Bethesda Angel
By Michael Straessle
Why did the angel trouble the water at Bethesda?
Why did he do it only once a year?
Couldn't it be the cause of a riot?
Bethesda: 964 (comp. 1004 & 2617). House of kindness.
1004: bayith probably from 1129 abbreviation for house
1129: bânâh: to build
2617: cheçed: kindness, favor
Google Bethesda
The pool the angel troubled is defined as a diving place according to Strong's 2861.
This indicates that the person who was fortunate enough to reach the pool first dove into it.
The implications are too numerous to mention because this passage engenders a multitude of questions. If there is a spiritual application to John 5: 1-9 it escapes me at this point (August 11, 2007). I could postulate that the pool is the place of deliverance for each individual, whatever that place may be. To do this, however, is to also postulate that this place is only found on rare occasions (a certain season). If this is true we have a problem that is not easily solved. With Bethesda not being mentioned anywhere else in scripture, the complexity of the problem gains a lot of ground. The research of the term listed above gives a miniscule amount of information and precludes any substantiated existence of the place as it is mentioned in John's gospel.
The description house of kindness is not an uncommon description of a level of relationship with Jesus. He is truly kind and gentle. To be in his presence is to feel his love and the Father's kind and gentle touch. This could be described in a variety of ways all dependant upon the individual. However, with the mention of an angel doing this, we get an understanding of the different types of service provided by angels. Since angels are commissioned and not commanded, it can also be ascertained that this angel was commissioned to trouble the water. It also makes me wonder if there were other pools of water he troubled. I base this assumption on the fact that there is only one instance recorded in scripture concerning an angel troubling a pool of water.
My desire and inclination is to research this event from every angle. For example, are there any records declaring a similar event in other eastern religions that resemble Christianity or Judaism. The Islamic nation is the first one that comes to mind. Knowing there are many things from the time eras of both the Old and New Testaments not recorded in our Bible makes me curious about what historians might have to say concerning strange events. There are records found by archeologists that contain references to Sodom and Gomorrah even though all evidence of the two cities is yet to be discovered.
Since artifacts are constantly being unearthed, I feel safe in saying that the inevitable is bound to happen. The Bible itself has many different translations all having a slightly different twist in the records. Even if we say we use the translation of the text that is closest to the original language, we still find that we are accepting a translation that was biased in its creation. Interestingly enough, everyone has their favorite translation. Why even consider the possibility of the differences in translations making a difference? We desire the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. However, if the truth we accept is the basis for our faith, what happens when we discover that some translations leave out words, phrases, and even complete sentences! Who do we trust? How do we know who to trust? What translation is there that has the complete manuscript's content in context? This would be a definite point of debate among men, but what does it matter if man is in disagreement? How will that change anything? What we find ourselves doing is accepting one translation over another. We try to ignore the areas where doubt arises concerning the origin of certain parts of the text and yet we blindly accept the parts that are similar to other translations.
What is a man to do? How can he convince himself that his favorite translation is the most accurate? And if he finds it within himself to do so, he still finds areas that cause internal struggle. Some take solace in the many translations and the fact that they can compare these translations for the purpose of arriving at a well thought out truth that sustains him for the present. Knowing that God is still pouring out revelation gives me hope that there is at least a possibility that what we accept as truth can be corroborated by this revelation. Having experienced revelation as confirmation to an accepted truth, I can vouch for the validity of scripture.
I have to make myself accept that the differences in translations are not too much of a problem for God to handle. By experience, then, man must rely on his relationship with God for confirmation concerning those passages that give him trouble. Jesus told Pilate that his motivation for coming to the earth was to bear witness to the truth. Pilate's question, “What is truth?” went unanswered by Jesus. We believe that truth is only found in the person of Jesus Christ.
Question: If truth is a person, why contemplate the differences in translations? I believe that Jesus is more concerned with our relationship with him than he is about our squabbles over the differences in translations. The fact is that there is enough about each translation that could be considered as common to each one of them that it brings us to a relationship with Jesus. After that it is up to each individual to render passages as useful or not. Some will thrive on passages of scripture that bring them life, while the same passage may not affect those immediately in their presence. Thus, we have divided ourselves on such a basis.
We tend to befriend those of like faith. This means that the majority of the facts about scripture are held as common among the group. There can be differences of opinion about passages and their meaning that does not necessarily cause a rift, but there is always a chance that it might. Man has formed cliques since he fell from grace. Today's world is no different; especially where scripture is concerned. Some cliques are quite large even to the point of separating themselves from others who are not like them.
