PDA

View Full Version : ROCK Solid



duxrow
09-11-2014, 06:41 AM
Rock-Solid
God is a 'ROCK', Ps18 - the metaphor suggesting UNMOVABLE, but also a source of water in Ex17.
Abraham goes around digging wells, and his son Isaac has to re-dig them after those pesky Philistines cover them up. Moses strikes the rock in order to get water for his thirsty bunch. "Spring up, O Well" indeed! The writing of Scripture is being portrayed as Living Water!

"They have forsaken me, [GOD] the fountain of living water, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water".Jer2:13.
"I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint.." Psalm 22:14

[Recite w gusto!]

CHRIST IS THE ROCK!
A lyric poem by Bob Smith, Ana Glyfada Greece, 7/87

Christ is the Rock, and he's the answer, 1Cor10:4
He's the shining light.. Acts9:3
Christ is the Rock, Christ is the answer, Gen28:18
He's the Bread of Life. Jn6:51

They say that honey comes from bee's, but the answer's on my tongue.. Ps81:16
"I get my HONEY FROM THE ROCK, so I'm sure I won't get stung! Rev10:10
The honey that opened Jonathan's eyes has also opened mine, and the 1Sam14:29
Word of God now tastes so sweet that I crave it all the time! Pr24:13

They say that water comes from rain, and that it's mainly in the plain, Hos6:3
but I get my WATER FROM THE ROCK, so I will never thirst again. Ex17:6
It's not the water in the well; No, this comes from Galilee.. Jn4:14
It's been poured out from God above, so naturally it's free! Ps22:14

They say that oil lubricates, and is pumped up from the ground, Dt32:13
but I get my OIL FROM THE ROCK...it's a gusher that I've found! Job29:6
That old oil covered up the flesh, and messed up Aaron's beard, but you Ps133:2
need the new oil for your lamp, when the bridegroom does appear. Matt25

They say that fire burns and kills--it's definitely HOT...but the Judg6:21
Word of God tastes extra good with the (new) FIRE FROM THE ROCK! Judg13:20
Don't let your sacrifice get cold; No, keep it piping hot.. Rom12:1
On the altar for burnt offerings, with fire from the Rock. Gen22:7

Now they ate lamb, but we eat bread; as spirit succeeds flesh,
The STONE that they rejected has become our righteousness.
Follow first the fire, if you want to see the cloud; It's the
Great Light that follows the darkness that eliminates the shroud!

Samson's HONEY is in stock, for those who want it from the Rock,
and for those who'll take a stand, there's still the WATER of Naaman.
The OIL of gladness yet abounds in churches where the Rock is found..
So grab your Bible, light a shock...the FIRE still comes from the Rock!

Christ is the Rock, and he's the answer, Ps18:31
He's the firstfruit from the dead.. Lev23:10
Christ is the Rock, Christ is the answer, 1Cor15:24
He's the Lifter of my Head. Ps3:3

Jesus never said "I AM the Rock", (it isn't written) leaving that information for Paul to divulge in 1Cor10:4. Besides, it would have driven the Pharisees and Sadducees ballistic! He's the monolithic Rock who's the source of the honey, the anointing oil, the Living Water, and the Holy Ghost baptism! Like a diamond with many facets!

:woah: "They shall be mine, saith the LORD of hosts, in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him". Mal 3:17
So the Jewel Thief will be coming "as a thief in the night" to rapture his beloveds!

duxrow
09-11-2014, 09:46 AM
:talk005: That OT 'water' had a bitter taste, but Jesus can turn it to wine at your wedding, in case you want another go. Just imagine the ignorance of atheists and others who think they can match wits with the Almighty, Creator of the Universe, including all the diverse flora and fauna..

sylvius
09-11-2014, 10:53 AM
:talk005: That OT 'water' had a bitter taste, but Jesus can turn it to wine at your wedding, in case you want another go. Just imagine the ignorance of atheists and others who think they can match wits with the Almighty, Creator of the Universe, including all the diverse flora and fauna..

Did he also turn the water that was carried by a man in a pitcher (Mark 14:13) to wine, even to the wine of which he should say: "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many"?

duxrow
09-11-2014, 11:33 AM
Did he also turn the water that was carried by a man in a pitcher (Mark 14:13) to wine, even to the wine of which he should say: "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many"?
:yo: Hey Sylvie, Why do you ask? Since Moses turned the water to blood, and he and Jesus are PILLARS of the Scriptures, it seems only natural that Jesus would turn the water to wine. In a figurative sense I believe it still happens when you 'cut the covenant' with Him. But maybe the situation, with six waterpots at a wedding, is crucial to the account. You think? :thumb:

ps: fits well with how Joseph turned the CORN into Bread! Right?

dpenn
09-11-2014, 11:35 AM
Did he also turn the water that was carried by a man in a pitcher (Mark 14:13) to wine, even to the wine of which he should say: "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many"?

No Sylvius, you need a little bit of priestly hocus pocus for that one.

dp

sylvius
09-11-2014, 11:23 PM
No Sylvius, you need a little bit of priestly hocus pocus for that one.

dp

Yet it is a rather obscure passage, Mark 14:13-15,

καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ὑπάγετε εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ ἀπαντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων: ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ, καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ ὅτι Ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει, Ποῦ ἐστιν τὸ κατάλυμά μου ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν μου φάγω; καὶ αὐτὸς ὑμῖν δείξει ἀνάγαιον μέγα ἐστρωμένον ἕτοιμον: καὶ ἐκεῖ ἑτοιμάσατε ἡμῖν.


καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν = "and he sent two of his disciples" -- cf. Mark 11:1, Καὶ ὅτε ἐγγίζουσιν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα εἰς Βηθφαγὴ καὶ Βηθανίαν πρὸς τὸ Ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν, ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ

Did he sent them in his quality of teacher = διδάσκαλος ?

Ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει, Ποῦ ἐστιν τὸ κατάλυμά μου = The teacher says: where is my lodging for the night?

So these things might constitute the very hard core of his teaching.

Mark 11:6,
οἱ δὲ εἶπαν αὐτοῖς καθὼς εἶπεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς: καὶ ἀφῆκαν αὐτούς - and they said to them like Jesus had said,

καθὼς εἶπεν occurs one more time in Mark 16:7,
ἀλλὰ ὑπάγετε εἴπατε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ Πέτρῳ ὅτι Προάγει ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν: ἐκεῖ αὐτὸν ὄψεσθε, καθὼς εἶπεν ὑμῖν.

It seeming to contrast with the καθὼς γέγραπται = like was written, that also occurs two times in Mark (Mark 1:2 and Mark 9:13)

Constituting the newness of his teaching , above to what has been written?

This "newness" being also in the wine, of which he said "this is my blood of the new covenant that has been shed for many".




The man carrying a jar with water, ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων, also a strange figure. -- he enters the house and disappears.

He meets you, it's not that you meet him.

ἀπαντάω,v \{ap-an-tah'-o}
1) to go to meet, to meet 1a) in a military sense: a hostile meeting

So in a way he forces you to follow him, like kind of a hooker.

And how you know he is carrying water in his earthenware jar? Or did he give you to drink from it?

ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ = wherever he goes in .

So he is the one who determines where it is; it's not first the house and he just the one brings you to that place.

David M
09-11-2014, 11:52 PM
Hello Dux

Just thinking about the title of your thread 'Rock solid'. Thinking outside the box for a minute, we could think how we are firmly attached to this planet (rock) by gravity.

The earth is referred to as the 3rd rock from the sun. By gravity we are firmly stuck to this planet. We are like little rocks attracted to a big rock. The earth is in its orbit around the sun because it is trying to escape from the sun, but is held in check by gravity. The moon likewise is held in check by the earth.

God and Jesus are our rocks, which we are attracted to them like gravity and our feet are firmly attached to those rocks. There are others who are trying to escape their pull, and are held in check, though not attached. Reprobates are those represented by the rocks that do escape the pull of gravity and will be lost to the outer depths of space.

All the best
David

dpenn
09-12-2014, 12:39 AM
The man carrying a jar with water, ἄνθρωπος κεράμιον ὕδατος βαστάζων, also a strange figure. -- he enters the house and disappears.

He meets you, it's not that you meet him.

ἀπαντάω,v \{ap-an-tah'-o}
1) to go to meet, to meet 1a) in a military sense: a hostile meeting

So in a way he forces you to follow him, like kind of a hooker.

And how you know he is carrying water in his earthenware jar? Or did he give you to drink from it?

ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθῃ = wherever he goes in .

So he is the one who determines where it is; it's not first the house and he just the one brings you to that place.

Sylvius,

You forget that Jesus had already told them to expect this. So why doubt? And if God, through an angel, or the Holy Spirit had already directed the man carrying a water pitcher to do His bidding, that is not a big deal. Remember how the Holy Spirit told Ananias to go to the street called narrow in Damascus, and to lay hands on Saul, that he might receive his sight, as a vessel chosen for His purpose and grace.

In my early posts, you might have read of my early Christian faith, and how I discovered answered prayer. And I was so absolutely, delightfully filled with joy at my new found blessing, I started a diary, whereby I listed my prayers and then entered when my prayers were answered, with a moment of thanksgiving, I might add. Well, without dwelling on myself too much, another answered prayer might draw a parallel here. When I was in grade 3 in a southern town of my home province of Saskatchewan, an American preacher and his family moved into my town, seemingly from nowhere. Daniel, was in my grade, and he was persecuted quite severely by the Catholics, as he brought his Bible to school daily, and they just couldn't stand that. Well I wasn't a Christian then, but he shared the Gospel with me, and I saw a most loving and caring boy that wouldn't hurt a fly, treated in the most despicable way. I moved from that town to the city, and some 10 years passed, at which time I came to believe on Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour.

... enter my prayer adventure ... well, one of my earlier prayers was, God what ever happened to Daniel? Would you please bring him to this city, so I can tell him I finally became a Christian? Well two weeks later, I was downtown in a city of some 200,000 and was confronted by Daniel. And with tears in his eyes, he told me of how often he had prayed for me over the years. And I was over-joyed at another answered prayer. And that is just a simple Canadian boy, finding favour with the God he now loves and serves ...

how much more the living, breathing, walking, disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, experience something that over time must have made them trust most anything He said, that is, up and until He told them of His pending crucifixion, burial, resurrection, ascension and return.

But didn't you appreciate my hocus pocus line ... you know, hoc est corpus meim? (I have no idea of the spelling of this, as I don't know Latin, and am only going from memory. I hope I haven't misquoted this.)

dp

sylvius
09-12-2014, 01:06 AM
The man carrying the jar with water might have been an angel.

cf. Genesis 37:15,
Then a man found him, and behold, he was straying in the field, and the man asked him, saying, "What are you looking for?"

LXX
καὶ εὗρεν αὐτὸν ἄνθρωπος πλανώμενον ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ ἠρώτησεν δὲ αὐτὸν ὁ ἄνθρωπος λέγων τί ζητεῖς

Hebrew: וַיִּמְצָאֵהוּ אִישׁ, "vayimtsaeihu ish",

Rashi:

This is [the angel] Gabriel, as it is said:“And the man Gabriel” (Dan. 9:21). [From Tanchuma Vayeshev 2]

He being the one to introduce Joseph to the place where he would be thrown into the pit by his brothers and then sold to Egypt on instignation of Judah,
parallelled in NT by Judas selling (betraying) him to the Highpriests.


Genesis 32:25,
And Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn.

LXX
ὑπελείφθη δὲ Iακωβ μόνος καὶ ἐπάλαιεν ἄνθρωπος μετ' αὐτοῦ ἕως πρωί


Rashi


Our Rabbis explained (Gen. Rabbah 77:3, 78:3) that this was the prince (guardian angel) of Esau.


until the break of down -- ἕως πρωί
when the roosters crow?

Last verse of Mark 14, KJV

And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.


Mark 15:1, Greek,
Καὶ εὐθὺς πρωῒ συμβούλιον ποιήσαντες οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς μετὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ γραμματέων καὶ ὅλον τὸ συνέδριον δήσαντες τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἀπήνεγκαν καὶ παρέδωκαν Πιλάτῳ.

sylvius
09-12-2014, 01:10 AM
I was in Northern France in 1999 with total sun-darkening, on a hill,

Impressive was the dawn that came from the west, very quick, and the roosters that began to crow.

dpenn
09-12-2014, 01:22 AM
I was in Northern France in 1999 with total sun-darkening, on a hill,

Impressive was the dawn that came from the west, very quick, and the roosters that began to crow.

One Hebrew roots Christian teacher said there were no roosters in Jerusalem, but this was rather the function of a priest, whose crying out in the morning was called the cock crow. Are you familiar with that?

btw, I was born on a farm, so am familiar with cock crows in the morning, especially on my grandparents farm.

dp

sylvius
09-12-2014, 03:25 AM
One Hebrew roots Christian teacher said there were no roosters in Jerusalem, but this was rather the function of a priest, whose crying out in the morning was called the cock crow. Are you familiar with that? No.

But it might be clear that the whole passion-story is not historical.

It is just very unlikely that the Sanhedrin came together in the night, even the night of passover.

duxrow
09-12-2014, 05:26 AM
I was in Northern France in 1999 with total sun-darkening, on a hill,

Impressive was the dawn that came from the west, very quick, and the roosters that began to crow.
The cock crowed TWICE!
Three of the gospels; Matthew, Luke, and John, all record how Jesus told Simon Peter that he would deny Him three times before the cock crowed. It's the gospel of Mark, 14:30, which throws a monkey wrench into this account by having Jesus say "before the cock crows twice, thou shalt deny me thrice".

Yes, I've heard the stories about the 'cockcrow' being a slang name for a watch of some kind, but I prefer to take the literal POV when possible.

My wife told me she was going to scream if she heard any more about that rooster crowing. I went round and round with all four gospels before concluding that Peter had to have denied Jesus three times before the first cockcrow and three more times before the second cockcrow. Six times in all; detailed rather extensively in the four accounts. :winking0001:

Our Holy Ghostwriter is thus perceived to have engineered this mystery of the gospels for the edification of believers. It's part of the banquet table (his Word) He's prepared for us in the midst of our enemies!

duxrow
09-12-2014, 05:55 AM
Hello Dux

Just thinking about the title of your thread 'Rock solid'. Thinking outside the box for a minute, we could think how we are firmly attached to this planet (rock) by gravity.

The earth is referred to as the 3rd rock from the sun. By gravity we are firmly stuck to this planet. We are like little rocks attracted to a big rock. The earth is in its orbit around the sun because it is trying to escape from the sun, but is held in check by gravity. The moon likewise is held in check by the earth.

God and Jesus are our rocks, which we are attracted to them like gravity and our feet are firmly attached to those rocks. There are others who are trying to escape their pull, and are held in check, though not attached. Reprobates are those represented by the rocks that do escape the pull of gravity and will be lost to the outer depths of space.

All the best
DavidHi David, the slang 'rock' being a large jewel like a diamond became a kind of 'bottom line' for me -- in the beginning (Ex17) it seemed to me like some kind of waterfall that started when Moses struck it--because "water from the Rock" brought on the thought of "blood from a turnip", and NOT LIKELY it seemed to me. On the other hand, was familiar with fracking for oil, so was a possibility.

Your '3rd rock from the sun' is another aspect, and connected with Gravity -- yet another pov to cause us to examine the account. Tks, /s/ dux

dpenn
09-12-2014, 09:46 AM
No.

But it might be clear that the whole passion-story is not historical.

It is just very unlikely that the Sanhedrin came together in the night, even the night of passover.

sylvius,

It was, after all, a very special moment for them. As if the whole illegal Sanhedrin kangaroo court wasn't very unlikely to any passionate observer. Is it therefore, unlikely? Somehow I just can't get warm and gushy for the Sanhedrin, so that their integrity might be restored. I know, let's just say it wasn't historical, and didn't happen after all!

A bit of a lame argument, wouldn't you say?

dux,

I don't buy the Hebrew roots special morning priest being called the "cock crow" either. But I also don't buy into your 2 sets of 3 denials for each of the 2 rooster crows. You aren't necessarily lying if one person says 2 roosters crowed, while another witness says a rooster crowed. Both could be true. The main part of the text is that Peter denied the Lord 3 times.

Your wife might have a good point. It sounds like you might NOT want to push this one around home.:lol:

dp

duxrow
09-12-2014, 10:14 AM
sylvius,

dux,

I don't buy the Hebrew roots special morning priest being called the "cock crow" either. But I also don't buy into your 2 sets of 3 denials for each of the 2 rooster crows. You aren't necessarily lying if one person says 2 roosters crowed, while another witness says a rooster crowed. Both could be true. The main part of the text is that Peter denied the Lord 3 times.

Your wife might have a good point. It sounds like you might NOT want to push this one around home.:lol:

dp:eek:Who said anything about two roosters? That's the kind of response coming from someone who isn't interested in the 'trivial' circumstances surrounding all six (6) denials. But you're right--I don't insist on my wife or anyone else digging into a 'foolish' agenda. No offense intended, dpen, just not ready to leave the game yet. :sFun_banghead2:

dpenn
09-12-2014, 10:31 AM
:eek:Who said anything about two roosters? That's the kind of response coming from someone who isn't interested in the 'trivial' circumstances surrounding all six (6) denials. But you're right--I don't insist on my wife or anyone else digging into a 'foolish' agenda. No offense intended, dpen, just not ready to leave the game yet. :sFun_banghead2:

You lost me ...

It is a good thing we are arguing over a couple of roosters and not 12 monkeys ... :eek:

Then this :sFun_banghead2: might be for real. Look what's happened to Hollywood. Reminds me of the Brad Pitt psyche ward scene, well at least one of them. Was that one or two scenes?:lol:

dp

duxrow
09-12-2014, 10:59 AM
You lost me ... It is a good thing we are arguing over a couple of roosters and not 12 monkeys ... :eek:

dpNot original with me--got it from Bullinger, ca1890, Companion Bible appendix, and he also shares the biz about two thieves AND two malefactors. Loved his "Fig. of Speech", Numbers in Scripture, and "Witness of the Stars.

sylvius
09-12-2014, 11:13 PM
sylvius,

It was, after all, a very special moment for them. As if the whole illegal Sanhedrin kangaroo court wasn't very unlikely to any passionate observer. Is it therefore, unlikely? Somehow I just can't get warm and gushy for the Sanhedrin, so that their integrity might be restored. I know, let's just say it wasn't historical, and didn't happen after all!

A bit of a lame argument, wouldn't you say?



Mark, Matthew and Luke have him suffer on the sixth day which is also the first day of Passover, and have him been laid in the grave exactly at the beginning of Sabbath, which is also the first day ofthe counting of the Omer, that counts up to the sixth day of the month Sivan = Pentecost, according to what Rashi wrote on Genesis 1:31,


the sixth day: Scripture added a “hey” on the sixth [day], at the completion of the Creation, to tell us that He stipulated with them, [“you were created] on the condition that Israel accept the Five Books of the Torah.” [The numerical value of the “hey” is five.] (Tanchuma Bereishith 1). Another explanation for “the sixth day” : They [the works of creation] were all suspended until the “sixth day,” referring to the sixth day of Sivan, which was prepared for the giving of the Torah (Shab. 88a). [The“hey” is the definite article, alluding to the well-known sixth day, the sixth day of Sivan, when the Torah was given (ad loc.).]

In this scheme they have placed the narrative.


John has it different, he has Jesus crucified on the day before Passover, the day on which the pascal-lambs are slaughtered, but also the sixth day (of the week).

David M
09-13-2014, 01:05 AM
Hi David, the slang 'rock' being a large jewel like a diamond became a kind of 'bottom line' for me -- in the beginning (Ex17) it seemed to me like some kind of waterfall that started when Moses struck it--because "water from the Rock" brought on the thought of "blood from a turnip", and NOT LIKELY it seemed to me. On the other hand, was familiar with fracking for oil, so was a possibility.

Your '3rd rock from the sun' is another aspect, and connected with Gravity -- yet another pov to cause us to examine the account. Tks, /s/ duxThinking of another word connection, we have 'Rock & Roll'

Rock is a form of music. There is the song title lyric "Solid (as a Rock)" by Ashford and Simpson.

Thinking of the words "rock" and "roll", I think of the image in Daniel where we have the small stone (rock) cut out of the mountain without hands. The rock rolls down the mountain and strikes the image on the feet. That image no longer had its feet firmly planted on on the ground, but was crushed to dust.

sylvius
09-13-2014, 02:18 AM
Thinking of another word connection, we have 'Rock & Roll'

Rock is a form of music. There is the song title lyric "Solid (as a Rock)" by Ashford and Simpson.



"Rock of Ages"

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-D1bWwu81dqI/ThtpL2EK63I/AAAAAAAAAUM/kY6aQ_c7M9Q/s1600/Band+Rock+of+Ages.JPG

sylvius
09-13-2014, 02:24 AM
Rock is Hebrew "tsur", related to "yatsar"= to form

Genesis 2:7, And the Lord God formed man dust from the ground

Dust = splintered rock?

dpenn
09-13-2014, 02:25 AM
Mark, Matthew and Luke have him suffer on the sixth day which is also the first day of Passover, and have him been laid in the grave exactly at the beginning of Sabbath, which is also the first day ofthe counting of the Omer, that counts up to the sixth day of the month Sivan = Pentecost, according to what Rashi wrote on Genesis 1:31,



In this scheme they have placed the narrative.


John has it different, he has Jesus crucified on the day before Passover, the day on which the pascal-lambs are slaughtered, but also the sixth day (of the week).

Sylvius, first I want to apologise for the tone in which I wrote the post you are referring to. I have tried to avoid insulting remarks, but I kind of let loose on that one.

Yes, I know, trying to reconcile the Synoptic Gospels with John is challenging. And I know there is a similar challenge in trying to reconcile the counting of the Omer from Passover to Weeks, in Leviticus 23:16-17 KJV:

"And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete: Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD."

But in the Hebrew there is a "min" before the "morrow" in both verses, "mimmochorath" (my transliteration is probably horrible), which I understand should be "from". But v 16, which is translated "Even unto", rather than what I think should be another "from", as another "min" is there. So it almost seems to say, "you shall count from the morrow after the sabbath ... seven sabbaths", and then, "from the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall you number fifty days", suggesting you are to count seven sabbaths, and on top of that, another 50 days. And further, when you study the first Passover, and the journey to Sinai, for the giving of the law, when you add up the days, it almost suggests that that journey took closer to 100 days till the giving of the law, which is the OT basis for Pentecost. Of course this rocks the boat, because this would mean that traditional Sivan 6 could not be the actual date of Pentecost (maybe need to drop the name Pentecost and stick with Weeks). What makes this seem somewhat possible is that you are told to count this, and it doesn't seem to make much sense if you know it is always going to be 50 and fall on Sivan 6.

It has been a long time since I studied this, and I have no reference anymore, but I do know that the double "min", if taken literally, does create a calculation problem, especially if you have reasons for insisting on 50 days to Pentecost. I know there is a discrepancy regarding this amongst practicing Hebrew roots people even today. A second issue is following Paul's final journey from Philippi to Jerusalem, and counting up the days, he begins at the end of Passover, but wants to make it to Jerusalem by Pentecost, however there seems to be more than 50. Also, if First Fruits of Passover week is barley harvest, and Pentecost is grain and grape harvest, it is argued that these crops would take more than an additional 50 days to harvest from barley waive offering. There might be something to this, because this would mean that in addition to the spring and fall feasts, there is a summer feast, not another late spring feast.

Many things to consider.

As for the crucifixion date, I have heard a few different attempts at resolving this. One says that at Passover, there could be multiple sabbaths, thus it being referred to as a high day. So they might have held off in dealing with Jesus burial for the first sabbath, and then on the day following the second sabbath, they visited the tomb with burial spices. I know many believe that Jesus was crucified on Wed/Thu, not Friday, and then was raised from the dead on late Sabbath, as it is said that He had already risen from the dead before sunrise on the day after Sabbath. But it doesn't actually say when He was resurrected, so it very well could have been on Sabbath. I must admit though, it sure seems to fit, His being raised from the dead on the 1st of the week, following Sabbath. Maybe it is time for me to work through this one again.

It sure is fascinating at times, isn't it? It appears that both OT and NT have synchronization issues.

dp

sylvius
09-13-2014, 03:48 AM
A second issue is following Paul's final journey from Philippi to Jerusalem, and counting up the days, he begins at the end of Passover, but wants to make it to Jerusalem by Pentecost.



The writer of Acts (Luke) seems to play with this.

He ralates of two Pentecosts, the first being the pentecost of Peter, the second the pentecost of Paul.

Acts 20:16,
ἔσπευδεν γὰρ εἰ δυνατὸν εἴη αὐτῷ τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πεντηκοστῆς γενέσθαι εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα.

For he made haste, if it were possible for him, to arrive the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem

But he never "arrived" the day of Pentecost -- before that he was arrested to evnetually "land" in Rome.

Acts doesn't relate Paul's death, so it leaves open that he might still be alive, " in his own hired house, and receiving all that come in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him", and still underway to his Pentecost.

dpenn
09-13-2014, 10:59 AM
The writer of Acts (Luke) seems to play with this.

He ralates of two Pentecosts, the first being the pentecost of Peter, the second the pentecost of Paul.

Acts 20:16,
ἔσπευδεν γὰρ εἰ δυνατὸν εἴη αὐτῷ τὴν ἡμέραν τῆς πεντηκοστῆς γενέσθαι εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα.

For he made haste, if it were possible for him, to arrive the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem

But he never "arrived" the day of Pentecost -- before that he was arrested to evnetually "land" in Rome.

Acts doesn't relate Paul's death, so it leaves open that he might still be alive, " in his own hired house, and receiving all that come in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him", and still underway to his Pentecost.

Sylvius,

I just can't believe how at the slightest synchronous issue in the NT, you come up with some crazy invention, the first thing that pops into your head, and blow it out like a fact. What about facing up to the same issues in the OT, like I showed, and give the same intellectual honesty and patient resolution to both?

dp

sylvius
09-14-2014, 12:32 AM
Sylvius,

I just can't believe how at the slightest synchronous issue in the NT, you come up with some crazy invention, the first thing that pops into your head, and blow it out like a fact. What about facing up to the same issues in the OT, like I showed, and give the same intellectual honesty and patient resolution to both?

dp

It was not the first thing that popped into my head, and it is also not my invention.

Acts mostly is considered to be a "history" book, about "the historical acts of the apostels".

I have a book that states: Acts is not history but parable, parable of the coming kingdom.

http://books.google.nl/books/about/Handelingen_Lucas_ten_tweeden_male.html?id=7nS6AAA ACAAJ&redir_esc=y


Van alle Bijbelboeken moesten de Handelingen der apostelen wel het diepste onder het juk van de historiserende exegese door. De auteur Lucas werd versleten voor ’de eerste kerkhistoricus’ en de teneur van het boek zou iets zijn in de trant van: hoe het evangelie groot is geworden van Jeruzalem weg naar het eeuwig Rome toe. De Handelingen der apostelen zijn parabels van het Koninkrijk.
Hemelsoet & Touwen1)

It was not very well accepted!

http://www.opbouwonline.nl/artikel.php?id=4855

But "time is not yet ripe"- Paul's Pentecost still being future ...


You might consider that Acts must have been written many years after Paul's death (years after the destruction of the Temple).

Paul was falsely accused of bringing Greeks into the Temple -- an accusation that still stands today, affirmed by both Jews and Christians.