Honor and Shame: Cultural Context of the Biblical World
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2021
- There is so much context we miss when we read the Bible, because we do not understand the honor and shame standards of the ancient world. This video will help explain ancient concepts of honor and shame so you can better understand the Bible.
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ inspiringphilosophy
/ @inspiringphilosophy
Sources:
Bruce Malina & John Pilch - Handbook of Biblical Social Values
Mark Strauss - Four Portraits, One Jesus
Joseph H. Hellerman - Challenging the authority of Jesus: Mark 11:27-33 and Mediterranean notions of honor and shame. digitalcommons.biola.edu/facu...
John H. Walton - The NIV Application Commentary: Genesis
E. Randolph Richards & Brandon J. O’Brien - Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes
David deSilva - Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity: Unlocking New Testament Culture
Krister Stendahl - The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West. www.jstor.org/stable/1508631.
Bruce Malina & Jerome H. Neyrey - The social world of Luke-Acts. Models for interpretation
#History #Rome #Israel - บันเทิง
![ภาพนี้ก็ฮาเหมือนกันนะเนี้ย #1 SS8 [ พากย์นรก MEME.EXE ] | easy boy](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ytc50m91QK8/mqdefault.jpg)
First off just want to say I really enjoy the channel. Now to the point, I used to be a staunch atheist for many many years until recently. I would’ve even considered myself to be an anti-theist. I had what I would describe as a loathing for both the idea of God and even more so Christians. I couldn’t for the life of me understand how anyone could believe in fairy tales like the ones I thought were written in the Bible. I watched thousands of debates like the ones you participate in and read dozens of books about atheism and God and science. I would argue with believers till I was blue in the face. And I heard every so called proof for the existence of God from all the big time apologists like William Lane Craig and CS Lewis etc.
And let me tell you none of those arguments were in any way what led me to become a Christian.
What opened my eyes was realizing that atheism is a dead end. My atheism led to nihilism and hedonism. I was on the road to destruction. I felt like I was at war with myself. And I asked how can I win a war against myself? And when I realized the answer that’s when I started to believe in God.
The answer is that I was too helpless and weak to live a good life without God and that I needed grace. I needed to become a child of God.
As an atheist I had a lot of pride and I would say, I don’t need God. That’s for the intellectually and emotionally inferior. But how wrong I was!!
I wrote a song about my journey called Child of God. It’s on my channel if you would like to hear it. Thanks for reading this!
@@IamGirlRemnant glad my comments helped :)
So good to see this, I think ultimately deep down (plus the bible tells us), we all know there is "something". We see creation, starry skies, beautiful sunsets, the things that are made, but even as a Christian, the pressure of this world is great.
I listened to your Great White Caboose, and part of your Child of God, very good. I really liked the Caboose one. God-Bless brother.
@AlienLanguageRecords thanks for sharing your story, I can certainly identify with parts of it! The difference was that that I didn't say I didn't need God, I just didn't believe that God existed. Like you I heard all the arguments, and although they showed me that the version of christianity I hated was a strawman they didn't make me believe that this admittedly better presented and more logical version of God actually **existed** any more than any other version. I can only liken it to looking at the famous picture of two faces and saying "sorry, I really can't see this candlestick you are talking about. Honestly, I think you are imagining it because it still just looks like two faces to me!"
I don't think it was pride or denial on my part, I just honestly couldn't see it. Yet after that as I continued reading the bible looking for more problems I had a supernatural experience and suddenly something **clicked** inside me and I could see the candlestick as it were, so clear and obvious that it was hard to believe I hadn't been able to see it all along.
So although I no longer consider myself an atheist I still have a lot of sympathy for atheists. Sure, maybe some of them **can** see the candlestick and just don't want to admit it is there for whatever reason. But what if they were like me and just honestly can't see it? And why did it click for me then, and not earlier or later? Did I need to have the strawman removed so that I could see the real thing? I really don't know, but I am grateful for my Christian friend who was so patient and kind with me for so long. I try my best to be just as patient and kind with others as he was with me, although I don't think I am there yet. But I certainly going to go check out your songs!
Another excellent video! I love these 'cultural context' videos because they hit two birds with one stone; understanding history and culture the bible was written in, but also examining how the bible's teaching GOES AGAINST the culture and is *truly* an *inspired* work.
That's actually a good point. Many people say they can be a good person without religion, without realizing that their standards of what is good originally came from religion itself defying prior values. It's like someone saying they can do surgery without first learning medicine.
This should apply to all religions
@Udhehf Hehcuw I think you are confusing Christianity with Islam.
@Udhehf Hehcuw Like I said, I'm pretty sure you are confusing this with the Islamic interpretation.
@Udhehf Hehcuw National sovereignty was protected back then by total war or slavery. This is why concepts like terrorism was not common then like it is today. Slavery was a means of incorporating your enemies into your family, but ensuring they did not subvert your people. This allowed you to spare their lives than having to kill them. Alternatively slaves were a means of settling debt. Society had no place for freeloaders. The concept of bankruptcy and tolerance of insolvency was nonexistent. If you couldn't pay with money, you paid with your life.
The Bible was unique in the fact that it reformed the perspective of what slaves were, while prior they were simply a symbol of wealth/power to be used and discarded however.
I love the historical insight here. Reminds me of modern day 'cancel culture', which is basically the 21st Century version of ancient honor and shame culture.
"For in those days...everyone did what was right in their eyes."
This guy gets it
Been trying to figure that part out. What was right in their eyes was most likely in line with the ten commandments. Society was good and a king wasn't required. Otherwise it means just what it says
@@keepthechange2811 no it means exactly the opposite. Because the Israelites abandoned God's instruction (including the Ten Commandments), they defined morality on their own terms to suit their own needs, which resulted in conflicts and power struggles.
Was thinking the same thing, mob morality is becoming more prominent.
The video was posted 17 hours ago and your comment is 5 days old. How's that possible?
This could be one of your most important videos about the cultural context of the Bible.
Thank you!
This fits nicely with how I was listening to someone describe recently how ancients didn't consider emotions or inner thoughts to actually originate with the mind. The mind was just a sense organ receiving those things like the eye receives light. The point of agency where one chooses to attend to those things was the real self.
Such an interesting insight honestly this makes me really interested in the Bible again it's awesome
That's a rather broad statement. In all my research over the decades, Ive never heard that explicitly articulated.
@@obadiahkilgore2964 It's hard to find explicit acknowledgement in ancient sources because it was the pervasive paradigm. But allusions to it are pretty common.
Well, this video brought to mind a memorable quote from Mulan (1998):
Mushu: That's it! Dishonor! Dishonor on you! Dishonor on your cow, and dishonor on your house!"
Yo, yoshi! A.k.a kevin! I saw a few of your theological videos, but didn't know you watched this guy too! That awesome!
Sorry, but it's weird to see a "smaller" channel you actually know in the comment section.
This honor and shaming community is still true here in India. When a person convert to Christian from Hinduism (or sikhism etc) he is immediately ostracize and disowned by his family and even from the society (mostly in rural areas). They also treat Hinduism not just a religion but their identity, their culture, their way of life. That's why its so hard to preach the gospel to orthodox hindu. They will also trace you back to the atrocities committed in the name of Christ.
As always, Awesome video IP. Eagerly waiting for your other videos specially on young earth creationism. God bless you
So is Islam.
This problem continues to play out in cultures today-Honor and Shame vs. Self-esteem and Guilt. The hypocrisy in the US is that we still use honor and shame on each other, yet often deny it or are in ignorance of it, but we also like to say “don’t judge me”, at the same time we look down on other cultures with a clear honor and shame context.
Very true. I've always hated the "don't judge me" or "keep an open mind" defense, because it basically is telling someone to blind themselves and not think for themselves. If something is justifiable, you should be able to explain the justification to someone, not just claim "they don't get it". However I do not think honor and shame is necessarily good, as it is defined by mob mentality rather than any concrete morals. It can be good, but only if the population is of good character and not easily tricked into sympathy for a bad person. I think cultural uniformity is better as there is no consequence to deviance (hence there is less danger to the mobs actions), but it is still made clear what is in and what is out. If that makes sense, I might not be saying this clearly.
@@DaveSmith-cp5kj problem is its more aligned with the way humans behave and the goal of humanity and the Bible is to make people know the wrong and right of something without the help of the community so everyone can hold themselves responsible not have it held for you. It's a destruction of that old honor system in favor of a more uplifted human, soar to heaven and listen to God do not stoop to hear conniving human mind where we are tricked by the devil into terrible deeds.
Your content has really helped me to sort through the young-earth creationism of my upbringing. It's taken me a long time to understand the value in the Bible's cultural context. I'm also a huge fan of Jordan Peterson, and your hermeneutic ties in really well with his psychological analysis.
@@missouritravelers The age of the earth didn't matter to them. They only cared about what made their lives liveable and their world meaningful, which meant having children so their lines would continue. As far as they were concerned, the earth's existence was defined by them living in it. That, and their God/gods providing for them and not being angered. That's why creation accounts were centred on the universe being transformed from chaos into order, because that's what made it habitable.
@@missouritravelers To call them uneducated in science is anachronistic. Their reality was not predicated on science. It's like calling an infantry drill sergeant a bad pilot. It's not his job to be a pilot. Ancient people were not universally stupid. We still don't know how the Egyptians built the pyramids, or how the Greeks made Greek Fire. The Chinese civilisation never had a scientific enlightenment, yet they possessed gun powder while Julius Caesar was conquering Gaul. The fact that the ancients thought the earth was flat had nothing to do with their cognitive abilities.
Thank you. This is not just informative but more than that it is edifying.
Hi Michael, it's a phenomenal teaching video my brother. May the Lord bless you and make your work a reason for millions to go back into His Church.
Thank you!
@@InspiringPhilosophy
Honest question....
You say that everyone will one day be publically shamed in front of God and all his servants.
But I thought that the bible states numerous times that believers will not be put to shame?
Are you sure that you have this one right?
I thought Christ bore our shame?
@@stevenrivard9246 well remember John said in his first letter to walk righteously so that we would not be ashamed at Jesus coming. Shame and Condemnation are distinct but when we know we have done wrong shame is a natural yet somewhat temporary response for modern people. Jesus then restores our honor and gives us glory by giving us crowns. So it all works out. But, we will feel that we suffered loss but it will not cause us to go in to depths of despair.
Great video. In a modern sense, the David story is turned on its head.
My undergraduate is History, my Master’s is in Theology. I preach this point a lot
Wow. I was thinking of David De Silva when I saw the title of your video and was amazed that he is one of your sources. He is so good.
This is a phenomenal teaching you've put together here. Your examples and thoroughness really make this video something people should watch. Thank you for taking the time to put this together!
Live in an Islamic society for a decade, and you may understand shame and honor.
That goes for Confucian society as well.
I've done about a decade in each, quite a learning experience of a lifetime.
Are you yourself a christian?
@@kimberiedema6951 I'm s firm believer that Christianity misses the entire point of both Bible's. It also dismisses the ten commandments to the detriment of many
@@keepthechange2811 so what do you believe then
@@keepthechange2811 well as a Christian I believe that as Jesus fulfilled the 10 commandments in our place, we still try to obey them (and only succeed by God's Holy Spirit) out of gratitude for our salvation and to be a light to the world. All of us has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God though, but world religions apart from that in Christ says we can be good and get to heaven, when none are righteous apart from by grace through faith.
The point of the Old and New Testaments throughout is Christ's coming and redemption of humanity out of God's love for us.
@@jesusistheonlygodamen3406 My guess is he is talking about the churches. I'm not a believer, but I have gone to many churches before because I like learning about religion and Christians tend to be pretty good people, however many churches no longer follow the bible because they are trying to stay tax-exempt non-profit, so they have to peddle a certain agenda to maintain that taxing status. One Catholic church I went to had the priest denouncing the pope for blocking investigation into the child molestation, supporting sexual deviancy, and for supporting "humanitarians" trafficking people such as terrorists across borders. The next Sunday he was excommunicated, and so I left as well. I will have nothing to do with any organization that condemns good people.
I also believe that the way the Bible presents God to us, churches are superfluous. We should not need a church in order to follow God. A church should be treated like a club, not like a holy organization because it isn't. It's just a congregation of people and should not hold any inherent religious power. God is supposed to guide us directly, no need for an intermediate who can twist his message.
Not a fan of islam though. I've fought in various middle eastern and a few African countries and there is a reason those people are centuries behind the rest of the world. Most of the farmers and rural guys are fairly good people, they aren't really muslims, they just want to live their life in peace. The people however who are doing the religious fighting or promoting Islam in other countries are some of the biggest hypocrites I have ever seen. In Islam things like homosexuality and out of wedlock intimacy's is forbidden, and yet many of them are participating in underaged sex slavery. And it's not always young girls either, they also use boys from impoverished or destitute families. They also are big on drug trade. They originally were against drugs but then later when they needed money, they dipped their foot in, realized it was profitable and made their followers stronger and more easily controlled and so they have fully indulged in all kinds of substances. I view islam similar to catholics. The good muslims/catholics despise their organization and reject the others for a parsimonious interpretation that isn't just driven by some militant or political agenda that wouldn't stand outside of that context.
Man this is so informative, you learn something new everyday.
hello
I've learned so much from your channel that it has made reading the Bible so much more interesting. Thank you!
Beautiful video as always.
Well done IP.
The past makes so much sense now. Good find!
So you're saying the Bible series was wrong and David and Uriah weren't buddies? 🤣 Seriously though, this is probably one of the best videos you've done. It expands the understanding of a lot of situations in the Bible that we clearly missed today.
Great video. I love how you present your material and share these hidden truths which make The Bible and Christianity more understandable and relevant.
Now that is a fascinating perspective. Thank you for sharing that.
Thank you for creating this video IP!
Dude if you made a whole series, like your genesis series, on just historical contexts that would be so awesome👌. Great video dude
That was beautiful IP my brother, now I see what you were trying to explain to Sean in the Torah debate and this video was useful with the discussion I had with my friend whom is a SDA who has a similar view as Sean.
Wow, thank you for the information. That does help me understand what is going on in Scripture.
Awesome! Right in line with Chapters 4, 5, & 7 of "Misreading Scripture With Western Eyes", Richards & O'Brien. Definitely needed.
Definitely sharing this video on every platform
Another amazing video! Great work !!!
I think the difference between guilt and shame is not a matter of individualism and collectivism. it depends on the type of obligation that has been infringed and whether you receive blame from others.
Some examples:
- you evade your income taxes, but still collect welfare from the state: you feel guilty
- you evade your wealth taxes, but someone blames you for not receiving enough welfare from the state: you feel ashamed
- you let non vaccinated clients have access to your shop, but one of them dies of covid: you feel guilty
- you refuse to get vaccinated, but one of your clients blames you for his brother's death with covid : you feel ashamed
So, both guilt and shame are emotions typical of a collectivist society, because they both arise from infringing an obligation, and obligations are typical of collectivist societies.
On the other hand, honor requires some measure of individualism because it concerns your individual liberty to exert your own power, but the exertion of your power limits other people's liberty, hence it is a zero-sum game.
Excellent presentation of an important concept! Thank you!
Wow! Great addition to the David/Bathsheba conversation
Great work, informative and edifying
Uriah was one of the Thirty elite warriors, as was Bathsheba's father Eliam, so they were elite members of society. Eliam's father Ahithophel had actually been a counselor of David but had taken Absalom's side during that revolt.
This is really a J.P. Holding (tektontv) classic. I sympthatize with his endeavor of making this knowledge public and more known to the field of apologetics and i think your channel really help this happen.
This context is really essential in interpreting the gospels and in inter-faith (or lack of faith!) dialogue as well. Hopefully we did not commit our usual presentism faux pas in interpreting the bible!
Such a great video, thank you!
Amazing content!! Thank you!!! God bless you 🙏
Thank you, your video gives me insights, clearer depths and background about the way things were in the biblical society.
I object though if David was not feeling guilty under the context. The way they talk by going around the direct clear sense way of talking, shows their awareness of consciousness, sense of justice, and the superiority of it over honor.
But yeah, even now people often times prioritize honor over justice/consciousness, making it just as an ornament of their politics. That's a stray I would argue, rather than a cluelessness.
The work of Jesus and Christianity throughout time draws the clear line of what a true goodness is, putting the price in consciousness and wisdom and the presence of God. The absence of that, is communal honor automatically (because God was not put into factor).
Note then, also, that God is the spirit of Truth, not to be confused with the God leaders of the past created for their political position.
So people who prioritize the Truth would have the sense of what works for sustainability and what wouldn't, no matter what the society perceives (this obtained through fortification of honesty)
Your videos are great resources for understanding the context in which the Biblical texts where written.
An interesting and thankful video. Thank you.
man you explaining abram changing his name really brings the whole jacob - israel thing into perspective and how big of a deal that actually was.
In “The Righteous Mind”, Jonathan Haidt argues people are prone to act selfishly - unless there’s an immediate price, usually social one (shame), to pay. He writes that the only way to maintain an orderly society is to ensure maximum accountability for our actions.
This has given me much fresh insight.
I disagree with Uriah suspecting David's actions with his wife and I would play more on the fear of public shame that drove David to set Uriah up for death. Other than those 2 things, I agree heavily with your video IP! As always great Job!
Outstanding. Thank you.
Thanks for the explanation on the Honor and Shame paradigm of the Bible.
Excellent video, Michael. Looking at the scripture and other ancient documents through the context of honor and shame really gives us a lot of insight into the culture of the ancient world. Someone not familiar with this concept could definitely not reach full understanding of the source material.
Have you ever considered taking this topic further and talking about the differences between the so-called guilt based and shame based societies of today? There could be a whole lot of things to talk about, like explaining how valuing guilt over shame on a societal level only developed in the western civilization due to the influence of Christianity, and then comparing that to the societies that are to this day based on shame such as India or China. Although I understand that you might want to avoid topics like these as they could be misunderstood as insults to people of other ethnicities. Still I think you should consider comparing Christian and non-Christian cultures starting from a moral level and going into societal structure and those kinds of topics.
thanks this was awsum
good work again
Thank you!
This is also one of the core teachings of Zoroastrianism. Some scholars say that Zarathustra was the first to encourage his followers to do what they believe is right (Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds) instead of what the community considers right. Meaning that one as an individual is required to assess the situation, find the right choice and act on it regardless of the circumstances (being righteous for the sake of righteousness), instead of justifying his actions through traditions, superstitions and so on (the "just following orders" defense). And this is where the idea of their final judgement comes from, as the individual bears full responsibility for his actions. Again, some credit Zoroastrianism as being the first religion with a ”heaven”/”hell” system, as the soul can either rest eternally in a place of bliss or it can be temporarily punished for his wrongdoings (and their belief even has an apocalypse-type of event, when the wicked will be purged of evil and cleansed, after which man will live forever, but that's another discussion).
It's a very interesting parallel to Christianity. Even though the Old Testament suggests something similar (as it is ones duty to be righteous in the face of God as opposed to his/her community), it wasn't formulated so explicitly as in the New Testament, where being the best person one can be (as in kind, altruistic, forgiving etc.) is a core doctrine. Some suggest that Zoroastrianism influences Christianity (in a similar manner to the way it influenced the philosophy of Socrates/Plato), but we may never know. Maybe this is just the same elephant and both Christianity and Zoroastrianism are the blind people touching and feeling different parts of it.
Wow. Thank you very much sir!
Temuchin Borjigin ... so it's official, from this you can surmise that you're now justified in murdering a Palestinian with impunity. Your life has been simplified with this scenario, with the result that the narrowing of conditions between collectivism and individualism is a zero sum game. If life were only like this ... 🤗 ... : - th-cam.com/video/vTSmbMm7MDg/w-d-xo.html
And now you also have better understanding of "Fiddler on the Roof."
Honor and shame literacy is absolutely essential to "rightly dividing".
Hey InspiringPhilosophy, I love your videos man. Thank you for the all the effort you put in. I’ve learned much from your content.
I’m inspired by your channel, and I myself am interested in creating videos. I’m curious, do you edit and produce all of your videos personally? If so, where would be a good place for me to start learning how to edit and produce teaching videos?
My interest would be to create videos on systematic theology and church history. I just don’t know where to start.
Really awesome video IP. I'm shocked I've just now seen it. Although internal consciousness was more developed through the framework of the New Testament, the honor-shame system is also highly prevalent. For example, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, Philippians 1:20, 2 Corinthians 10:8, etc. It seems that much of our internal consciousness, guided by the Holy Spirit, still directs us to the church, which is the pillar and support of the truth. Although the Holy Spirit dwells with us individually, it is only through fellowship do we become the temple of God, and it is that same Temple that has the trust and authority from God to exercise church discipline as they see fit. Also, one of the purposes of the church is to edify one another. Even if we seek to do right by God within our internal consciousness, a big part of doing right by God is defined by our fellowship with his people. Deep stuff!
Excellent work!
Just a quibble: Uriah was one of David's mighty men and he was married to the daughter of one of David's advisers. So, he wasn't a random soldier. I think it shows even more how shameful David's actions were. He betrayed a friend.
I think this video perfectly explains how we understand the cultural context of the biblical authors...
For example, Job ripping his cloth, shaved his head and sat in ashes as a sign of sorrow and grief...
I've discussed this subject with others that we need to look at the Bible through the lens of the culture who wrote and read it. However, you have done it in a much more effective manner. You have given me concrete examples to use in those conversations and for that, I thank you! You are an outstanding teacher!
"The law will be written on their hearts"
Is made even more remarkable with this in mind. God wasn't concerned with the Honor/Shame public paradigm but more it seems to me something closer to what we've developed in respecting others as the image of God and loving them as we love ourselves, per Christ's command.
Most people in Christianized nations recognize this, but I'm sure there are cultures that still operate on the honor paradigm (Middle east and east asia may still operate very much on saving face) that it would be a revelation to.
Nice job Michael Jones.
Interesting!
Your presentation makes me wonder whether Peter's instruction to honor all men, and to honor the emperor (1 Pet. 2:17) indicates that the zero-sum honor game is replaced with the idea that honor is something we can give, without losing ours.
The honor of the emperor is apparently not honor for the position of emperor, or of the institution which he heads, rather, honor for the emperor himself. The job of the emperor and the institution of the empire in the context is the one that the emperor Tiberius sent governor Pilate 'to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good' (1 Pet. 2:14) but instead, Pilate released the murderer Barabbas, and crucified the one who committed no sin (1 Pet. 2:21-23). This, on Peter's analysis, is the illustration and the example of how political power and empire work, it is something that we see repeated, and which we have to face in the same way that the Lord did. Yet, we are to honor the emperor nonetheless.
Amazing
IP uploaded and I got a job interview, having a good day
Thank you for this insightful video. I learned something new. I want though to point out that the video over-emphasize the 'shame-honor culture' as a sort of substitute for the existence of conscience. We have biblical evidences that conscience was recognized and operative among the ancients. It seems that the safest conclusion would be to say that though they had conscience they would most probably ignore it unlike the 'honor-shame' pressure.
St. Paul as a new covenant Jew speaks of his conscience that bear witness: "I tell the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my CONSCIENCE also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit" Romans 9:1; he even points out that conscience was operative in those who were outside the new covenant: "For when the nations, who do not have the Law, do by nature the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law unto themselves; who show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their CONSCIENCE also bearing witness, and the thoughts between one another accusing or even excusing one another"
- Romans 2:15
St. Peter also seems to link the effect of baptism to conscience, "which figure now also saves us, baptism; not a putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good CONSCIENCE toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" - 1Peter 3:21.
IP, would you like to make a video about the validity of the Watch Argument?
As a historian who spent years studying ancient history I can not express more how Important is to take things and deeds of our ancestors in the context! How easy we get to judge the people from the past by our standards. Let me give you an example , imagine you have an ancient roman friend who is telling you how great where a games in the Colosseum he saw last day! He saw a man which head was totally swollen by a lion and later he saw his favourite gladiator who cut a whole arm of his opponent on the arena! And he is talking about it as you would talking about latest episode of your favourite serial on Netflix :D Can you imagine that? Different times , different context different tools ! Really! Oh yea, and was no internet back then and most people never seen anything what was more than 30 miles away from their town or village :D What I am talking! Most people can not imagine a famine! We tent to think of it as a African problem . Imagine not so far in the past it was a common problem and how much you have food was the most important thing to your survival !
Wasn’t Uriah more than just a regular soldier?
He is listed as one of David’s “Mighty Men” in 1 Chronicles 11.
(The incident with Bathsheba is alluded to later in 1 Chronicles 20.)
This perspective of the passage makes a lot of sense though!
self esteem and honor, lets use them both! why only use self esteem? 😂 use all the things that are right from God, dont go half the truth❤ our identity in Christ shall be expressed both inside and outside❤ thanks for this video brother🎉 you spoke the truth😮
Can I get a heart for being early 😅🥺 also, I would be interested to see videos on probability
Interesting. I feel like not only have we shifted from honor and shame to self-esteem and guilt in the modern West, but postmodernism has dropped guilt while focusing solely on self-esteem and honor (without guilt or shame). Though refocusing identity to group associations, but only superficial associations like skin color or sexual orientation, rather than more meaningful group associations like religion, nation, or family.
Honor was far more important than today in Western culture too until the 20th century.
As someone from an ethnic background I always found this concept quite intuitive in contrast to my western (white) friends. shame and honour is a big part of nigerian culture. This is the same for my wife who is turkish. When I read the bible through this natural lense it makes a lot of sense to me.
In light if the topic here, the principle of Abram leaving his country, family and changing identity because of his move, gives a new glance at Jesus informing about hating our father, mother and family.
I disagree pretty heavily with the Bathsheba was flirting thing. Bathing on the roof was how they used to do it and the palace was definitely massive and David could totally have just been peeping.
This is awesome! And I totally understand deeper why Christianity is different from every other "religion", the focus point of Christianity is the humiliation of God… Jesus deserves the Honor, but His people wanted it for themselves
IP, is this idea somehow related to the “Honor your father and mother”? Is the idea of the commandment to bring honor in the sense of what our community says about our parents?
Dr Michael Heisner explained how child birth was viewed in the ancient world. Taking that into consideration, could "your soul", from the phrase "As you live and as your soul lives", be a reference to the soul David put in his wife? In other words, since the culture at the time considered children to originate from men with women being only the vessel from which they grew, could Uria have been directly telling David he knew about the child?
It was a huge change for Ruth, but Abraham's lineage kept contact with this kin back in Harran for at least two more generations.
This is interesting, and reminds me of my own experience seeing people "leaving the church" because of the community, people gossiping etc, when the focus should be the LORD, always. It doesn't matter public opinion, but to worship and serve Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This is the only thing that really matters. And the reward is to live eternally in His grace.
Good video, but I should point out one thing:
16:35 I don't think Uriah was just a regular soldier. In 2 Samuel 23 verse 39 he is mentioned as one of the mighty warriors. He must have at least been a renowned warrior or possibly a commander.
Pls make a video on esus!
@IP, Nice video of the title of and context but I wouldn't say you would disagree either of Christ being crucified from the Pharisees or Sanhedrin claiming to be God more then a honor thing, still I understand they may had this view of honor while Jesus Christ did not worry about honor at all,thanks.
Besides the book of romans it’s hard for me to identify with most of the context cause of exactly this reason. American world view based in guilt and innocence where the Middle East especially ancient Israel is shame and honor. Very difficult to relate to when you have no context of shame and honor
bro you saved me from religious trauma 😢 may YAHUAH HAMASHIACH (Jesus) always use you to speak the TRUTH in this LAWLESS WORLD ❤
Honestly this also brings a stronger perspective of the effects of the Law now being written on our hearts, and how God just new his people in the past needed much more guidance with the Law of Moses, and how Jesus had to still point out to the Jews if they would’ve really just focused and obeyed the first two great commandments the rest would’ve been much easier to follow but their culture hindered them tremendously with hardened hearts.
I think you may have fallen for the modern scholarship trap of seeing Israel as just one ancient nation among the many rather than exceptional. Individual guilt is a persistent and obvious theme in the OT: from the blood of Abel crying out to God for justice to Nathan confronting David (one on one) and David confessing that he had sinned against God. The Christian message fulfilled the OT; it did not “expand” it. Indeed even the more noble pagans understood the distinction, for example with Plato’s ring of Gyges. Individual guilt is a part of human nature properly attuned; it is part of innate conscience. The role of communal honor in the ancient world, especially with Israelites who understood the Torah, may be overemphasized here.
Community shame was also among the jews tho lev 21:9 if daughter priest was prostitute he done disgrace to him that’s one example in the bible
Such an underated channel
We took a Molly each, less than an hour later I came home. Twenty minutes after I got back you guys called and told me you were pissed because I left and wanted me to return and drink beers, with me always being kind I hadn't refused even though I was burnt out still went to the store and bought a case of beer to drink all morning long. This was the last day I remembered all month long last December.
Should've let me stay home, I wouldn't have changed, this was the day the turning point.
Told me months later it was PCP (AKA Angel dust) you told me to lay down and relax.
Correction: 2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all stand before Christ to be judged. We will each receive whatever we deserve for the good or evil we have done in this earthly body.
This presentation helps explain the meaning of the language of divine judgement, and reward and punishment, before those ideas were hijacked into the individualistic personal conscious afterlife experiences of heaven and hell that later became the primary understanding of what salvation is about.
The biblical view of the personal afterlife is not of any conscious experience, rather, the dead know nothing, feel nothing, experience nothing, say nothing and do nothing, because as individuals, men are mortal beings of flesh, they are dust, a mist that appears for a while and then vanishes (e.g. Ecc. 9:5; Jam. 4:14). Men do not persist, they do not live on, except in the memory of the living, and in the offspring they raise up before they die, whether physical offspring, or spiritual offspring (e.g. of the eunuchs, Is. 56:3-5 cf. Acts 8:26-39) or political offspring (e.g. of the Lord, Is. 53:10-12). Men, and their lives and kingdoms, are mortal, given enough time, the memory of everyone is forgotten, and the dynasties fall, and the kingdoms fail and go down to the world of the dead (e.g. Mat. 11:23), like the 'trees' (i.e. political kingdoms) in the garden of Eden (e.g. Ez. 31). The question of the resurrection, then, concerns, raising up offspring, that a man's name not be blotted out from Israel (Deut. 25:5-6; Mat. 22:23-33), and indeed the resurrection is the resurrection of Israel itself (Ez. 37:1-14; Hos. 6:1-2; Mat. 3:9; 10:8; 11:5; Acts 26:4-8; Rom. 11:15). This resurrection of Israel, the Lord proclaimed underway (E.g. Mat. 11:2-6; John 5:25), and Paul proclaimed was underway and joined the Gentiles with resurrecting Israel (Eph. 2:1-22).
Thus, with no immortality of the soul, and no resurrection of the physical bodies of men (who die and who do not rise physically e.g. Job. 7:7-10; 14:7-12; 2 Sam. 14:14), the resurrection is not of flesh and blood (1 Cor. 15:50), and the concept of judgement, reward and punishment is not a personal conscious experience of every individual (as is supposed in our individualistic culture), rather it is a status of honor or shame in the minds of those who witness and remember and judge them (e.g. Dan. 12:2), as in the collectivist cultural context. The body sown in dishonor, and raised in honor (1 Cor 15:42-49) is the singular body, into which the dead, plural, are raised (1 Cor. 15:35). The old body is the corpse to be eaten by vultures (Mat. 24:28 cf. Rev. 19:17-21), the body of the old Israel to be destroyed in dishonor and shame (e.g. the body of the rebels, Is. 66:24), but the new body is the body of Christ, of which we are members, raised in honor.
The individual judgement, and honor and dishonor, must be read and interpreted in this context: the dead prophets are judged and rewarded when their blood is vindicated and the guilt of killing them is repaid collectively and historically, in the Second Flood, the flood of men of war, in fulfillment of Gen. 9:5-6; Deut. 32; Is. 28; Dan. 9:24-27; Mat. 7:24-27; 23:29-38; 24:37-39; and Rev. 12:15-16. The judgement of the living and the dead that Peter pronounced in the First Century was ready to be poured out (1 Pet. 4:5), would come when the dead prophets are judged in this way and rewarded by means of the destruction of the destroyers of the land of Israel and Jerusalem (i.e. the Zealots), Rev. 11:18, and of the prostitute (wayward Israel), Rev. 19:2.
The concept of this personal status of honor is expressed as having one's name written in the book of life in heaven (Dan. 12:1; Luke 10:20; Phil 4:3; Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12-15; 21:7). This is an essentially forensic and deliberative status before God himself, rather than merely honor before men. It expresses the notion that there is a greater judge and a greater judgement of men's deeds, to determine whether they should be remembered with honor and given honor, or forgotten or remembered as evil. Thus, 'it is appoiunted for man to die once, and after that comes judgement' (Heb. 9:27). The bible contains no descriptions of the experience of 'going to heaven when you die' because there is no such concept or teaching of the afterlife as a personal experience, as opposed to a post-mortem forensic, legal or honor status. The concept of being in Paradise, is, as the revolutionary correctly framed the question, one of being 'remembered' (Luke 23:42), i.e. being identified with, and credited as one of the Lord's people, when he comes in his kingdom (the 'today' is referenced for the date of the pronouncement, to emphasize the circumstances of that cruel day in which the promise was given, rather than to identify the time when Christ comes in his kingdom, which is when his blood is avenged against 'those who did not want me to reign over them', Luke 9:27; 19:11-27; 21:31).
The Christian movement from its earliest days venerated the dead martys as saints. It gave them honor, it remembered them, it esteemed them as holy men and venerated them. It re-told the stories of the deaths (e.g. Acts. 7), and how God honored them in their deaths and in the book of life in heaven. The dead thus 'go to heaven' but not in the sense of a conscious personal experience of the dead, rather, a status of honor in the eternal kingdom, in the immortal body of God's people, as part of the great cloud of witnesses (Heb. 12:1). The status of 'going to heaven' is something that we experience before we die, since the concept of going to heaven or being in heaven is of political power and status (e.g. David and his political kingdom are exalted to heaven in Ps. 89, but that kingdom falls and his crown falls to the dust of the underworld as his political kingdom fails; the psalm is actually a lament for David's fallen kingdom) rather than physical transformation or disembodied conscious existence. Thus, in Christ, we are are sons of God, we partake in the divine nature, and we are exalted to heaven while we live physically as flesh-beings on earth (e.g. Mat. 5:9; Rom. 8:14; 2 Pet. 1:4; Eph. 2:6). Indeed, we believe in the communion of the saints, dead and living, in our one community that unites heaven and earth, and where God is all in all, and in all ages. It is in this communion of the saints that we are present eating with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom (e.g. Mat. 8:10-12), and where, to God, all the dead live, even before the resurrection wa scompleted (Luke 20:37-38).
The later traditions about afterlife and heaven and hell and the resurrection of the physical bodies of individuals and the individualistic experiencial reward and punishment are unbiblical and a misreading of other foreign ideas into the texts.
TL;DR
This is incorrect. Jesus was physically raised from the dead and so shall we be too.
"It is the same way with the resurrection of the dead. Our earthly bodies are planted in the ground when we die, but they will be raised to live forever. 43 Our bodies are buried in brokenness, but they will be raised in glory. They are buried in weakness, but they will be raised in strength."
- 1 Corinthians 15:42-43 NLT
@@matthewschardtii1338 That is a common argument but it doesn't really hold up. Christ's physical and personal life and death and resurrection is the physical embodiment and sign of something spiritual and collective, the story of Israel. For example, Is. 53, in context, is talking about Israel's story of suffering and her hope of resurrection as a nation. Christ fulfils this personally, but in order to fulfill it in the fullest sense of the new Israel.
The NLT is trying to be helpful in injecting its interpretation into the text. But 1 Cor. 15 doesn't actually support that interpretation grammatically and linguistically. A better translation would be: 'So also is the resurrection of the dead ones [plural]. It [singular i.e. the dead ones as a single entity, the old body of Israel] is sown a perishable body [singular], it [singular] is raised an imperishable body [singular]. It [singular] is sown in dishonour [singular], it [singular] is raised in glory [singular].' etc. The body in 1 Cor 15 is singular, and into it the dead, plural, are raised. This is because the dead in the context are the dead of Israel, who some in Corinth denied were being included and made part of the resurrection [present tense] that they believed, along with Paul, they were already in the process of experiencing. Paul's response, as in Rom. 11, is that Israel, the old dead Israel, is not lost, her promises are not cancelled, but are being fulfilled through Paul (an Israelite, of the tribe of Benjamin), and his ministry. The resurrection of Israel was a promise to be kept and perfected (Rom. 11:15). Paul affirms the same thing in 1 Cor 15, the enemies and their kingdom would be destroyed and in its place the new kingdom, the new nation, the new body was already rising and would soon rise in perfection. This would be when those enemies and their kingdom would be destroyed and when the power of the old Law would be overcome, in the lifetime of at least some of his original audience.
Without the bodily resurrection Christianity is false and the Apostles are all liars about said bodily resurrections.
@@johnrockwell5834 sure there is a bodily resurrection, the question in 1 cor. 15 is 'with what kind of body [singular] do they [plural, I.e. the dead ones] come?' Paul says a spiritual body, not a natural one. The single spiritual resurrection body, the body of Christ, is the Christian teaching, not multiple natural bodies.
Paul teaches one hope (Eph. 4:4), the hope of Israel (Acts. 28:20), that the 12 tribes earnestly seek God night and day to obtain (Acts. 26:4-8), the resurrection of the dead, both the just and the unjust (Acts. 24:15). That resurrection hope is that all Israel will be saved, as she inherits life from the dead (Rom. 11). That hope the Gentiles are resurrected and incorporated into Israel, as one new man (Eph. 2). That one new man is the resurrection body, singular.
The unjust rise to be condemned in the old body, the corpse. The unjust arise in rebellion, to take over the old body in lawlessness, as the mystery of lawlessness is revealed in the rebellion of Is. 66:24; Dan. 9:24-27; Mat. 24:7; 2 Thes. 2; Rev. 9 etc.
How does Brene Brown’s research on shame fit in here? Does she have more of a western mindset or does it align with this concept of shame?
What you give is a modern reading pretending to be an ancient, more contextual framing of those events. But, none of the ancient sources claim that the Rabbis killed Jesus for an Honor/Shame game. The ancient sources claim that they killed Him and persecuted Christians because Jesus declared himself to be the Son of God and performed miracles with the help of demons.
IP says we will all be publically shamed in front of God and other believers... but what about the numerous passages in the bible saying that believers will not be put to shame?
Hey, Mike. Could you do a vid on the Hyksos, the Elephantine Papyri and the Mernapteh Stele?
th-cam.com/video/Y4M-D2VSMQA/w-d-xo.html
Good video, but there are some discrepancy in your story about David, David DID feel internalized guilt as confessed in Psalm 32. 3-4 For when I kept silent, my bones wasted away through my groaning all day long. 4 For day and night your hand was heavy upon me; my strength was dried up[1] as by the heat of summer.
so while I agree that shame/honor system was at work. its more likely to say that the shame/honor system kept David from repenting and not that he did not experience any form of conscious remorse or guilt until the prophet wisely rebuked him.
This is the first time I am this early.
Psalm 51
Wonder healing power and the 10 of best.