Bob Sanford wanted to create a Bible that would bring order and clarity to the text. Instead, he's waded right into one of the great debates of biblical scholarship.
The Chronological Study Bible will be released this fall in the midst of a Bible-publishing boom in the United States. In an industry that now as much to do with profits as with prophets, Sanford expects his new edition to have wide appeal.
"(Our challenge) is to take the scholarship and make it enjoyable to a readership that enjoys history," said Sanford, who oversees the Bible division for the giant Christian publisher, Thomas Nelson....
preacherjond. wrote: These sacrifices are a memorial and a reminder to ISRAEL, in the same way that the Lord's supper is a memorial and a reminder to the Christian church WHICH IS NOT ISRAEL. Scripture is very CLEAR.
I deleted most of the mindless nonsense, but had to leave some so as to have SOMETHING to respond to
_
Sure, preacherjond, sure ... The Jews, during the Millennium, are gonna need a *reminder*. A reminder of something they haven't seen or done for over 2000+ years!
They'll supposedly have the GLORIFIED CHRIST with all his saints right there with them in an earthly Jerusalem ruling and reigning ... and they're gonna need reminders. Hahaha!
Let me ask you something, preacherman: Do YOU need a reminder of the sacrifices that were made under the Mosaic sacrificial system which were ALL a mere shadow and type of the REALITY (Christ) Who was to come ... AND CAME in TOTAL fulfillment of ALL the animal sacrifices and offerings?!
Or maybe the boys of Israel won't have a BIBLE handy during the Millennium to tell them all about the O.T. sacrifices, huh.
And you better READ Ezekiel 45 over and over and realize that these animal sacrifices will be made, NOT ONLY as memorials, but to actually MAKE reconciliation!
DJC49 wrote: Ah! The Millennium!According to preacherjond, we have the reinstallation of the Jewish sacrificial system! Burnt offerings, sin offerings -- the whole nine yards -- to make reconciliation for the house of Israel! So ... for the sake of your clinging to the mistranslation of Easter in Acts 12:4 of the KJV, you have a Millennial theology in a total muddle. Christ Who was the FULFILLMENT of ALL the sacrifices supposedly ruling and reigning right then & there presiding over ancient sacrifices which NOW made atonement for their sins.
Once again you failed to read. You are really void of spiritual understanding. You have not a clue as to what the Bible teaches. Neither does Jim Lincoln. You both are products of a man's theology and false gospel that's leading millions to hell. -These sacrifices are a memorial and a reminder to ISRAEL, in the same way that the Lord's supper is a memorial and a reminder to the Christian church WHICH IS NOT ISRAEL. Scripture is very ClEAR.
Boy you Calvinists amaze me toting your "intellect" and your "knowledge" you know all the right articles, but haven't a clue what Bible says, and your posts show your SPIRITUALLY BLIND you are, and have not the HOLY SPIRIT. (1 Corinthians 2:11-15)I'm done with the ignoranc
He answered and said,Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire,and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spoke and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth" (Dan. 3:25, 26).
Bible believers should note that as far as "contemporary scholarship" is concerned,there is a tendency to find a problem with many of the prophecies and revelations of Christ in the Old Testament! it is not only a question of how Nebuchadnezzar could speak about "the Son of God"but how could he also speak about El Elyon (In Chaldee it is Illai), "the Most High God." Verse 26 is the first instance of this title of Deity in Daniel.The answer can only be by revelation! believing that Nebuchadnezzar's words in 3:25 are a revelation rather than merely a startled exclamation, Elahin/Elohim is used here in its usual sense of the true God. There should be no doubt that it was in fact the Son of God in the fiery furnace with the three Hebrews. Whenever a singular angelic personage appears in the O T,it is the Preincarnate Christ
DJC49 wrote: NO. That was the obvious implication made by Mr. eDseL Ford. And he did it for a purpose. Afterall ... SOMEONE has to be in Jerusalem during Passover Week to celebrate the pagan "Easter" festival! And there's only ONE candidate: the Roman SOLDIERS; specifically the garrison of auxiliary Romans assigned to Jerusalem/Judea. THE PASSOVER!
Thus the problem with the biblical fundamentalist dispensationalist hermeneutic of grammatical historical interpretation. They continually have to reach outside of the inspired word to come up with their hokey heterodox endtime and KJVO doctrines. Whatever happened to Scripture interprets Scripture. The KJV translation does not rule over the original Greek manuscripts.
ENGINEER wrote: YOU try to put these SAXONS "in Jerusalem"
NO. That was the obvious implication made by Mr. eDseL Ford. He did it purposely:
Afterall, SOMEONE has to be in Jerusalem during Passover to celebrate the pagan (cough) "Easter" festival! And there's only ONE candidate: Roman SOLDIERS; specifically the garrison of auxiliary Romans assigned to Jerusalem.
Think. It's the Passover season. Jerusalem is swelling with JEWS! Not pagans! Herod Agrippa I had his own troops for security and general military needs, though Rome may have sent him temporary reinforcements when necessary from Caesarea. The Roman garrison was composed of auxiliary troops, with the nearest legions being stationed in Syria. There may have been a few small details of legionaries or lone centurions on detatched duty here and there, but their tasks would not have had anything to do with the day to day operations in Judea.
Sure, upon Jewish High Feasts, such as the Passover, a cohort of about 500 soldiers would be stationed in the Fortress of Antonia in Jerusalem, overlooking the temple grounds.
So did most of these pagan Romans have time to celebrate Ishtar? Unlikely. Hey, they had their hands full maintaining the Pax Romana during this time of ...
Jim Lincoln wrote: as the King James that falls down on pointing out the preincarnate Christ,
John Chapter 1 in the KJV makes a pretty good case of the preincarnate Christ.."In the beginning was the word...etc....." Sounds clear enough to me that Christ existed before his incarnation on earth.
Wake up, DJC49! 9/2/08 8:02 PM (Tuesday) "easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, worshipped by the Saxon ...in the month of April. " 9/2/08 10:28 PM "BTW the Roman army was filled with soldiers from the Saxon area earning their citizenship by mercenary work."
YOU try to put these SAXONS "in Jerusalem"
But I took it to mean that the rulers of England were Saxon influenced.
Translation of pascha to mean Easter in English shows preacherjond is right.
You seemed to miss the need for the word Easter to travel to Britain. It came from the Astarte, to Anglo-Saxon influence on LANGUAGE, partly fed by Roman Legions filled with Saxon mercenaries who ended up settling there (as Bede tells us). Easter IS correct Easter's history You did know that the Saxons influenced English , didn't you?
ENGINEER wrote: The only one I see here speaking of Saxons in Jerusalem is you.
Wake up, ENGINEER!
'Twas Daniel Lee Ford in his post of 9/2/08 8:02 PM (Tuesday) who INITIALLY brought up the mention of SAXONS. These SAXONS were named in the brief article from his Encyclopaedia Britannica reference.
Then in his post of 9/2/08 10:28 PM (Tuesday), Mr. Ford went on to mention the SAXONS AGAIN as filling the Roman army earning their citizenship as mercenaries.
He attempts to tie these SAXONS in with their being the ones who did the pagan Roman worship at "Easter" in Jerusalem according to the KJV Acts 12:4 mistranslation blunder.
It wasn't until TODAY that I made any response about Mr. Ford's SAXON reference.
Try to keep up, ENGINEER!
_____
"In the first [month], in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the PASSOVER, A FEAST OF SEVEN DAYS; unleavened bread shall be eaten." [Ezekiel 45:21]
Thus, ancient goddess worship spread, even to England, and later,Easter worship influenced `Anglo-Saxon' English, the pagan festival, recorded in Acts, had a word in English: Easter.
You're not setting up straw men to knock 'em down are you?
read this Inspired vernacular Bibles, in a sense, were born in Acts chapter 2, when the "Holy Ghost" inspired men to speak the "language" of "every nation under heaven." Gothic, the great great grandfather of English, was a major world language at the time of Christ and the apostles. (see The Mother Tongue: English and How It Got That Way by Bill Bryson).Gothic&Saxon roots of the Authorised
I support the idea of English should be the national language, not that foreign languages can't be taught in the U.S., but it should be given a preeminence. Of the mongrel languages it may even be the best, It's the only language that I know and love, even if it is a mongrel. Do you think that when God's Kingdom is established on Earth that his followers will use anything but the language of God's people--Hebrew? When we are transformed at the Rapture, we will not only get new bodies, but many like me, will have English as a second language -- if we remember it at all. It would do us good, if we start having more Hebrew used in our Bibles. I suppose there would still be an argument if the Textus Receptus, q.v., The Biblical Position on The KJV Controversy should be used for the New Testament. Any translation that doesn't have the best Hebrew translations into English now should be discarded, as the King James that falls down on pointing out the preincarnate Christ, q.v., Defects of the KJV plus other errors in the Old Testament. So, while all us Anglophones have to depend on Bibles in our mongrel language of English, they should be the be the best translations available, such as the NASB.
Daniel Lee Ford wrote: "It is called easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, WORSHIPPED BY THE SAXON with peculiar ceremonies in the month of April." (x3)
"Herod, by paying respect to the "goddess Eostre" agrees with preacherjond who has "Easter" meaning a pagan ROMAN festival.
BTW the Roman army was filled with SOLDIERS FROM THE SAXON AREA earning their citizenship by mercenary work.
And so it was SAXONS who filled the ranks of the auxiliary detachment of ROMAN soldiers stationed in and around Jerusalem/Judea. Aye? And Herod Agrippa I (an Edomite king, NOT a Roman magistrate & having NO charge over Roman soldiers) kowtowed to these SAXONS during the Jewish Passover Week and these same SAXONS were the worshippers of a pagan ROMAN festival? Interesting!
Now, if you'd be so kind, would you provide the documentation for such an assertion? Show some sort of PROOF that there were oodles and oodles of SAXON mercenaries in Jerusalem/Judea at the time of ~44 A.D.
Or is it that you just enjoy "making stuff up" as you go along?
BTW, NO Roman "Eostre" festival mentioned in these:
preacherjond " It is called easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, worshipped by the Saxon with peculiar ceremonies in the month of April. "
When are those scholarship-Only girls going to get on the same page?
One has "pascha" meaning passover; another meaning 'festival'(CEV) ladies, ladies, stop bickering!
according to her proof taken from the scholar she chooses at the moment!
As I quoted the Britannica "It is called easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, worshipped by the Saxon with peculiar ceremonies in the month of April.
"Herod, by paying respect to the "goddess Eostre" agrees with preacherjond who has "Easter" meaning a pagan Roman festival.
BTW the Roman army was filled with soldiers from the Saxon area earning their citizenship by mercenary work.
So ... for the sake of their clinging to any mistranslation as "passover" in Acts 12:4 of whatever English bible they pick for that moment, they have a theology in a total muddle.
You'd wish these ladies would think this whole thing through a little better. Or at least quote with a modicum of accuracy a passage that is only a paragraph long from Britannica.
"It is called easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, worshipped by the Saxon with peculiar ceremonies.."
When are you KJV-Only boys going to get on the same page? One (preacherjond) has "Easter" meaning a pagan Roman festival; another (DLF) has it meaning the Christian observance of the Resurrection -- according to his proof taken from the Encyclopaedia Britannica! The latter admits to Christians celebrating "Easter" VERY early on in Church history ... extremely doubtful.
Anyway ...
If DLF is correct, then Herod, by paying respect to the Christian feast of Easter (in Acts 12:4) would have certainly vexed the Jews whom he aimed to please! Makes no sense.
_____
Ah! The Millennium! According to preacherjond, we have the reinstallation of the Jewish sacrificial system! Burnt offerings, sin offerings -- the whole nine yards -- to make reconciliation for the house of Israel!
So ... for the sake of your clinging to the mistranslation of Easter in Acts 12:4 of the KJV, you have a Millennial theology in a total muddle. Christ Who was the FULFILLMENT of ALL the sacrifices supposedly ruling and reigning right then & there presiding over ancient sacrifices which NOW made atonement for their sins.
You better think this whole thing through a little better, boys.
Having studied both modern and biblical Greek since high school (our Public School Latin teacher was a Christian Reformed teacher,and helped with Biblical Greek after school) and being well into my 4th decade of marriage to the eldest of a large Macedonian Greek family(I married the oldest of 11 kids!) I've been to my share of Greek Orthodox weddings, and learned many Orthodox Easter sayings- pertinent to this thread is-
DJC49 wrote: Then read Ezekiel 45:21!!! It reads: "In the first [month], in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the PASSOVER, A FEAST OF SEVEN DAYS; unleavened bread shall be eaten."
This passage in Ezekiel takes place in the millenial reign of Christ and is a memorial to the feast in Exodus of which you did not read or you would know that the Passover happened in one night.
How many nights did the Lord PASS OVER the Israelites? And then there were seven days of unleavened bread-- just like it says in Acts. "then were the days of unleavened bread"
You can jump thru all the hoops you want to throw out the true Word of God and keep your false Bibles-- but you'll be sorry you did.
"To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them"
Encyclopaedia Britannica 'thinks' "pascha" [πάσχα] is rightly translated "Easter"
This is a word for word quote from my own Hard Copy of the MDCCLXXI Encyclopaedia Britannica or, A DICTIONARY OF ARTS and SCIENCES. By a Society of GENTLEMEN in Scotland Vol II pg.464(gothic font)
"EASTER, a festival of the christian church, observed in memory of our Saviour's resurrection. The Greeks call it pasga, the Latins pascha, an Hebrew word signifying passage, applied to the Jewish feast of the passover. It is called easter in the English, from the goddess Eostre, worshipped by the Saxon with peculiar ceremonies in the month of April. The Asiatic churches kept their easter upon the very same day the Jews observed their passover; and others, on the first Sunday after the first full moon in the new year. This controversy was determined in the council of Nice, when it was ordained that easter should be kept upon one and the same day, which should always be a Sunday, in all christian Churches in the world. For the method of finding easter by calculation, see Vol I pg. 492."
preacherjond wrote: You need to go back and read the book of Exodus instead of an article written by unbelieving Jews.
Are you really this ignorant of the Scripture?
Good bye and good day.
Regardless of what you might think, preacherjond, the Jewish Passover (PESACH) is celebrated for 7 days -- 8 days outside of Israel. See: http://www.KINGJAMESBIBLEONLINE.org/Passover.php4 http://www.hartfordinstitute.org/ency/judaism.htm http://www.judaica-mall.com/glossary-terms.htm http://www.pleasanton.k12.ca.us/fhsweb/pagtakhan/nightvocab.doc
Don't believe these? Then read Ezekiel 45:21!!! It reads: "In the first [month], in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the PASSOVER, A FEAST OF SEVEN DAYS; unleavened bread shall be eaten."
_____
Now, for you to think that the Greek word "pascha" [πάσχα] is to be translated "Easter" and that this "Easter" refers to some ancient, pagan Roman festival is patently absurd.
29 times "pascha" is found in the KJV, and EVERYWHERE but in Acts 12:4 is it translated PASSOVER.
Sorry, but the KJV translators, in deference to some of the earlier English Bibles which preceded the KJV, mistranslated "pascha" to "Easter" and flatout got it WRONG.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Put the KJV up on the shelf along with your complete works of Shakespeare, and keep both out of the reach of children.
Cannot be done. There is a major difference between the scriptures and Shakespeare. What we need to keep out of children's reach is a corrupt culture and its works, not the historic English Bible.
Easter IS correct Easter's history scholarship only effeminate christianity documented and pastors With No Answers who can't answer simple questions like WHAT IS SCRIPTURE?or "THE BIBLE"? or YOUR FINAL AUTHORITY? IS IT TRUE THAT NO TRANSLATION IS INSPIRED? is "ONLY ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS WERE INSPIRED' a FORM OF DEISM? debate against your straw man 'magic' seen here: Bible Believer" Who Can't Produce His "Bible" reading this correspondence that he refused to answer—he has no tangible final authority. typical for the "only the originals are inspired" and "no translation can be inspired" crowd.They wish to steal the true Bible away from a believers heart and mind and replace it with nothing but their "opinion," making themselves their own final authority. Rummagers vs the Bible 5%short or complete?
No, PreacherJond, Easter, is not the correct translation, and that is well noted. Just like Jehovah, is not the name of God, while Yahweh, may be an imperfect attempt, it is better than Jehovah, personally I would prefer "YHWH" to either or the synonym, LORD. I would also suggest that you look up the Strong's numbers for Joshua and Jesus, you will come up with Yeshua for both. Good name, and I wouldn't mind if people would prefer that over the Greek, but Jesus is passable. No, Engineer, King James Onlyism, supports the idea that the The King James Bible, is some how "magically" superior to the others, it not as good as the NASB, Comparing Bible Translations--Conclusions. Put the KJV up on the shelf along with your complete works of Shakespeare, and keep both out of the reach of children.
113
There are a total of 152 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Brian Edwards | 7/17/2008
Dr. Alan Cairns | 3/16/2009
COMMENTS | 
"in Jerusalem"
john uk from wales: "lisa, if that is your testimony, i hope it is true. but amazed..."
