ENDURING STICKING POINTS part 3 of 4


Interesante gînduri ci periculoase ramificații pentru unii creștini mai fundamentaliști din ziua de azi. Mă tot întreb cu putea Daniel cu un astfel de nume transformat să aibă parte de viziuni de la Dumnezeu. Sau cu alte cuvinte cum putem fi atît de înțepeniți în gîndire?

Waging Wisdom

identity The question I want to begin with, here, is why did the four Jewish friends have a sticking point about the king’s menu but not about a change at the heart of their identities? That is, they accept radically different personal names (Daniel 1:7). This must have been a most distasteful compromise to these devout Yahwists, whose birth names are in various ways associated with characteristics of the God of Israel. But when they enter the Chaldean Institute their Hebrew names are formally changed to denote various pagan gods. Although some of these names have not been satisfactorily explained, the following indicates the enormity of the changes:
  • “Hananiah” in Hebrew means Yah has favored [me]. His new name, “Shadrach,” means something like Command of Aku (Aku being a Mesopotamian lunar deity).
  • “Mishael” means Who is what God is? His name is changed to “Meshach,” Who is what Aku is?

Vezi articolul original 516 cuvinte mai mult