He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn't stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and its father. He was a mansleere fro the bigynnyng, and he stood not in treuthe; for treuthe is not in hym. Whanne he spekith lesyng, he spekith of his owne; for he is a liere, and fadir of it.
And certainly he was a killer of men as the Greek word properly signifies from the beginning of the world: for from the very creation he designed and contrived the ruin of men. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own - For he is the proper parent, and, as it were, creator of it. See the origin not only of lies, but of evil in general! There are two households: that of God, composed of his children; and that of the devil, composed of his children.
All who hear the voice of Christ become God's children by adoption Ro , and all who refuse to hear him, do so because they belong to the devil's household and hear his voice. They "will do the lusts of their father". He was a murderer from the beginning. He caused the first murder, moves those who do murder, and those who seek to kill Christ are of his spirit. Share your own thoughts or commentary here King James Bible Online. Register or Login. John John Context 41 Ye do the deeds of your father.
Other Translations Click here to view. Ye are of your father the deuill, and the lusts of your father ye will doe: hee was a murtherer from the beginning, and abode not in the trueth, because there is no truth in him. Bible commentary Click here to view.
- Policy Instruments for Environmental and Natural Resource Management?
- Bible Living.
- The Bible in Basic English.
The Gospel of Matthew is often evaluated as the most Jewish of the canonical gospels, and yet it is sometimes argued that it is anti-Judaic or antisemitic. Matthew's Gospel has given readers the impression his hostility to Jews increases as his narrative progresses, until it culminates in chapter First, a series of "woes" are pronounced against the Pharisees :.
You snakes, you brood of vipers! How can you escape being sentenced to hell? Certain passages which speak of the destruction of Jerusalem have elements that are interpreted as indications of Matthew's anti-Judaic attitudes. Jesus is said to have lamented over the capital: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it See, your house is left to you, desolate" Matthew The culmination of this rhetoric, and arguably the one verse that has caused more Jewish suffering than any other second Testament passage, is the uniquely Matthean attribution to the Jewish people: "His [Jesus's] blood be on us and on our children!
This so-called "blood guilt" text has been interpreted to mean that all Jews, of Jesus' time and forever afterward, accept responsibility for the death of Jesus. In Matthew, as in many books of the New Testament, the idea that Christ followers are persecuted is pervasive. Blessings are pronounced on those who are persecuted for righteousness sake in the Sermon on the Mount; the woes against the Pharisees in Matthew 23 culminate in predictions that they will "kill and crucify, flog in synagogues, and pursue from town to town;" the parable of the banquet in Matthew 22 implies that servants of the king will be killed by those to whom they are sent.
Douglas Hare noted that the Gospel of Matthew avoids sociological explanations for persecution: . Only the theological cause, the obduracy of Israel is of interest to the author. Nor is the mystery of Israel's sin probed, whether in terms of dualistic categories or in terms of predestinarianism.
- Featured Verse Topics.
- You Are of Your Father the Devil?
- Confronting Kingdom Challenges: A Call to Global Christians to Carry the Burden Together;
Israel's sin is a fact of history which requires no explanation. The term "Jews" in the Gospel of Matthew is applied to those who deny the resurrection of Jesus and believe that the disciples stole Jesus's corpse. The Sadducees , for example, prominent elsewhere, are not distinguished. In the other three texts, the plot to put Jesus to death is always presented as coming from a small group of priests and rulers, the Sadducees.
John himself has Jesus tell the Samaritan woman that "salvation is from the Jews. In some said "he is a good man" whereas others said he deceives the people, but these were all "whispers", no one would speak publicly for "fear of the Jews". Jewish rejection is also recorded in , , , and John says many did believe, but they kept it private, for fear the Pharisees would exclude them from the synagogue.
After the crucifixion, has the disciples hiding behind locked doors, "for fear of the Jews". In several places John's gospel also associates "the Jews" with darkness and with the devil. In John ;  ,  Jesus says, speaking to a group of Pharisees:.
I know that you are descendants of Abraham ; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you. I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father. They answered him, "Abraham is our father. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.
- True Blood: The Untold History of Television?
- The Innovators Dilemma: Warum etablierte Unternehmen den Wettbewerb um bahnbrechende Innovationen verlieren (Business Essentials) (German Edition).
- Learn More!
He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is you are not of God. Although it has been claimed that the modern consensus is that the term Ioudaioi Jews in John refers exclusively to religious authorities,  the basis for this claim has been challenged and John's use of the term Jews remains a complex and debated area of biblical scholarship.
Dunn writes:. The Fourth Evangelist is still operating within a context of intra-Jewish factional dispute, although the boundaries and definitions themselves are part of that dispute. It is clear beyond doubt that once the Fourth Gospel is removed from that context, and the constraints of that context, it was all too easily read as an anti-Jewish polemic and became a tool of anti-semitism.
But it is highly questionable whether the Fourth Evangelist himself can fairly be indicted for either anti-Judaism or anti-semitism. Reflecting the consensus that John's use of the term refers strictly to Jewish religious authorities, some modern translations, such as Today's New International Version , remove the term "Jews" and replace it with more specific terms to avoid antisemitic connotations.
Successive generations of Christians read in the Gospel of John the collective guilt of Jews, universally and in all generations, in the death of Christ. John's use of the collective expression "the Jews" is likely explained by the historical circumstances in which and audience for which he wrote. With the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD , the Jewish priesthood, and thus the class of the Sadducees was massacred and thus ceased to exist, due to its role in the First Jewish—Roman War.
As John wrote his Gospel after these events, for a gentile audience, he spoke generically of Jews, rather than specifying a group within Judaism that no longer existed and that would have been unfamiliar to his readers. For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you suffered the same things from your own compatriots as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out; they displease God and oppose everyone by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved.
Thus they have constantly been filling up the measure of their sins; but God's wrath has overtaken them at last. The text appears somewhat anomalous compared to the general tone of thanksgiving, in that we have a diatribe against persecutors identified as Jews. This has led several scholars to question its authenticity, and suggest that it is an interpolation.
Jesus and Abraham
Bruce called it an 'indiscriminate anti-Jewish polemic' mirroring Graeco-Roman pagan attitudes to the Jews. Gene Green, Ernest Best, T. Holtz, Amy Downey variously argue that it resonates with Old Testament themes, plays on Jewish fears of being the "privileged people of God" and typical of an argumentative style shared by Greeks and Jews alike and thus, in Downey's words, exemplifying an intracultural clash between Paul the Jew and Jewish leaders opposing the propagation of Gospel ideas in both Judea and Thessalonia.
Most scholars consider the Epistle to the Hebrews to have been written for Christians who were tempted to return to Judaism. Lillian Freudmann thinks that it in trying to argue the superiority of Christianity to Judaism, it twisted Old Testament passages in a way that transmitted an anti- Torah antisemitism. John Gager reads it as a polemic against Judaism, not the Jewish people, and regards it as the most important anti-Judaizing text of early Christianity.
Samuel Sandmel asserts that rather than vilifying Judaism, or the Jews of that age, the Epistle to the Hebrews is an argument for the supersessionist notion that Christianity is the pinnacle of ancient Judaism. William L.
Praise for the Print Edition
Lane dismissed the idea that it contains an anti-Judaic polemic, its primary concern being simply to assert that the Old Testament prophecies had been fulfilled. Those who see in its discontinuities antisemitism are wrong William Hagner argued: there may be anti-Judaism, but no antagonism for Jews. While it promotes supersessionism it venerates the Hebrew saints, for Donald Bloesch, and therefore what it is exhorting is the replacement of Jewish institutions, not Jews.
For Timothy Johnson, Christianity had to struggle to survive amid a majority of sects that were not Messianic, and whatever slander there is, is to be understood as the rhetoric of a marginal group against the majority of Jews. Such rhetorical vehemence was common in antiquity in religious and philosophical disputes. At Revelation we have:.
I know your tribulation and your poverty but you are rich and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie--behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and learn that I have loved you. There is no certainty about who are those claiming falsely to be Jews:  whether they are Jews hostile to gentiles, Jewish Christians persecuted by a Jewish majority, Jews who are practicing a "false" form of Judaism or gentiles feigning to be Jews.
Pagels identifies most of these internal enemies as converts to the Pauline doctrine and teachings prevailing among gentiles. Taken literally the passage at Revelations would refer to gentiles upstaging Jewish followers of Jesus, feigning to be more Jewish than Jews themselves.
Paul Duff on the other hand assumes they are Jews, like John himself, but Jews who are hostile to the Jesus movement. David Frankfurter has revived the old argument of Ferdinand Baur by endorsing the view that in fact the members of Satan's synagogue are mostly gentiles, claiming Israel's legacy while rebuffing religious practices that are obligatory for Jews.
Pin on Christian Blogs
Even those who, like David Aune , consider that the phrase indicates Jews, not gentiles, allow that the Book of Revelation is virtually devoid of traces of the polemics between Christians and Jews typical of those times. It has been argued that the idea of a Jewish Antichrist developed from these verses. True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today.
Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. Norman Beck, professor of theology and classical languages at Texas Lutheran University , has proposed that Christian lectionaries remove what he calls "… the specific texts identified as most problematic …". Daniel Goldhagen , former Associate Professor of Political Science at Harvard University , also suggested in his book A Moral Reckoning that the Roman Catholic Church should change its doctrine and the accepted Biblical canon to excise statements he labels as antisemitic,- he counts some such passages in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts of the Apostles alone  -to indicate that "The Jews' way to God is as legitimate as the Christian way".
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.