C*******r
发帖数: 10345 | 1 马可福音第二章
23 耶稣当安息日，从麦地经过。他门徒行路的时候，掐了麦穗。
24 法利赛人对耶稣说，看哪，他们在安息日为什么作不可作的事呢？
25 耶稣对他们说，经上记着大卫和跟从他的人，缺乏饥饿之时所作的事，你们没有念
过吗？
26 他当亚比亚他作大祭司的时候，怎么进了神的殿，吃了陈设饼，又给跟从他的人吃
。这饼除了祭司以外，人都不可吃。
27 又对他们说，安息日是为人设立的，人不是为安息日设立的。
28 所以人子也是安息日的主
撒母耳记上第二十一章
1 大卫到了挪伯祭司亚希米勒那里，亚希米勒战战兢兢地出来迎接他，问他说，你为什
么独自来，没有人跟随呢？
2 大卫回答祭司亚希米勒说，王吩咐我一件事说，我差遣你委托你的这件事，不要使人
知道。故此我已派定少年人在某处等候我。
3 现在你手下有什么。求你给我五个饼或是别样的食物。
4 祭司对大卫说，我手下没有寻常的饼，只有圣饼。若少年人没有亲近妇人才可以给。
5 大卫对祭司说，实在约有三日我们没有亲近妇人。我出来的时候，虽是寻常行路，少
年人的器皿还是洁净的。何况今日不更是洁净吗？
6 祭司就拿圣饼给他。因为在那里没有别样饼，只有更换新饼，从耶和华面前撤下来的
陈设饼。
这个明显矛盾，祭司亚比亚是押沙龙作乱时候的，没有任何记载给过大卫陈设饼。详细
可见撒母耳记下15章。牛津版79年的annotated bible明显指出这段是马可福音记载错
误。解神大师的study bible怎么说的？中文圣经又替尊者讳了，屁都没提。 | C*******r
发帖数: 10345 | 2 英文KJV的：
Mark 2
23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath
day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.
24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day
that which is not lawful?
25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had
need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?
26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest
, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests,
and gave also to them which were with him?
27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
sabbath:
28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
1 Samuel 21
Then came David to Nob to Ahimelech the priest: and Ahimelech was afraid at
the meeting of David, and said unto him, Why art thou alone, and no man
with thee?
2 And David said unto Ahimelech the priest, The king hath commanded me a
business, and hath said unto me, Let no man know any thing of the business
whereabout I send thee, and what I have commanded thee: and I have appointed
my servants to such and such a place.
3 Now therefore what is under thine hand? give me five loaves of bread in
mine hand, or what there is present.
4 And the priest answered David, and said, There is no common bread under
mine hand, but there is hallowed bread; if the young men have kept
themselves at least from women.
5 And David answered the priest, and said unto him, Of a truth women have
been kept from us about these three days, since I came out, and the vessels
of the young men are holy, and the bread is in a manner common, yea, though
it were sanctified this day in the vessel.
6 So the priest gave him hallowed bread: for there was no bread there but
the shewbread, that was taken from before the Lord, to put hot bread in the
day when it was taken away. | T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 3 写书记录错了。这段马太和路加都有，没问题。
想啊，如果在法利赛人面前露出bug，法利赛人能放过吗？ | C*******r
发帖数: 10345 | 4 所以除了圣经无误论者外，一般都认为是马可记录错误。
【在 T*****n 的大作中提到】
: 写书记录错了。这段马太和路加都有，没问题。
: 想啊，如果在法利赛人面前露出bug，法利赛人能放过吗？
| m*1
发帖数: 1997 | 5 圣经绝对无误是大多数基督徒和世界上大多数主流神学院所抛弃的观点。 | E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 6 Jason 正在翻 study bible 要來反駁？ | J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 7 能用studybible很好啊。NET bible对这个问题上做了些解释。而且我认为这不算什么
“严重错误”吧。似乎不怎么影响人们对圣经的理解。
https://net.bible.org/#!bible/Mark+2:23
52 tn A decision about the proper translation of this Greek phrase (ἐ
πὶ ᾿Αβιαθὰρ ἀρχιερέως, ejpi
Abiaqar ajrcierew") is very difficult for a number of reasons. The most
natural translation of the phrase is “when Abiathar was high priest,” but
this is problematic because Abiathar was not the high priest when David
entered the temple and ate the sacred bread; Ahimelech is the priest
mentioned in 1 Sam 21:1-7. Three main solutions have been suggested to
resolve this difficulty. (1) There are alternate readings in various
manuscripts, but these are not likely to be original: D W {271} it sys and a
few others omit ἐπὶ ᾿Αβιαθὰρ ἀρχιε
ρέως, no doubt in conformity to the parallels in Matt 12:4 and
Luke 6:4; {A C Θ Π Σ Φ 074 Ë13 and many others} add τοῦ
before ἀρχιερέως, giving the meaning “in the days of
Abiathar the high priest,” suggesting a more general time frame. Neither
reading has significant external support and both most likely are motivated
by the difficulty of the original reading. (2) Many scholars have
hypothesized that one of the three individuals who would have been involved
in the transmission of the statement (Jesus who uttered it originally, Mark
who wrote it down in the Gospel, or Peter who served as Mark’s source) was
either wrong about Abiathar or intentionally loose with the biblical data in
order to make a point. (3) It is possible that what is currently understood
to be the most natural reading of the text is in fact not correct. (a)
There are very few biblical parallels to this grammatical construction (&#
7952;πί + genitive proper noun, followed by an anarthrous common noun)
, so it is possible that an extensive search for this construction in
nonbiblical literature would prove that the meaning does involve a wide time
frame. If this is so, “in the days of Abiathar the high priest” would be
a viable option. (b) It is also possible that this phrasing serves as a
loose way to cite a scripture passage. There is a parallel to this
construction in Mark 12:26: “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the
passage about the bush?” Here the final phrase is simply ἐπὶ
τοῦ βάτου (ejpi tou batou), but the obvious function of the
phrase is to point to a specific passage within the larger section of
scripture. Deciding upon a translation here is difficult. The translation
above has followed the current consensus on the most natural and probable
meaning of the phrase ἐπὶ ᾿Αβιαθὰρ ἀρ
χιερέως: “when Abiathar was high priest.” It should be
recognized, however, that this translation is tentative because the current
state of knowledge about the meaning of this grammatical construction is
incomplete, and any decision about the meaning of this text is open to
future revision.
Eloihim，你说的很对，如果下次你能帮我翻翻study bible，再贴过来的话，我就太感
谢了。
【在 C*******r 的大作中提到】
: 马可福音第二章
: 23 耶稣当安息日，从麦地经过。他门徒行路的时候，掐了麦穗。
: 24 法利赛人对耶稣说，看哪，他们在安息日为什么作不可作的事呢？
: 25 耶稣对他们说，经上记着大卫和跟从他的人，缺乏饥饿之时所作的事，你们没有念
: 过吗？
: 26 他当亚比亚他作大祭司的时候，怎么进了神的殿，吃了陈设饼，又给跟从他的人吃
: 。这饼除了祭司以外，人都不可吃。
: 27 又对他们说，安息日是为人设立的，人不是为安息日设立的。
: 28 所以人子也是安息日的主
: 撒母耳记上第二十一章
| o***1
发帖数: 592 | 8 顶你这句！信神也要有节操。
【在 m*1 的大作中提到】
: 圣经绝对无误是大多数基督徒和世界上大多数主流神学院所抛弃的观点。
| j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 9 Mark 2:26 "how he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the
high priest, and ate the showbread, which is not lawful to eat, except for
the priests, and also gave some to those who were with him?"
You should think about the "in the days of Abiathar the high priest".
see this for more details:
http://www.toughquestionsanswered.org/2009/09/27/is-there-a-mis
First Samuel is correct in stating that the high priest was Ahimelech. On
the other hand neither was Jesus wrong. When we take a closer look at Christ
’s words we notice that He used the phrase “in the days of Abiathar” (v.
26) which does not necessarily imply that Abiathar was high priest at the
time David ate the bread. After David met Ahimelech and ate the bread, King
Saul had Ahimelech killed (1 Sam. 22:17–19). Abiathar escaped and went to
David (v. 20) and later took the place of the high priest. So even though
Abiathar was made high priest after David ate the bread, it is still correct
to speak in this manner. After all, Abiathar was alive when David did this,
and soon following he became the high priest after his father’s death.
Thus, it was during the time of Abiathar, but not during his tenure in
office.
Abiathar was a high priest during David’s reign as king, and he is
mentioned some 29 times in the Old Testament in relation to his priestly
role. Those familiar with the Hebrew Bible in the 1st century (when The
Gospel of Mark was written) would easily connect Abiathar to David, so Mark
2:26 is merely reminding readers of the time frame of David’s eating the
consecrated bread.
The words “the high priest,” coming after “Abiathar” are just his title,
much like we might say, “When President Obama attended college, he made
many friends.” Obama was not president while he was in college, but
whenever we mention Obama, we refer to him as President Obama. - See more at | w*********r
发帖数: 3382 | 10 按你这个前提，正常逻辑结果是马大师大D等基要派观点被大多数基督徒和世界上大多
数主流神学院所抛弃。不过你没这么说，所以不算你论断人，是不是这么说？呵呵。。。
【在 m*1 的大作中提到】
: 圣经绝对无误是大多数基督徒和世界上大多数主流神学院所抛弃的观点。
| | | E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 11 你信聖經無誤，對吧？
but
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 能用studybible很好啊。NET bible对这个问题上做了些解释。而且我认为这不算什么
: “严重错误”吧。似乎不怎么影响人们对圣经的理解。
: https://net.bible.org/#!bible/Mark+2:23
: 52 tn A decision about the proper translation of this Greek phrase (ἐ
: πὶ ᾿Αβιαθὰρ ἀρχιερέως, ejpi
: Abiaqar ajrcierew") is very difficult for a number of reasons. The most
: natural translation of the phrase is “when Abiathar was high priest,” but
: this is problematic because Abiathar was not the high priest when David
: entered the temple and ate the sacred bread; Ahimelech is the priest
: mentioned in 1 Sam 21:1-7. Three main solutions have been suggested to
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 12 piece of cake，瞧我的：
http://blog.roodo.com/yml/archives/11570171.html
聖經絕對無誤，這是我們永遠必須保持的信念。
以最出名或比較具代表性的人來當家族人物的代表，其他人則被省略
也就是說，被列出的那人名，但未必表示就真的是那個人。
比方說：馬太福音的耶穌家譜，為了達成一種『十四代』的切割法，所以這些家譜其實
有很多人都被省略掉。
我們看到的『A生B』，未必就表示B是A所親生，是A的親生兒子，
事實上，連孫子，都可以被聖經簡寫成『A生B』。
馬可福音的聖經原文意思是：
『正在亞比亞他………那個大祭司…………的時候』
那個希臘文用法，是當時很常見的希臘文使用法。
這是一種『廣泛性』的用法，不是『特定且精確』的用法。
所以，該句經文意思，只是說亞比亞他『在世時』，而非亞比亞他『實際當大祭司的時
候』。
請注意這兩種意思的差異性：
『正在亞比亞他………那個大祭司…………的時候』
vs
『正在亞比亞他………當大祭司…………的時候』
換言之，大衛當時確實是發生在亞比亞他的父親亞希米勒時，
當時，亞比亞他只是小孩，
但是，因為亞比亞他後來當大祭司，而聖經也常有這種『用最高的職稱』來稱呼人的情
形，
所以，即使當時亞比亞他還小，但依然稱那是亞比亞他那個大祭司的時候，並非不可理
解。
【在 C*******r 的大作中提到】
: 所以除了圣经无误论者外，一般都认为是马可记录错误。
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 13 还有，
http://www.ccgn.nl/boeken02/sjnthb/chapter42.html
馬可福音記載耶穌說亞比亞他當大祭司，是否指耶穌犯了錯誤呢？無論如何，當我們仔
細研讀馬可二26時，便發覺耶穌其實沒有暗示亞比亞他是大衛探訪挪伯時的大祭司，因
為耶穌說EpiAbiathar archiereos，意即「正在亞比亞他——那大祭司——的時候」。
參看撒母耳記上可知，兇殘的掃羅隨即令以東人多益殺死亞希米勒，同時亦殺盡挪伯城
的祭司(撒上二十二18-19)，只有亞希米勒的兒子亞比亞他僥倖地逃脫了。亞比亞他投
奔大衛(20節)，在大衛落難逃避掃羅之時，亞比亞他任大祭司。故此，大衛登上王座後
，很自然地就立亞比亞他為大祭司，在大衛有生之年，亞比亞他都與掃羅馬所立的撒督
均分大祭司的職份。由這段歷史事實看來，稱亞比亞他作大祭司，是挪伯事件多年後。
這情況就正如我們說：「這時候，大衛王是個牧童」；大衛還是個牧童的時候，當然不
會是君王。艾特與金格樹指出，epi與所有格(genitive)的詞連在一起，就只有「在那
時候」的含意。馬可福音二26的意思與此相同(參W．F．Arndt＆ F. W.Gingrich，A
Greek-English Lexicon Of the New Testament [Chicago：University of Chiago，
1957]，p．286)。新約聖經與馬可福音二26epi一字用法相似的，有使徒行傳十一28，
「到革老丟年間」；以及希伯來書一2，「就在這末世」(ep'eschatou ton hemeron
touton)。事實上，大衛吃挪伯會幕的陳設餅，的確發生於亞比亞他在生之時，並且他
當時亦必定在場，看見大衛等人吃陳設餅；其後，亞比亞他就被立為大祭司，因為掃羅
殺死了他父親亞希米勒。故此，我們照耶穌說話的含義來解釋，馬可二26這經文便與歷
史事實沒有衝突。
==================================================
所以，圣经绝对无误，这是无法反驳的，这可以用破句——断句——重新标点来证明。
你可以反驳吗？哈哈哈哈哈
【在 C*******r 的大作中提到】
: 所以除了圣经无误论者外，一般都认为是马可记录错误。
| C*******r
发帖数: 10345 | 14 泥马，三岁小儿也能看出这是皇帝新装，牵强附会。
【在 T*****n 的大作中提到】
: 还有，
: http://www.ccgn.nl/boeken02/sjnthb/chapter42.html
: 馬可福音記載耶穌說亞比亞他當大祭司，是否指耶穌犯了錯誤呢？無論如何，當我們仔
: 細研讀馬可二26時，便發覺耶穌其實沒有暗示亞比亞他是大衛探訪挪伯時的大祭司，因
: 為耶穌說EpiAbiathar archiereos，意即「正在亞比亞他——那大祭司——的時候」。
: 參看撒母耳記上可知，兇殘的掃羅隨即令以東人多益殺死亞希米勒，同時亦殺盡挪伯城
: 的祭司(撒上二十二18-19)，只有亞希米勒的兒子亞比亞他僥倖地逃脫了。亞比亞他投
: 奔大衛(20節)，在大衛落難逃避掃羅之時，亞比亞他任大祭司。故此，大衛登上王座後
: ，很自然地就立亞比亞他為大祭司，在大衛有生之年，亞比亞他都與掃羅馬所立的撒督
: 均分大祭司的職份。由這段歷史事實看來，稱亞比亞他作大祭司，是挪伯事件多年後。
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 15 居然敢说基要派是牵强附会？下地狱的伺候
【在 C*******r 的大作中提到】
: 泥马，三岁小儿也能看出这是皇帝新装，牵强附会。
| T*****n
发帖数: 2456 | 16 我靠，我发现你居然拿这个问题闯到人家基要派的地盘里单挑去了，大过节的这不是自
己找不痛快吗
【在 C*******r 的大作中提到】
: 泥马，三岁小儿也能看出这是皇帝新装，牵强附会。
| C*******r
发帖数: 10345 | 17 戳到痛处了，鸡药很鸡冻。
【在 T*****n 的大作中提到】
: 我靠，我发现你居然拿这个问题闯到人家基要派的地盘里单挑去了，大过节的这不是自
: 己找不痛快吗
|
|
