Necessity of background knowledge

[donfriesen1]

Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world proclaims John Baptist - to Jews.

The caravan traveller with his goods on camels, had he heard, might have said, 'those people aren't going to be taking too many sins away. Sheep can't carry much.'

The aboriginal from the Amazon would say, 'A lamb? What's a lamb?'

Many Gentiles would say, 'What is this all about? Why does a lamb take away sins?'

The Jew of that day instantly knew the reference referred to animal sacrifice, but even they may not have necessarily have connected it with the Passover Lamb.

Christians today instantly associate it to the last Passover Lamb because of background knowledge gained over many years.

This highlights the fact that proper understanding of scripture is dependent on background knowledge.

This is a fact.

[Amanah]

All the background knowledge needed for the intended audience was available in the law and the prophets.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Amanah

All the background knowledge needed for the intended audience was available in the law and the prophets.

Luke 16:27-31 records the dialogue between the rich man and God. Within this discussion the rich man asks God to resurrect Lazarus from the dead and send him to the rich man's family. So, Lazarus would persuade them to repent and not end up in torments. God sums it all up with one verse, "If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead." The religiously blind Judeans had Moses and the prophets, and they still missed Jesus. The rock was cut out of the mountain Daniel 2:34-35, Daniel 2:44-45 striking the image in the feet where it is blown to the four corners of the earth. The striking stone then grows into a new mountain which engulfs the entire earth. The Word of God is throughout the world. It is accessible to everyone. If they want to know what a lamb is, and how ancient Judeans used those lambs, the Bible, the Holy Ghost leading a sincere Amazonian headhunter to the Truth of Christ.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Amanah

All the background knowledge needed for the intended audience was available in the law and the prophets.

Thx for confirming my point.

John B made no reference to what you said. Anyone hearing/reading just the words of John B would not have the background knowledge, right?

But are you agreeing or disagreeing?

[jediwill83]

John was speaking to Essene Jews and Pharisees who absolutely knew what John was referring to and who were raised from children on memorization and repetition of scripture and prophecy. John was the son of the High Priest.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by jediwill83

John was the son of the High Priest.

John was speaking to Essene Jews and Pharisees who absolutely knew what John was referring to and who were raised from children on memorization and repetition of scripture and prophecy.

Agreed. My point was, that any reading John's words not knowing the background, which most Jews would have known, would not know what he meant. Background info is sometimes vital.

John was the son of the High Priest.

I did not know this. And since the Bible does not say this could you direct me to a historical source?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

Thx for confirming my point.

John B made no reference to what you said. Anyone hearing/reading just the words of John B would not have the background knowledge, right?

But are you agreeing or disagreeing?

Don, give this a try.

https://www.dalecarnegie.com/en/courses/216

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Don, give this a try.

https://www.dalecarnegie.com/en/courses/216

I had said this to Amanah: "Thx for confirming my point. John B made no reference to what you said. Anyone hearing/reading just the words of John B would not have the background knowledge, right? But are you agreeing or disagreeing?"

Dom seems to answer for her.

Does Amanah appear unable to answer for herself, needing someone to do it for her? Perhaps someone like Dom, who views themself as the self appointed cop/judge of AFF, seeing a need to intervene?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

I had said this to Amanah: "Thx for confirming my point. John B made no reference to what you said. Anyone hearing/reading just the words of John B would not have the background knowledge, right? But are you agreeing or disagreeing?"

Dom seems to answer for her.

Does Amanah appear unable to answer for herself, needing someone to do it for her? Perhaps someone like Dom, who views themself as the self appointed cop/judge of AFF, seeing a need to intervene?