and about time
QUOTE (Zarkov+)
and about time
For what? You and flashgordon to get a clue? The first two lines of the article read:
And this is news because...? Of course it was part of "Jewish tradition". Jesus came to fulfil what was prophesied in the Old Testament Jewish scriptures:
"And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him. And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women said: but him they saw not. Then said he unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself."(Luke 24:13-27)
Christ's sufferings and consequential resurrection from the dead were foretold in the writings of Moses and all the prophets. So, how is this article that you cited "news"? A little later that same day, the following transpired:
"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day..."(Luke 24:36-46)
As I said, the Old Testament scriptures foretold of Christ's sufferings and consequential resurrection from the dead on the third day. So, this article is "news" because...?
For what? You and flashgordon to get a clue? The first two lines of the article read:
QUOTE
JERUSALEM — A three-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
And this is news because...? Of course it was part of "Jewish tradition". Jesus came to fulfil what was prophesied in the Old Testament Jewish scriptures:
"And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs. And they talked together of all these things which had happened. And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them. But their eyes were holden that they should not know him. And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad? And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done. Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive. And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women said: but him they saw not. Then said he unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself."(Luke 24:13-27)
Christ's sufferings and consequential resurrection from the dead were foretold in the writings of Moses and all the prophets. So, how is this article that you cited "news"? A little later that same day, the following transpired:
"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day..."(Luke 24:36-46)
As I said, the Old Testament scriptures foretold of Christ's sufferings and consequential resurrection from the dead on the third day. So, this article is "news" because...?
You're right! Fu*k the scientists! Fu*k archaeology! Just smash the tablet, we got what we need right here in this book! 
Can't see what's wrong with a prophecy arguement around here?
Jesus Christ . . . what kind of scientists do we have in this day and age?
I mean, did nostrodomas actually predict every major event in history over the last so many hundreds of years?
Can anybody feel the dark ages coming!?
Jesus Christ . . . what kind of scientists do we have in this day and age?
I mean, did nostrodomas actually predict every major event in history over the last so many hundreds of years?
Can anybody feel the dark ages coming!?
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 6 2008, 06:05 PM)
So, how is this article that you cited "news"?
Because the Messiah on this tablet is named Simon, for one.
Oh, really? I'd love to see an Old Testament reference to a third-day resurrection, as I wasn't aware there was one.
Because the Messiah on this tablet is named Simon, for one.
QUOTE
As I said, the Old Testament scriptures foretold of Christ's sufferings and consequential resurrection from the dead on the third day.
Oh, really? I'd love to see an Old Testament reference to a third-day resurrection, as I wasn't aware there was one.
I'll take the dead silence as a sign there's no Old Testament reference to a 3 day resurrection.
Yanno, I seen him make that claim before... I still ain't seen no quotin o the passage in which it apepars, though.
The first part of this iconoclastic film, should be part of this conversation.
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
QUOTE (zoktoberfest+Jul 8 2008, 03:47 AM)
The first part of this iconoclastic film, should be part of this conversation.
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
Thanks for that link, zoktoberfest. Nice find.
g.
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
Thanks for that link, zoktoberfest. Nice find.
g.
QUOTE
Jesus Christ . . . what kind of scientists do we have in this day and age?
Ironically, sloppy ones. That is to say the vast majority are too focused and don't take the broad view. In this case, the Bible as whole.
“This should shake our basic view of Christianity,” he said as he sat in his office of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem where he is a senior fellow in addition to being the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University. “Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story.”
To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words “L’shloshet yamin,” meaning “in three days.” The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible by Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur, but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is “hayeh,” or “live” in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.
Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, “In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.”
He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.
But there was, he said, and “Gabriel’s Revelation” shows it.
“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”
It is best to understand the book as being both about race AND grace.
The evil of Evolution{race baiting part and parcel of} and by extension... if you think the shoe fits.
MrB.
As to what the prophectic picture was like... Who Knows?!
Biogcacophecy says it is pretty much the same, today.
The science is in the eschatology.
Math 27:3
When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the 30 silver pieces to the chief priests and elders. 'I have sinned' he said, 'for I have betrayed innocent blood'.
'What is that to us they replied, that is your problem.'
So Judas threw the money into the temple then went away and hanged himself.
Compare:
Act 1: 18
With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.
There are many more such examples. I hope you get the point.
And what point is that?
No obligation. Nor any restriction or limitation, nor any guidelines or rules. Nor are you bound by any circumstances or situations, nor constrained by any Code or law. Nor are you punishable for any offense, nor capable of any—for there is no such thing as being “offensive” in the eyes of God.
You are making mock of Me. You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection. You are saying that My Son—who you call the One Perfect One—has saved you from your own imperfection—the imperfection I gave you. In other words, God’s Son has saved you from what His Father did.
GOD.
You are making mock of Me. You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection. You are saying that My Son—who you call the One Perfect One—has saved you from your own imperfection—the imperfection I gave you. In other words, God’s Son has saved you from what His Father did.
GOD.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 7 2008, 12:11 AM)
You're right! Fu*k the scientists! Fu*k archaeology! Just smash the tablet, we got what we need right here in this book!
Notwithstanding your foul mouth can you tell me which book that is?
Notwithstanding your foul mouth can you tell me which book that is?
QUOTE (Inkaat+Jul 9 2008, 01:07 PM)
Notwithstanding your foul mouth can you tell me which book that is?
It was sarcasm, I figured the EYEROLL would be a big enough hint, guess not. And that book would be the bible.
>>> Judas bought a field; <<<
I don't think so. I see that quote from Acts is the New International Version.
I'd say Judas "bought the farm".
Top results of about 2,130 for "bought the farm" euphemism. (0.49 seconds)
Euphemism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia... pegged it, carked it, turned their toes up, bought the farm (comes from the ... There are a few euphemisms for killing which are neither respectful nor ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism - 96k - Cached - Similar pages
Distancing language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaEveryday euphemistic references to death, dying, burial, corpses and to the people and places ... i.e. "croaked", "bought the farm", "expired", "passed on". ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distancing_language - 18k -
More results from en.wikipedia.org »
This is how Monsignor Knox put it:
"With the price of his treachery, this man came into possession of a field;...
in the book of Psalms the words are written, Let their camping place be deserted, and let no man be found to dwell in it. And again, Let another take over his office. There are men who have walked in our company all through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us, from the time when John used to baptize to the day when he, Jesus, was taken form us. One of these ought to be added to our number as a witness of his resurrection."
Over to the Psalms...
MrB.
I don't think so. I see that quote from Acts is the New International Version.
I'd say Judas "bought the farm".
Top results of about 2,130 for "bought the farm" euphemism. (0.49 seconds)
Euphemism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia... pegged it, carked it, turned their toes up, bought the farm (comes from the ... There are a few euphemisms for killing which are neither respectful nor ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism - 96k - Cached - Similar pages
Distancing language - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaEveryday euphemistic references to death, dying, burial, corpses and to the people and places ... i.e. "croaked", "bought the farm", "expired", "passed on". ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distancing_language - 18k -
More results from en.wikipedia.org »
This is how Monsignor Knox put it:
"With the price of his treachery, this man came into possession of a field;...
in the book of Psalms the words are written, Let their camping place be deserted, and let no man be found to dwell in it. And again, Let another take over his office. There are men who have walked in our company all through the time when the Lord Jesus came and went among us, from the time when John used to baptize to the day when he, Jesus, was taken form us. One of these ought to be added to our number as a witness of his resurrection."
Over to the Psalms...
MrB.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 7 2008, 12:11 AM)
You're right! Fu*k the scientists! Fu*k archaeology! Just smash the tablet, we got what we need right here in this book!
So it was the bible was it? Now go back to my bible quotations and consider again the 'everything' that you have got.
So it was the bible was it? Now go back to my bible quotations and consider again the 'everything' that you have got.
No thanks, because you didn't make a point.
And I don't care.
And I don't care.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 10 2008, 07:06 PM)
And I don't care.
Yeah, right.
Yeah, right.
Oh man, ya got me good!!! 
Care to tell us what your "point" was, besides spouting random bible passages and saying "SEEEEE!"
Care to tell us what your "point" was, besides spouting random bible passages and saying "SEEEEE!"
Book of me, Chapter 42 Verse 12
Ooga booga blamf macarhonk.
Book of me, Chapter 16 Verse 42
harharyardar seeku pant pant
There are many more such examples. I hope you get the point.
Please read those passages, then read your passages, and tell me what you've got.
Ooga booga blamf macarhonk.
Book of me, Chapter 16 Verse 42
harharyardar seeku pant pant
There are many more such examples. I hope you get the point.
Please read those passages, then read your passages, and tell me what you've got.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 11 2008, 04:52 PM)
Book of me, Chapter 42 Verse 12
Ooga booga blamf macarhonk.
Book of me, Chapter 16 Verse 42
harharyardar seeku pant pant
There are many more such examples. I hope you get the point.
Please read those passages, then read your passages, and tell me what you've got.
Sure I do.
Ooga booga blamf macarhonk.
Book of me, Chapter 16 Verse 42
harharyardar seeku pant pant
There are many more such examples. I hope you get the point.
Please read those passages, then read your passages, and tell me what you've got.
Sure I do.
QUOTE (barakn+)
Because the Messiah on this tablet is named Simon, for one.
barakn: Not quite.
barakn: Not quite.
QUOTE (article+)
But the stone is broken, and some of the text is faded, meaning that much of what it says is open to debate.
QUOTE (article+)
In Mr. Knohl’s interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone could be a man named Simon who was slain by a commander in the Herodian army, according to the first-century historian Josephus. The writers of the stone’s passages were probably Simon’s followers, Mr. Knohl contends.
QUOTE (article+)
Ms. Yardeni said she was impressed with the reading and considered it indeed likely that the key illegible word was “hayeh,” or “live.” Whether that means Simon is the messiah under discussion, she is less sure.
...much of what is says is open to debate...In Mr. Knohl's interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone COULD BE a man named Simon(and this is based upon the writings of Josephus and NOT upon the writings on the stone itself)...Whether that means Simon is the messiah under discussion, she is less sure.
...much of what is says is open to debate...In Mr. Knohl's interpretation, the specific messianic figure embodied on the stone COULD BE a man named Simon(and this is based upon the writings of Josephus and NOT upon the writings on the stone itself)...Whether that means Simon is the messiah under discussion, she is less sure.
QUOTE (barakn+)
Oh, really? I'd love to see an Old Testament reference to a third-day resurrection, as I wasn't aware there was one.
I'll give you the one that Jesus Himself mentioned on more than one occasion:
"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas."(Matthew 16:4)
Here is the passage from Jonah to which Jesus was referring:
"Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights."(Jonah 1:17)
Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
Good Friday afternoon
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
I'll give you the one that Jesus Himself mentioned on more than one occasion:
"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas."(Matthew 16:4)
Here is the passage from Jonah to which Jesus was referring:
"Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights."(Jonah 1:17)
QUOTE (barakn+)
I'll take the dead silence as a sign there's no Old Testament reference to a 3 day resurrection.
Actually, the "dead silence", as you called it, was a sign that I was away on a business trip and that I had neither the time nor the desire to post during that timeframe. In case you haven't heard, many would consider patience a virtue. Take care.
Actually, the "dead silence", as you called it, was a sign that I was away on a business trip and that I had neither the time nor the desire to post during that timeframe. In case you haven't heard, many would consider patience a virtue. Take care.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 7 2008, 12:11 AM)
You're right! Fu*k the scientists! Fu*k archaeology! Just smash the tablet, we got what we need right here in this book!
But in this case it looks like the Bible said "Event A" happened. And then a stone tablet was found from before the time of "Event A", that predicted it.
But then again wasn't Mary told to name her son something. I forget what but it wasn't Jesus.
And at least one book I read suggested that JC knew the prophesies and made them come true or at least look like it.
But in this case it looks like the Bible said "Event A" happened. And then a stone tablet was found from before the time of "Event A", that predicted it.
But then again wasn't Mary told to name her son something. I forget what but it wasn't Jesus.
And at least one book I read suggested that JC knew the prophesies and made them come true or at least look like it.
*sigh*
I know, I was being facetious.
I know, I was being facetious.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 14 2008, 11:37 AM)
Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
Good Friday afternoon
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Good Friday afternoon
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 14 2008, 06:12 PM)
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Good Friday afternoon
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Uh, there are also yearly Sabbaths that don't necessarily fall on Sat - in this case, Passover.
(Just my 2 cents worth - carry on.)
EDIT: PS - this is actually a very important point since Jesus said it is the ONLY sign he would give... And 99% of all Christians I've met do not understand it.
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
QUOTE (Inkaat+Jul 14 2008, 01:40 PM)
QUOTE
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Uh, there are also yearly Sabbaths that don't necessarily fall on Sat - in this case, Passover.
(Just my 2 cents worth - carry on.)
EDIT: PS - this is actually a very important point since Jesus said it is the ONLY sign he would give... And 99% of all Christians I've met do not understand it.
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Inkaat: "Keep the change"? What "change"? You left me to foot the bill. Nice try with that "day of preparation" thingy... Unfortunately(for you), some of us know how to read and actually comprehend what we are reading. Had you started your Bible citation a little earlier, we would have read:
"And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!"(John 19:14)
IN CONTEXT, "the day of preparation" was clearly speaking of "the preparation of the passover"...NOT the weekly sabbath. Had you waited for gmilam's response before you posted what you did, then you would have possibly understood that the Jewish Feasts were also sabbaths:
"These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein."(Leviticus 23:4-7)
The feast of Passover, the day in which Jesus Christ was crucified and perfectly fulfilled the Old Testament type by becoming the True Lamb of God Who takes away the sin of the world, was a sabbath. It was this sabbath that the Jews were preparing for in the portion of scripture that you cited...NOT the weekly sabbath. This fact is also brought out in another verse that precedes the verse that you cited from John chapter 19:
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away."(John 19:30-31)
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast...in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
Every Saturday was a high day in the old Jewish religion because it is the sabbath.
Bear in mind that in those days there were no cinemas televisions or motor cars so people lived a very simple life, the Sabbath was a very important and special day for them. They all went to the synagogue and met up with friends, it was an enjoyable day. And every Friday was a day of preparation because they also had no microwaves and they were not allowed to do any work whatsover on the sabbath therefore all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday.
I stand by what I said - no circular logic necessary.
Oh, really? I'd love to see an Old Testament reference to a third-day resurrection, as I wasn't aware there was one.
I'll give you the one that Jesus Himself mentioned on more than one occasion:
"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas."(Matthew 16:4)
Here is the passage from Jonah to which Jesus was referring:
"Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights."(Jonah 1:17)
I'll take the dead silence as a sign there's no Old Testament reference to a 3 day resurrection.
Actually, the "dead silence", as you called it, was a sign that I was away on a business trip and that I had neither the time nor the desire to post during that timeframe. In case you haven't heard, many would consider patience a virtue. Take care.
Nice try. I said 'prediction' and you give me a story about a man eaten by a fish, and then some New Testament quotes. Since a messiah is not mentioned in the fish story, nor even death nor crucifixion, this hardly qualifies. Keep on fishing.
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Inkaat: "Keep the change"? What "change"? You left me to foot the bill. Nice try with that "day of preparation" thingy... Unfortunately(for you), some of us know how to read and actually comprehend what we are reading. Had you started your Bible citation a little earlier, we would have read:
"And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!"(John 19:14)
IN CONTEXT, "the day of preparation" was clearly speaking of "the preparation of the passover"...NOT the weekly sabbath. Had you waited for gmilam's response before you posted what you did, then you would have possibly understood that the Jewish Feasts were also sabbaths:
"These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread. In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein."(Leviticus 23:4-7)
The feast of Passover, the day in which Jesus Christ was crucified and perfectly fulfilled the Old Testament type by becoming the True Lamb of God Who takes away the sin of the world, was a sabbath. It was this sabbath that the Jews were preparing for in the portion of scripture that you cited...NOT the weekly sabbath. This fact is also brought out in another verse that precedes the verse that you cited from John chapter 19:
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away."(John 19:30-31)
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast...in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
QUOTE (gmilam+)
Uh, there are also yearly Sabbaths that don't necessarily fall on Sat - in this case, Passover.
(Just my 2 cents worth - carry on.)
gmilam: Your "2 cents worth" was 2 cents worth more than Inkaat's non-existant "change". Good for you. Take care.
(Just my 2 cents worth - carry on.)
gmilam: Your "2 cents worth" was 2 cents worth more than Inkaat's non-existant "change". Good for you. Take care.
Anyone wanna discuss why the Easter sunrise services are also wrong? 
Nevermind, I'll go back to my lurking.
Nevermind, I'll go back to my lurking.
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away."(John 19:30-31)
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", He took the time? He was merely stating that the sabbath is a high day in the Jewish religion and and every Sabbath. John also took the time to say he was at the foot of the cross when Jesus died and that he discovered Jesus body missing on Easter Sunday a couple of incidents the other evangalists do not verify. signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast.. It signifies nothing but what you want it to sifnify..in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly or wrongly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
Amazing how you can get things to say what you want them to say.
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", He took the time? He was merely stating that the sabbath is a high day in the Jewish religion and and every Sabbath. John also took the time to say he was at the foot of the cross when Jesus died and that he discovered Jesus body missing on Easter Sunday a couple of incidents the other evangalists do not verify. signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast.. It signifies nothing but what you want it to sifnify..in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly or wrongly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
Amazing how you can get things to say what you want them to say.
Honestly, I had problems with this one since I was a little boy. I never saw how anyone got "after three days" out of Fri - Sun... Never mind three days and three nights. However, the fact that it was Passover is very crucial to the entire symbolism involved. (The whole sacrificial lamb/lamb of God bit.)
This takes a little circular logic, and it doesn't "prove" anything, it only makes it possible.
Jesus was put in the tomb at sunset. IF we assume three days and nights (this is a very specific time frame - 72 hours) THEN "logically" he would have risen at sunset.
Mary and the other ladies arrive at the tomb on "the first day of the week, before the sun came up" to find an empty grave. So, if the "sign" is true, Jesus rose on Sat at sunset. Passover must've started Weds at Sunset.. which was when Jesus was placed in the tomb.
Someone knowledgeable in ancient calendars and lunar cycles should be able to calculate what day of the week Passover was on that year. That would clear the entire mystery up.
This takes a little circular logic, and it doesn't "prove" anything, it only makes it possible.
Jesus was put in the tomb at sunset. IF we assume three days and nights (this is a very specific time frame - 72 hours) THEN "logically" he would have risen at sunset.
Mary and the other ladies arrive at the tomb on "the first day of the week, before the sun came up" to find an empty grave. So, if the "sign" is true, Jesus rose on Sat at sunset. Passover must've started Weds at Sunset.. which was when Jesus was placed in the tomb.
Someone knowledgeable in ancient calendars and lunar cycles should be able to calculate what day of the week Passover was on that year. That would clear the entire mystery up.
QUOTE (gmilam+Jul 15 2008, 07:44 AM)
Honestly, I had problems with this one since I was a little boy. I never saw how anyone got "after three days" out of Fri - Sun... Never mind three days and three nights. However, the fact that it was Passover is very crucial to the entire symbolism involved. (The whole sacrificial lamb/lamb of God bit.)
This takes a little circular logic, and it doesn't "prove" anything, it only makes it possible.
Jesus was put in the tomb at sunset. IF we assume three days and nights (this is a very specific time frame - 72 hours) THEN "logically" he would have risen at sunset.
Mary and the other ladies arrive at the tomb on "the first day of the week, before the sun came up" to find an empty grave. So, if the "sign" is true, Jesus rose on Sat at sunset. Passover must've started Weds at Sunset.. which was when Jesus was placed in the tomb.
Someone knowledgeable in ancient calendars and lunar cycles should be able to calculate what day of the week Passover was on that year. That would clear the entire mystery up.
You are of course assuming that people of those times were able to count with astonishing accuracy, numbers larger than '2'!
g.
This takes a little circular logic, and it doesn't "prove" anything, it only makes it possible.
Jesus was put in the tomb at sunset. IF we assume three days and nights (this is a very specific time frame - 72 hours) THEN "logically" he would have risen at sunset.
Mary and the other ladies arrive at the tomb on "the first day of the week, before the sun came up" to find an empty grave. So, if the "sign" is true, Jesus rose on Sat at sunset. Passover must've started Weds at Sunset.. which was when Jesus was placed in the tomb.
Someone knowledgeable in ancient calendars and lunar cycles should be able to calculate what day of the week Passover was on that year. That would clear the entire mystery up.
You are of course assuming that people of those times were able to count with astonishing accuracy, numbers larger than '2'!
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jul 16 2008, 05:56 AM)
You are of course assuming that people of those times were able to count with astonishing accuracy, numbers larger than '2'!
g.
LOL
Well, I "believe" humans have been fairly intelligent for a long time... although I could cite a few current examples which might disprove that idea.
I just get tired of hearing the same old BS arguments over and over. (From both "sides" of this discussion.) It usually boils down to people believing what they have been told rather then reading it and learning for themselves.
g.
LOL
Well, I "believe" humans have been fairly intelligent for a long time... although I could cite a few current examples which might disprove that idea.
I just get tired of hearing the same old BS arguments over and over. (From both "sides" of this discussion.) It usually boils down to people believing what they have been told rather then reading it and learning for themselves.
Every Saturday was a high day in the old Jewish religion because it is the sabbath.
Bear in mind that in those days there were no cinemas televisions or motor cars so people lived a very simple life, the Sabbath was a very important and special day for them. They all went to the synagogue and met up with friends, it was an enjoyable day. And every Friday was a day of preparation because they also had no microwaves and they were not allowed to do any work whatsover on the sabbath therefore all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday.
I stand by what I said - no circular logic necessary.
QUOTE (Inkaat+Jul 16 2008, 11:57 AM)
I stand by what I said - no circular logic necessary.
Fine, don't bother to learn something about the culture that the stories were written for. Makes no difference to me.
Fine, don't bother to learn something about the culture that the stories were written for. Makes no difference to me.
QUOTE (gmilam+Jul 16 2008, 01:20 AM)
LOL
Well, I "believe" humans have been fairly intelligent for a long time... although I could cite a few current examples which might disprove that idea.
I just get tired of hearing the same old BS arguments over and over. (From both "sides" of this discussion.) It usually boils down to people believing what they have been told rather then reading it and learning for themselves.
I think they were more honest, but less 'knowing'. Superstition is not really 'dishonesty', but just unknowing.
If we look at the Human 'predicament' from the evolutionary perspective, there would always be a moment in our development when we necessarily had to pass through an age of 'superstition', as we are on a learning path (hopefully). So here, at the time in question, we have such a scenario. People were not stupid, but not knowing either...
In evolutionary terms (epochs), this 'awakening' motion is a rather rapid development indeed!
It will be 'bye bye' to all things, at some point.
g.
Well, I "believe" humans have been fairly intelligent for a long time... although I could cite a few current examples which might disprove that idea.
I just get tired of hearing the same old BS arguments over and over. (From both "sides" of this discussion.) It usually boils down to people believing what they have been told rather then reading it and learning for themselves.
I think they were more honest, but less 'knowing'. Superstition is not really 'dishonesty', but just unknowing.
If we look at the Human 'predicament' from the evolutionary perspective, there would always be a moment in our development when we necessarily had to pass through an age of 'superstition', as we are on a learning path (hopefully). So here, at the time in question, we have such a scenario. People were not stupid, but not knowing either...
In evolutionary terms (epochs), this 'awakening' motion is a rather rapid development indeed!
It will be 'bye bye' to all things, at some point.
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jul 16 2008, 01:38 PM)
I think they were more honest, but less 'knowing'. Superstition is not really 'dishonesty', but just unknowing.
If we look at the Human 'predicament' from the evolutionary perspective, there would always be a moment in our development when we necessarily had to pass through an age of 'superstition', as we are on a learning path (hopefully). So here, at the time in question, we have such a scenario. People were not stupid, but not knowing either...
In evolutionary terms (epochs), this 'awakening' motion is a rather rapid development indeed!
It will be 'bye bye' to all things, at some point.
g.
Agreed, intelligence and accumulated knowledge are not the same thing. We have more knowledge now, but that does not mean we are more intelligent.
We are still surrounded by superstition at every turn. From religion, to wearing "lucky shirts" at football games, to tracking numbers that are "due to hit" on the lottery.
If we look at the Human 'predicament' from the evolutionary perspective, there would always be a moment in our development when we necessarily had to pass through an age of 'superstition', as we are on a learning path (hopefully). So here, at the time in question, we have such a scenario. People were not stupid, but not knowing either...
In evolutionary terms (epochs), this 'awakening' motion is a rather rapid development indeed!
It will be 'bye bye' to all things, at some point.
g.
Agreed, intelligence and accumulated knowledge are not the same thing. We have more knowledge now, but that does not mean we are more intelligent.
We are still surrounded by superstition at every turn. From religion, to wearing "lucky shirts" at football games, to tracking numbers that are "due to hit" on the lottery.
QUOTE (gmilam+Jul 16 2008, 08:00 AM)
Agreed, intelligence and accumulated knowledge are not the same thing. We have more knowledge now, but that does not mean we are more intelligent.
We are still surrounded by superstition at every turn. From religion, to wearing "lucky shirts" at football games, to tracking numbers that are "due to hit" on the lottery.
Well, in a way, if you think about it, there will always be things we have not yet uncovered, so 'superstition' is something we have to learn how to control, as opposed to 'eliminate' altogether. I don't think the latter is possible, because it has now 'morphed' into a less fearful inquisitiveness, and we need an element of that in our lives.
Also, all people are different, have access to different amounts of information and are exposed to many different ideas. Who of the 'privileged' kids of today is capable of growing their own food, for example? ~ The most basic of needs are neglected. Even fewer would know how to nourish themselves in 'the wild'.
We are all born as 'blank pages' of potential, but few are afforded adequate access to information...until now, maybe, as we introduce ourselves to the 'internet'...
Now, the task is to try to determine the Real information from the deceptive, and in so doing, the previously deceptive WILL be ousted. It is simply no longer of any use to people. In the past, we did not allow ourselves the luxury of 'options'. If people did not toe-the-line and simply believe what they were told to, they were equally simply put to death.
People of deception are the superstitious of today. These are the truly fearful. Fearful of change and personal loss. Goes hand in hand with greed. It is simple. Those with the most have the most to lose, and thus the most fear of loss.
g.
We are still surrounded by superstition at every turn. From religion, to wearing "lucky shirts" at football games, to tracking numbers that are "due to hit" on the lottery.
Well, in a way, if you think about it, there will always be things we have not yet uncovered, so 'superstition' is something we have to learn how to control, as opposed to 'eliminate' altogether. I don't think the latter is possible, because it has now 'morphed' into a less fearful inquisitiveness, and we need an element of that in our lives.
Also, all people are different, have access to different amounts of information and are exposed to many different ideas. Who of the 'privileged' kids of today is capable of growing their own food, for example? ~ The most basic of needs are neglected. Even fewer would know how to nourish themselves in 'the wild'.
We are all born as 'blank pages' of potential, but few are afforded adequate access to information...until now, maybe, as we introduce ourselves to the 'internet'...
Now, the task is to try to determine the Real information from the deceptive, and in so doing, the previously deceptive WILL be ousted. It is simply no longer of any use to people. In the past, we did not allow ourselves the luxury of 'options'. If people did not toe-the-line and simply believe what they were told to, they were equally simply put to death.
People of deception are the superstitious of today. These are the truly fearful. Fearful of change and personal loss. Goes hand in hand with greed. It is simple. Those with the most have the most to lose, and thus the most fear of loss.
g.
QUOTE (Gorgeous+Jul 16 2008, 07:38 PM)
Well, in a way, if you think about it, there will always be things we have not yet uncovered, so 'superstition' is something we have to learn how to control, as opposed to 'eliminate' altogether. I don't think the latter is possible, because it has now 'morphed' into a less fearful inquisitiveness, and we need an element of that in our lives.
Also, all people are different, have access to different amounts of information and are exposed to many different ideas. Who of the 'privileged' kids of today is capable of growing their own food, for example? ~ The most basic of needs are neglected. Even fewer would know how to nourish themselves in 'the wild'.
We are all born as 'blank pages' of potential, but few are afforded adequate access to information...until now, maybe, as we introduce ourselves to the 'Internet'...
Now, the task is to try to determine the Real information from the deceptive, and in so doing, the previously deceptive WILL be ousted. It is simply no longer of any use to people. In the past, we did not allow ourselves the luxury of 'options'. If people did not toe-the-line and simply believe what they were told to, they were equally simply put to death.
People of deception are the superstitious of today. These are the truly fearful. Fearful of change and personal loss. Goes hand in hand with greed. It is simple. Those with the most have the most to lose, and thus the most fear of loss.
g.
(imo) The written word probably attained a powerful almost magical status. Anything actually written down especially on posh parchment or etched into stone or whatever would have innate authority from the perspective of the masses who were more likely to be illiterate.
Perhaps to those who were able to exploit the power of the written word, the idea of a public library, Internet or basic general education would have seemed a very dangerous idea indeed.
Also, all people are different, have access to different amounts of information and are exposed to many different ideas. Who of the 'privileged' kids of today is capable of growing their own food, for example? ~ The most basic of needs are neglected. Even fewer would know how to nourish themselves in 'the wild'.
We are all born as 'blank pages' of potential, but few are afforded adequate access to information...until now, maybe, as we introduce ourselves to the 'Internet'...
Now, the task is to try to determine the Real information from the deceptive, and in so doing, the previously deceptive WILL be ousted. It is simply no longer of any use to people. In the past, we did not allow ourselves the luxury of 'options'. If people did not toe-the-line and simply believe what they were told to, they were equally simply put to death.
People of deception are the superstitious of today. These are the truly fearful. Fearful of change and personal loss. Goes hand in hand with greed. It is simple. Those with the most have the most to lose, and thus the most fear of loss.
g.
(imo) The written word probably attained a powerful almost magical status. Anything actually written down especially on posh parchment or etched into stone or whatever would have innate authority from the perspective of the masses who were more likely to be illiterate.
Perhaps to those who were able to exploit the power of the written word, the idea of a public library, Internet or basic general education would have seemed a very dangerous idea indeed.
QUOTE (Sinister Utopia+Jul 16 2008, 09:27 AM)
(imo) The written word probably attained a powerful almost magical status. Anything actually written down especially on posh parchment or etched into stone or whatever would have innate authority from the perspective of the masses who were more likely to be illiterate.
Perhaps to those who were able to exploit the power of the written word, the idea of a public library, Internet or basic general education would have seemed a very dangerous idea indeed.
Yeah, we take so much for granted nowadays. It may be hard to imagine a world without even any books in it!
All people needed to know then was how to build a shelter and keep themselves fed, but this does not mean they were any less intelligent. That actually works, until 'progress' starts to poison itself.
They just used their (much shorter) lives in different ways. It must have been more of a 'now' experience, being as they were far more dependent upon the elements, which are constantly changing.
When such a 'writing' came along, it was a 'church only' affair for the first few hundred years! It is just so difficult to imagine how exceptionally 'dark' such days must have been! My theory is that the church created its very own 'hell on earth', just to prove themselves 'correct'. Proto-politics, controlling of the masses, basically, and this is so ingrained into our 'constitutions' and such, that it is still a visible remnant of 'how things are done' to this day.
A more advanced option, IMO, would be to allow people who show an air of responsibility to become autonomous. This would be a fine example of true 'faith' ~ faith in each other, in fellow Humans, something Real for a change.
g.
Perhaps to those who were able to exploit the power of the written word, the idea of a public library, Internet or basic general education would have seemed a very dangerous idea indeed.
Yeah, we take so much for granted nowadays. It may be hard to imagine a world without even any books in it!
All people needed to know then was how to build a shelter and keep themselves fed, but this does not mean they were any less intelligent. That actually works, until 'progress' starts to poison itself.
They just used their (much shorter) lives in different ways. It must have been more of a 'now' experience, being as they were far more dependent upon the elements, which are constantly changing.
When such a 'writing' came along, it was a 'church only' affair for the first few hundred years! It is just so difficult to imagine how exceptionally 'dark' such days must have been! My theory is that the church created its very own 'hell on earth', just to prove themselves 'correct'. Proto-politics, controlling of the masses, basically, and this is so ingrained into our 'constitutions' and such, that it is still a visible remnant of 'how things are done' to this day.
A more advanced option, IMO, would be to allow people who show an air of responsibility to become autonomous. This would be a fine example of true 'faith' ~ faith in each other, in fellow Humans, something Real for a change.
g.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 14 2008, 05:37 AM)
QUOTE (barakn+)
Oh, really? I'd love to see an Old Testament reference to a third-day resurrection, as I wasn't aware there was one.
I'll give you the one that Jesus Himself mentioned on more than one occasion:
"Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."(Matthew 12:38-40)
"A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas."(Matthew 16:4)
Here is the passage from Jonah to which Jesus was referring:
"Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights."(Jonah 1:17)
QUOTE (barakn+)
I'll take the dead silence as a sign there's no Old Testament reference to a 3 day resurrection.
Actually, the "dead silence", as you called it, was a sign that I was away on a business trip and that I had neither the time nor the desire to post during that timeframe. In case you haven't heard, many would consider patience a virtue. Take care.
Nice try. I said 'prediction' and you give me a story about a man eaten by a fish, and then some New Testament quotes. Since a messiah is not mentioned in the fish story, nor even death nor crucifixion, this hardly qualifies. Keep on fishing.
Actually I never said 'prediction,' I merely asked for a reference, but a reference to a messianic 3-day resurrection in the Old Testament would be a prediction of sorts, if indeed Christ were the messiah (and there have been quite a few other claimants to the title).
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away."(John 19:30-31)
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", He took the time? He was merely stating that the sabbath is a high day in the Jewish religion and and every Sabbath. John also took the time to say he was at the foot of the cross when Jesus died and that he discovered Jesus body missing on Easter Sunday a couple of incidents the other evangalists do not verify. signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast.. It signifies nothing but what you want it to sifnify..in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly or wrongly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
Amazing how you can get things to say what you want them to say.
Inkaat: Yes, it is amazing how YOU can get things to say what you want them to say. Having already conveniently disregarded THE CONTEXTUAL FACT that "the day of preparation" was clearly referring to "the preparation of the passover"(John 19:14), you now shift your focus(NOT that you're "seeing straight") to "the high day". As has already been noted, John specifically stated "for THAT sabbath was an high day". Notice that he DID NOT SAY "THE sabbath was an high day". Why the distinction? Because he was clearly referring to one of the annual sabbaths and not the regular weekly sabbath as should be CONTEXTUALLY CLEAR to anyone without an agenda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
Annual Sabbaths
For more details on this topic, see High Sabbaths.
Seven annual Biblical festivals are also called by the name shabbaton in Hebrew and "High Sabbath" in English. These are recorded in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy and do not necessarily occur on the weekly Sabbath. They include the first and seventh days of Unleavened Bread or Passover (Pesach); Pentecost (Shavuot); Trumpets (Rosh Hashanah); Atonement (Yom Kippur, the "Sabbath of the Sabbaths"); and the first and eighth days of Tabernacles (Sukkoth).
Additionally, you stated:
John took the time to specify this sabbath as "an high day", He took the time? He was merely stating that the sabbath is a high day in the Jewish religion and and every Sabbath. John also took the time to say he was at the foot of the cross when Jesus died and that he discovered Jesus body missing on Easter Sunday a couple of incidents the other evangalists do not verify. signifying that it was one of the sabbaths in relation to a Jewish Feast.. It signifies nothing but what you want it to sifnify..in this case, the feast of Passover. So, would you like to try again? "Good Friday" has no support in scripture. Once rightly or wrongly removed from the equation, there is absolutely no problem in calculating Jesus' three days and three nights in the grave/tomb.
Amazing how you can get things to say what you want them to say.
Inkaat: Yes, it is amazing how YOU can get things to say what you want them to say. Having already conveniently disregarded THE CONTEXTUAL FACT that "the day of preparation" was clearly referring to "the preparation of the passover"(John 19:14), you now shift your focus(NOT that you're "seeing straight") to "the high day". As has already been noted, John specifically stated "for THAT sabbath was an high day". Notice that he DID NOT SAY "THE sabbath was an high day". Why the distinction? Because he was clearly referring to one of the annual sabbaths and not the regular weekly sabbath as should be CONTEXTUALLY CLEAR to anyone without an agenda.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbath
Annual Sabbaths
For more details on this topic, see High Sabbaths.
Seven annual Biblical festivals are also called by the name shabbaton in Hebrew and "High Sabbath" in English. These are recorded in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy and do not necessarily occur on the weekly Sabbath. They include the first and seventh days of Unleavened Bread or Passover (Pesach); Pentecost (Shavuot); Trumpets (Rosh Hashanah); Atonement (Yom Kippur, the "Sabbath of the Sabbaths"); and the first and eighth days of Tabernacles (Sukkoth).
Additionally, you stated:
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Every Saturday was a high day in the old Jewish religion because it is the sabbath.
Bear in mind that in those days there were no cinemas televisions or motor cars so people lived a very simple life, the Sabbath was a very important and special day for them. They all went to the synagogue and met up with friends, it was an enjoyable day. And every Friday was a day of preparation because they also had no microwaves and they were not allowed to do any work whatsover on the sabbath therefore all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday.
I stand by what I said - no circular logic necessary.
Riddle me this, Batman...
Since "all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday", then how the hell do YOU explain the following:
"On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed in the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."(John 12:12-13)
I think that it is safe to assume that, according to your chronology, this was "Palm Sunday". Am I correct? If so, then this would have to be 5 days before your "Good Friday" crucifixion. Right? Well, in case you haven't noticed, this passage of scripture starts with the words "On the next day". Since this was, according to your assumed chronology, Sunday, then let's take a quick look-see at what happened the day before on Saturday or the weekly Jewish Sabbath.
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served; but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him."(John 12:1-2)
IN CONTEXT, this is clearly the day that preceded your assumed "Palm Sunday", which means that this would have to be a Saturday or weekly sabbath day. Tell me/us, Inkaat, what the hell JEWS were doing MAKING A SUPPER AND SERVING IT on the sabbath day, won't you? After all, YOU are the one who just stated that "all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday". Well? While you're at it, why not explain to me/us what the hell JEWS who should have been in the synagogue/temple, according to you, were all doing hanging out at Lazarus' house.
"Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there; and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead."(John 12:9)
I await your reply.
Bear in mind that in those days there were no cinemas televisions or motor cars so people lived a very simple life, the Sabbath was a very important and special day for them. They all went to the synagogue and met up with friends, it was an enjoyable day. And every Friday was a day of preparation because they also had no microwaves and they were not allowed to do any work whatsover on the sabbath therefore all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday.
I stand by what I said - no circular logic necessary.
Riddle me this, Batman...
Since "all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday", then how the hell do YOU explain the following:
"On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed in the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."(John 12:12-13)
I think that it is safe to assume that, according to your chronology, this was "Palm Sunday". Am I correct? If so, then this would have to be 5 days before your "Good Friday" crucifixion. Right? Well, in case you haven't noticed, this passage of scripture starts with the words "On the next day". Since this was, according to your assumed chronology, Sunday, then let's take a quick look-see at what happened the day before on Saturday or the weekly Jewish Sabbath.
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served; but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him."(John 12:1-2)
IN CONTEXT, this is clearly the day that preceded your assumed "Palm Sunday", which means that this would have to be a Saturday or weekly sabbath day. Tell me/us, Inkaat, what the hell JEWS were doing MAKING A SUPPER AND SERVING IT on the sabbath day, won't you? After all, YOU are the one who just stated that "all the food had to be prepared, the table set, etc etc on the Friday". Well? While you're at it, why not explain to me/us what the hell JEWS who should have been in the synagogue/temple, according to you, were all doing hanging out at Lazarus' house.
"Much people of the Jews therefore knew that he was there; and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead."(John 12:9)
I await your reply.
You are making mock of Me.
You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection.
You are saying that My Son—who you call the One Perfect One—has saved you from your own imperfection—the imperfection I gave you. In other words, God’s Son has saved you from what His Father did.
Interesting line of thought.
MM
You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection.
You are saying that My Son—who you call the One Perfect One—has saved you from your own imperfection—the imperfection I gave you. In other words, God’s Son has saved you from what His Father did.
Interesting line of thought.
MM
MaskedMaruader: Alright...you've spammed the forum enough times with this nonsense, so I'll briefly acknowledge it(even though you're probably just trying to help bail out Inkaat by derailing the current line of discussion).
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection.
More rubbish. Since when do the scriptures state that one doesn't "have to be good"? Cite chapter and verse. God desires for men/women to be "born again" of His Spirit and then to maintain good works. THAT is what the scriptures teach.
And yet more rubbish.
"For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."(I John 3:8)
Just because the devil is your father... You get my point, don't you? I've read enough of your posts to recognize that you're only interested in trouble and not genuine dialogue. With this in mind, I'll ignore your future posts UNLESS you somehow change for the better. Farewell.
"no end" (KJV) The last three of six:
Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. (KJV)
Isaiah 9:7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this. (KJV)
Luke 1:33
And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (KJV)
That first one is nailed for sure!
MrB.
QUOTE
You are making mock of Me.
You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation.
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| You are making mock of Me. You are saying that I, God, made inherently imperfect beings, then have demanded of them to be perfect, or face damnation. |
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
You are saying then that, somewhere several thousand years into the world’s experience, I relented, saying that from then on you didn’t necessarily have to be good, you simply had to feel bad when you were not being good, and accept as your savior the One Being who could always be perfect, thus satisfying My hunger for perfection.
More rubbish. Since when do the scriptures state that one doesn't "have to be good"? Cite chapter and verse. God desires for men/women to be "born again" of His Spirit and then to maintain good works. THAT is what the scriptures teach.
QUOTE
You are saying that My Son—who you call the One Perfect One—has saved you from your own imperfection—the imperfection I gave you. In other words, God’s Son has saved you from what His Father did.
And yet more rubbish.
"For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."(I John 3:8)
Just because the devil is your father... You get my point, don't you? I've read enough of your posts to recognize that you're only interested in trouble and not genuine dialogue. With this in mind, I'll ignore your future posts UNLESS you somehow change for the better. Farewell.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 01:29 PM)
MaskedMaruader: Alright...you've spammed the forum enough times with this nonsense, so I'll briefly acknowledge it(even though you're probably just trying to help bail out Inkaat by derailing the current line of discussion).
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
More rubbish. Since when do the scriptures state that one doesn't "have to be good"? Cite chapter and verse. God desires for men/women to be "born again" of His Spirit and then to maintain good works. THAT is what the scriptures teach.
And yet more rubbish.
"For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."(I John 3:8)
Just because the devil is your father... You get my point, don't you? I've read enough of your posts to recognize that you're only interested in trouble and not genuine dialogue. With this in mind, I'll ignore your future posts UNLESS you somehow change for the better. Farewell.
So... god made the devil. an imperfect being.
Even more interesting.
So, give man complete free will to do anything man chooses. As long as it is what god wants...
Something like Ford's deal, you can have your car any color you like, as long as it's black...
What kind of freedom is that? Do anything you want, but if you don't do what I say, I will cook you forever... What if I were to tell you that god doesn't need adoration, or prayer, or any kind of egotistical stroking that man need? What would you say to that?
humor me, as I seem only able to hand you nonsense. But to those of us that find the christian faith a little..... lacking, perhaps you can make a point...
Or take one.
MM
As we both know, this is not what the scriptures teach. The scriptures plainly teach a "fall of man"...not that man was "made inherently imperfect".
More rubbish. Since when do the scriptures state that one doesn't "have to be good"? Cite chapter and verse. God desires for men/women to be "born again" of His Spirit and then to maintain good works. THAT is what the scriptures teach.
And yet more rubbish.
"For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."(I John 3:8)
Just because the devil is your father... You get my point, don't you? I've read enough of your posts to recognize that you're only interested in trouble and not genuine dialogue. With this in mind, I'll ignore your future posts UNLESS you somehow change for the better. Farewell.
So... god made the devil. an imperfect being.
Even more interesting.
So, give man complete free will to do anything man chooses. As long as it is what god wants...
Something like Ford's deal, you can have your car any color you like, as long as it's black...
What kind of freedom is that? Do anything you want, but if you don't do what I say, I will cook you forever... What if I were to tell you that god doesn't need adoration, or prayer, or any kind of egotistical stroking that man need? What would you say to that?
humor me, as I seem only able to hand you nonsense. But to those of us that find the christian faith a little..... lacking, perhaps you can make a point...
Or take one.
MM
I just stumbled across a book I found on the internet its called the book of thomas sometimes refered to the secret book of thomas. Has anyone else read this book? If so what are your thoughts on the meaning behind the books wisdom?
QUOTE
Yeah, we take so much for granted nowadays. It may be hard to imagine a world without even any books in it!
"no end" (KJV) The last three of six:
Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. (KJV)
Isaiah 9:7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this. (KJV)
Luke 1:33
And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (KJV)
That first one is nailed for sure!
MrB.
MaskedMarauder: I just returned from an extended business trip and I've got several more coming up right around the bend. Having very limited "free time", I hesitate to get involved in "fruitless" discussions. Having said that, I'll briefly answer your most recent post, although I can tell you that I have no intention of getting into a long, drawn out discussion due to my work schedule.
QUOTE (MM+)
So... god made the devil. an imperfect being.
Even more interesting.
Without getting into a long scriptural dissertation on the devil, I'll simply offer this:
"Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."(Ezekiel 28:15)
Although initially addressed to "the king of Tyrus", a simple reading of this discourse will plainly show that the source of the king's "inspiration" was really being addressed...specifically "the anointed cherub that covereth". This "cherub", whom most, if not all, Biblical scholars recognize as the devil, was created perfect. His downfall was, in part, due to pride:
"Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness..."(Ezekiel 28:17)
That's enough on that topic, for now.
Even more interesting.
Without getting into a long scriptural dissertation on the devil, I'll simply offer this:
"Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."(Ezekiel 28:15)
Although initially addressed to "the king of Tyrus", a simple reading of this discourse will plainly show that the source of the king's "inspiration" was really being addressed...specifically "the anointed cherub that covereth". This "cherub", whom most, if not all, Biblical scholars recognize as the devil, was created perfect. His downfall was, in part, due to pride:
"Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness..."(Ezekiel 28:17)
That's enough on that topic, for now.
QUOTE (MM+)
So, give man complete free will to do anything man chooses. As long as it is what god wants...
Something like Ford's deal, you can have your car any color you like, as long as it's black...
What kind of freedom is that? Do anything you want, but if you don't do what I say, I will cook you forever...
Scripturally speaking, man/woman only has two options:
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."(Matthew 12:30)
It's either God or "other gods"...something that doesn't sit well with the atheistic mindset, I'm sure.
Something like Ford's deal, you can have your car any color you like, as long as it's black...
What kind of freedom is that? Do anything you want, but if you don't do what I say, I will cook you forever...
Scripturally speaking, man/woman only has two options:
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."(Matthew 12:30)
It's either God or "other gods"...something that doesn't sit well with the atheistic mindset, I'm sure.
QUOTE (MM+)
What if I were to tell you that god doesn't need adoration, or prayer, or any kind of egotistical stroking that man need? What would you say to that?
As I've explained before, things such as worship/adoration are the direct result of a genuine encounter with God. When created man comes into genuine contact with his Creator, worship will be the natural result...with the exception, of course, of willful rebellion. Why bother any further with this line of discussion? Everything that I've spoken of in relation to God over the years stems from direct encounters with God. Why bother with suppositions/arguments/hypotheses? If you're looking for an argument, then you've come to the wrong place. If, however, you're GENUINELY looking for God(which we both know that you're not), then...
As I've explained before, things such as worship/adoration are the direct result of a genuine encounter with God. When created man comes into genuine contact with his Creator, worship will be the natural result...with the exception, of course, of willful rebellion. Why bother any further with this line of discussion? Everything that I've spoken of in relation to God over the years stems from direct encounters with God. Why bother with suppositions/arguments/hypotheses? If you're looking for an argument, then you've come to the wrong place. If, however, you're GENUINELY looking for God(which we both know that you're not), then...
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 02:24 PM)
Why bother with suppositions/arguments/hypotheses? If you're looking for an argument, then you've come to the wrong place. If, however, you're GENUINELY looking for God(which we both know that you're not), then...
You have a point. However I am in the mood for conversation, not argument. There is zero intent on changing your mind, more of making you think.
However, get one thing correct.
AGNOSTIC athiest. minor point with BIG implications...
Just don't buy off on any man made religion.. and they are ALL man made.
And I found my definition of god a very long time ago.
MM
You have a point.
However I am in the mood for conversation, not argument. There is zero intent on changing your mind, more of making you think.However, get one thing correct.
AGNOSTIC athiest. minor point with BIG implications...
Just don't buy off on any man made religion.. and they are ALL man made.
And I found my definition of god a very long time ago.
MM
QUOTE (MM+)
You have a point. However I am in the mood for conversation, not argument. There is zero intent on changing your mind, more of making you think.
MaskedMarauder: I'm genuinely pleased that you recognize my point. If you fully understand it, however, then you should realize that there is A LOT more than just "thoughts" involved in my own decision making. As I've explained in detail before(and I'm not going to bother rehashing any of it...my posting history is there for any interested party to view/review), I have much experience/results to go along with any "thoughts" I might have/hold. By the way, I've never disengaged my mind in relation to Christianity, which is basically why I never "fit in" with most of so-called "Christendom" from the get-go. By way of reminder, Christ's most glaring opponents were "religious folk". Much like several of you, I totally disregard much of what deems itself to be "Christian"...I just haven't thrown out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.
As has already been noted, John specifically stated "for THAT sabbath was an high day". Notice that he DID NOT SAY "THE sabbath was an high day". Why the distinction? Because he was clearly referring to one of the annual sabbaths and not the regular weekly sabbath as should be CONTEXTUALLY CLEAR to anyone without an agenda.
I know for a fact that John did not state that.
How do I know? English wasn't a language then.
If you want to be that picky with the wording of what was said, you would have to know the exactl original words plus know how that language was used at that time.
How do you know the empasis wasn't put there by King Jimmy?
And afaik nothing about what John said was written down in his lifetime.
However I am in the mood for conversation, not argument. There is zero intent on changing your mind, more of making you think.MaskedMarauder: I'm genuinely pleased that you recognize my point. If you fully understand it, however, then you should realize that there is A LOT more than just "thoughts" involved in my own decision making. As I've explained in detail before(and I'm not going to bother rehashing any of it...my posting history is there for any interested party to view/review), I have much experience/results to go along with any "thoughts" I might have/hold. By the way, I've never disengaged my mind in relation to Christianity, which is basically why I never "fit in" with most of so-called "Christendom" from the get-go. By way of reminder, Christ's most glaring opponents were "religious folk". Much like several of you, I totally disregard much of what deems itself to be "Christian"...I just haven't thrown out the proverbial baby with the bathwater.
QUOTE (MM+)
However, get one thing correct.
AGNOSTIC athiest. minor point with BIG implications...
I'm not going to take the time to review your posting history...I admittedly assumed that you were an atheist, but you may have never stated such. If you are indeed an agnostic, then I stand corrected and humbly apologize for suggesting/implying otherwise.
AGNOSTIC athiest. minor point with BIG implications...
I'm not going to take the time to review your posting history...I admittedly assumed that you were an atheist, but you may have never stated such. If you are indeed an agnostic, then I stand corrected and humbly apologize for suggesting/implying otherwise.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 12:26 PM)
As has already been noted, John specifically stated "for THAT sabbath was an high day". Notice that he DID NOT SAY "THE sabbath was an high day". Why the distinction? Because he was clearly referring to one of the annual sabbaths and not the regular weekly sabbath as should be CONTEXTUALLY CLEAR to anyone without an agenda.
I know for a fact that John did not state that.
How do I know? English wasn't a language then.
If you want to be that picky with the wording of what was said, you would have to know the exactl original words plus know how that language was used at that time.
How do you know the empasis wasn't put there by King Jimmy?
And afaik nothing about what John said was written down in his lifetime.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 02:24 PM)
As I've explained before, things such as worship/adoration are the direct result of a genuine encounter with God. When created man comes into genuine contact with his Creator, worship will be the natural result...with the exception, of course, of willful rebellion.
I postulate that you can not have faith in God, you can only have faith in your ability to distinguish a real encounter from a false encounter.
I just find it funny how every ones true encounters with the same Supreme Being are different from each others.
I postulate that you can not have faith in God, you can only have faith in your ability to distinguish a real encounter from a false encounter.
I just find it funny how every ones true encounters with the same Supreme Being are different from each others.
QUOTE (buttershug+)
I know for a fact that John did not state that.
How do I know? English wasn't a language then.
If you want to be that picky with the wording of what was said, you would have to know the exactl original words plus know how that language was used at that time.
How do you know the empasis wasn't put there by King Jimmy?
And afaik nothing about what John said was written down in his lifetime.
buttershug: The underlying Greek text is available for anyone who wants to view it. A simple Google search will prove this to be so. Regardless of "emphasis" or date of writing, the facts still remain that, IN CONTEXT, the Feast of Passover/Feast of Unleavended Bread were being "prepared for". Additionally, as I pointed out in my most recent post to Inkaat, using his assumed "Palm Sunday" chronology, that leaves Jews performing some totally abnormal practices on a weekly sabbath. I'd like to see his explanation of that...
Ps
What are the abnormal practices that the Jews performed on the Sabbath and what evidence do you have that they performed them?
How do I know? English wasn't a language then.
If you want to be that picky with the wording of what was said, you would have to know the exactl original words plus know how that language was used at that time.
How do you know the empasis wasn't put there by King Jimmy?
And afaik nothing about what John said was written down in his lifetime.
buttershug: The underlying Greek text is available for anyone who wants to view it. A simple Google search will prove this to be so. Regardless of "emphasis" or date of writing, the facts still remain that, IN CONTEXT, the Feast of Passover/Feast of Unleavended Bread were being "prepared for". Additionally, as I pointed out in my most recent post to Inkaat, using his assumed "Palm Sunday" chronology, that leaves Jews performing some totally abnormal practices on a weekly sabbath. I'd like to see his explanation of that...
QUOTE (buttershug+)
I just find it funny how every ones true encounters with the same Supreme Being are different from each others.
Always seeking to be fair, I readily admit that MANY(not every) so-called "encounters" greatly differ from each other. As you might imagine, in the course of my travels/lifetime, I've personally met THOUSANDS of people who have claimed to have had "encounters" with the God of scripture. Unfortunately, upon SIMPLE inspection, I have found that almost all of them greatly differed from the God Who is revealed in scripture. In most cases(including one that transpired just last night between my wife and her cousin), their "God"((in quotes, deliberately) seems to only be concerned with their HAPPINESS(as in having a good time...I'm aware that "blessed" can mean "happy", but this blessedness is ofttimes associated with persecution/tribulation and even death/martyrdom). Find me this God in scripture. God desires His people to be HOLY. In other words, people create a "god" of their own desires/lusts...Satan is only "happy" to accomodate. At the same time, sad to say, of those whom I've personally encountered who I believe had genuine encounters with the God of scripture, almost all of them were actually DISHEARTENED by such encounters. When God speaks to individuals, He's not planting "visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads". He's usually convicting individuals of sin and attempting to sanctify them/set them apart as holy to be used for his purposes...purposes that will hardly bring one "fame and fortune". Anyway...
Always seeking to be fair, I readily admit that MANY(not every) so-called "encounters" greatly differ from each other. As you might imagine, in the course of my travels/lifetime, I've personally met THOUSANDS of people who have claimed to have had "encounters" with the God of scripture. Unfortunately, upon SIMPLE inspection, I have found that almost all of them greatly differed from the God Who is revealed in scripture. In most cases(including one that transpired just last night between my wife and her cousin), their "God"((in quotes, deliberately) seems to only be concerned with their HAPPINESS(as in having a good time...I'm aware that "blessed" can mean "happy", but this blessedness is ofttimes associated with persecution/tribulation and even death/martyrdom). Find me this God in scripture. God desires His people to be HOLY. In other words, people create a "god" of their own desires/lusts...Satan is only "happy" to accomodate. At the same time, sad to say, of those whom I've personally encountered who I believe had genuine encounters with the God of scripture, almost all of them were actually DISHEARTENED by such encounters. When God speaks to individuals, He's not planting "visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads". He's usually convicting individuals of sin and attempting to sanctify them/set them apart as holy to be used for his purposes...purposes that will hardly bring one "fame and fortune". Anyway...
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 04:27 PM)
At the same time, sad to say, of those whom I've personally encountered who I believe had genuine encounters with the God of scripture, almost all of them were actually DISHEARTENED by such encounters. When God speaks to individuals, He's not planting "visions of sugarplums dancing in their heads". He's usually convicting individuals of sin and attempting to sanctify them/set them apart as holy to be used for his purposes...purposes that will hardly bring one "fame and fortune". Anyway...
So says the illustrious Newguy.
Information from the 'authority' on who God is and what he says. Amazes me how you know these things.
You crack me up.
By the way what's the Palm Sunday chronology that I used?
So says the illustrious Newguy.
Information from the 'authority' on who God is and what he says. Amazes me how you know these things.
You crack me up.
By the way what's the Palm Sunday chronology that I used?
Ps
What are the abnormal practices that the Jews performed on the Sabbath and what evidence do you have that they performed them?
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
By the way what's the Palm Sunday chronology that I used?
Inkaat: You can't even figure that out by yourself(not to mention all the hints that I gave you)? You've got Jesus being crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". Follow the Biblical chronology and you will see that 5 DAYS PRIOR TO THIS, people greeted Jesus with palm branches on what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday". There's no way around it...if you maintain that scripture teaches Jesus was crucified on Friday, then 5 DAYS PRIOR TO FRIDAY IS SUNDAY. Additionally, as I clearly documented in my last post to you, on the day before what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday", WHICH, ACCORDING TO YOUR CHRONOLOGY, WOULD HAVE TO BE A SATURDAY/SABBATH, Martha and Mary prepared a meal for Jesus and served it to him. These are NOT normal sabbath practices, as you yourself plainly stated. That ought to answer your P.S.:
Inkaat: You can't even figure that out by yourself(not to mention all the hints that I gave you)? You've got Jesus being crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". Follow the Biblical chronology and you will see that 5 DAYS PRIOR TO THIS, people greeted Jesus with palm branches on what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday". There's no way around it...if you maintain that scripture teaches Jesus was crucified on Friday, then 5 DAYS PRIOR TO FRIDAY IS SUNDAY. Additionally, as I clearly documented in my last post to you, on the day before what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday", WHICH, ACCORDING TO YOUR CHRONOLOGY, WOULD HAVE TO BE A SATURDAY/SABBATH, Martha and Mary prepared a meal for Jesus and served it to him. These are NOT normal sabbath practices, as you yourself plainly stated. That ought to answer your P.S.:
--------------------
"
Would you just point me in the direction (chapter and verse) of the reference in the bible that says 5 days as quoted by you.
Inkaat: You can't even figure that out by yourself(not to mention all the hints that I gave you)? You've got Jesus being crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". Follow the Biblical chronology and you will see that 5 DAYS PRIOR TO THIS, people greeted Jesus with palm branches on what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday". There's no way around it...if you maintain that scripture teaches Jesus was crucified on Friday, then 5 DAYS PRIOR TO FRIDAY IS SUNDAY. Additionally, as I clearly documented in my last post to you, on the day before what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday", WHICH, ACCORDING TO YOUR CHRONOLOGY, WOULD HAVE TO BE A SATURDAY/SABBATH, Martha and Mary prepared a meal for Jesus and served it to him. These are NOT normal sabbath practices, as you yourself plainly stated. That ought to answer your P.S.:
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Ps
What are the abnormal practices that the Jews performed on the Sabbath and what evidence do you have that they performed them?
Now, would you like to answer my intitial questions that I asked you in my previous post or should I expect more dodging tactics?
What are the abnormal practices that the Jews performed on the Sabbath and what evidence do you have that they performed them?
Now, would you like to answer my intitial questions that I asked you in my previous post or should I expect more dodging tactics?
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 05:03 PM)
Inkaat: You can't even figure that out by yourself(not to mention all the hints that I gave you)? You've got Jesus being crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". Follow the Biblical chronology and you will see that 5 DAYS PRIOR TO THIS, people greeted Jesus with palm branches on what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday". There's no way around it...if you maintain that scripture teaches Jesus was crucified on Friday, then 5 DAYS PRIOR TO FRIDAY IS SUNDAY. Additionally, as I clearly documented in my last post to you, on the day before what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday", WHICH, ACCORDING TO YOUR CHRONOLOGY, WOULD HAVE TO BE A SATURDAY/SABBATH, Martha and Mary prepared a meal for Jesus and served it to him. These are NOT normal sabbath practices, as you yourself plainly stated. That ought to answer your P.S.:
--------------------
"
Would you just point me in the direction (chapter and verse) of the reference in the bible that says 5 days as quoted by you.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 03:05 PM)
I'm not going to take the time to review your posting history...I admittedly assumed that you were an atheist, but you may have never stated such. If you are indeed an agnostic, then I stand corrected and humbly apologize for suggesting/implying otherwise.
Apology unnecessary, and yes, I have stated both Atheist and Agnostic Atheist depending on the day.
I find my spirituality in books such as Conversations With God, Illusions, Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah, and so on.
I do NOT interchange science with religion, as to me, organized religion is a fallacy. Another way to control the masses.
Keep in mind, it is simply my opinion, based on my experience on the planet. I can read science and enjoy the research, then step outside to the wonderment of this planet I have the privilege to be living on. I think this is what the great minds such as Einstein enjoyed.. never sure.
I do not force my religious views on anyone, nor do I require their involvement. One of the things that organized religion seem to misunderstand... What others do in their lives is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS unless they are invited to comment....
Conversation, on the other hand, can be fun and even eye opening in the correct setting.
MM
Apology unnecessary, and yes, I have stated both Atheist and Agnostic Atheist depending on the day.
I find my spirituality in books such as Conversations With God, Illusions, Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah, and so on.
I do NOT interchange science with religion, as to me, organized religion is a fallacy. Another way to control the masses.
Keep in mind, it is simply my opinion, based on my experience on the planet. I can read science and enjoy the research, then step outside to the wonderment of this planet I have the privilege to be living on. I think this is what the great minds such as Einstein enjoyed.. never sure.
I do not force my religious views on anyone, nor do I require their involvement. One of the things that organized religion seem to misunderstand... What others do in their lives is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS unless they are invited to comment....
Conversation, on the other hand, can be fun and even eye opening in the correct setting.
MM
QUOTE (Masked Marauder+Jul 30 2008, 07:20 PM)
I do not force my religious views on anyone, nor do I require their involvement. One of the things that organized religion seem to misunderstand... What others do in their lives is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS unless they are invited to comment....
Conversation, on the other hand, can be fun and even eye opening in the correct setting.
MM
I'm guessing you agree with me that Morality is for following and not for enforcing?
With the caveat that laws such as laws against stealing are for the protection of society rather than existing because of someone's sense of morality.
Conversation, on the other hand, can be fun and even eye opening in the correct setting.
MM
I'm guessing you agree with me that Morality is for following and not for enforcing?
With the caveat that laws such as laws against stealing are for the protection of society rather than existing because of someone's sense of morality.
QUOTE (buttershug+Jul 30 2008, 08:25 PM)
I'm guessing you agree with me that Morality is for following and not for enforcing?
With the caveat that laws such as laws against stealing are for the protection of society rather than existing because of someone's sense of morality.
I am one of those that believes morality is something man decided on, and has passed down. Society enforces those rules and regulations.
I would take it a step further, steal all you want, as often as you like, but when someone shoots you or beats you for doing just that, take responsibility for your actions...
If you violate someone, and they choose to punish you for it, don't dodge what you did... But for the one who does the punishing, society may choose to punish you. Again, don't dodge responsibility, instead accept the reaction for your action...
How's that for a thought.
MM
With the caveat that laws such as laws against stealing are for the protection of society rather than existing because of someone's sense of morality.
I am one of those that believes morality is something man decided on, and has passed down. Society enforces those rules and regulations.
I would take it a step further, steal all you want, as often as you like, but when someone shoots you or beats you for doing just that, take responsibility for your actions...
If you violate someone, and they choose to punish you for it, don't dodge what you did... But for the one who does the punishing, society may choose to punish you. Again, don't dodge responsibility, instead accept the reaction for your action...
How's that for a thought.
MM
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Would you just point me in the direction (chapter and verse) of the reference in the bible that says 5 days as quoted by you.
Inkaat: You can find that information in the first post on page 4 of this thread.
Inkaat: You can find that information in the first post on page 4 of this thread.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 30 2008, 11:59 PM)
I think that it is safe to assume that, according to your chronology, this was "Palm Sunday". Am I correct? If so, then this would have to be 5 days before your "Good Friday" crucifixion. Right? Well, in case you haven't noticed, this passage of scripture starts with the words "On the next day". Since this was, according to your assumed chronology, Sunday, then let's take a quick look-see at what happened the day before on Saturday or the weekly Jewish Sabbath.
I take it that you can't point me in the direction of the bible quote that says 5 days. Would that be because there isn't one which screws up your entire argument.
As for the claim of my 'chronology, this was Palm Sunday - right?'' Where did I mention Palm Sunday and where does the bible mention it? The celebration of Palm Sunday is one of the many concoctions of the Catholic Church and it is celebrated on a Sunday minus a jot of evidence to show that it was a Sunday probalbly because the church can con more money out of the people on that day.
There is only one reference to the occasion that Palm Sunday supposedly celebrates, it is by Mark who made the story up to fit in with the Old Testament passage which says; 'See your King comes to you, righteous and riding on a donkey, on a colt the foal of a donkey.' Zephaniah 9:9
I take it that you can't point me in the direction of the bible quote that says 5 days. Would that be because there isn't one which screws up your entire argument.
As for the claim of my 'chronology, this was Palm Sunday - right?'' Where did I mention Palm Sunday and where does the bible mention it? The celebration of Palm Sunday is one of the many concoctions of the Catholic Church and it is celebrated on a Sunday minus a jot of evidence to show that it was a Sunday probalbly because the church can con more money out of the people on that day.
There is only one reference to the occasion that Palm Sunday supposedly celebrates, it is by Mark who made the story up to fit in with the Old Testament passage which says; 'See your King comes to you, righteous and riding on a donkey, on a colt the foal of a donkey.' Zephaniah 9:9
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
I take it that you can't point me in the direction of the bible quote that says 5 days. Would that be because there isn't one which screws up your entire argument.
Inkaat: I posted it for you once and referred you to it a second time...can't you read? Here it is, AGAIN:
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. Then took Mary a pound of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For the poor always he have with you; but me ye have not always. Much people therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus. On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."(John 12:1-13)
"...six days before the passover..."
"ON THE NEXT DAY..."
Ummm, THE NEXT DAY would be the 5th day before the passover, in case that's too lofty for you.
Six days before the Passover Jesus arrived at Bethany where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. Here a dinner was given in Jesus honour. Martha served ( not permissable on the Sabbath) Then Mary took a pint of pure nard, an expensive, she poured it on Jesus feet and wiped his feet with her hair. (Not permissable on the sabbath). Where does it say that the Passover was on the Sabbath?
I was wrong about Mark being the only one to record the so-called Palm Sunday event, that's because I am no expert, I don't even remember what the argument was that started all this nonsense.
Inkaat: I posted it for you once and referred you to it a second time...can't you read? Here it is, AGAIN:
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. Then took Mary a pound of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For the poor always he have with you; but me ye have not always. Much people therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus. On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."(John 12:1-13)
"...six days before the passover..."
"ON THE NEXT DAY..."
Ummm, THE NEXT DAY would be the 5th day before the passover, in case that's too lofty for you.
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
There is only one reference to the occasion that Palm Sunday supposedly celebrates, it is by Mark who made the story up to fit in with the Old Testament passage which says; 'See your King comes to you, righteous and riding on a donkey, on a colt the foal of a donkey.' Zephaniah 9:9
Wrong...AGAIN. We just read(well, I did anyway...I'm not too confident in your reading abilities, to be quite frank) how, ON THE 5TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, the people "took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him". Sounds like what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday" to me. Twist all you'd like. This occured 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion which YOU claim happened on "Good Friday". That makes this particular day a Sunday, according to YOUR chronology. Period. Additionally, that makes the 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER a Saturday, according to YOUR chronology. Now, back to my original questions that you've been dodging. On this 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, JEWS were not only preparing a supper but also serving it. According to YOUR OWN TESTIMONY, this is NOT a normal practice during a weekly Jewish sabbath. How then do you explain this? How about an actual answer this time...you're starting to bore me with all of your dodging tactics. Or, you could just go away...
Wrong...AGAIN. We just read(well, I did anyway...I'm not too confident in your reading abilities, to be quite frank) how, ON THE 5TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, the people "took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him". Sounds like what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday" to me. Twist all you'd like. This occured 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion which YOU claim happened on "Good Friday". That makes this particular day a Sunday, according to YOUR chronology. Period. Additionally, that makes the 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER a Saturday, according to YOUR chronology. Now, back to my original questions that you've been dodging. On this 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, JEWS were not only preparing a supper but also serving it. According to YOUR OWN TESTIMONY, this is NOT a normal practice during a weekly Jewish sabbath. How then do you explain this? How about an actual answer this time...you're starting to bore me with all of your dodging tactics. Or, you could just go away...
Six days before the Passover Jesus arrived at Bethany where Lazarus lived, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. Here a dinner was given in Jesus honour. Martha served ( not permissable on the Sabbath) Then Mary took a pint of pure nard, an expensive, she poured it on Jesus feet and wiped his feet with her hair. (Not permissable on the sabbath). Where does it say that the Passover was on the Sabbath?
I was wrong about Mark being the only one to record the so-called Palm Sunday event, that's because I am no expert, I don't even remember what the argument was that started all this nonsense.
QUOTE (newguy+)
According to YOUR OWN TESTIMONY, this is NOT a normal practice during a weekly Jewish sabbath. How then do you explain this? How about an actual answer this time...you're starting to bore me with all of your dodging tactics. Or, you could just go away...
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Martha served ( not permissable on the Sabbath) Then Mary took a pint of pure nard, an expensive, she poured it on Jesus feet and wiped his feet with her hair. (Not permissable on the sabbath).
QUOTE (inkaat+)
Where does it say that the Passover was on the Sabbath?
[
QUOTE (newguy+)
ON THE 5TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, the people "took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him". Sounds like what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday" to me. Twist all you'd like. This occured 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion which YOU claim happened on "Good Friday". That makes this particular day a Sunday, according to YOUR chronology. Period. Additionally, that makes the 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER a Saturday, according to YOUR chronology.
You don't read very well, do you Inkaat?
You don't read very well, do you Inkaat?
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 31 2008, 06:29 PM)
[
QUOTE (newguy+)
ON THE 5TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER, the people "took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him". Sounds like what is traditionally known as "Palm Sunday" to me. Twist all you'd like. This occured 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion which YOU claim happened on "Good Friday". That makes this particular day a Sunday, according to YOUR chronology. Period. Additionally, that makes the 6TH DAY BEFORE THE PASSOVER a Saturday, according to YOUR chronology.
You don't read very well, do you Inkaat?
When did I say the crucifixion happened on a Friday? I wasn't even there.
So the Passover has shifted to a Friday now has it? Confusing.
"This occurred 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion" How do you work that out?
There is no need to resort to insults Newguy it shows a lack of
You don't read very well, do you Inkaat?
When did I say the crucifixion happened on a Friday? I wasn't even there.
So the Passover has shifted to a Friday now has it? Confusing.
"This occurred 5 days prior to Christ's crucifixion" How do you work that out?
There is no need to resort to insults Newguy it shows a lack of
QUOTE (Inkaat+Jul 31 2008, 02:04 PM)
When did I say the crucifixion happened on a Friday? I wasn't even there.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=356892
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=356892
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Forget that post? Keep the change
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
Forget that post? Keep the change
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
"This occurs 5 days prior to Christ's Crucifixion" How did you work that out"
QUOTE (newguy+)
"Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. Then took Mary a pound of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. For the poor always he have with you; but me ye have not always. Much people therefore knew that he was there: and they came not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead. But the chief priests consulted that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews went away, and believed on Jesus. On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord."(John 12:1-13)
"...six days before the passover..."
"ON THE NEXT DAY..."
Ummm, THE NEXT DAY would be the 5th day before the passover, in case that's too lofty for you.
Your eyes must have blitzed right to the "insult" (not really an insult, after your post I'm in agreement), and forgotten to read the rest of the post where he answered every question you just asked.
"...six days before the passover..."
"ON THE NEXT DAY..."
Ummm, THE NEXT DAY would be the 5th day before the passover, in case that's too lofty for you.
Your eyes must have blitzed right to the "insult" (not really an insult, after your post I'm in agreement), and forgotten to read the rest of the post where he answered every question you just asked.
QUOTE (excaza+Jul 31 2008, 07:07 PM)
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=356892
Forget that post? Keep the change
Your eyes must have blitzed right to the "insult" (not really an insult, after your post I'm in agreement), and forgotten to read the rest of the post where he answered every question you just asked.
You don't seem to get it do you? It was not I that said Jesus was crucified on 'Good Friday' I was merely quoting common Christian belief. As for your assertians below; first establish the day on which Jesus was crucified and work from their and don't use the chronology that you claim is mince because it is not, I don[t have a chronology and I am not an expert. Show me that you are right and I will have learnt something.
The original question I do believe was: 'Friday afternoon, Saturday and Easter Sunday morning, how do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that? Vis a vis the time Jonah spent in the stomache of a whale.
Forget that post? Keep the change
Your eyes must have blitzed right to the "insult" (not really an insult, after your post I'm in agreement), and forgotten to read the rest of the post where he answered every question you just asked. You don't seem to get it do you? It was not I that said Jesus was crucified on 'Good Friday' I was merely quoting common Christian belief. As for your assertians below; first establish the day on which Jesus was crucified and work from their and don't use the chronology that you claim is mince because it is not, I don[t have a chronology and I am not an expert. Show me that you are right and I will have learnt something.
The original question I do believe was: 'Friday afternoon, Saturday and Easter Sunday morning, how do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that? Vis a vis the time Jonah spent in the stomache of a whale.
Next time I'll check for spelling mistakes
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
When did I say the crucifixion happened on a Friday? I wasn't even there.
Inkaat: Don't you even remember what you said?
Inkaat: Don't you even remember what you said?
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
Good Friday afternoon
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
To which I replied:
Holy Saturday
Easter Sunday morning
How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of that?
To which I replied:
QUOTE (newguy+)
Inkaat: I don't. Show me anywhere in scripture where it states that Jesus was crucified on what is commonly known as "Good Friday". First, let's see if you or anyone else can do that(you can't) and then I'll show you what the scriptures actually teach in regards to His crucifixion, burial and resurrection. Fair enough?
To which you replied:
How's that for starters?
Newguy.
Sorry for mixing you up with someone else but do note; I never said Jesus was crucified on a Friday I merely quote those who do ie Christian Doctrine per se.
You can keep the change.
Thanks, I needed it.
To which you replied:
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
John 19:41
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
How's that for starters?
EDIT:
I'm heading out early tomorrow morning for an extended business trip, so I probably won't be posting for the better part of two weeks. Just thought I'd let you know, in case you don't get a response to any posts that are addressed to me.
At the place where Jesus was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden
a new tomb, in which no-one had laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation
and since the tomb was near by they laid Jesus there.
The day of preparation is the day before the Sabbath since no one is allowed to
work on the Sabbath. Friday.
Keep the change.
How's that for starters?
EDIT:
I'm heading out early tomorrow morning for an extended business trip, so I probably won't be posting for the better part of two weeks. Just thought I'd let you know, in case you don't get a response to any posts that are addressed to me.
QUOTE (Inkaat+)
There is no need to resort to insults Newguy it shows a lack of...
Inkaat: Although you never finished this sentence and although you were actually responding to something that excaza posted and not something that I posted, I will be more gracious when I return. Sorry about that. Like I said earlier, I most likely won't be back for about 2 weeks. Talk to you then. Good night.
Inkaat: Although you never finished this sentence and although you were actually responding to something that excaza posted and not something that I posted, I will be more gracious when I return. Sorry about that. Like I said earlier, I most likely won't be back for about 2 weeks. Talk to you then. Good night.
Two weeks? Is that the first time they allow visitation, also?
QUOTE (Inkaat+Jul 31 2008, 01:16 PM)
Where does it say that the Passover was on the Sabbath?
Are you really this dense or are you just being a jerkoff?
We've already covered this. The Passover IS A Sabbath - no matter which day of the week it falls on.
Learn something about the culture that these stories were written for.
Are you really this dense or are you just being a jerkoff?
We've already covered this. The Passover IS A Sabbath - no matter which day of the week it falls on.
Learn something about the culture that these stories were written for.
QUOTE (gmilam+Aug 1 2008, 12:50 PM)
Are you really this dense or are you just being a jerkoff?
We've already covered this. The Passover IS A Sabbath - no matter which day of the week it falls on.
Learn something about the culture that these stories were written for.
So let's say it was a Wednesday. Now count back six days and see if it comes to Palm Sunday or are all days where people throw palms and shout Hosanna Sundays.
By the way, as I said before I didn't say Christ was crucified on a Friday, Christian tradition says it. The initial question I asked was: How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of Friday afternoon Saturday and Sunday? and one of you guys I think it was the new one said the explanation is because Jesus was not crucified on a Friday. Which is fair enough, I wasn't there and I'm not arguing but to justify this claim he points to a bible verse that says 5 days before the passover was Palm Sunday. , He counted back from Good Friday the day before the day of the passover, because again it is my chronology, 5 days to reach Palm Sunday. Was it really a Friday when Jesus died in which case why are we arguing or was it not in which case why are you counting back 5 days from the Friday to make your point. The mind boggles. And if Jesus died on a Saturday what does that do with all your calculations or a Thursday, Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday ditto.
Ps All Passovers are not Sabbaths. The Sabbath is the 7th day of the week named as the day on which God rested after creating the Universe - for those who must believe that.
We've already covered this. The Passover IS A Sabbath - no matter which day of the week it falls on.
Learn something about the culture that these stories were written for.
So let's say it was a Wednesday. Now count back six days and see if it comes to Palm Sunday or are all days where people throw palms and shout Hosanna Sundays.
By the way, as I said before I didn't say Christ was crucified on a Friday, Christian tradition says it. The initial question I asked was: How do you get 3 days and 3 nights out of Friday afternoon Saturday and Sunday? and one of you guys I think it was the new one said the explanation is because Jesus was not crucified on a Friday. Which is fair enough, I wasn't there and I'm not arguing but to justify this claim he points to a bible verse that says 5 days before the passover was Palm Sunday. , He counted back from Good Friday the day before the day of the passover, because again it is my chronology, 5 days to reach Palm Sunday. Was it really a Friday when Jesus died in which case why are we arguing or was it not in which case why are you counting back 5 days from the Friday to make your point. The mind boggles. And if Jesus died on a Saturday what does that do with all your calculations or a Thursday, Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday ditto.
Ps All Passovers are not Sabbaths. The Sabbath is the 7th day of the week named as the day on which God rested after creating the Universe - for those who must believe that.
QUOTE (newguy+Jul 31 2008, 08:02 PM)
How's that for starters?
Newguy.
Sorry for mixing you up with someone else but do note; I never said Jesus was crucified on a Friday I merely quote those who do ie Christian Doctrine per se.
QUOTE (Inkaat+Aug 1 2008, 12:50 PM)
Ps All Passovers are not Sabbaths. The Sabbath is the 7th day of the week named as the day on which God rested after creating the Universe - for those who must believe that.
QUOTE (Inkaat+Aug 1 2008, 12:50 PM)
By the way, as I said before I didn't say Christ was crucified on a Friday, Christian tradition says it.
Then save your argument for people who believe Christian tradition.
Then save your argument for people who believe Christian tradition.
QUOTE (gmilam+Aug 1 2008, 06:26 PM)
You can keep the change.
Thanks, I needed it.
QUOTE (Inkaat+Aug 1 2008, 05:50 PM)
Ps All Passovers are not Sabbaths. The Sabbath is the 7th day of the week named as the day on which God rested after creating the Universe - for those who must believe that.
Why would you take it for granted that the only Sabbaths are the weekly ones.
Why would you take it for granted that the only Sabbaths are the weekly ones.
QUOTE (Zarkov+Jul 6 2008, 04:16 PM)
and about time
Read Leviticus, which was written some 1200 years or so before Jesus.
The ENTIRE Jewish tradition is based on prophecy of a Messiah who would die and rise again.
People who make threads like this show their ignorance of BOTH judaism and Christianity, in that they don't even remotely know what Judaism is all about.
Exodus 12: Passover
The blood of the lamb on the doorposts in Egypt to protect from the destroyer.
If you look at the story.
1) Blood of a Male lamb without blemish that died in the person's place
It was important that the bones not be broken, and that there be no trace to be found on the morning (Jesus's body was not found by the guards.)
2) Hyssop, unleavened bread, bitter herbs
3) Doorpost (shaped like a wooden gibbet). What you need to know here is "wood", or more specificly blood of a lamb on wood.
Jesus was most likely hung on a double posted gibbet, not the popular "cross" shape we know today.
Next, leviticus and the cleasing of the "leperous" house.
I will note here that the plague called "leprosy" in the Bible is NOT the same thing that is usually called leprosy in modern medicine.
In leviticus notice, Cedar Wood, Hyssop, blood, and a perfectly clean sacrifice, along with scarlet(which you also see in most of the tabernacle rituals and sacrifices.)
Anyway:
Leviticus 14:
4Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:
5And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water:
6As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water:
7And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.
8And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.
9But it shall be on
Read Leviticus, which was written some 1200 years or so before Jesus.
The ENTIRE Jewish tradition is based on prophecy of a Messiah who would die and rise again.
People who make threads like this show their ignorance of BOTH judaism and Christianity, in that they don't even remotely know what Judaism is all about.
Exodus 12: Passover
The blood of the lamb on the doorposts in Egypt to protect from the destroyer.
If you look at the story.
1) Blood of a Male lamb without blemish that died in the person's place
It was important that the bones not be broken, and that there be no trace to be found on the morning (Jesus's body was not found by the guards.)
2) Hyssop, unleavened bread, bitter herbs
3) Doorpost (shaped like a wooden gibbet). What you need to know here is "wood", or more specificly blood of a lamb on wood.
Jesus was most likely hung on a double posted gibbet, not the popular "cross" shape we know today.
Next, leviticus and the cleasing of the "leperous" house.
I will note here that the plague called "leprosy" in the Bible is NOT the same thing that is usually called leprosy in modern medicine.
In leviticus notice, Cedar Wood, Hyssop, blood, and a perfectly clean sacrifice, along with scarlet(which you also see in most of the tabernacle rituals and sacrifices.)
Anyway:
Leviticus 14:
4Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop:
5And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water:
6As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water:
7And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field.
8And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days.
9But it shall be on