 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 Was there a reason for the 'Folded Napkin' (face cover) |
Cojak |
In my time I have heard at least three theories for the grave clothes on the floor of the tomb and the 'neatly folded napkin' where HE had lain.
Do you KNOW or have a theory? I heard a version I had never heard before this morning, and I could not see it in logic. I would like to hear from ministers on here.
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/ |
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24285
4/16/17 10:26 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Why John believed ... |
Mat |
John chapter 20 tells how Peter and John rushed to the empty tomb early Sunday morning after Mary Magdalene had visited the tomb and seen that the guards were gone, the seal broken, the stone moved from the entrance and the body of Jesus gone. She said to the disciples "they have taken him", perhaps thinking it was the Jews or the Romans or grave robbers who took the body leaving the grave clothes.
Peter and John run to the tomb, John out runs Peter and looks in, but when Peter arrives he goes directly in, as only Peter would do. John follows, they both see the grave clothes close up, but something "sparks" John's faith and he writes that he "believed" (in the resurrection of Jesus).
So, what element of the grave clothes sparked John's faith? The head "napkin", which is reported as in place and "folded". More correctly, it was a head cloth that was "wrapped" around the head of the dead in a turban like manner. It was a separate piece from the burial shroud which covered the body. Unlike the Lazarus who was raised from the dead (and whose home the disciples stayed in at the being of the week (at least before Palm Sunday), the resurrection of Jesus did not require the unwrapping (or "loosing") of the living body from the grave clothes.
What John is saying, as best I can tell from my studies, is that the head turban was intact and in place, but empty. The resurrected Savior did not need to have someone (or even an angel) unwrap his grave turban to be loose from death. In his resurrected and glorified state Jesus just passed through the cloth, much like latter he passed through the closed door to be with the disciples. Jesus was the "first fruit of the resurrection which is something very different then being brought back to life, like Lazarus, where the body is still bound by nature and still faces death.
This is my take on why John reports that the folded napkin caused him to believe Jesus was resurrected and not that someone (they) had taken the body.
Mat |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1994
4/17/17 6:39 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Cojak, my thoughts on this are that somehow it indicated to Peter and John that Jesus was resurrected and not that his body was stolen away (presumably by someone who would have hurriedly taken body, shroud, and napkin). |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
4/17/17 7:51 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Da Sheik |
My dear friend, I will tell you the answer if you promise to tell me what Jesus wrote in the dirt with his finger. Then we can compare notes on other secrets of the Bible, publish a new book, and even toss in a vial of miracle water for the first 50 customers (Jubilee discount ).  |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1865
4/17/17 8:08 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
I guess this brings up the whole question of where he got his clothes when he started appearing to the disciples.
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
4/17/17 8:41 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Oh, and if the "folded napkin" is about neatness and order, I'm doomed. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
4/17/17 8:42 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
sheepdogandy |
| Da Sheik wrote: | | My dear friend, I will tell you the answer if you promise to tell me what Jesus wrote in the dirt with his finger. Then we can compare notes on other secrets of the Bible, publish a new book, and even toss in a vial of miracle water for the first 50 customers (Jubilee discount ). |
Jesus wrote. "I will die for her, stone me!"
_________________
Charles A. Hutchins
Senior Pastor SPWC
Congregational Church of God
www.spwc.church |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 7307
4/17/17 8:52 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Old Time Country Preacher |
You boys still don't git it, do ya? Call Perry, he will then call his anonymous source in the Knesset, Netanyahu will give the anonymous source permission to tell Perry, Perry will then write a book on it, then all will be answered and laid to rest.
Oops, almost fergot, the name of the book will be:
The Seven-fold Napkin
There will be an introduction, 7 chapters and a conclusion. Each chapter will focus on one of the seven folds in the napkin. Each fold will represent something that we can have today through the Holy Spirit. |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15570
4/17/17 10:27 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Carolyn Smith |
| Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | You boys still don't git it, do ya? Call Perry, he will then call his anonymous source in the Knesset, Netanyahu will give the anonymous source permission to tell Perry, Perry will then write a book on it, then all will be answered and laid to rest.
Oops, almost fergot, the name of the book will be:
The Seven-fold Napkin
There will be an introduction, 7 chapters and a conclusion. Each chapter will focus on one of the seven folds in the napkin. Each fold will represent something that we can have today through the Holy Spirit. |
Could be he's already preached on it and gave that away for free. Guess you'll never know, OTCP!
_________________
"More of Him...less of me."
http://twitter.com/camiracle77
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5923
4/17/17 5:32 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Old Time Country Preacher |
| Carolyn Smith wrote: | | Old Time Country Preacher wrote: | You boys still don't git it, do ya? Call Perry, he will then call his anonymous source in the Knesset, Netanyahu will give the anonymous source permission to tell Perry, Perry will then write a book on it, then all will be answered and laid to rest.
Oops, almost fergot, the name of the book will be:
The Seven-fold Napkin
There will be an introduction, 7 chapters and a conclusion. Each chapter will focus on one of the seven folds in the napkin. Each fold will represent something that we can have today through the Holy Spirit. |
Could be he's already preached on it and gave that away for free. Guess you'll never know, OTCP! |
I'm still trying to find biblical support for Moses speaking in tongues, Carolyn. |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 15570
4/17/17 10:42 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cojak |
Okay, thanks for the comments. I think DaSheik is onto it. BUT the reason I ask is my dad had a theory, never claimed to be inspired but felt our LOrd had completed the toughest part of his mission. He personally was in NO Hurry now, and took time to fold the head cloth.
This Easter I heard a fervent message. It was good. But something I had never heard. I have never known the practices of the jewish families and their table customs. But the minister declared that when a visitor ate with someone, other families or an eating establishment, that if he was not happy with the meal or service he folded his napkin neatly and placed it on the table as a sigh of his distaste with the meal and HE WOULD NOT BE BACK. Thus Jesus was saying, I WILL NOT RETURN TO THE GRAVE AGAIN.
Since I do not know Jewish customs, I truly do not know. But to my logical thinking if a person was dissatisfied I can picture them wadding the table napkin and throwing it on the table. BUT that is using what I think today's actions would be.
Now my question to ANY scholar of Jewish History, is the napkin story just a story, or was it an actual practice? And How would I find out? Just curious.
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/ |
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 24285
4/17/17 11:11 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Don't let the KJV mislead you ... |
Mat |
| Cojak wrote: | Okay, thanks for the comments. I think DaSheik is onto it. BUT the reason I ask is my dad had a theory, never claimed to be inspired but felt our LOrd had completed the toughest part of his mission. He personally was in NO Hurry now, and took time to fold the head cloth.
This Easter I heard a fervent message. It was good. But something I had never heard. I have never known the practices of the jewish families and their table customs. But the minister declared that when a visitor ate with someone, other families or an eating establishment, that if he was not happy with the meal or service he folded his napkin neatly and placed it on the table as a sigh of his distaste with the meal and HE WOULD NOT BE BACK. Thus Jesus was saying, I WILL NOT RETURN TO THE GRAVE AGAIN.
Since I do not know Jewish customs, I truly do not know. But to my logical thinking if a person was dissatisfied I can picture them wadding the table napkin and throwing it on the table. BUT that is using what I think today's actions would be.
Now my question to ANY scholar of Jewish History, is the napkin story just a story, or was it an actual practice? And How would I find out? Just curious. |
Don't let the KJV mislead you with the word "napkin" as to is modern usage. There was a separate cloth placed over the face and I think the original language of John 20 will show that it was used for a "wrapping" of the head. When Peter and John entered the tomb the head cloth was still wrapped, not undone. I don't think there is a relationship between OT Jewish table traditions (where is that napkin story in the Bible?) and burial traditions in the time of Jesus. While the NT does not give the explanation as to its meaning, we know that John saw and believed. John says, the head cloth was still in place, still wrapped and when he saw it in that condition he believed. That we do know for certain.
Mat |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1994
4/18/17 6:27 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Jason Justus |
In the times of the Kings and jewish tradition... It's said if the King was done with his food as he would just throw the towel down on the plate. By the King throwing it down, that meant that his staff could remove his plate if he got up from the table. By all accounts the theory was or is told that Jesus was saying "I'm not done yet, I'm coming back". So there's another theory to throw out there... I've studied this passage and this is what I've felt it meant because of Jesus KNOWING that the Jewish people would understand that thought. That's the reason why the napkin was folded!
Hope this helps.
P.S. "It's GREAT preaching lol.... |
New Member
Posts: 23
4/18/17 8:12 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | While the NT does not give the explanation as to its meaning, we know that John saw and believed. |
That's the crux of the matter--he believed. Some congregations get all stirred up with speculative metaphors, but give me the bottom line. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
4/18/17 8:42 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
diakoneo |
| It proves the shroud of Turin is a hoax. |
Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere
Posts: 3382
4/18/17 8:47 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Understanding |
renewal |
One of the reasons that so many do not know why certain things are mentioned is that most of us read the word from a Western perpective.
We, for the most part, have detached ourselves to that type of thinking.
An understanding of the Jewish world of the day would enlighten us to powerful insights written in the word.
Those who saw the napkin knew what it meant. Why? They were Jewish. |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1021
4/18/17 2:10 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Understanding |
bonnie knox |
What are you saying it meant? We have 3 or 4 theories on this thread, 2 of which purport to use the understanding of Jewish customs. The problem is those 2 theories are mutually exclusive.
| renewal wrote: | One of the reasons that so many do not know why certain things are mentioned is that most of us read the word from a Western perpective.
We, for the most part, have detached ourselves to that type of thinking.
An understanding of the Jewish world of the day would enlighten us to powerful insights written in the word.
Those who saw the napkin knew what it meant. Why? They were Jewish. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
4/18/17 2:40 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Meaning.. |
renewal |
In the Jewish culture when a person was finished they folded the napkin...Look it up,
The folded napkin must mean something, everything in the word has some sort of meaning. They knew what it meant, did they not?
If one says no they did not know then why did he do it? and why was it mentioned?
As long as we are thinking Western church we will never know.
Look it up and be enlighten....Do the research.... |
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1021
4/18/17 4:14 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Meaning.. |
Nature Boy Florida |
| renewal wrote: | In the Jewish culture when a person was finished they folded the napkin...Look it up,
The folded napkin must mean something, everything in the word has some sort of meaning. They knew what it meant, did they not?
If one says no they did not know then why did he do it? and why was it mentioned?
As long as we are thinking Western church we will never know.
Look it up and be enlighten....Do the research.... |
So we need a version that says - "When they went to the tomb, they knew he was alive because of the folded napkin - cause everyone knows when you fold a napkin - it means....."
So, if we were truly good teachers, we would always fold our napkins at Cracker Barrel, so the wait staff would know---ah, they are Christians---they fold their napkins when they are done.
Have you taught your children to fold napkins?
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16646
4/18/17 4:58 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| What I find interesting is... |
Mark Ledbetter |
Messianic Jewish Resources to which I have access are virtually silent regarding any special significance to the linen wrapping the head of Jesus being separate from the other linen wrapping the body of Jesus. There is no reference to any special custom, no dinner/meal references, no kings.
Here is a sampling:
| Quote: | Apparently,, one of the reasons for John's belief is that when he saw the line cloths, they were still rolled up. They were not unrolled or scattered, which is what one would expect to see if some had removed them from the body. - Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, The Messianic Bible Study Collection. {Fruchetnabum makes reference to Lazarus in John 11}
The linens lay on the bench in the very place the Master's body had reposed. They looked as if they had deflated around Him...The linen, which had covered the Master's head, lay nearby, rolled up by itself. - First Fruits of Zion
As he [John] entered the sepulcher, he 'steadfastly (intently) beholds in one place the line swathes that had bound the Sacred Limbs, and in another the napkin that had been about His Head. There was no sign of haste, but all was orderly, leaving the impression of One Who had leisurely divested Himself of what no longer befitted Him. - Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah
The burial clothes consisted of a shroud around the body and a head-cloth (compare 11:44). Yochanan's painstaking description of their undisturbed location, especially the separate position of the still folded head cloth (v. 7), tells us that Yeshua's body was miraculously loosed from the burial clothes, so that they collapsed in place. - David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary
As was pointed out in the story of the raising of Lazarus, the Jewish practice of burying the dead with a separate cloth for the face is attested today through the archeological excavations done in Israel. The author of the Gospel did not imagine the details, (a separate cloth for the face), he remembered them. Archeological finds confirm his story. Judeans indeed buried their death way John described. - Eli Lizorkin-Eysenberg, The Jewish Gospel of John: Discovering Jesus, King of All Israel. |
None of these noted Jewish scholars attached any superfluous significance. They simple attested the fact this it was common practice to bury the dead in the manner described by John's account.
And, they point out the manner in which John found the linen clothes convinced John Jesus had indeed been resurrected.
Noted Christian (Gentile Believers) offer little credence to speculative language but simply observe the obvious.
William Barclay writes,
...the grave clothes were not disheveled and disarranged; they were lying there still in their folds - that is what the Greek means- the clothes for the body where the body had been, the napkin where the head had lain. The whole point of the description is that the grave clothes did not look as if they had been put off or taken off; they were lying there in their regular folds as the body of Jesus had simply evaporated out of them and left them lying.
F.F. Bruce and Leon Morris, however, do suggest there may be some significance of the separation of the head linen from the body linen, but they offer no real speculation as to any symbolic meaning but to the possible significance.
Bruce suggests the manner in which the head linen cloth appeared not as if it retained its shape "but rather someone, having no further use for it, had rolled it up and laid it tidily aside."
Morris, however, does seem to believe the head cloth separated and rolled indicated something more but does not fully indicate what the something more actually meant. He concludes, like the others, "...whatever be the truth of this, John is plainly describing an orderly scene, not one of wild confusion. This means that the body had not been taken by grave-robbers. They would never have let the cloths wrapped neatly."
Perhaps the following commentary best explains the significance of the event:
| Quote: | Why did John believe? Probably because the body of Jesus had miraculously passed through the thick folds of the grave clothes, leaving them unmoved and untouched, as, on the evening of the same day, the risen Lord appeared in the midst of the disciples, when the doors were shut. It was clear from the position of the clothes, which had not been unwound, that no human hands had removed the Lord's body, and further, since His body had passed unimpeded though solid matter, that it was now a spiritual and glorious body, not bound by the laws of terrestrial matter. Jesus had risen, therefore, not to an earthly but to a heavenly life. A Commentary on the Holy Bible by Various Writers, Edited by The Rev. J.R. Dummelow (as far as I know is not Jewish)
|
There is no reason to sensationalize an already glorious event outside the realm of human understanding. In fact, adding unsubstantiated embellishment in the end detracts from the story and can only serve to deflate the ego of anyone who uses such methods once their speculations are revealed for what they really are - attempts to sensationalize their message.
The consensus of scholars cited is this: According to the evidence record, Jesus was resurrected and not the victim of grave-robbers.
_________________
God-Honoring
Christ-Centered
Bible-Based
Spirit-Led
(This is how I want to be) |
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2109
4/18/17 5:31 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
