his spirit" King James, NIV, and a couple of others I can't remember the names of.

My question is.... why the difference in the wording? What changed between when these bibles were published and what is showing on the internet today?

This can be a sticky subject but the very reason we use the King James as a starting reference is BECAUSE of what you noticed today.
Newer versions with more modern language can help beginners understand what they are reading better, and that's a good thing. But.....despite the admitted shortcomings of the translators who worked on the original 1609 KJV, it is still the most accurate version an English reader is going to find.

I checked my own KJV bible first to see exactly how it was worded. It's 51 years old now and the only one I've ever had, so I could eliminate the possibility of new wording in newer printings.
It's the same wording in mine too....

50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

I'm going to assume it's the use of the word "resurrection" in verse 53 that you were wondering about? 
But yes, I hate to assume anything, lol.
That was a good catch though I see why it's confusing. Jesus' "resurrection" is actually 3 and 1/2 days later, right?
(And that IS right, BTW)

So the next thing I did was open up my Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and look up the word used in verse 53 "resurrection".
This happens nearly every week when we study. Today, I looked up "wondrous" in Psalms 72, the last one David wrote. I wasn't confused, just curious to know a more complete definition. As usual, it cemented and reaffirmed how "wondrous" God is.
(An action that is too hard, too high, too difficult to do)..........Like bringing dead people out of their graves.

Anyway, guess what I found?
Resurrection (in English) is used 5 times in the book of Matthew, but the 5th it's used in Matt 27:53, the Greek word in the original manuscript is different than the other 4, meaning it might have a slightly different definition or usage.
It's this.....
bible.knowing-jesus.com/strongs/G1454
Which comes from this.....
bible.knowing-jesus.com/strongs/G1453
And is used like this......

probably akin to the base of 58 (through the idea of collecting one's faculties)

Source: bible.knowing-jesus.com/strongs/G1453


1. to arouse, cause to rise
a. to arouse from sleep, to awake
b. to arouse from the sleep of death, to recall the dead to life
c. to cause to rise from a seat or bed etc.
d. to raise up, produce, cause to appear
1. to cause to appear, bring before the public
2. to raise up, stir up, against one
3. to raise up i.e. cause to be born
4. of buildings, to raise up, construct, erect

Source: bible.knowing-jesus.com/strongs/G1453

 
Other places it's used were times when Jesus was asleep and awakened by disciples, or when he told the lame man to "take up his bed and walk", etc.

Now comes the hard part and I only offer my opinion on why it was worded this way, and mine is worth the same as anyone else....not much, lol.
It DOES differ slightly from what we would consider His resurrection from the tomb 3 days later on Sunday morning and probably refers to that moment when His Spirit left His body on the cross and was freed. I would imagine it is a bit of a surprise or shock to anyone when that happens, even Christ Himself. After all, we only do it once and none of have before except for those "life after death" experiences you hear about from people who've been revived. 
 
Hope that helps.
As to the 2nd question....

The one lady in class asked why that was never shown in all the movies that have been done about the Crucifixion, why was this important passage ignored?

My first guess is that people don't really like talking or thinking about it. Look at it this way, even if you DID see Aunt Martha that died last month walking around the neighborhood, would YOU wanna tell anybody?
LMAO. 

[farmrbrown]

Another possible explanation is that the wording doesn't make the timing very clear, if the graves opened and the saints that were seen walking the streets of the city actually DID happen 3 days later when CHRIST was resurrected.

www.compellingtruth.org/resurrected-with-Jesus.html

biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/27/50-53

[Jolly]

Don't get lost in the weeds. When the Bible says in Matthew 27:50 that He gave up His ghost, it's simply saying He physically died. Ghost, Spirit...in this case, same thing. The loud cry of Jesus at that time is reported in all the synoptic gospels. (That's unusual in a physical sense, as a man dying from crucifixion cannot draw a full breath at that point).

Jesus had to physically die as man, or there is no resurrection. His death at 3pm coincided with the afternoon sacrifice. That is significant in itself as the ultimate sacrifice, but the tearing of the vale in the Temple is also significant, as is the fact that the priests would have been in the Temple at that time to see that four inch thick curtain tear itself, bringing into view the Holy of Holies for all.

To each his own in Revelations. Revelations is a picture book, full of stories and allegories. Take it for what it is and take it broadly. I've heard some mighty hot debates on small points of John's work, by some pretty learned people, and I tend to fall back on what Jesus said about no man knowing when his return would be. IIRC, Jesus doesn't know when He shall return, until His Father bids him.

Have faith. Do good. Work towards sanctification.

And come quickly, Lord Jesus.

[woolybear]

farmrbrown, what threw us off was the use of "resurrection" in verse 50. "And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he was resurrected", not "gave up his spirit".
Amazing isn't it how you can start out reading verses in one book, it lists a reference to another book, and off you go on a discussion and research because of the use of a single word in that verse. Was rather funny that we all sat there dumbstruck that we had never took note of the use of "resurrected" in verse 50. And how we missed the many holy people coming out of their tombs and being seen in town. I have read thru the bible about 3 times over the last 40 years, but we only read it - a whole chapter at a time, and then with a quick discussion which most of the class would never do any talking. We never took it verse by verse. When we started class back up after covid I wanted to read Revelations and found a book that did one verse at a time with some explanations and references. I want to use this technique of one verse at a time when we move to the next book when Revelations is finished.
And I want to thank you all for guidance when we fall into a rabbit hole while reading the Bible.

[wildhorseluvr]

Nov 14, 2022 1:24:22 GMT Jolly said:

Don't get lost in the weeds. When the Bible says in Matthew 27:50 that He gave up His ghost, it's simply saying He physically died. Ghost, Spirit...in this case, same thing. 

Yes, Ghost and Spirit are the same here. But John 10:18 makes it quite clear that man could not take His life…he voluntarily gave up his Spirit. (Not quite sure if we’re in agreement here or not. 🙂)

New International Version
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.

Berean Standard Bible
No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father.”

Berean Literal Bible
No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it again. This commandment I received from My Father."

King James Bible
No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

New King James Version
No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

New American Standard Bible
No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it back. This commandment I received from My Father.”

NASB 1995
“No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.”

Amplified Bible
No one takes it away from Me, but I lay it down voluntarily. I am authorized and have power to lay it down and to give it up, and I am authorized and have power to take it back. This command I have received from My Father.”

[farmrbrown]

Nov 14, 2022 13:54:20 GMT woolybear said:

farmrbrown , what threw us off was the use of "resurrection" in verse 50. "And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he was resurrected", not "gave up his spirit".
Amazing isn't it how you can start out reading verses in one book, it lists a reference to another book, and off you go on a discussion and research because of the use of a single word in that verse. Was rather funny that we all sat there dumbstruck that we had never took note of the use of "resurrected" in verse 50. And how we missed the many holy people coming out of their tombs and being seen in town. I have read thru the bible about 3 times over the last 40 years, but we only read it - a whole chapter at a time, and then with a quick discussion which most of the class would never do any talking. We never took it verse by verse. When we started class back up after covid I wanted to read Revelations and found a book that did one verse at a time with some explanations and references. I want to use this technique of one verse at a time when we move to the next book when Revelations is finished.
And I want to thank you all for guidance when we fall into a rabbit hole while reading the Bible.

Ah, bad assumption on my part. If you saw that in v. 50 instead of v.53, my advice would be to put that bible away and not use it again. 

Everything that I've looked at on the internet all says the same thing "he gave up his spirit" BUT in every bible that we looked in today it said when he died he was "resurrected" not the "gave up his spirit" King James, NIV, and a couple of others I can't remember the names of.
My question is.... why the difference in the wording? What changed between when these bibles were published and what is showing on the internet today?

I'll now give you the answer I didn't before, when I misunderstood where you saw that word used. (v.50 NOT v.53)
From the time of Moses onward, the scribes used to copy biblical text were infiltrated by Kenites.

1 Chronicles 2:55
King James Version
55 And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hemath, the father of the house of Rechab.

If you don't know who the Kenites are, where they descended from and what they've done then great portions of the Bible from beginning to end won't make sense. I mean that quite literally.
Look at II Timothy for all the reasons to study the Bible and how to do it peacefully. That will give you a path to go, between an irritating fanatic and being biblically ignorant.

The reason I wouldn't use that particular bible again is this.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_Text

The short version is this.
It's not a Da Vinci code or Bible code to hidden treasures, that's for movie fiction. 
This was the way the Torah was kept from copying errors over the centuries. A master copy was kept in the Temple and when a new copy was scribed, the sentences and paragraphs were arranged so that it could be checked and verified like a word search puzzle. If the letters in a row, column or diagonal didn't line up and spell the "code word" written in the margin, it was rejected as copy with mistakes.


You should do your own research on the Kenites, but if you do, you'll find out WHY Jesus was so contemptuous of the Pharisees and scribes in the Gospels and what He was referring to in Revelation 2:9 and 3:9.

We tried asking the pastor this morning when our class was done and before church but his only reply was "copy the verse and I'll translate it from the Greek" Umm shouldn't this be something you would already know about??

And THIS is why my 2nd study guide is a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. There are Strong's Concordances too, but that one has everything as the title indicates. Meaning every word in the KJV translated back to the 4 languages of the original manuscripts.

Good luck and keep studying. It's the best investment you can make on this earth.

 

[blackfeather]

Vincent word studies...

Yielded up the ghost (ἀφῆκε τὸ πνεῦμα)
Lit., dismissed his spirit. Rev., yielded up his spirit. The fact that the evangelists, in describing our Lord's death, do not use the neuter verb, ἔθανεν, he died, but he breathed out his life (ἐξέπνευσε, Mar_15:37), he gave us his spirit (παρέδωκε τὸ πνεῦμα, Joh_19:30), seems to imply a voluntary yielding up of his life. Compare Joh_10:18. Augustine says, “He gave up his life because he willed it, when he willed it, and as he willed it.”

Now on the saints rising from the grave,

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 
And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.  

Who is the word HIS referring to? That is where, as previously mentioned, Strong's concordance comes into play
His =

autos
ow-tos'
From the particle αὖ au (perhaps akin to the base of G109 through the idea of a baffling wind; backward); the reflexive pronoun self,

So, what is this saying? The bodies of the saints arose and came out of the graves after self resurrection, or the arose each after their own resurrection, Therefore, we can suggest that this was not about Jesus's resurrection. As to who these were, the bible doesn't say. I've speculated that these were people who were meant to receive the Holy Spirit but had died before that time came and they were brought back in order to be around till that was given, but I'm only guessing here.

One last question, one I've never heard addressed, We know that Christians are made one with God and Jesus through the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit, but if God turned his back on Jesus because all the sin of the world was on him, did God also withdraw his Spirit from him?  If unity is through the Spirit, and Christ cried out "Why have you forsaken me?" Quoting the Psalm. Would it seem then that the Holy Spirit was withdrawn thus leaving him alone?

Now on the subject of two witnesses they are mentioned elsewhere. Look at Zecheriah 4. If your clever you might be able to figure out who they are going to be. (not specific people but the offices they will hold)

[Jolly]

Sadly, I don't read Ancient Greek and Hebrew. Bible translations are just that, translations.

Some are better than others...

[Txsteader]

I believe the Holy Spirit is the best source for wisdom & understanding. God didn't intend for us to be confused, although some things are going to be hidden until He chooses to reveal them to us.

Pray for understanding & don't worry about the 'correct' translation. HE will reveal what you need to know.

[woolybear]

farmrbrown, the problem we had with the use of "resurrection" in verse 50 is - we found it in 4 different versions of the bible, including the King James that my friend uses. That was the main reason for our confusion. Yes we all will admit we are confused a great portion of the time, but sometimes we like a bit of "clarity" - I'm the youngest at 64 and the oldest is 94, so a bit of confusion reigns in class lol.
blackfeather, thanks for the references for the 2 witness'. I'll look those verses up and take them to class with me this coming Sunday. I'll also take to class your last question...Did God withdraw his spirit from Jesus?
If no one has any objections would it be ok for me to copy some of your responses to take to class with me? You have given me a number of things to discuss with class, and since there are only 4 of us some outside ideas would be welcomed.

[farmrbrown]

Nov 15, 2022 14:55:17 GMT woolybear said:

farmrbrown , the problem we had with the use of "resurrection" in verse 50 is - we found it in 4 different versions of the bible, including the King James that my friend uses. That was the main reason for our confusion. Yes we all will admit we are confused a great portion of the time, but sometimes we like a bit of "clarity" - I'm the youngest at 64 and the oldest is 94, so a bit of confusion reigns in class lol.
blackfeather , thanks for the references for the 2 witness'. I'll look those verses up and take them to class with me this coming Sunday. I'll also take to class your last question...Did God withdraw his spirit from Jesus?
If no one has any objections would it be ok for me to copy some of your responses to take to class with me? You have given me a number of things to discuss with class, and since there are only 4 of us some outside ideas would be welcomed.

I got it now. That's why I checked with my 50 y/o KJ bible and told you to throw that one away. 
And when people tell you not to worry about it....throw that advice away too.
It's the biblically ignorant that are being deceived the most in this world.
If the Creator of the universe left you written instructions on your life and your future, would you say that's something pretty important?

If you go back to what I said about the Kenites and start there, it'll all make sense.
The Kenite scribes main mission was to misquote the Word of God in order to cause confusion.
And they still exist today those bibles you found are living proof.
It's one of Satan's most important tasks, the more people he can confuse, the better chance he has of keeping them from God.

[Jolly]

Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς... I admit I'm guessing, and it certainly could be a boustrophedonic written text, but it's still all Greek to me...

[farmrbrown]

Nov 15, 2022 16:45:58 GMT Jolly said:

Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς... I admit I'm guessing, and it certainly could be a boustrophedonic written text, but it's still all Greek to me...

It is........relating to Moses and the serpent.
That famous line (John 3:16) was said to Nicodemus, who although he was a well educated leader of the Pharisees, apparently didn't know WHAT Jesus was talking about, lol.
 In fact by reading the entire chapter instead of picking out that single verse, you get a much better idea of what Jesus was saying, making a point that the supposed uneducated often understand things the religious leaders do not.
Even today, people still are confused about what the word "believe" meant, in context.
 Does it mean all you have to do is believe God exists, or does it mean you have to "believe" or trust in God in order to be saved?
Yes, words matter.