This sounds interesting

[EclipseEventSigns]

Combining lunar and solar cycles is problematic. It is one of the reason that you find such a large difference in the celebration of Easter and Passover. Which can be as much as several weeks apart. Over the centuries, we know that months have been added to lunar calendar cycles to correct solar seasons.

@EclipseEventSigns can you give a summary of how you dealt with the complexities of the lunar Hebrew calendar requirement? I'll be honest with you, there are so many uncertainties in the process that I've never even tried to reconcile it to the degree you've undertaken. I have to say that I'm skeptical when someone tries to actually name a "day of the week" relative to our current calendar. The "10" day correction that took place with the Julian Calendar "stumped" me. The US eventually corrected 11 days. This correction makes it impossible to reconcile the 7 day week.

Can you tell me how I'm wrong?

I've considered these facts for years when dealing with Hebrews that insist they actually know the actual calendar day the Sabbath should be worshipped on.

There is no evidence that the days of the week have ever been modified. That is, for example, Tuesday has always been Tuesday and never renamed to Friday. That means the Sabbath has always been on the day that is the Sabbath from the beginning of time. This cycle of 7 days (which is not tied to any environmental factor) has been consistent from the start.

Even though I'm confident this was the case since Creation, during the Exodus, God specifically stated that current month was to be the start of their year. At that point alone, that set the pattern of the particular 7 day cycle which has not been modified. And as I mentioned in the previous post the time cues within the narrative very clearly show the relationship between the Sabbaths mentioned and the set date of Passover (always Nisan 14).
[Exo 12:2 LSB] 2 "This month shall be the beginning of months for you; it is to be the first month of the year to you.

Adding one month (an intercalation) to the Jewish year was according to very specific rules for the calendar. Not just theirs but any calendar which is luni-solar. They used a 19 year cycle (the Metonic cycle) which added a month at the end of the year in a set pattern of every 2 or 3 years. This is actually what was corrupted in the modern method. Something that I have rediscovered and proven both mathematically and with historical evidence. Something which no Jewish or Christian scholars are aware of - that I know of.

The Julian and Gregorian calendars of the West have shifted around in regards to the particular date number within a month.

In regards to Easter and Passover that is a big can of worms. Early on, the Christian church distanced itself further and further from Jewish culture. There was ignorance about the Feasts of the Lord, about how their calendar worked and about cultural practices. The anti-jewish sentiment grew to blame the people as a whole for killing the Messiah. Some Christians knew that Passover should always be on Nisan 14 and that it was specifically tied to the full moon on that date which shifted to a different weekday every year. But that did not allow for the tradition of Good Friday which obviously should always be on a Friday (they were already ignorant that the crucifixion didn't happen on a Friday).

But the Jews themselves lost the accurate keeping of their calendar. After 70 AD, the Sanhedrin could no longer accept witnesses for the sighting of the crescent moon or the ripeness of the winter barley. They were kicked out of Jerusalem. And the temple had been destroyed so they could no longer perform their sacrifice rituals anyway. As the calendar could no longer be based on sighting, they had to make it a purely calculated calendar. And when this was introduced around 350 AD by Hillel II, this set the corruption in stone which has been to this modern day.

The church scholars of that time recognized that the Jews celebrated their Passover too early. They went so far as to decree that anyone who celebrated Passover along with the Jews should be excommunicated. But their method of determining Easter (called Passover by Rome) was in error as well. Instead of recognizing and restoring the proper method, they came up with such a convoluted algorithm to ensure that Christian Passover (Easter) could never be at the same time as the Jewish Passover.

And the modern church even after the supposed Reformation still accepts this situation to this day.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

The Syriac tradition is within the MT stream of texts. I don't believe you can rightfully appeal to the Peshitta as an alternate external means of confirmation. There is no reason to believe that the MT is more authoritative than the Hebrew source of the LXX.

I'm not sure where that information comes from. The Masoretic text was finalized at the end of the first millennium. The Peshitta Old Testament is much more ancient. There are no records of when it was translated but conjecture between second century BC and first century AD. The Aramaic Targums were in wide use throughout synogogues well before then. These all reflect a Hebrew text as ancient as if not older than the LXX.

 

[praise_yeshua]

There is no evidence that the days of the week have ever been modified. That is, for example, Tuesday has always been Tuesday and never renamed to Friday. That means the Sabbath has always been on the day that is the Sabbath from the beginning of time. This cycle of 7 days (which is not tied to any environmental factor) has been consistent from the start.

I don't know of a single anchor that exists whereby you can possibly determine this. We know there have historically been efforts to correct past mistakes.

Even though I'm confident this was the case since Creation, during the Exodus, God specifically stated that current month was to be the start of their year. At that point alone, that set the pattern of the particular 7 day cycle which has not been modified. And as I mentioned in the previous post the time cues within the narrative very clearly show the relationship between the Sabbaths mentioned and the set date of Passover (always Nisan 14).
[Exo 12:2 LSB] 2 "This month shall be the beginning of months for you; it is to be the first month of the year to you.

I don't see how this verse anchors your position. Isn't this actually a correction that had to take place? I don't know how you comments above are reconciled to this correction?

Adding one month (an intercalation) to the Jewish year was according to very specific rules for the calendar. Not just theirs but any calendar which is luni-solar. They used a 19 year cycle (the Metonic cycle) which added a month at the end of the year in a set pattern of every 2 or 3 years. This is actually what was corrupted in the modern method. Something that I have rediscovered and proven both mathematically and with historical evidence. Something which no Jewish or Christian scholars are aware of - that I know of.

Yet this just happened to maintain an accurate 7 day cycle? It seems like a "stretch" to make such a claim.

The Julian and Gregorian calendars of the West have shifted around in regards to the particular date number within a month.

I agree.

In regards to Easter and Passover that is a big can of worms. Early on, the Christian church distanced itself further and further from Jewish culture. There was ignorance about the Feasts of the Lord, about how their calendar worked and about cultural practices. The anti-jewish sentiment grew to blame the people as a whole for killing the Messiah. Some Christians knew that Passover should always be on Nisan 14 and that it was specifically tied to the full moon on that date which shifted to a different weekday every year. But that did not allow for the tradition of Good Friday which obviously should always be on a Friday (they were already ignorant that the crucifixion didn't happen on a Friday).

I can agree with the "Friday" claims. However, it is the modern adjustments that have caused some of the discrepancy. To me, this creates issues with such a specific reference to a day of the week. Especially working backwards from our current date.

But the Jews themselves lost the accurate keeping of their calendar. After 70 AD, the Sanhedrin could no longer accept witnesses for the sighting of the crescent moon or the ripeness of the winter barley. They were kicked out of Jerusalem. And the temple had been destroyed so they could no longer perform their sacrifice rituals anyway. As the calendar could no longer be based on sighting, they had to make it a purely calculated calendar. And when this was introduced around 350 AD by Hillel II, this set the corruption in stone which has been to this modern day.

I'm not certain this alone "set the corruption in stone".

The church scholars of that time recognized that the Jews celebrated their Passover too early. They went so far as to decree that anyone who celebrated Passover along with the Jews should be excommunicated. But their method of determining Easter (called Passover by Rome) was in error as well. Instead of recognizing and restoring the proper method, they came up with such a convoluted algorithm to ensure that Christian Passover (Easter) could never be at the same time as the Jewish Passover.

And the modern church even after the supposed Reformation still accepts this situation to this day.

So what is the actual date and day of the week today?

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'm not sure where that information comes from. The Masoretic text was finalized at the end of the first millennium. The Peshitta Old Testament is much more ancient. There are no records of when it was translated but conjecture between second century BC and first century AD. The Aramaic Targums were in wide use throughout synogogues well before then. These all reflect a Hebrew text as ancient as if not older than the LXX.

I've extensive studied the subject. The MT was reconstructed and emended. The earliest witness is the 9th century. The Peshitta is from the 2nd to 3rd century.

Why did the Hebrew authors of the NT write in Greek and not Aramaic? Why does the LXX even exist if Aramaic was the language of choice among national Israel?

The very choices themselves made during the life of the apostles prove you're overstating the very limited usage of Aramaic texts of the OT.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I can see that my comments are being seen through your particular filter. You are assuming things which I never said.
Your assumption remains that there have been weekdays which have been shifted around. You refer to "past mistakes". What mistakes are you referring to?

Yet this just happened to maintain an accurate 7 day cycle? It seems like a "stretch" to make such a claim.

Intercalations have absolutely nothing to do with 7 day cycle. There is nothing "just happened" about it. It's not a "stretch" at all. It's the mathematical algorithm. It's just the way the calendar is constructed. It's the particular method of keeping the seasons (solar year) in sync with the lunar cycle. Anyone who has studied the luni-solar calendars would appreciate this. There is no shifting of weekdays with intercalations.

The rest of your responses assume a mindset of shifting weekdays, which I have never found any evidence for. And as for the actual date and day of the week, you have missed the point entirely my explanations if you think I was implying that there is something somehow different.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

I've extensive studied the subject. The MT was reconstructed and emended. The earliest witness is the 9th century. The Peshitta is from the 2nd to 3rd century.

There is a difference when talking about the Old Testament Peshitta vs the New Testament Peshitta. They did not come into existence at the same time.

The Masoretic was not reconstructed. Vowel points to preserve pronounciation and notes for interpretation were added. The Masoretic reflects how the text had been for centuries.

Why does the LXX even exist if Aramaic was the language of choice among national Israel?

You do know the origin of the LXX and when it was translated right? I hope so, because I sure don't want to have to provide evidence of something so well attested to.

The very choices themselves made during the life of the apostles prove you're overstating the very limited usage of Aramaic texts of the OT.

Again, not sure what choices you are referring to. It is well attested to that Aramaic Targums were used in the synagogues not just in the Judean homeland but throughout the diaspora. That and the Hebrew text were in use. The very fact that the Talmuds, both the Jerusalem and Babylonian were written in Aramaic proves that the lingua franca of the Jews was Aramaic, not Greek. And the evidence given within the works of Josephus which states that Greek was actively discouraged by the jewish religious leaders.

Here's a helpful diagram from my upcoming presentation. It illustrates that the New Testament in Greek went west through the Roman Empire where the lingua franca was Greek. At the same time the New Testament in Aramaic went east through Mesopotamia, Parthia, India and onwards where the lingua franca was Aramaic at that point.

 

[Sabertooth]

I'm an old earth theistic evolutionist.

Many consider that unsaved.

Most OEC theology that I have seen has had a "plot hole" with regards to Original Sin.

 

[Diserner]

Most OEC theology that I have seen has had a "plot hole" with regards to Original Sin.

Yes, it can seem difficult to harmonize.

But definitely not impossible!

I fully accept Original Sin!

 

[Diserner]

.

Good info and cool map!

 

[Olde Tymer]

.
Maybe it's time for an intermission with some comic relief?


Old Dan Tucker was a fine old man
He washed his face in a frying pan
He combed his hair with a wagon wheel
And died of a toothache in his heel

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=

Here come old flat top
He roller coaster
He got early warning
He got muddy water
He one Mojo filter
He say one and one and one is three
Got to be good looking
'Cause he's so hard to see

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

A spinster lady was asked why she never married. Well; she said: I've got a
hound that lays around the house all day, a stove that smokes, and a bird
that cusses. What do I need a man for?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Carry on dudes,
And be excellent to each other!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Burma Shave
_

 

[civic]

.
Maybe it's time for an intermission with some comic relief?


Old Dan Tucker was a fine old man
He washed his face in a frying pan
He combed his hair with a wagon wheel
And died of a toothache in his heel

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=

Here come old flat top
He roller coaster
He got early warning
He got muddy water
He one Mojo filter
He say one and one and one is three
Got to be good looking
'Cause he's so hard to see

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

A spinster lady was asked why she never married. Well; she said: I've got a
hound that lays around the house all day, a stove that smokes, and a bird
that cusses. What do I need a man for?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Carry on dudes,
And be excellent to each other!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Burma Shave
_

Thanks for lightening things up a bit. Sometimes we get to serious. People that know me like the fact I get them to laugh all of the time. Humor is good for the soul.

 

[Administrator]

.
Maybe it's time for an intermission with some comic relief?


Old Dan Tucker was a fine old man
He washed his face in a frying pan
He combed his hair with a wagon wheel
And died of a toothache in his heel

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=

Here come old flat top
He roller coaster
He got early warning
He got muddy water
He one Mojo filter
He say one and one and one is three
Got to be good looking
'Cause he's so hard to see

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

A spinster lady was asked why she never married. Well; she said: I've got a
hound that lays around the house all day, a stove that smokes, and a bird
that cusses. What do I need a man for?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Carry on dudes,
And be excellent to each other!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Burma Shave
_

This place is getting better and better. Now we have stand up comedians.

 

[Exeter]

I've considered these facts for years when dealing with Hebrews that insist they actually know the actual calendar day the Sabbath should be worshipped on.

The messed up calendar:

In September 1752, eleven days were removed from the calendar. This was because the earlier version of the calendar, the Roman Julian Calendar, was 11 days longer than the Gregorian Calendar. The New Year was also moved from March 25 to Jan 1st at this time. The removal of the 11 days caused riots in villages because people thought the government was trying to cheat them out of 11 days of their lives. [BingChat]

 

[Frank Russell]

I was emphasizing why the "gap" [Genesis 1:1-2] could not support life (as we currently know it);
no light (yet), no air (yet) & no dry land (yet).

I am reminded of the angel of the waters, and the morning stars of the light.

Every aspect of creation had angels.

Myths of old civilizations during the period of darkness, may have come from angels who were there, but got too infected with sin to continue to be obedient.

Since angels and humans are not made the same way, it's not comparable.

 

[Sabertooth]

Myths of old civilizations during the period of darkness, may have come from angels who were there, but got too infected with sin to continue to be obedient.

Since angels and humans are not made the same way, it's not comparable.

There is wiggle room for angels, but not for terrestrial humans or any other creatures having lungs & eyeballs.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The messed up calendar:

In September 1752, eleven days were removed from the calendar. This was because the earlier version of the calendar, the Roman Julian Calendar, was 11 days longer than the Gregorian Calendar. The New Year was also moved from March 25 to Jan 1st at this time. The removal of the 11 days caused riots in villages because people thought the government was trying to cheat them out of 11 days of their lives. [BingChat]

In my opinion, just one of many events that make such determinations impossible.

 

[praise_yeshua]

There is a difference when talking about the Old Testament Peshitta vs the New Testament Peshitta. They did not come into existence at the same time.

I never said differently. You're trying to separate them when we only have witnesses from the 2nd or 3rd century. This is a common mistake made by those who first start to "dabble" in the historical canon. What I said was exacting. You're point to 2nd/3rd century manuscripts.

The Masoretic was not reconstructed. Vowel points to preserve pronounciation and notes for interpretation were added. The Masoretic reflects how the text had been for centuries.

Then point to an intact manuscript showing that preservation. You can't. I know you can't. It is an empty claim. The MT was reconstructed from multiple sources. I never appealed to vowel accents. Quote me. You're assume too many things here. I know the subject well. Better than most.

The DSS are a variant collection of various variant texts that do not 100 hundred percent agree with any extant collection such as the MT. Do you even know there were competing texts among the Masoretes? Competing books among the Hebrews? Do you know that DSS contain books that are not in the MT canon? Right? How does that affect your claim concerning the MT?

You do know the origin of the LXX and when it was translated right? I hope so, because I sure don't want to have to provide evidence of something so well attested to.

You are purposely avoiding my questions. Aramaic was NOT the common language of dispersed Jews. Greek was. Jesus read from a Greek scroll of Isaiah as recorded in the Gospels. The NT was written in Greek for JEWISH PEOPLE to discern and accept the message of Jesus Christ. Jews translated the OT into Greek for THEIR PEOPLE..... The LXX is what caused the explosion of the Gospel throughout the Gentile world. Not the MT. Greek speaking people didn't have to learn Temple era Hebrew to KNOW the Scriptures.

I suppose you prefer the Wycliffe Bible???? Right? No need to update anything right? These are contrasting questions. Not accusations. State clearly what you believe.

Again, not sure what choices you are referring to. It is well attested to that Aramaic Targums were used in the synagogues not just in the Judean homeland but throughout the diaspora. That and the Hebrew text were in use. The very fact that the Talmuds, both the Jerusalem and Babylonian were written in Aramaic proves that the lingua franca of the Jews was Aramaic, not Greek.

Nope. Not even close. The Targum and Talmud were held closely by Rabbis. Extant witnesses varying between editions. So don't treat them all the same here. Be exacting. Such was not for the common "folk" of the era. The common people had access to the LXX and they used it. We know because the vast majority of NT quotes of the OT are from the LXX witness. You can't just simple believe everything you read about the subject. I suggest you look for actual evidence. I have. I know the extant witnesses. I don't care what a commentary says about something. I can make choices from the actual evidence.

And the evidence given within the works of Josephus which states that Greek was actively discouraged by the jewish religious leaders.

Quote it. Go find it. Quote it. Don't listen to commentators. You're reading after men. Men don't mind lying.

Emanuel Tov has rightfully recognized that the Jews that rejected Jesus Christ hated the LXX because of how it feed the Greek explosion of Christianity in the early church. Do you know Emanuel Tov? He is a Jew. An excellent critic. He has no agenda. At least none that I can find. A mean removed from the requirements of religion from either side.

I'll make another suggestion. Don't "latch on" to the first reference you find that agrees with you. There is a vast amount of information on this subject and much of it is wrong. I call these people "Hebrew Onlyists". They have a goal. Their goal is usually discredit Jesus Christ as Messiah. It is the goal of Satan.

Tell me who you're reference for information. Establish their reputation or provide the quotes themselves.

Here's a helpful diagram from my upcoming presentation. It illustrates that the New Testament in Greek went west through the Roman Empire where the lingua franca was Greek. At the same time the New Testament in Aramaic went east through Mesopotamia, Parthia, India and onwards where the lingua franca was Aramaic at that point.
View attachment 128

Wow. A map someone created. Don't expect me to take this map as evidence of anything.

How about we look to the Scriptures? Want to "come along" for the ride?

Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Act 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Notice the place. "Synagogue". Notice the searching "daily" through the Scriptures. Notice WHO is doing the searching......

There is a reason I've waited 30 plus years to publish much of anything. I've never felt as if I really knew the subjects well enough. I was searching. Adding the evidence to my knowledge. Making it my own instead of relying solely upon the work of others. All the while, debating, arguing, seeking the truth. I'm not bragging. Don't believe me. Find it for yourself. Just never think you can't be corrected. We all can. You haven't properly considered the alternatives. Don't publish unless you expect to correct your mistakes later. Few do. Once they claim something, they almost always stop learning.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

This is a common mistake made by those who first start to "dabble" in the historical canon. What I said was exacting. You're point to 2nd/3rd century manuscripts.

You're assume too many things here. I know the subject well. Better than most.

You are purposely avoiding my questions. Aramaic was NOT the common language of dispersed Jews. Greek was.

I suppose you prefer the Wycliffe Bible???? Right? No need to update anything right?

You can't just simple believe everything you read about the subject. I suggest you look for actual evidence... I don't care what a commentary says about something. I can make choices from the actual evidence.

Don't listen to commentators. You're reading after men. Men don't mind lying.

I'll make another suggestion. Don't "latch on" to the first reference you find that agrees with you. There is a vast amount of information on this subject and much of it is wrong. I call these people "Hebrew Onlyists". They have a goal. Their goal is usually discredit Jesus Christ as Messiah. It is the goal of Satan.

Tell me who you're reference for information. Establish their reputation or provide the quotes themselves.

Wow. A map someone created. Don't expect me to take this map as evidence of anything.

. Find it for yourself. Just never think you can't be corrected. We all can. You haven't properly considered the alternatives. Don't publish unless you expect to correct your mistakes later. Few do. Once they claim something, they almost always stop learning.

This discussion has taken a bad turn which is unfortunate. This type of attitude displayed is where I get off and won't continue with. I am not "dabbling" with anything. I'm not assuming, avoiding, preferring anything. Not just taking any research at face value. Not "latching on" to anything.

Everything I stated is based on my own research. Yes, research from reading many different sources and evaluating them - as any proper reseacher would do. Of course everyone can be corrected. And yes I've considered many alternatives. But I have come to the true understanding of a great many things. All of which have sources and evidence. Just because you don't see them or appreciate them or have your own biases doesn't mean it's not so.

As I stated, if you want to find out more, check out my full presentations for every single source and evidence that backs up my claims. I can't possibly include everything in a forum chat.

But I will not continue in any discussion with your type of attitude and condescending and disrespectful words.

 

[praise_yeshua]

This discussion has taken a bad turn which is unfortunate. This type of attitude displayed is where I get off and won't continue with. I am not "dabbling" with anything. I'm not assuming, avoiding, preferring anything. Not just taking any research at face value. Not "latching on" to anything.

What have you quoted as evidence?

Everything I stated is based on my own research. Yes, research from reading many different sources and evaluating them - as any proper reseacher would do. Of course everyone can be corrected. And yes I've considered many alternatives. But I have come to the true understanding of a great many things. All of which have sources and evidence. Just because you don't see them or appreciate them or have your own biases doesn't mean it's not so.

You haven't said one thing I haven't dealt with many many times. I know what you're going to say before you say it. I know because I have heard it before. I have it read it from the writings of others.

Have I said anything you've never heard before in our short conversation? Have I shared information that is new to you?

As I stated, if you want to find out more, check out my full presentations for every single source and evidence that backs up my claims. I can't possibly include everything in a forum chat.

But I will not continue in any discussion with your type of attitude and condescending and disrespectful words.

I see claims. I don't see any compelling evidence.

I didn't have the intent of insulting you. I have been aggressive in my responses but you have too. That is what debates are about. Iron is hard against iron brother.

Tell you what. Just deal with my reference to Acts 17 and show me where I'm wrong. That alone is worthy of response to your claims. That is internal evidence that we both considered "inspired" and without question.

 

[EclipseEventSigns]

What have you quoted as evidence?



You haven't said one thing I haven't dealt with many many times. I know what you're going to say before you say it. I know because I have heard it before. I have it read it from the writings of others.

Have I said anything you've never heard before in our short conversation? Have I shared information that is new to you?




I see claims. I don't see any compelling evidence.

I didn't have the intent of insulting you. I have been aggressive in my responses but you have too. That is what debates are about. Iron is hard against iron brother.

Tell you what. Just deal with my reference to Acts 17 and show me where I'm wrong. That alone is worthy of response to your claims. That is internal evidence that we both considered "inspired" and without question.

The ONLY reason I engaged with you yesterday is that after an initial comment where you displayed this present type of attitude, you actually responded without ad hominems and disrespect but actually presented your views in a discussion. The way this forums rules state it should be conducted.
I have heard everything you responded with before. Researched it all. And I'm quite confident you have not heard my complete take on things before - because no one has come to the conclusions that I have. Believe me, I have searched. There are no other scholars because all of them either are still tied to false church tradition or if they accept alternate views, they have a very faulty view of Scripture.
This is not the way I would like to be treated in discussions and I choose to remove myself - unless there is evidence of a change in attitude.