Posted on 12/31/2005 7:39:53 PM PST by Coleus
Perhaps, but I think "tents" refers more to the metaphor of our flesh. And in the Old Testament to the New, we see a gradual movement of this, from tent, to temple, to flesh itself.
As to Christ's Birthday, many get enthralled with the longest night and the first day of winter. But the Scripture does say when the angel came to announce to Mary that Christ would be born:
"In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth..." Luke 1:26
The sixth month is Adar, which corresponds to Feb/Mar of our calendar. Figure nine months from the time Mary conceived Jesus, and you come up with December. The celebration of the Nativity of Christ is then historically nad accurately placed when the Word was born of flesh.
Regards
I did. I quoted the thoughts of Jewish writers and theological thought within Judaism. Are you scandalized that some Jews see God's Wisdom as something that formed the world WITH God the Father? It is there in Jewish Scripture. Judaism is not so monolithic as you might imply, from what I read. Seems that there were numerous issues that rabbis disagreed on.
Regards
Knock it off.
testing
Ok I apologize to jo kus for calling him an "idiot", that was over the top. I do, however, stand by my comment that he's "anti-jewish." Surely you don't have a problem with that? The word anti-Catholic is only used in here about 500 times a day.
Perhaps, but I think "tents" refers more to the metaphor of our flesh. And in the Old Testament to the New, we see a gradual movement of this, from tent, to temple, to flesh itself.
As to Christ's Birthday, many get enthralled with the longest night and the first day of winter. But the Scripture does say when the angel came to announce to Mary that Christ would be born:
"In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth..." Luke 1:26
The sixth month is Adar, which corresponds to Feb/Mar of our calendar. Figure nine months from the time Mary conceived Jesus, and you come up with December. The celebration of the Nativity of Christ is then historically nad accurately placed when the Word was born of flesh.
Regards
61 posted on 01/02/2006 7:16:48 PM MST by jo kus
"In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth..." Luke 1:26
I think you have taken this verse out of context; it is a continuation of the conception of John the Baptist.
Luke 1:13 But the angel said to him: "Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John.Luke 1:14 He will be a joy and delight to you, and many will rejoice because of his birth,
Luke 1:15 for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth. [Or from his mother’s womb]
Luke 1:16 Many of the people of Israel will he bring back to the Lord their God.
Luke 1:17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous — to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."
Luke 1:18 Zechariah asked the angel, "How can I be sure of this? I am an old man and my wife is well on in years."
Luke 1:19 The angel answered, "I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to tell you this good news.
Luke 1:20 And now you will be silent and not able to speak until the day this happens, because you did not believe my words, which will come true at their proper time."
Luke 1:21 Meanwhile, the people were waiting for Zechariah and wondering why he stayed so long in the temple.
Luke 1:22 When he came out, he could not speak to them. They realised he had seen a vision in the temple, for he kept making signs to them but remained unable to speak.
Luke 1:23 When his time of service was completed, he returned home.
Luke 1:24 After this his wife Elizabeth became pregnant and for five months remained in seclusion.
Luke 1:25 "The Lord has done this for me," she said. "In these days he has shown his favour and taken away my disgrace among the people."
Luke 1:26 In the sixth month, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee,
Luke 1:27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin's name was Mary.
This is the key to determining the birth of Y'shua.
Zechariah was a high priest and he served in the temple on a certain month
based on his tribe. He is serving when the angel announces John's conception ;
Y'shua's conception in Miriam is six months later.
Nine months later Y'shua enters his tent or tabernacle on Sukkot.
John was to be Elijah and Elijah is always expected on Pesach
where a place is always set and the children go to the door to look for him.
Thank you for the opportunity.
b'shem Y'shua
Excuse me for interrupting, but how do you regard "us" in these verses? (This isn't a gotcha, I am just interested in your opinion/interpretation.)
Then God said: "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and the cattle, and over all the wild animals and all the creatures that crawl on the ground." (Genesis 1:26)
Then the LORD God said: "See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever." (Gen 3:22)
Let us then go down and there confuse their language, so that one will not understand what another says." (Gen 11:7)
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?" "Here I am," I said; "send me!" (Isaiah 6:8)
Christians maintain that Genesis 1:26 and Genesis 11:7 are prooftexts of an alleged tri-unity god, but this claim is erroneous. The inference that "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26) refers to the plurality of God is refuted by the subsequent verse, which relates the creation of man to a singular God, "And God created man in His image" (Genesis 1:27). In this verse the Hebrew verb "created" appears in the singular form. If "let us make man" indicates a numerical plurality, it would be followed in the next verse by, "And they created man in their image." Obviously, the plural form is used in the same way as in the divine appellation 'Elohim, to indicate the all- inclusiveness of God's attributes of authority and power, the plurality of majesty. It is customary for one in authority to speak of himself as if he were a plurality. Hence, Absalom said to Ahithophel, "Give your counsel what we shall do" (2 Samuel 16:20). The context shows that he was seeking advice for himself' yet he refers to himself as "we" (see also Ezra 4:16-19).
There is another possible reason for the use of the plural on the part of God, and that is to manifest His humility. God addresses Himself to the angels and says to them, "Let us make man in our image." It is not that He invites their help, but as a matter of modesty and courtesy, God associates them with the creation of man. This teaches us that a great man should act humbly and consult with those lower than him. It is not unusual for God to refer to His heavenly court (angels) as "us," as we see in Isaiah 6:8, "And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, 'Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?'" Although God often acts without assistance, He makes His intentions known to His servants. Thus, we find "Shall I conceal from Abraham that which I am doing" (Genesis 18:17); "He made known His ways to Moses, His doings to the children of Israel" (Psalms 103:7); "For the Lord God will do nothing without revealing His counsel to His servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7).
With reference to the verse, "Come, let us go down, and there confound their language" (Genesis 11:7). Here, too, the confounding of the language is related in verse 9 to God alone, ". . . because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth." In this verse the Hebrew verb "did" appears in the singular form. Also, the descent is credited in verse 5 to the Lord alone, "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower." In this verse the Hebrew verb "came down" appears in the singular form. If a doctrine of plurality of persons is to be based on the grammatical form of words, the frequent interchanging of the singular and the plural should vitiate such an attempt as being without foundation or merit. We may safely conclude that the Bible refutes most emphatically every opinion, which deviates from the concept of an indivisible unity of God.
With a little research Zechariah would have been serving on the 8th week of the year as outlined in 1 Chronicles 24:10.
b'shem Y'shua
I believe you are correct. Thank you.
How did you determine that Zechariah served the eighth week of the Jewish year? I imagine this would be the religious calendar, not the secular calendar?
Regards
Regards
"The inference that "Let us make man in our image" (Genesis 1:26) refers to the plurality of God is refuted by the subsequent verse, which relates the creation of man to a singular God, "And God created man in His image" (Genesis 1:27)."
But why the words "Us" and "Our"?
**God addresses Himself to the angels and says to them, "Let us make man in our image."**
I think that's a stretch, the angels cannot create. There has to be something else going on there.
"If a doctrine of plurality of persons is to be based on the grammatical form of words, the frequent interchanging of the singular and the plural should vitiate such an attempt as being without foundation or merit."
No word in scripture is wasted. There has to be a reason for the Us and Our. "One God in three Persons" would allow the changes between plural and singular.
Thank you for these posts though. Hope you have a happy new year.
I tried to explain this to you before but you obviously didn't listen. What you define as "Judaism" of the 2nd Temple period are fringe beliefs found mostly in the "wisdom" literature, intertestamental writings and apocryphal writings which mainstream Judaism didn't find necessary to include in the Tanakh. I explained to you earlier that these beliefs were a minority in Judaism. Since you dismiss out of hand the "mainstream" Judaism of the time perhaps because it doesn't line up with or evolve into your psuedo mithraism mindset makes you appear to be anti-Jewish. Again, you want to define what Jews are. Thanx anyway, but that task is better left to the Jews.
Because I do not share your beliefs does not make me anti-Jewish.
You can't imagine how many times I've said the same thing to those who've called me anti-catholic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.