Was the resurrection on the Sabbath?

[TreeOfLife]

P.S. [to my last post above] Here’s I little word study re the Hebrew words of the Scriptures for ‘dawn’ and ‘dusk.’ Perhaps someone will find value in doing their own word studies of the words of the Word God?

[Planey]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Is the correct knowledge of when Jesus actually died and rose a salvation issue?

Asking questions is important to me.

Well good for you, TreeOfLife. I think it is also important.

However I have limited time available to me. If I find a question I have to decide if the question is important enough to spend my limited time resources to pursue it.

As Gerry has stated, one of the important things I consider: If I find the answer to this question, or not find the answer, will it make any difference to my relationship with my redeemer, or to my salvation?

If the answer to this question is no, it will make no difference, then I move on to other more important questions where the answer will make a difference.

Knowing what day Jesus was resurrected is not a salvation issue.

You keep counting the number of angels on the head of a pin.

Graeme

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Gerry Cabalo

Is the correct knowledge of when Jesus actually died and rose a salvation issue?

Mk 12:30,31 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: ... and ...thy neighbour as thyself.

1 Cor 2:2 ...Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

Umm, that’s it. All else either derives from or is redundant and/or superfluous. The rest of the compendium of the 66 books and 788,000 words (let alone the extraBiblical 30,000,000) is, therefor, moot – notwithstanding ‘Gd’s every word written by man as inspired by the HG’ – thingee.

The principal purpose for the gathering of ourselves together should center upon the sharing of potluck and meatless recipes; never mind those silly Bereans – or those questionable fundamentals...

Yes? No? Maybe?

[Daniel1632]

 

It follows from the above that your, Daniel 1632, model is based upon a

presumption that the crucifixion took place either on Aviv 14, Wednesday March

28, 31 CE or else on Aviv 14, Wednesday April 25, 31 CE, and that the more

common presumption is based upon the idea that the crucifixion took place on

Aviv 14, Friday April 27, 31 CE, as based upon a proclamation of men and not

upon any reckoning provided by the One that made heaven, and earth, and the sea,

and the fountains of waters.

 

       I guess I did not state what year I

thought the crucifixion was in.   This chart will clear up my opinion

on that:

 

[ClubV12]

Planey, your point is well taken, it's not a salvation issue. Indeed, if Christ had been raised ON/DURING the sabbath, I would not have a problem with that. I do belive he was raised early Sunday morning though and for me it illustrates the thoughtful and caring nature of Christ. While he would heal OTHERS on the Sabbath, not so for himself!

But the question is interesting and therefore worthy of discussion, for those that have time. Some of us kind of like to count the angels on the head of a pin and inspect every little detail. If such a search leads to a deeper understanding and a greater love, then it was time well spent.

[TreeOfLife]

Originally Posted By: TreeOfLife

Asking questions is important to me.

Well good for you' date=' TreeOfLife. I think it is also important.

However I have limited time available to me. If I find a question I have to decide if the question is important enough to spend my limited time resources to pursue it.

As Gerry has stated, one of the important things I consider: If I find the answer to this question, or not find the answer, will it make any difference to my relationship with my redeemer, or to my salvation?

If the answer to this question is no, it will make no difference, then I move on to other more important questions where the answer will make a difference.

Knowing what day Jesus was resurrected is not a salvation issue.

You keep counting the number of angels on the head of a pin.

Graeme

[/quote']

’A Salvation Issue?’

What is the Nature of our Ticket to Heaven?

- Being 100% in Control over our Destiny…

Dear Planey,

To me, one important aspect of ‘salvation’ is the various unique problems each one of us is suffering from in the here and now. Given that each of us are having unique experiences, the exact type of ‘salvation,’ i.e. the exact type of ‘solution’ or ‘answer’ will vary from person to person and from moment to moment. Thus, the beauty of it is that what is a “salvation issue” for one of us at one moment may or may not be “a salvation issue” for another at another moment.

But yes, on another level, we are all of us suffering from the many ‘sins of our fathers,’ that is, the various blindnesses, misconceptions, deceptions, etc. that we have all inherited from blind and misguided tradition and from a culture that is still very much colored by the errors taught by the Roman Catholic Church and by other forces of darkness operating behind the scenes. Among the sins that effect us the most are those that are tied to whichever calendar each of is using from day to day. If you stop and consider to what extent your own daily activities are affected by whatever is dictated by the calendar you happen to be using you may be waking up to a new realization. That is, you may be given a very real opportunity to be “saved out of your sins” by mending your ways and by correcting your daily and annual activities towards more of that which characterizes the Kingdom of God and those blessings that are uniquely tied to God’s very own calendar as taught us from the beginning in the Holy Scriptures, but which calendar has been increasingly obscured by the powers and activities so distinctively set forth in Daniel 7:25.

And, thinking about these things, it is indeed true that all of us are deep into sin, blinded by the misguided teachings we’ve all grown up with in each our societies. It is only by God’s grace and by God’s teachings, that any of us is once in a while rescued out of the mires of Satan in some particular, and even then it is only to the extent that we are each allowing ourself to be exposed to the pure teachings of the Holy Writ while staying clear of the distortions of the anti-truth propaganda bombarding us constantly through the whisperings of our neighbors and through the public media machine with all its ramifications.

Do any of us truly desire the heaven we are talking about in church? If so, why aren’t we doing more in the here and now towards realizing the particulars of the Kingdom of God taught us by our Saviour, Yeshua, the One called Messiah, or even “Jesus Christ?”

Yes, the particular problems you may be facing in your most important relationships in life may be different from the ones I am facing, and to that extent what is a “salvation issue” to me may or may not be a “salvation issue” to you. Yet, to the extent that any of us find something interesting and valuable, God may be able to teach us important things crucial to each our ‘salvation’ – even through one another.

The still small voice of God is talking to each of us in many different ways and by many different means. We are each created a unique living being with unique dreams and desires. If that wasn’t so we’d all be wishing to marry the same one at the same time, to have the same job at the same place, to eat the very same apple and none other, and that just wouldn’t work, would it?

Thus it follows that if these things that I am writing about in my posts is not such as is pleasing your taste buds at this particular time, then you are probably better off not reading my posts at all until such time as you are experiencing a real and true hunger for such subject matters. I am doing my best to attach headings to each of my posts to the effect that you may better know ahead of time whether the subject matter I am writing about in my often lengthy posts is worth your time reading or not. If you find you are wasting your time reading a post of mine that is dealing with subject matters outside your area of interest, I believe you are very much responsible for whatever undesirable feelings you are encountering as a consequence. Others may find great values where you don’t, and vice versa.

Let’s use our powers of control where we are given 100% control from the beginning – if only we’ll accept it. That is, the power to control our selves and that which God and none other has given each of us responsibility for, i.e. first of all our very own beingness and secondly our very own families. Let’s take care to learn and follow ever more and more the instructions of our Designer and Creator as taught us in the blueprint that we know of as the Holy Scriptures.

Let’s work on respecting the peculiarities of one another even where we do not have the time or the interest to know or understand what those peculiarities of our fellow men and women are all about, and I believe we’ll all feel more at ease and more secure while we are each of us building upon the dreams planted in our hearts from the very beginning by our great Creator and Saviour.

To the extent that we each trust our fellow man to be and to do whatever he or she will while yet within his or her own domain while not trespassing upon that which is ours, I am convinced that in return we will soon experience a corresponding trust and respect from each our neighbor and loved ones.

So long as the tip of the pin is pushing hard at a sensitive spot on my skin I may indeed be “counting the number of angels [stomping hard] on the head of a pin,” wouldn’t you?

So, in essence, I entirely agree with you… Thanks for your feedback!

Shabbat Shalom! Let peace be over your home and over your family this very Sabbath day,

Tree of Life©

PS. As a people God is leading even His beloved Seventh-day Adventist church ever closer to the truth. I believe that each of us have a responsibility for our contribution to that church of which we are each a part. When we are being alerted to errors in our teachings and in our practices, I believe that it is of the essence for each of us to stand up for our convictions and for that which our Lord and Saviour is leading us to from day to day.

There are errors in details within our teachings that are in need of correction and we should all attempt to do as the Bereans did when there is ‘a little one’ like ‘Paul’ coming our way with a message that at first may feel as though it may be a false accusation against us, while in truth it is merely pointing out a former area of blindness, an area of teaching where, until now, none have ventured to study deeply enough into the original firsthand witness as recorded in the original writings of the Word of God…

May I recommend Ellen White’s book Counsels on Sabbath School Work?

[TreeOfLife]

Originally Posted By: jasd

And we know that Abib ('Nisan') 15 was a Sabbath, yes? a high Sabbath; that is, an annual Sabbath.

[TreeOfLife]

Originally Posted By: John317

Have you looked into paragraph #14, which is the section that supposedly refers to or support worship on Sunday? Do you see any evidence that the text has been altered?

.

.

.

In Erik G. Jay’s New Testament Greek – An Introductory Grammar, p.27, I find that the ending “-hn” indicates the acc. sing. of certain masculine nouns.

.

.

.

Modifying and Correcting a Detail Within my Prior Post Entitled…

”Re Sunday Worship and Mistranslations vs. the Greek Didache”

Please replace the red font sentence quoted above using the following words:

.

.

.

In Erik G. Jay’s New Testament Greek – An Introductory Grammar, pp. 20 and 27, I find that the ending “-hn” indicates the acc. sing. of certain masculine and feminine nouns of the 1st declination. However, the word “kuriakos” is a feminine word belonging to the 2nd declination (p. 19) and, if I am not mistaken, the form “kuriakhn” is declined in accord with the rules for an adjective of the 2nd declination acc. sing. feminine (p. 36. Cf. pp. 20 and 32.) (Please, correct me if and where I am wrong!)

Considering that “kuriakhn” and “katakuriakhn” must, as far as I can tell, both be adjectives and not even nouns, how could “kata kuriakhn” possibly be translated “The Lord’s Day,” even after adding the corresponding noun, “kuriou,” the 4th word in the above quoted sentence from Didache 14:1? But perhaps I am only revealing my lack of insight into the intricacies of the Greek language?

.

.

.

Shabbat Shalom,

Tree of Life©

[Ted Oplinger]

While the charts have eye appeal, the proceeding on the premise that because "Sabbath" is in the Greek plural, there must be necessarily a different interpretation from that commonly taken, to me is a bit of a stretch.

Taking this to it's logical conclusion, most of the references to the Sabbath in the four Gospels must be treated in similar fashion, to be consistent - even where the context is clearly demonstrating a single day. Doing a quick check in the Greek versions I have, I find that MOST of the references to the Sabbath in the Greek are, in fact, in the plural, even when it clearly referencing a single Sabbath day.

Then, there are those instances where the Sabbath is referred to both plurally and singularly in the same event (the grain incident with the disciples in Mark 2 is a good example).

The Bible chronology of days around the Crucifixion/Resurrection account contains no language in the Greek different from the other Sabbath references in the NT accounts, where I must necessarily be clued into the Festivals to seek a meaning which does not much more than shroud the account in confusion to the average reader.

The Bible is remarkably consistent in the usage of language - such that even the simplest among us may read of the account and know what is spoken. Keep it simple, let God do the rest.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: TreeOfLife

Asking questions is important to me.

Well good for you' date=' TreeOfLife. I think it is also important.

However I have limited time available to me. If I find a question I have to decide if the question is important enough to spend my limited time resources to pursue it.

As Gerry has stated, one of the important things I consider: If I find the answer to this question, or not find the answer, will it make any difference to my relationship with my redeemer, or to my salvation?

If the answer to this question is no, it will make no difference, then I move on to other more important questions where the answer will make a difference.

Knowing what day Jesus was resurrected is not a salvation issue.

You keep counting the number of angels on the head of a pin.[/quote']

Thanks, Graeme! You expressed my thoughts better than I would have done it myself!

[jasd]

I adjure thee brethren that when thou, having taken the milk of the word sufficient to the building of bones – thou partakest also of the meat of the word – that thou mayest be fitted unto the creature of promise – new and glorified –

ready to give an answer to him who asketh of thine faith.

I adjure thee also that thine threescore and ten, having obtained unto the new and the glorified, bear witness wherewith thine glory obtaineth – that they, seeing, desireth also unto sonship

with that great Gd of Heaven. Forsooth, forsooth. –jasd 12:12

;-)

[Planey]

After due consideration, it has been decided that the book of jasd should not be included in the Sacred canon.

Graeme

[TreeOfLife]

pending...

[TreeOfLife]

Originally Posted By: TreeOfLife

.

.

.

2. Presumptions re the date of the day of crucifixion:

It follows from the above that your, Daniel 1632, model is based upon a presumption that the crucifixion took place either on Aviv 14, Wednesday March 28, 31 CE or else on Aviv 14, Wednesday April 25, 31 CE…

.

.

.

See TreeOfLife’s post at this link…

I guess I did not state what year I thought the crucifixion was in. This chart will clear up my opinion on that:

Some Questions Re the Admirable Work of Daniel 1632

Dear Daniel 1632,

I really admire the beauty and the completeness of the work you’ve been creating! You’ve surely made a great many discoveries into truth and reality as it really happened and contrary to the forces of deception. There seem to remain though, or so I believe until you or someone else show me contrariwise, a number of errors and misconceptions to be ironed out and corrected in your book as currently published on the web… No doubt the errors could be in the eyes of the beholder, me that is, but, if so, perhaps you would please kindly help me by pointing me in the right direction?

The day before your above quoted post I was reading in your book and realized my error in believing that you were among all those that still believe that the crucifixion occurred in 31 CE. Yes, I agree that your Abib 14, 34 CE was indeed a Wednesday. There is full support for that from NASA’s Phases of the Moon pages and from the calendar I was linking to in my prior post. Please forgive me my false assumption!

Thanks for sharing, in your book, the info re “VAT 5047!” Such data serves as most important anchor points in history.

Re 34 AD as the year of Crucifixion

Unfortunately for your model, year 34 is not among the years listed as possible years of crucifixion per my discoveries. Cf. item #20 under this link. The reason for it not being a possible year is that it doesn’t fit my model, which is based partly on Yeshua’s and Mark’s statements re the beginning of Passover as recorded in Matthew 26:2 and in Mark 14:1, respectively. That is, to me it is quite clear, based upon the Greek Textus Receptus alone, as much later confirmed to me by Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew, that the beginning of Abib 14 in the year of crucifixion was concurrent with the beginning of the Third Day of the week in that particular year, i.e. Abib 14 began at the sunset of a Monday evening. Extensive further confirmation for the veracity of my model may be found under these links of mine:

1. Astronomical observations per contemporary records;

2. Numerous more or less exactly dated events within the New Testament concurring within themselves as well as with the anchor points based upon said astronomical observations; and

3. Numerous more or less exactly dated events within secular history as recorded by Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Phlegon, and others, all concurring within themselves as well as with the anchor points based upon the above astronomical observations.

If you are not prepared to accept my above described model re Abib 14 of that year being a Tuesday, then I beg you to please at least consider carefully the following:

Re your SP and AY reckoning

As you’ll be able to see in this Excel spread sheet of mine, I agree with you that the 20th Scriptural year of Artaxerxes, as referenced in Nehemiah 1:1 and 2:1, fell in 445/444 BCE.

I am not certain that I correctly understand the difference between your “Anniversary Years” and your “Standard Persian Years?” I assume that what you mean with “Standard Persian Years” is the Babylonian spring to spring calendar beginning each year with Nisanu 1. Apparently what you mean with “Anniversary Years” is a calendar uniquely based upon, and beginning its year with, the throne shift between Xerxes and Artaxerxes I? However, so far as I am aware, there is no evidence that such calendars were ever used anywhere besides when reckoning the birthdays or the age of a living being. Perhaps you have not considered the common practice, at that time, of double dating letters using both the Babylonian calendar and the Egyptian calendar, i.e. as evidenced by many of the Elephantine papyri? Perhaps, if you weren’t considering both of those calendars for your purposes, you found an apparent solution to a problem with your reckoning, by creating such an “Anniversary Year” calendar?

However, as you may also see from my spread sheet, the event recorded in Nehemiah 2:1 did fall in Artaxerxes’ 21st year of reign as reckoned by the Babylonian Calendar that was used in Persia at that time. (Nehemiah 1:1 references an event in Artaxerxes’ 20th year of reign per the Babylonian calendar.) As you may deduce from the table under this link, Nehemiah 1:1 references a day in the 21st Egyptian Year and Nehemiah 2:1 references a date in the 22nd Egyptian Year of Artaxerxes’ reign. It follows that, if your SP and AY are somehow linked to the Babylonian and the Egyptian calendars, then, for Nehemiah 2:1, your reckoning is one year off from the reckoning of the Babylonian calendar and 2 years off from the reckoning of the Egyptian calendar, i.e. as I perceive the reckoning of these events?

(You may notice that my discoveries as reported in my table re the Elephantine papyri (and elsewhere) resolve the three enigmas falsely attributed to “scribal error” in The Chronology of Ezra 7 by Siegfrid H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood. Cf. AP 8, AP 10, and Kraeling 8 at this link.)

Re “Xerxes died in Chislev…”

I am curious to find out your basis for stating “Xerxes died in Chislev 465, and Artaxerxes assumed the throne?” Based upon my discoveries from studying the Elephantine papyri and more I deduce that said throne shift occurred between the beginning of the Scriptural Calendar year, Tishri 22, 465 BCE, and the beginning of the Egyptian Calendar year, Thoth 1, 465 BCE. Notice that this makes the accession year of Artaxerxes I (as reckoned by both the Babylonian and Scriptural calendars) end in the 2nd year of Artaxerxes I as reckoned per the Egyptian Calendar!

Would you please share with me your exact reference re Chislev?

Re your reckoning of ‘sevenths’ referencing “Daniel 9:24-26”

Between the beginning of 445 BC and the end of 33 AD there are no more than 33 - ( - 447 ) = 480 years. Yet, as best I can tell from your diagram in your post above, you are claiming that within those 480 years you can fit 69 full weeks of years, i.e. 69 x 7 = 483 years. How do you do that while yet placing the initiating event within, and not before, the first of those 480 years and the concluding point in time within, and not after, the last of those 480 years? In other words, how do you fit 483 full years into any 480 year sequence?

Looking further at the same diagram of yours I notice that you are reckoning a full 7 x 7 = 49 years beginning within 445 BC and ending within 402 BC. But between the beginning of 445 BC and the end of 402 BC there are no more than 445 – 401 = 44 years. How do you do that, fitting 49 full years into 44 years?

Likewise you are reckoning a full 62 x 7 = 434 years within a time frame beginning within 396 BC and ending within 33 AD. But between those last two points of time there are no more than 396 + 33 = 429 years. How do you do that, fitting 434 full years into 429 years?

For your reference, these are the results I’ve been blessed with lately re the chronology touching on Daniel’s prophecies and more…

- - - - -

But, perhaps that is enough questions for one post?

Looking forwards to your answers to my questions,

Shalom,

Tree of Life©

PS. If you’d kindly provide me with your unlocked versions of the following pages of your book as published on the web, it would facilitate my studies of your paradigm: Pages locked for copying: 31, 87, 96-99, 130, 140, 143, 209, and 210.

[TreeOfLife]

Excuse me for not reading the entire thread. But I believe that Christ could have risen on Saturday. Granted .... it was AFTER Sabbath and towards the first day of the week. But if we consider midnight as the drawing line ... we just don't know which day He rose from the grave. I don't believe the Bible tell us?

Am I wrong?

”Am I wrong?”

Yes, Redwood, I am pretty sure you are…

I hope you don’t mind me saying so up front?

If you care to begin studying the Bible for yourself re this question of yours and related issues, may I suggest that this link of mine just may prove exciting and helpful to you?

May Yeshua the Messiah guide you safely and securely every step of your way towards the Kingdom of God,

Tree of Life©

[phkrause]

According to the SDA bible commentary the crucifixion was in the year 30 or 31 as I've stated before. If you go to the Jewish Calendar you'll see that in AD 30 the Pesach was celebrated on 21 and 22 of Nissan (Wed and Thur) or April 10 and 11. If you go with AD 31 Pesach is from Mon-Wed (Nissan 14,15, and 16) or March 24-26. And since I accept that Jesus was crucified on friday, I go with the year AD 30.

pk

[TreeOfLife]

According to the SDA bible commentary the crucifixion was in the year 30 or 31 as I've stated before. If you go to the Jewish Calendar you'll see that in AD 30 the Pesach was celebrated on 21 and 22 of Nissan (Wed and Thur) or April 10 and 11. If you go with AD 31 Pesach is from Mon-Wed (Nissan 14,15, and 16) or March 24-26. And since I accept that Jesus was crucified on friday, I go with the year AD 30.

pk

?

I hear you, P Krause,

But I am not sure I understand your words? You are saying that “in AD 30 the Pesach was celebrated on 21 and 22 of Nissan (Wed and Thur) or April 10 and 11.” That doesn’t make sense to me at all because per Leviticus 23 the Pesach, i.e. Passover, also called ‘the Preparation of Passover,’ is always on Abib / Nissan 14, never on any other day of that month. Abib 15 through Abib 21 is the Feast of Unleavened Bread, however sometimes also referenced as a whole, i.e. Abib 14-21, as Pesach. In 30 AD the beginning of Abib / Nissan was almost certainly at sunset March 23 or March 24. It follows that Abib 14, Passover, fell on April 6 or 7, 30 AD, i.e. on the 14th day after the new moon crescent was first seen on March 23 or 24. April 6 was a Thursday, beginning Wednesday at sunset. April 7 was a Friday, beginning Thursday at sunset. Nissan 21 is always the 7th day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, consistently recognizable in the Greek Textus Receptus by the words ‘mia ton sabbaton’ or similar – and in KJV consistently recognizable by the mistranslated words “the first day of the week.” In consequence of the above, in 30 AD, Nissan 21 fell on either Wednesday or Thursday, beginning at sunset on the night before, i.e. on April 12 or 13, not on “April 10 and 11” as you say?

Shalom,

Tree of Life©

[jasd]

>>After due consideration, it has been decided that the book of jasd should not be included in the Sacred canon.<<

Upon that agreement - howsabout the pseudepigraphal, yes? the extraBiblical, no?

Anytheways, it would only make sense to one who endeavoured to go beyond the meanest absolute in Biblical understanding, yes?

Salve! Planey (or should that be salvific?) :-o

Having fun...

[Planey]

We may allow the book as an addendum to the Apocrypha.

Graeme

[jasd]

>>We may allow the book as an addendum to the Apocrypha.<<

Okay, I’m good with that; or mebbe even as a ligament text...

I hold much of the Apocrypha in respect, as the disposition of the Ten Northern Tribes with much of The Tribes of Judah – together the Caucasians – is found. They, together, almost represent the two staffs of Judah and Joseph. And...

where else in Writ might one find a cure for cataracts

Besides, what revered pastoral minister was it that stated, “I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it”? Nothing wrong with wise, yes? After all,

Jesus Christ and the Apostles quoted ‘bout a dozen times from the Apocrypha.

Thanks for the compliment

(the Apocrypha was, for the most part, included in the Bible until Puritans and Presbyterians lobbied for its removal from Writ – finding, in AD1825, an ally in the British and Foreign Bible Society. In AD1880 the American Bible Society followed suit re the KJV. Weird that self-annointed parochialists determined the contents of your Bible, yes? )

Allright, back to discussing the fact that Jesus Christ arose on a late (in that particular week/year) Sabbath afternoon... and reasons why it behooves the devout to know such things.

[Daniel1632]

Hi TreeOfLife,

You will find the relevant data for Xerxes death in "The Chronology of Ezra 7", Siegfried H. Horn, Lynn H. Wood, Review and Herald. To arrive at Chislev all you have to do is cross check their dates with Parker and Duberstein's Babylonian Chronology.

"In the 20th year" (Neh. 1:1). The passage is cryptic. It does not say "of Artaxerxes" doubtless because it was not "official" SP. Only in 2:1 does it say that. The 2:1 date is the SP = Standard Persian date starting in Nisan 445. In 1:1, "Chislev" refers to the month of Artaxerxes accession to the throne, such that Neh 1:1 marks his 20th anniversary. What it is telling us is that to convert to a Tishri basis we must back shift the 20 SP by 6 months such that the anniversary date lies in the 20th year. The crytic part is that doing so synchronizes the Jubilee. The 20th year is in fact the 20th year of the Jubilee cycle. And Finegan tells us "Later the point from which to start the [Jubilee] count was taken to be the first year of Arataxerxes ... rather than the seventh" (§236). Finegan is an excellent scholarly souce. I bought my revised edition at the SDA bookstore in La Sierra Ca.

Thus AY = Anniversary Year is nearly coincident with the Jubilee cycle. I have a vast amount of data establishing the Jubilee and Sabbatical year on other evidence, which is used to decrypt the meaning of "In the 20th year". So if any Jew needed to justify saying in the 20th year to the Persians, it would be including Artaxerxes accession year, and justified as the proper tishri-Nisan shift based on his accession, but if to themselves, it was the 20th year of the Jubilee cycle. All of this is just explanation. In figuring Daniel 9, I just use the SP date placing Nisan 1 of the 20th year in 445 BC.

If I assume correctly, you place the resurrection on Monday. I have to disagree with this because it is not a Sabbath as specified in Matthew 28:1, "On the later of the Sabbaths, at the dawning on the first of the Sabbaths ....".

I have to disagree with Shem Tov too, because I don't accept that as a valid Hebrew Matthew, but as a translation made from a Greek original (and a very poor one at that). I see you linked to Nehemia Gordon as your source. The only thing that Gordon DOES that I consider valid is produce new moon reports. What he believes is total heresy. He is an opportunist and an unbeliever -- as well as a Karaite, which is bad enough.

I see you consider the XMAS star as a comet 15/16 B.C. This is wrong. Ernest L. Martin, "The Star that Astonished the World" is the one and only correct explanation of the star, and is favorably reveiwed in Finegan. Yeshua was born in 3 BC.

I see you place Claudius regin in AD 26. This is totally wrong. Tiberius was Emperor in AD 26.

I see you place the crucifixion in AD 18. In order to achieve this you have to trash the entire history of Rome. With the amount of revisionism and postuating of conspiracy in secular chronology used by the bible, I would have so say that there is absolutely no apologetical value in your result. For who can trust it? However, I've seen a lot of wierd stuff coming out of Eurpoe on the Passion, so maybe you are just an innocent victum of this wild speculative atmosphere.

I think it would be plain from the chart that sabbatical years are being counted and not seven year periods. Of course you can't fit 483 years between. But where does Daniel 9 say 483 years? It doesn't. If you read Hebrew and understand a little Aramaic, it should be clear to you that a "seven" is in fact the "seventh" year (cf. Deut. 15:9) shnat ha-sheva.

The pages are only locked for printing. You can download them and use Acrobat to read them. I did that on purpose. The only disadvantage is convience, and you already know the remedy for that.

[Daniel1632]

While the charts have eye appeal, the proceeding on the premise that because "Sabbath" is in the Greek plural, there must be necessarily a different interpretation from that commonly taken, to me is a bit of a stretch.

Taking this to it's logical conclusion, most of the references to the Sabbath in the four Gospels must be treated in similar fashion, to be consistent - even where the context is clearly demonstrating a single day. Doing a quick check in the Greek versions I have, I find that MOST of the references to the Sabbath in the Greek are, in fact, in the plural, even when it clearly referencing a single Sabbath day.

Then, there are those instances where the Sabbath is referred to both plurally and singularly in the same event (the grain incident with the disciples in Mark 2 is a good example).

The Bible chronology of days around the Crucifixion/Resurrection account contains no language in the Greek different from the other Sabbath references in the NT accounts, where I must necessarily be clued into the Festivals to seek a meaning which does not much more than shroud the account in confusion to the average reader.

The Bible is remarkably consistent in the usage of language - such that even the simplest among us may read of the account and know what is spoken. Keep it simple, let God do the rest.

Please see the link below. It explains where the plural form in the Greek came from.

It also explains why your concerns are not valid.

Σαββατων in the LXX and NT and

related word Studies

[TreeOfLife]

Clashing Paradigms – A Viable Solution

Hi TreeOfLife,

You will find the relevant data for Xerxes death in "The Chronology of Ezra 7", Siegfried H. Horn, Lynn H. Wood, Review and Herald. To arrive at Chislev all you have to do is cross check their dates with Parker and Duberstein's Babylonian Chronology.

"In the 20th year" (Neh. 1:1). The passage is cryptic. It does not say "of Artaxerxes" doubtless because it was not "official" SP. Only in 2:1 does it say that. The 2:1 date is the SP = Standard Persian date starting in Nisan 445. In 1:1, "Chislev" refers to the month of Artaxerxes accession to the throne, such that Neh 1:1 marks his 20th anniversary. What it is telling us is that to convert to a Tishri basis we must back shift the 20 SP by 6 months such that the anniversary date lies in the 20th year. The crytic part is that doing so synchronizes the Jubilee. The 20th year is in fact the 20th year of the Jubilee cycle. And Finegan tells us "Later the point from which to start the [Jubilee] count was taken to be the first year of Arataxerxes ... rather than the seventh" (§236). Finegan is an excellent scholarly souce. I bought my revised edition at the SDA bookstore in La Sierra Ca.

Thus AY = Anniversary Year is nearly coincident with the Jubilee cycle. I have a vast amount of data establishing the Jubilee and Sabbatical year on other evidence, which is used to decrypt the meaning of "In the 20th year". So if any Jew needed to justify saying in the 20th year to the Persians, it would be including Artaxerxes accession year, and justified as the proper tishri-Nisan shift based on his accession, but if to themselves, it was the 20th year of the Jubilee cycle. All of this is just explanation. In figuring Daniel 9, I just use the SP date placing Nisan 1 of the 20th year in 445 BC.

If I assume correctly, you place the resurrection on Monday. I have to disagree with this because it is not a Sabbath as specified in Matthew 28:1, "On the later of the Sabbaths, at the dawning on the first of the Sabbaths ....".

I have to disagree with Shem Tov too, because I don't accept that as a valid Hebrew Matthew, but as a translation made from a Greek original (and a very poor one at that). I see you linked to Nehemia Gordon as your source. The only thing that Gordon DOES that I consider valid is produce new moon reports. What he believes is total heresy. He is an opportunist and an unbeliever -- as well as a Karaite, which is bad enough.

I see you consider the XMAS star as a comet 15/16 B.C. This is wrong. Ernest L. Martin, "The Star that Astonished the World" is the one and only correct explanation of the star, and is favorably reveiwed in Finegan. Yeshua was born in 3 BC.

I see you place Claudius regin in AD 26. This is totally wrong. Tiberius was Emperor in AD 26.

I see you place the crucifixion in AD 18. In order to achieve this you have to trash the entire history of Rome. With the amount of revisionism and postuating of conspiracy in secular chronology used by the bible, I would have so say that there is absolutely no apologetical value in your result. For who can trust it? However, I've seen a lot of wierd stuff coming out of Eurpoe on the Passion, so maybe you are just an innocent victum of this wild speculative atmosphere.

I think it would be plain from the chart that sabbatical years are being counted and not seven year periods. Of course you can't fit 483 years between. But where does Daniel 9 say 483 years? It doesn't. If you read Hebrew and understand a little Aramaic, it should be clear to you that a "seven" is in fact the "seventh" year (cf. Deut. 15:9) shnat ha-sheva.

The pages are only locked for printing. You can download them and use Acrobat to read them. I did that on purpose. The only disadvantage is convience, and you already know the remedy for that.

[TreeOfLife]

A Reminder,

- Just in Case You Missed My Challenge and My Question for You…

Hi TreeOfLife,

You will find the relevant data…

Originally Posted By: TreeOfLife

Clashing Paradigms – A Viable Solution

.

.

.

A viable solution to our clashing paradigms

…

In the light of that corner stone the cracks in Ptolemy’s Canon of Kings can be readily perceived for anyone willing to take a close enough look. I believe my article on that particular should be clear enough for most to understand, and brief enough for each to have time enough for reading and considering in depth. And most particularly, I have little or no doubt but that you, Daniel 1632, will be able to see the light in my article, should you venture to scrutinize it’s every detail?

.

.

.

May the “bright light set up behind” us keep each of us safely upon our path,

Shalom,

Tree of Life©