Why telerion does not believe in Muffy.

Originally posted by Omnislash
Does it matter when?

Only if you make the claim that the two posts are at the same time.

Nemesio

Originally posted by frogstomp
That seder includes passover on the 14th and the feast of unleven bread on the 15th
23:5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD's
passover.
23:6 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.

You are confusing two things.

The Feast of Unleavened Bread is seven days long (eight in the Diaspora).

This is not relevent to the discussion, except in as much as the Passover Seder
is celebrated on the evening before the first daytime part of that Festival. The
Seder is a single day in Israel (always has been), taking place on the evening
of 14 Nissan on the Jewish calendar. On the morning of 14 Nissan, the Paschal
lamb was sacrificed.

The issue is that, because of the details the Gospel of St John indicate unequivocably
that the Last Supper could not have been the Passover Seder (because the Jews feared
defilement for the eating of the Passover on the morning of His scourging), but the
Synoptic Gospels make clear that the Passover was the Passover Seder because
the Paschal lamb was sacrificed.

To answer Omnislash's question: does it matter? Only if you claim both are right! If
you claim that the Bible has no errors in matters of history, then it certainly does matter.
If you accept (as I do) that the Gospel of St John is very likely a non-historical account,
but a theological reflection upon what Jesus symbolized as the Son of God, then the change
in the historical detail enhances the theological message -- it emphasizes the sacrificial
nature of Jesus's actions.

My argument is that a literal reading of many Biblical accounts obscures a meaningful
theological interpretation and, given the significant number of irreconcilable literal contradictions,
such a reading should be naturally avoided.

As such, I offer this very important scene in Christian theology, one which no historical
fact can deny: These accounts cannot be reconciled, thus any claim to the utter literalness
of Biblical history is necessarily invalid.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
You are confusing two things.

The Feast of Unleavened Bread is seven days long (eight in the Diaspora).

This is not relevent to the discussion, except in as much as the Passover Seder
is celebrated on the evening before the first day ...[text shortened]... iteralness
of Biblical history is necessarily invalid.

Nemesio

While I do not wish to diminish your rational point here my friend, I disagree that these two points with the stone moving can not be reconciled . I fail to see the difference in timing. I believe the exact point at which we see differently is at Matthew 28:2. specifically, "There was". I believe you are reading it as to mean present tense. I read it past tense (i.e. "Now there had been"😉. For myself, I find it clear from the parallel acounts that the event occurred before the woman actually arrived at the tomb.

If I can find the time, I will tackle the other"discrepency" tonight. Otheriwse, perhaps tomorrow.

Best Regards,

Omnislash

Originally posted by Omnislash
While I do not wish to diminish your rational point here my friend, I disagree that these two points with the stone moving can not be reconciled . I fail to see the difference in timing. I believe the exact point at which we see differently is at Matthew 28:2. specifically, "There was". I believe you are reading it as to mean present tense. I read it pas ...[text shortened]... he other"discrepency" tonight. Otheriwse, perhaps tomorrow.

Best Regards,

Omnislash

You may choose to read it with whatever tenses you want.

What is in the Greek, however, is not subject to interpretation.

St Matthew has the simple past throughout -- the women arrive wondering
how they will move the stone, and then an angel arrives.

St Mark has the women looking up and seeing the stone having been removed.
The translation note from the United Bible Societes (a very conservative Bible Studies
organization) Translation Handbook reads that anakekulistai is "not technically a
passive, in that the women saw the stone actually being rolled back. What they saw was
the state of the stone in a rolled-back position. This means that in some languages one
must translate either as pluperfect passive of process, e.g., 'had been rolled back' or as
a poast state, e.g., 'was in a rolled-back position.'"

However, your claim about St Matthew (and I never said anything was in 'present tense'😉
is incorrect. The use of simple past indicates order: the women went to the tomb, an
earthquake happened, an angel came, rolled back the stone, sat upon, and spoke (a
summary of all the active verbs in 28:1-5).

These are not reconcilable accounts. You can twist the translation however you want in
order to make them match, but doing so does not reflect the original text.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
You are confusing two things.

The Feast of Unleavened Bread is seven days long (eight in the Diaspora).

This is not relevent to the discussion, except in as much as the Passover Seder
is celebrated on the evening before the first daytime part of that Festival. The
Seder is a single day in Israel (always has been), taking place on the evening
of 14 ...[text shortened]... thus any claim to the utter literalness
of Biblical history is necessarily invalid.

Nemesio

I don't think I am tho here's where I got that info

http://www.holidays.net/passover/seder.html

Exo 12:6 And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

Exo 12:8 And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.

Exo 12:10 And ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire.

Exo 12:10 And ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire.

Not my field of expertise, what time does the day change?

Originally posted by frogstomp
I don't think I am tho here's where I got that info

http://www.holidays.net/passover/seder.html

Exo 12:6 And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

Exo 12:8 And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleaven ...[text shortened]... ye shall burn with fire.

Not my field of expertise, what time does the day change?

6 o'clock in the evening

Originally posted by Nemesio
You may choose to read it with whatever tenses you want.

What is in the Greek, however, is not subject to interpretation.

St Matthew has the simple past throughout -- the women arrive wondering
how they will move the stone, an ...[text shortened]... but doing so does not reflect the original text.

Nemesio

Well, I am sorry to hear that you think I am "twisting" the text. I am glad to see that you have a source for your unbending view.

The International Bible Society, The New York Bible Society, The Palos Heights scholars from both the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals scholars, and the Committe on Bible Translation all agree with my statement.

Indeed, my comment is almost identical to the notation in the NIV for Matthew 28:2.

So, if I am "twisting" words, then I must most humbly apologize. Regardless, I regret that we apparently can not see eye to eye on this.

Best Regards,

Omnislash

Originally posted by Omnislash
Well, I am sorry to hear that you think I am "twisting" the text. I am glad to see that you have a source for your unbending view.

The International Bible Society, The New York Bible Society, The Palos Heights scholars from both the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals scholars, and the Committe on Bible Translation ...[text shortened]... ss, I regret that we apparently can not see eye to eye on this.

Best Regards,

Omnislash

They are not disagreeing with 'my view.'

They are disagreeing with the Greek texts as found in the original in an effort
to maintain the illusion of literally inerrancy. The reason that they are able to
do so is because people remain ignorant of the contents of the Greek manuscripts
which are the basis for translation.

So, unless you wish to debate that 'had been moved' and 'was moved' entail the
same meaning, you and they haven't a logical leg to stand on.

Sorry.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Omnislash
Well, I am sorry to hear that you think I am "twisting" the text. I am glad to see that you have a source for your unbending view.

The International Bible Society, The New York Bible Society, The Palos Heights scholars from both the Christian Reformed Church and the National Association of Evangelicals scholars, and the Committe on Bible Translation ...[text shortened]... ss, I regret that we apparently can not see eye to eye on this.

Best Regards,

Omnislash

They are not disagreeing with 'my view.'

They are disagreeing with the Greek texts as found in the original in an effort
to maintain the illusion of literally inerrancy. The reason that they are able to
do so is because people remain ignorant of the contents of the Greek manuscripts
which are the basis for translation.

So, unless you wish to debate that 'had been moved' and 'was moved' entail the
same meaning, you and they haven't a logical leg to stand on.

Sorry.

Nemesio

Originally posted by dj2becker
6 o'clock in the evening

Inprecise.

Sundown. The 'next day' begins when the Sun goes down.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
Inprecise.

Sundown. The 'next day' begins when the Sun goes down.

Nemesio

Are you saying that they started with the passover meal untill the sun was down?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Are you saying that they started with the passover meal untill the sun was down?

There are many rituals which precede the Passover meal which occur
before sundown (e.g., the sacrifice of the Passover lamb).

However, the Seder traditionally does not take place before sundown,
which can be at varying times depending on when Passover takes
place.

I can look up the specific requirements (it is similar to the timing of
Easter in that it has to do with the moon and the equinox) later, if you
would like.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
There are many rituals which precede the Passover meal which occur
before sundown (e.g., the sacrifice of the Passover lamb).

However, the Seder traditionally does not take place before sundown,
which can be at varying times depending on when Passover takes
place.

I can look up the specific requirements (it is similar to the timing of
Easter in that it has to do with the moon and the equinox) later, if you
would like.

Nemesio

So does this not answer your question on whether Christ was crucified before or after the Pascha?

Originally posted by dj2becker
So does this not answer your question on whether Christ was crucified before or after the Pascha?

That last post was in response to your other post.

To review: Sts Mark, Matthew, Luke -- Jesus ate the Passover with
his Disciples at the Last Supper. Thus the Passover was eaten BEFORE
Jesus was crucified.

St John has Jews (not in the Diaspora!) worried about entering the
praetorium for fear of defiling themselves so that they can eat that
Passover that evening. Thus the Passover was eaten AFTER Jesus was
crucified.

One is wrong: which is it DJ?

Nemesio

Originally posted by Nemesio
They are not disagreeing with 'my view.'

They are disagreeing with the Greek texts as found in the original in an effort
to maintain the illusion of literally inerrancy. The reason that they are able to
do so is because people remain ignorant of the contents of the Greek manuscripts
which are the basis for translation.

So, unless you wish to deba ...[text shortened]... entail the
same meaning, you and they haven't a logical leg to stand on.

Sorry.

Nemesio

I want to be certain I understand your position. Let me express to you what I believe you are saying.

The English translations of the Bible are not accurately translated. The mistranslation was done so on purpose.

'had been' and 'was' can not, and do not, mean the same thing. (i.e. If I say "I had been there" it means something different than "I was there".)

If I do not understand your position correctly, please elaborate and/or correct my statement here so that I might understand. I assume that your position exists because you have earnest and logical cause for it, and would like to know more about it. I am exceptionally interested in it as you contend that my sources (all the major credible translating organizations of the past fifty years) are all wrong. Please understand that I do not wish to dispute you. I am simply stating why I have cause to beleive as I do, and would like to know more of why you hold you opposing stance and how you refute my sources.

Best Regards,

Omnislash