SIGN UP

the meek shall inherit the earth?

Avatar Image
pesama | 12:24 Mon 30th Jun 2008 | Religion & Spirituality
19 Answers
In one of his beatitudes Jesus said that "the meek shall inherit the eartth". This is evidently a reference to Psalm 37:29, which says that the 'righteous will inherit the earth and live forever on it'. I read Sura 21:105 in the Qu'ran which is a direct quotation from Psalm 37:29! Is it correct to say then that the Bible and the Qu'ran both teach that man's hope is to live forever on this earth and not to float off to heaven, hell, ethereal paradise, limbo, purgatory, or another life?

Answers

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by pesama. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Surah 21 is known as Al Anbiya (The Prophets).

105 � Before this we wrote in the Psalms, after the message (given to Moses): My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth.

I can not see where in this verse it is said that man (human) would live here forever.

However if you are suggesting that Man wishes to stay here then that is man�s will and not God�s and the righteous we are talking here are the ones who surrender their will to God.
-- answer removed --
The 3rd Beatitude - Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth.

In the Greek New Testament, �meek� is from the Greek term praus. It does not suggest weakness; rather, it denotes strength brought under control. The ancient Greeks employed the term to describe a wild horse tamed to the bridle. The Hebrew term used meant �humble�. The essence of being that in service to God you are both strong and humble. Something nuns and priests use as a vow to their life-long commitment in service.

Psalm 32.9: Do not be like the horse or the mule, which have no understanding but must be controlled by bit and bridle or they will not come to you.

Again �inherit the earth� is open to interpretation. When it was first written, it is likely to have referred to the land of Canaan; a sort of declaration that the strong and obedient (to God) will have lands to call their own. But in biblical terms, God created the earth, therefore such inheritance was always implied as �spiritual� rather than as a physical asset and by such strong humility, you will be welcomed in Gods kingdom on Earth as it is in Heaven.
Which is all well and good but as far as I know Jesus didn't speak Greek so you can read what you like into the subtlties of translation from Greek into English but you're still relying on the competency of an unknown translator who translated into Greek from Aramaic.

The Aramaic word l'makikhe could be translated as "the meek" (as was done from the Greek), but the Aramaic would say "gentle" or "humble." I did not see the point in adding that the first time round.

Behind these words, the old roots carry the same meaning of one who has softened that which is unnaturally hard within, who has submitted or surrendered to God, or who has liquified rigidities, heaviness (especially moral heaviness), and the interior pain of repressed desires."

So in this sense, a person who is virtuously humble or meek might be one who has loosened up, given up rigid thinking, and has put aside personal glorification to live in harmony with the universe.
How do you know that arameic word was used?

I didn't think there were any copies of the old testament in arameic
I don't, it was conjecture.
we don't know what language he spoke. (This is if you assume he existed.) Western Aramaic is a good guess - there's a village outside Damascus where they still speak it - but we don't know, so this is all speculation. But that doesn't automatically mean that some secretary or translator has got it wrong. My guess would be that, in a predominantly oral culture, those recording his words went to some trouble to report him correctly - otherwise why record them at all?
You're making the assumption that the record was done reasonably contemporaniously (sp?)

I think even the most optimistic estimates have Mark at least 15-20 years after the fact. It's also a pretty fair assumption nobody was following Jesus around with a notepad and pencil.

How many speeches can you recall from a decade ago and remember the exact words used?
none at all. But that's why I made the point that the culture in those days was oral. People trained themselves to remember things. I have no idea when they were written down, whether on the spot or 20 years later. But we shouldn't judge them by the standards of our own memories. (Indeed, some people argue that children of today will have even less facility for remembering things than we do, since they rely so much more heavily on simply looking things up on the internet.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/j un/28/highereducation
I agree oral cultures are very good at passing down information from one generation to another. They often spend years learning something word perfect from their teacher.

However that's not quite the same as recording something accurately the first time in a one off that may never be repeated.

I have little doubt that the transmission was accurate but I'm less convinced about the original "recording"
That as may be but I have tried to answer the question in the spirit it was asked. I would never claim my answer to be the one and only explanation, as we all know the Bible is open to various interpretations and full of contradiction.

How can we ever really know what was said and what was written as being truly aligned with each other? Similarly in Caesars Gallic War writings, we only have his version of events to tell us how things happened as he saw them, we cannot explicitly say that that is exactly what happened with the utmost certainty.

I hope in amongst the serene m�l�e that pesama found an answer, of sorts.
My reason for guessing that the original recording of, say, the Sermon on the Mount would have been pretty accurate is that if you go to the trouble of listening to a holy man you're going to be paying attention to what he says. Of course in real life it may have all been very Life of Brian with people muttering 'cheesemakers?'
The meek shall inherit the earth is one of the greatest myths of all time.

The meek were killed of long ago by our ancestors.
Hmm, who do you mean by �our� ancestors?

The Ancient Britons, Celts, Vikings, Danes, Anglo-Saxons, Romans, or Normans?
All of them. Everyone alive is decended from people who dominated their environment through brutal supression of the meek.
Greek meek, or Hebrew meek?
The meek shall inherit the earth as they will be too meek to refuse it!
There is a difference between, "meek," and, "weak."

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Do you know the answer?

the meek shall inherit the earth?

Answer Question >>