Good Friday and 3:00 p.m.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Violater1
Regardless if you are Christian or not, there are those that believe that Our Savior, The Lord Jesus Christ, Died for us at 3:00 pm. So before you post something good, bad or indifferent, I want to say to all of you, Peace be with you.
Of all of my post and threads that you may have read of mine, I would like for you to remember just four words of mine, Peace be with you.
If you find hatred, love or indifference with what I say, I still say, Peace be with you.


AMEN!!!

It was 3p, but it was actually Thursday not Friday.


Yeah, but most christians are not taught the things they should know about the correct times. Hebrew days begin at dusk, but most don't know this.




posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 07:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Violater1
Regardless if you are Christian or not, there are those that believe that Our Savior, The Lord Jesus Christ, Died for us at 3:00 pm. So before you post something good, bad or indifferent, I want to say to all of you, Peace be with you.
Of all of my post and threads that you may have read of mine, I would like for you to remember just four words of mine, Peace be with you.
If you find hatred, love or indifference with what I say, I still say, Peace be with you.


AMEN!!!

It was 3p, but it was actually Thursday not Friday.


Yeah, but most christians are not taught the things they should know about the correct times. Hebrew days begin at dusk, but most don't know this.


Yeah, it comes from Catholicism. And it was Thursday because the Bible says "the SabbathS" plural. Friday was Passover which was an 'appointed feast/Sabbath", and Saturday was the regular weekly Sabbath. It was like a 2-day holiday weekend for them like when we have a holiday on Monday we get a 3 day weekend.

edit on 8-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Either I'm missing something or you made a mistake. I have 8 fingers, and no life's savings. It's very late and I'm working on 6 hours of sleep in the last 2 days.

What's the mystical application here? Throw me a bone please?

Did you meet my Jesus this weekend who turned this life completely upside down or not friend?



Does that mean you believe in the wrong Jesus? Because if your mind was on the right track I don't know how you would be in that position.

The bone I threw to you was my words.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical

Hey Not Your Typ

You wrote QUOTE

"... it was Thursday because the Bible says "the SabbathS" - plural. Friday was Passover which was an 'appointed feast/Sabbath", and Saturday was the regular weekly Sabbath.

It was like a 2-day holiday weekend for them like when we have a holiday on Monday we get a 3 day weekend. "

UNQUOTE

Not so fast.

Even IF a Pesach ('passover') fell on what we in the West call a Tuesday (from 'Tiewes' the Nordic god of war + Daeg / Tag ='day') it would still be called a Sabbath reckoned 'from sunset to sunset' (Monday sunset to Tuesday sunset).

If a Sabbath fell on what we in the west call a Tuesday, then what we call Monday ('day of the Moon') would have been the 'Day of Preparation' counting from sunset Sunday night to sunset Monday night.

Modern English-speaking persons who consider themselves to be 'Christians' (whatever that means, exactly) are prone to think that Sabbaths (from Shabbat = meaning the '7th' or 'leave of absence', or 'abandonment' (e.g. of work) hence 'llama sabbachtani') are always on what we in the West call a Saturday (from the Roman god 'Saturn' the god of Time + Daeg / tag ('day') - but this is NOT the case.

Twelve average Lunar months are equal to 354.3670 days (while the solar year is 265.2425 days)

It was the LUNAR calednar that came into prominence especially after the time of the Maccabee Hashmoneans (c. 170 BCE) in Judah - which caused a secessionist reaction by the Dead Sea Scroll ( Solar-Henochite based) Covenanter Zadokite Successionsit-Priests at the 'monastery at Seccacah-Damsacus' = modern day Qumran (who led by the Teacher of Righteousness - possibly a high priest himself at one time - separated from the other Macabbean Hashmonean priests c. 170 BCE known as the 'Camp of Jerusalem which is the head of all the Camps) and these are always tricky since we in the west have adopted the Gregorian 365.2425 solar days calendar 9at least since c. 1752) as the standard (meaning every 4 years we in the west add one full day (leap year) and every 500 years, we have to ADD a full day - that .0025 adds up over time !

Since the Roman Praefectus of Judaea seems to have been Pontius Pilatus at the time (recalled, Summer 37 AD, back to Rome following the political fall of his mentor, Sejanus) here are the possible dates in the Western Calendar (rough modern day Western Gregorian equivalents) -

the term CE = 'common era' was formerly expressed by Christians as 'A.D.' (anno domini)

Jewish Year # 3789 = CE 29 = Full moon (14 Nisan) = Apr 14 Saturday (Day of Preparation 13 April, Friday)

3790 = CE 30 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Apr 3 Wednesday (Day of Preparation 2 April, Tuesday)
3791 = CE 31 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Mar 24 Monday (Day of Preparation 23 March, Sunday
3792 = CE 32 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Apr 12 Monday (Day of Preparation 11 April, Sunday)
3793 = CE 33 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = April 1st Friday (Day of Preparation 31 March Thursday)
3794 = CE 34 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Mar 20 Monday (Day of Preparation 19 March Sunday)
3795 = CE 35 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Apr 9 Monday (Day of Preparation 8 April, Sunday)
3796 = CE 36 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Mar 28 Friday (Day of Preparation 27 March Thursday)
3797 = CE 37 = Full moon Pesach (14 Nisan) = Mar 18 Wednesday (Day of Preparation 17 March, Tuesday)


Even though April 3rd CE 30 was a Wednesday, it was still (technically speaking) a SABBATH (being a festal Sabbath day); ditto for Monday March 24, CE 31, or Monday April 12 CE 32 or Monday March 20 CE 34, or Monday April 9th CE 35, all Sabbaths. So it does NOT have to have taken place on a FRIDAY necessarily - altough 36 CE looks to be a very likely candidate - and modern scholarship has in fact tended towards AD/CE 36 being the most likely date for the execution for armed sedition against Rome of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef (the Galilean Nazir) - which date is still being hotly debated (of course !) - since it tallies best with the purported career of Saul of Tarsus who claimed to have'breathed murder' against the Nazorean Christians for at least three years (CE 36 - CE 39) before having his 'lightning vision 'on the road to Damasq' (c. 39 CE) and then having spent 14 years recuperating/studying before his preaching 'to the elect of Yisro'el scattered among the goyim' beginning in c. 53 CE up until the time of the brutal antiZionist Neronian persecution of 64-65 CE.

The issue here is that the 4th gospel places the execution (for armed sedition against the state) of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef on the DAY OF PREPARATION while the lambs were being slain...(i.e. his execution was on a Thurs, if it was CE 36), whereas the Synoptic gospels ('according to Matthew', 'according to Mark' 'according to Luke', whoever they were) place the execution on the actual Passover.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 



Not so fast.


If you're telling me "not so fast", that means you need to catch up, you're lagging behind.

I said "THURSDAY", I didn't say "Tuesday".

So catch up, I don't have time to slow down there are souls at stake here.


Modern English-speaking persons who consider themselves to be 'Christians' (whatever that means, exactly) are prone to think that Sabbaths (from Shabbat = meaning the '7th' or 'leave of absence', or 'abandonment' (e.g. of work) hence 'llama sabbachtani') are always on what we in the West call a Saturday (from the Roman god 'Saturn' the god of Time + Daeg / tag ('day') - but this is NOT the case.


I know how the Hebrews reckoned days man, I know their day begins at sundown. A Friday Passover Sabbath is the only way Christ could have spent 3 days and 3 nights in a tomb according to Jewish reckoning and have risen on the first day of the week.

How's that for a dummy Christian?

edit on 8-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by greyer

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Either I'm missing something or you made a mistake. I have 8 fingers, and no life's savings. It's very late and I'm working on 6 hours of sleep in the last 2 days.

What's the mystical application here? Throw me a bone please?

Did you meet my Jesus this weekend who turned this life completely upside down or not friend?



Does that mean you believe in the wrong Jesus? Because if your mind was on the right track I don't know how you would be in that position.

The bone I threw to you was my words.


When people meet the right Jesus He fundamentally transforms their life and turns it completely upside down. people who meet the fake one, go right back to licking up their vomit.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sigismundus

The issue here is that the 4th gospel places the execution (for armed sedition against the state) of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef on the DAY OF PREPARATION while the lambs were being slain...(i.e. his execution was on a Thurs, if it was CE 36), whereas the Synoptic gospels ('according to Matthew', 'according to Mark' 'according to Luke', whoever they were) place the execution on the actual Passover.


That has always been a very narrow view. In fact, there are a number of reasons why there would have been two Passover meals (not the least of which were weather and the growing population of Israel). In the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, it's well-established that Jesus was crucified on the day after the Passover lambs are slaughtered, meaning his supper with the Twelve was very much a legitimate Passover meal. In John, the only thing that contradicts this is the fact that the Jews would not enter the palace because they wanted to eat the Passover - the implication being that, for whatever reason, they were observing a second Passover that year. That meant that, not only was Jesus able to observe the Passover, but he was also able to become the perfect Passover lamb by being sacrificed on its second observance.

As I said above, weather could have been to blame. The observance of Passover was based on at least two witnesses testifying to a certain phase of the moon. The decision was then made by the Sanhedrin that the new year would begin, and, from that, the Passover was set. Finally, the news was spread by lighting fires on hills to announce the start of the year to outlying populations. If the weather was bad, this could delay the Passover by a day.

Also, the population of Israel was growing. By the time AD 30 rolled around, because so many lambs had to be slaughtered, it was quite possible that the Passover meal was spread over two days.

And there may also have been just a general division between home Passover observance and its observance in the Temple, with the Jews of the Temple observing a day later.

Any number of reasons would have caused a second observance of the Passover. Given this, it would seem to be the true mark of an eye-witness that this double observance is noted in the gospels, as later writers would likely miss such a detail. And it's certainly a show of our arrogance that we, 2000 years later, would declare historical works inauthentic simply because they contain details we aren't aware of.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical

Hey NOT

I didn't say it was a TUESDAY - I said 'even IF it were a Tuesday' (i.e. any day but a Friday night to Saturday night ) then...it would still be a SABBATH....

Go read my post again...then...YOU catch up !!!!!



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical

Hey again NOT -

More catching up for you to do, I'm afraid - you're quickly lagging behind !!

'Just as Jonah was THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS in the BELLY OF THE FISH so shall the Bar Enasha ('son of man' from Dan 7:13-14) be in the 'belly' of She'ol....

So...even IF the 'bar enasha' was crucified to death (arguable after only 6 hours of hanging naked and spreadeagled / castrated when the typical length of time it takes terran human adult males to die on a Roman CRUX would be 90 hours) on a Friday afternoon and buried before sundown (i.e. a rush job) riddle me this

FRIDAY NIGHT TO SATURDAY NIGHT = 1 day/night
SATURDAY NIGHT TO SUNDAY NIGHT = 1 day/night
SUNDAY NIGHT TO MONDAY NIGHT = 1 day/night

--- Total : THREE days and THREE Nights = i.e. in the BELLY OF SHE'OL would place the 'exaltation' (i.e. of a dead Zionist armed Juhadist Martyr for the Daviddic Cause in 1st century Judaea) to the 'right hand of the Power of El' on a 'Tuesday morning', a far cry from a Sunday BEFORE the sun rose ('at dawn, the women came to the tomb...') !!!

I suspect the 3 days and 3 nights is a SYMBOLIC MARTYROLOGICAL MIDRASH on the phrase 'a time, two times and half a time' of Heb. Daniel 12:7 (i.e. 1260 days of prophecy - i.e. a year, two years and half a year) alla the reference in Apocalypse of Yohanon the Levite (aka the Book of Revelation) see:

Rev chapter 11

And I looked, & behold, I saw: Two Olive Trees
And lo, they were in front of the Throne of EL in heaven
And walking between two Golden Arms of the Menorah :
And behold, they both were in deep-mourning
And clothed head to foot in Saqcloth
And wearing Ashes upon their Heads.

And I turned to one of the Watchers near me, and spoke to him
Saying, Who are these Two Olive Trees
Even they who are walking between the Two Arms of the Menorah
Who are walking to and fro in Mourning
And dressed from head to foot in Saqcloth
And wearing Ashes upon their heads?

And he spoke saying, These Two Olive Trees are My Two Slain Martyrs:
And lo, they are both now worthy to walk between the Lamps of the Menorah
And serve as Priests before the Face[s] of his Altar for ever :
For behold, it was they who preached the testimony unto death
And did not value their life to speak the Word of the Eternal Gospel
Both to the House of Yisro’el & to the Exiles scattered abroad.

For behold, the Combined Days & Nights of their Words
And the combined Time of their Testimony
Had lasted for a total of even 1,260 Days :
And during their Times, they held the Power to shut the Windows of Heaven :
And lo, they also had Power to turn the Fresh Rivers & Fountains to Blood
And to smite those occupying the Land with any Plague they chose to inflict :

And if during the 1260 Days of their Testimony on earth,
If any son of man should attack them
Lo, Fire would issue forth from their mouths to devour them.
And if any Weapon was used against them at all
The same would have been turned back on the attackers
In order to destroy them in the attempt thereof.

And behold, when the 1260 Days of their Testimony was ended
Behold, the Abba Doq’on rose up from the Smoky Abyss
In order to wage un-holy war against them :
And lo, both of them suffered a cruel Death
Even the horrible suffering of the holy Martyrs
Even at the Hands of him who rose from the botom of the Pit.

And lo, their Corpses lay unburied
Even in the midst of the open Streets of the Holy City
Yea, exposed without their being placed in Graves :
And lo, they lay there exposed to the open air
Even for a set Period of times
Even Three & One Half Days & Nights .

And during this time, Goyim of every Race,
Even of every Kindred and Tongue looked on,
And refused them any Burial in the ground [of their ancestors] :
And when the Occupiers of the Land [of Yisro’el] saw them dead,
Behold, they began to rejoice with each other
And to celebrate their Victory over them:
Then lo, they all began offering each other gifts & presents.

For lo, the Two Martyrs had pronounced oracles of evil against them
Even during the period of 1260 Days
Which constituted the times of their Combined Preaching :
And behold, after Three & One-Half Days was fulfilled
Behold, the Breath of Life from EL returned to them
And re-entered the Corpses of the Two Martyrs who were slain.

And lo, they both stood up alive breathing once more
And great Terror fell upon all the Watchers
And a mighty shaking seized all those who looked thereon :
And those looking on heard a Qol from Heaven peal :
And it spake saying : Ascend now, My Righteous Ones,
Even to your assigned places in Heaven !

And lo, the Two Martyrs began to ascend
Even high up into the Firmament of Heaven
And were surrounded by a Luminous Cloud
Even that of the Bright Glory of the Most High
While their Enemies watched on from below
Every one of them trembling in great Fear.


Clear as Mud?



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


Which one is it? First I had to hold on, now I have to catch up. Weird, I think you're lost and have no idea if you're following or leading.

(according to Jewish reckoning any part of a day is considered 1 day)

Thursday hung, died, and placed in the tomb before dusk = 1 day
Thursday from dusk to Friday dawn = 1 night (Feast of Passover)
Friday dawn till Friday dusk = 1 day
Friday dusk till Saturday dawn = 1 night (Weekly Sabbath)
Saturday dawn till Saturday dusk = 1 day
Saturday dusk till Sunday dawn = 1 night

Days according to Jewish reckoning = 3
Nights according to Jewish reckoning = 3

You have really big words, and such intellectual speech but thank God He hid these things from the wise and revealed them unto babes.


I need my diaper changed now please, I just poopied myself.



I suspect the 3 days and 3 nights is a SYMBOLIC MARTYROLOGICAL MIDRASH on the phrase 'a time, two times and half a time' of Heb. Daniel 12:7


Nope, He spent 3 days and 3 nights in the grave, just like He said He would.

edit on 8-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical

Hey NOT -

I was telling you to 'HOLD ON' because you were about to go over a cliff...once again !!

'Three Days AND Three NIGHTS' =

Yet the tradition holds burial 'in the belly of Sheol' from Friday sundown before the Sabbath to early before Dawn Sunday -

Does this sound like THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS to you? Can't you even COUNT THREE WHOLE DAYS AND NIGHTS ?

Let's break it down for you:

Friday Night to Saturday Night (one full 'day & night') ...then Saturday Night to Sunday Morning before daybreak - (one full night only)

Adding these together, I only count 1 day and 2 nights during this time : how on earth can you get THREE DAYS AND NIGHTS out of this timeframe?

Look very very carefully at the mangled Greek NT texts :

e.g. 'so also shall the Bar Enasha ('son of man') spend THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF SHE'OL' =

Yet th is same gospel-tradition claims that R. Yehoshua was placed into a rock-tomb PRIOR to the Saturday morning Sabbath (begins 6pm Friday nght) yet was found to be missing from his crypt 'before dawn' i.e. on Sunday ('the first day of the week')?

The tradition does not say 'one and a half days and nights...' it states clearly 'THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS in the BELLY OF SHE'OL'

Say for the sake of argument, the executed criminal was taken down c. 5pm on 'Friday' just as the Pesach was more or less starting and before the sun set. Then this executed Daviddic Pretender seditionist was found to be missing from his 'garden tomb' by say 6am on Sunday morning (by 'the women', although females were considered to be 'non-credible witnesses' according to Jewish Law of the time...) - that would ONLY be c. 36-37 hours.

The last time I checked, a FULL DAY and NIGHT comprised 24 hours. Therefore TWO Full Days and Two Full Nights would be 48 Hours. And Three FULL Days and Three FULL Nights would be 72 Hours.

So 36 hours out of 72 hours is only 1/2 the time you stated, viz. 1.5 days and nights.

Even if one posits the crucifixion to have taken place (as the 4th gospel suggests) on the Day of Preparation and NOT on the Pesach itself (which is what the Synoptic gospels claim !) - and by placing the date a full day early, the writer of the 4th canonical Greek gospel (whoever he was) was able to make the martyrdom co-incide with the slaughter of the paschal lambs in the temple at Jerusalem e.g. on a Thursday night - with the actual Pesach Festal Sabbath falling on a Friday night at sundown, and and a normal Sabbath falling on a Saturday night at sundown, you still are a FULL day short - for - think about it - by the time the 'women come to the tomb' before sunrise on Sunday ('after the sabbath was completed') only TWO days & Nights had passed....not THREE..

The tradition does NOT say (e.g. 'three partial days and two full nights') but THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS -

Again, we are dealing with symbolic Midrash not literal 'historically verifiable' language here in the gospel material - with the writers being heavilly guided by the Hebrew scriptures in their telling and shaping of the narrative in order for it to confirm with certain Apocalyptic and Messianic 'prophecies' which are themselves written in symbolic poetry, not literal prose.

To literalise this event (or 'these events' if you want to take them all separately) and try to attempt to find any 'real literal history' in the details of the socalled Passion narratives, you are missing a great deal of the theological and didactic import of the gospel writers who were primarily 'preachers of the Word' - as the author of the 3rd canonical gospel ('according to Luke' whoever he was) claimed - and they were certainly NOT interested in writing sober prose at all - read what the 4th canonical Greek gospel writer (whoever he was) states : 'Now these things were written down so that you might believe that ho Iesous is the Christos, and by believing you might have Life in his Name' - this kind of admission is not exactly the words of a 'modern historian' who is supposed to deal with 'hard facts'. The gospel writers only want their hearers or readers 'to believe that ho Iesous is the Christos' - that is all.

Even the 2nd Greek canonical gospel ('according to Mark' whoever he was) despite its being first to be set down in writing of the 'canonical 4' is not history either - in fact, it is largely written in a very bad Greek - which nonetheless reflects an earlier oral Aramaic stream tradition - and is largely composed in a kind of Lament (three line) Qinah metre format - and in no way written in any factual prosaic historical narrative style at all - nor is it to be literalised or believed word for word - as what we would normally understand 'positivistic literal/factual history' to be...









So, again, 'hold on', you're careening over the Precipice once more - only this time it's about to get ROUGH !!

edit on 8-4-2012 by Sigismundus because: stutterinnngggggg commmputtterrrrrrrr



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


You're using Roman reckoning, not Jewish.

/facepalm

Jesus was a Jew speaking to Jews.

I've already broken down the 3 days and 3 nights above. It fits perfectly according to Jewish reckoning for days and the Bible saying Sabbaths in the plural.

You don't have a leg to stand upon. Great, I pooped myself again. *sigh*


So, again, 'hold on', you're careening over the Precipice once more - only this time it's about to get ROUGH !!


Eeeek, that just sounds painful. Do your own math according to Jewish reckoning beginning on Thursday with two Sabbaths, the Passover and the weekly, you only have to count to three twice.

There were TWO Sabbaths, the other must have been BEFORE the weekly 6th day Sabbath because Sunday He rose from the tomb, therefore the other Sabbath must have been Friday. If He was crucified on the "eve" of Passover it was THURSDAY. Friday was Passover, Saturday is the weekly Sabbath, and Sunday he arose. Factoring in Jewish reckoning and not Roman reckoning which Jesus nor his Jewish audience gave two craps about for their religious observances, then it's quite clear.

How's that for a stupid Jesus worshiper?

edit on 9-4-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


On top of what NOTurTypical said (which I happen to agree with, by the way...a Thursday crucifixion is the only possibility that fits the contexts of all four gospels), I also see you conveniently ignored my explanation of the apparent discrepancy between John and the synoptic gospels. Sort of like you don't care...which is telling.

I guess the long posts and big words are in place of actual historical knowledge and Scriptural understanding.

"John (whoever he was)" - you know full-well who John was. He was the disciple whom Jesus loved. He was the apostle who was with Jesus from the very beginning, who wrote three epistles that bear his name, and who received the revelation of Jesus Christ while on Patmos. The narrative in the gospel according to John has all the hallmarks of a legitimate eye-witness account.
And the same goes for the other gospel writers (except for them being eye-witness accounts):
You know who Luke was. He was the physician travelling with the apostle Paul. He interviewed many eye-witnesses in order to compile his "orderly" gospel account as testimony to his readership.
You also know who Mark was. He was John Mark, the one who wrote for the apostle Peter.
And you know who Matthew was. He was the follower, disciple, and apostle of Jesus. Him being the author of the gospel as we now have it is unlikely, but we certainly have historical reference (Papias, writing in the early 2nd century) to a predecessor of the current gospel, which Matthew did write, though he wrote it in Hebrew or Aramaic. Matthew's original gospel was then translated into Greek, and, in the process, the writer used the gospel according to Mark (which is really the gospel according to Peter) to expand the narrative.

I'm not sure what you gain by treating the gospel writers with this sort of contempt. It seems rather childish, to be honest.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime

Hi CL -

I see you are in the same car crash as Not Yours...

Well.. here is some of your own jejune nonsense for us to examine

You wrote : QUOTE

'I guess the long posts and big words are in place of actual historical knowledge & Scriptural understanding.

"John (whoever he was)" -

You know full-well who John was. He was the disciple whom Jesus loved. He was the apostle who was with Jesus from the very beginning, who wrote three epistles that bear his name, and who received the revelation of Jesus Christ while on Patmos.

The narrative in the gospel according to John has all the hallmarks of a legitimate eye-witness account.."

UNQUOTE

You wrote more garbage of course, but I will have to stop you before you choke on your own innaccuracies.

Let's start with the 'Yohanon' who wrote the 3 Epistles bearing his name and the anonymous Yohanon who cobbled together the Apocalype of Yohanon (aka the socalled 'Book of Revelation').

You DID know (didn't you? then go out and take a basic GREEK class for cryin' out loud !!!) that the author of the Epistles of 1,2 and 3 'John' is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same personage as the one (or group !) who cobbled together the Apocalypse - the Greek is abosutely NOT the same - just as the anonymous author of the Epistle to the Hebrews writes in a very very very different style of 1st-2nd century Koine Greek from the mid-1st century Tarsian Koine Greek of Saul of Tarsus (e.g. the author of Galatians, or most of 1st Corinthians (minus a couple of anti female verses which are NOT his style) and say, Romans).

But of course if you CANNOT READ KOINE GREEK and have no knowledge of 1st and 2nd century Koine Greek style then you would have no idea about these little matters, would you?

You and Not Your Typ are walking around BLIND without a Cane and falling all over yourselves.

Tsk Tsk Tsk ..I am afraid you both are living in a Fools' Paradise - the author of 'Revelation' was positively NOT (as in 'IN NO WAY') the same person who penned the 3 Yohanine Epistles - and the author of the 4th gospel (attritbuted to the same John of the Epistles) although based on his preaching, clearly had his written Greek gospel work touched up by others ('and out poured blood and urine - and this is the disciple who witnessed these two things - [in the margin: And WE know that HIS testimony is reliable..."] haven't you ever asked yourself - who is WE ?)

The Book of Revelation was written by a Apocalyptic ('end of days') Palestinian Levitical rabidly-Anti Gentile Zionist-Jihadist Messianic Sword Wielder whose claim to fame seems to be a Vision of the New Jerusalem with the conquored goyim (non jews) being sucked dry of their money and dragged into the city gates quoting a string of vomit from passages like those found in e.g. tritoIsaiah chapter 60 and others like it...

e.g. Jerusalem, your gates will always stand open,
they will never be shut, by day or by night,
so that the goyim whall bring to you the wealth of the nations—
their kings shall all be led in triumphal procession.
For the Gentile Kingdoms that will not bow down before your faces shall die
They shall all go to perdition..

The glory of Lebanon will come to you,
the juniper, the fir and the cypress together, to adorn my sanctuary;
and I will glorify the place for my feet, says YHWH.
The sons of your occupiers will come bowing & scraping before your faces:
all who despise you will bow down at your feet
and will call you the City of YHWH,
Zion of the Holy One of Israel..."

Sound familiar? Do yourself a favour: read the 3 Johanine Epistles (in English if that's all you can read) then read the 'book of Revelatioin' word for word in your messy english translations (the Greek of 'Revelation' is ever worse than the ungrammatic Greek slop of the 2nd canonical Greek gospel, according to 'Mark' whoever he was. and no you DO NOT know who wrote the book - in case you hadn't noticed, the gospels were NOT SIGNED by their writers !!)

As for the 'John the Elder' (ho presbuteros means 'old man') we know very little about him, except that IF the 4th gospel is related to his preaching at least the author knew a little about the geography of Palestine (unlike Mark or even Matthew at times !!) and especially seemed to know Jerusalem (as opposed to the Galilee where a real disciple would have come from !)

Since there were 'an inner core of three' (Yakkov bar Zavdai, Yohanon bar Zavdai & Shimeon bar Yonah ha Kephah aka John and James sons of Zebedee and Simon 'Peter') disciples, and an outer core of 9 additional disciples forming (The Twelve) and another OUTER layer of 70 disciples (according to the 3rd canonical Greek Gospel 'according to 'Luke' wheover he was) and another of 490 (70 x 7) mentioned by 'Saul' this Elder person might have been of the outer (not the inner) circle of followers....!



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


The conclusion that John could not have written the gospel according to John, the 3 Johannine epistles, and the book of the revelation of Jesus Christ because the Greek is inconsistent is foolishness based on the assumption that John would have written these books in Greek. In fact, considering his audience, John likely wrote in Aramaic. This means that translators would later have translated his original Aramaic works into Greek. Given that different translators probably translated his different books, it would be safe to assume that these different books would have noticeably different prose.

Now...you seem to be taking great pride in your own assumption that I can't read Greek. If I were you, I wouldn't be too quick to assume anything at all. As a matter of fact, I can read Koine Greek. I do so on a regular basis. If you want, I can even link you to a website which just happens to be home to my own original (and literal) translation of the Book of Revelation from the Greek.
I don't know what the Book of Revelation ever did to you to make you be so hostile against it, but I've been all over its original Greek, and I don't see what the problem is. You think the Greek is a grammatical mess. It's not. The Greek is structured the same as most of the Greek throughout the rest of the New Testament, with only a couple phrases with difficult syntax (specifically, in the first and last chapters). It's certainly nothing abnormal. I don't know what the source of it is, but your prejudice is rather thick.

Plus, there is nothing anti-Gentile in the book that's undeserved. The Gentile nations are derided, sure, because they were persecuting God's people. However, once the persecution ends, we see the glory of the nations being brought into the new Jerusalem. It would seem atypical for a "rabidly anti-Gentile" Jew to conclude with such a welcoming image of the glorification of the Gentile nations.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


I would like to see that... I only know of the King James and was warned that the breaking down of the texts since then on is what is actually trying to destroy the word and basically western civilization, inadvertently if even.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


To keep the thread from diverting to my own work, I U2Ud you the link.

The King James and American Standard are relatively accurate, and are about as literal as you can get without being illegible. The one problem, of course, being the fact that they're in Ye Olde English, which no one understands anymore.
The New King James is alright, since it just takes the Old English and replaces it with more modern English, though some nuances are lost this way.
Young's Literal Translation is pretty good, but, no matter how literal Young intended to be, he fails to live up to the name. His syntax is exceptionally literal. His translation of verb tenses, not so much.
Green's Literal Translation is fine. It's a literal translation in modern English, similar to my own Revelation translation. The only thing is the flow. It seems choppy in places, and it adds too many words to the text, which are in italics and interrupt the flow. I almost never add words, and any words I do add are explicitly demanded from a literal reading of the Greek text.
The New International Version is about the best modern English reading Bible you'll find, though it's not far above the NKJV. And the NIV is useless as a study Bible, which makes the NKJV better in that case.

When I preach, I do so from the NIV, unless a more literal rendering of the text is warranted, in which case I use my own original translations.

All other translations should probably be avoided.
edit on 9-4-2012 by CLPrime because: added the ASV



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime

CL Prime

You're Koine must not be very good if you can't even sniff out the Vorlage underlay to the clumsy Greek of the Book of Revelation when comparing it to the smooth elastic Koine Greek prose of 1,2,3 John and even the 4th Gospel.

The Johanine epistles have NO THING to do WHATSOEVER with the style of utterance, Weltanschauung, theology, syntax, vocabulary, sentence structure, word combinations, special imagery, special phraseology, or contents of the mangled Koine Greek of the 'Book of Revelation' which seems to have originally been written in Qinah Meter Hebrew & Aramaic Lament forms - possibly using two or more 'different' literary sources...

The Book of Revelation and the Epistles attributed to John the Elder (whoever he was) come from TWO different persons. They have hardly anything at all in common, theologically or stylistically.

To say that they came from the same pen would be like saying that Saul of Tarsus (or at any rate, the author of Galatians and Romans and Philemon) was the same as the author of the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews which has likewise a vastly different style from the Greek of the core writings of the Pauline corpus.

So ... if you claim to be able to read Koine....take the 1st and 2nd Epistles of 'John the Elder' then take the mangled Greek of the 'Apocalypse' and compare them for contents and theology and Weltanschauung and rhythm and specialised vocabulary - line by line and phrase by phrase.

You will find that when you do come across Aramaisms in either document set, the Aramaisms are DIFFERENT in content and outlook - they are NOT related entities.

Then you should be a little more conversant in these matters about which you seem to know very very little indeed.
edit on 9-4-2012 by Sigismundus because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


Hardly anything in common? You're kidding.

John's Gospel, John's Epistles, and John's Book of Revelation boast an almost exclusive occurrence of several words, including nikao (to conquer; found more than 20 times throughout John's works, spread evenly between Revelation and John's other 4 books, while being found only 3 times elsewhere, in Romans), arnion (little lamb; found once in John and more than 2 dozen times in Revelation), martyria (testimony; found 21 times in the gospel of John and the epistles, and 9 times in Revelation, while being used just 4 times elsewhere).

John is also the only one who ever calls Jesus the Word of God; and, at the same time, he also consistently refers to him as light, and as having existed in the beginning (John 1:1-5,14; 1 John 1:1-7; Revelation 19:11-16, 22:5,13).

John is also the only New Testament writer who quotes Zechariah 12:10, using the same word for "pierced" on both occasions (exekentesan; John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7) - a word which is used nowhere else in the New Testament.

Could you perhaps give me an example from Revelation of what you consider to be mangled Greek? Because, for all of my translating, nothing in the book has stood out as being out of the ordinary.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by CLPrime
reply to post by SisyphusRide
 


To keep the thread from diverting to my own work, I U2Ud you the link.

The King James and American Standard are relatively accurate, and are about as literal as you can get without being illegible. The one problem, of course, being the fact that they're in Ye Olde English, which no one understands anymore.

so odd because it is the only one that make me 'feel' those words... Language is devolving obviously in some aspects but picking up and condensing in other ways via slang and new words popping up in the vocabulary.

thanks for the link... been reading thru it.





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join