over His house

S

stellashi

Member
China
Chinese
Hi everyone,​
​
Could someone explain to me how I should understand the meaning of the phrase?​
​
It is indeed good if the Christians, too, ensure that all the​
needs of the church buildings are met in like manner. In so doing,​
the name of the Lord, which is over His house, will be glorified.

Thank you in advance!

Stella​
 
    • I'll try to write in other words -

    It is true that it is good if the Christians, as well as non-Christians, maintain the Church buildings in a similar way. This will mean that God is honoured by honouring his house.
     
    Hi,
    Using this text I have done myself a little exerscise just for education.
    Would it be said somewhat like that?

    The name of the Lord is glorified by the Christians through the respecting all the Church buildings which are His houses.
     
    I don't have context for the reference "in like manner" as I don't know what went before this extract, but…
    I think "ensure that all the needs of the church buildings are met" refers to financial obligations to pay for the upkeep of the church and its priests.
    The mention of "Christians, too" implies that other religious adherents have been spoke of previously. This leads me to think that the churches of the Christian God is being compared to some other Deity's buildings.
     
    Actually,the context is in the Old Testament, the Jewish people offered money and other materials for the needs of the service carried out in the house of the Lord. But Timpeac's answer is quite clear to me. Thanks!

    Stella
     
    timpeac said:
    I'll try to write in other words -

    It is true that it is good if the Christians, as well as non-Christians, maintain the Church buildings in a similar way. This will mean that God is honoured by honouring his house.
    Click to expand...

    The passage doesn't imply that non-Christians should do anything for church buildings. (Why should they?)

    I think my previous assessment still stands.
     
    maxiogee said:
    The passage doesn't imply that non-Christians should do anything for church buildings. (Why should they?)

    I think my previous assessment still stands.
    Click to expand...
    I see your point of view, partly. To me the passage in itself does imply that "if the Christians, too, ensure that all the needs of the church buildings are met ", but I agree that applying common sense to the passage makes that interpretation less likely.

    To make it make sense we need to either delete the "too" or change "Church" to "religious". I perfer the second option -

    It is true that it is good if the Christians, like the non-Christians do, maintain their religious buildings in a similar way.
     
    timpeac said:
    It is true that it is good if the Christians, like the non-Christians do, maintain their religious buildings in a similar way.
    Click to expand...

    Of course it is - "our God" must have a better house than "their God". It's all about status, and as a new religion the Christians would have had to begin erecting eminent structures to evince the superiority of their God.
    It's all very well meeting in 'rooms' and catacombs when you're being persecuted, but eventually you need to show a bit of "clout". :rolleyes:
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top