Nazarene Space

Hello All -
 
This matter came up in a different discussion and Beryl asked me to make it a separate discussion.
 
The Jews no longer observe The Passover, which is the 14th of Abib / Nissan.
 
They only observe the The Feast of Unleavened Bread from the 15th to the 21st.
 
 4.  These are the feasts of the Lord, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.
 5.  In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover.
 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.    Leviticus 23.4-6
 
I have documented all the relevant facts from scripture and The Jewish Encyclopedia here:
 
 
If I am in error please show me where, for I don't like being wrong about anything
 
In the exodus they slaughtered the lamb right at the end of the 13th/begining of the 14th and they were to stay in their homes all night long on the 14th, they gathered in Ramses during the day of the 14th and left Egypt in the night of the 15th.
 
 And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.           Numbers 33.3
 
In Jesus day He took the bread and the wine, was arrested, tried, died, and was in the grave on the 13th = The Day of Preparation for The Passover.
 
 14.  And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
 15.  But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.     John 19.14-15
 
The Passover was eaten after nightfall which began the new Day = the 14th - The Passover
 
27.  Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.
 28.  Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.
 29.  Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man?    John 18.27-29
 
Anyhow I present more evidence on that page above, please examine and show me where I have gone wrong.
 
Many Blessings -
 
Jim

Views: 1606

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ben Avraham,

This particular issue isn't an issue with the Greek text.  In fact the Greek text can be interpreted in such a way that it makes sense, which can't be said for the Peshitta.

Please review the following verses taken directly from Dr. James Murdock's translation of the Peshitta:

Matthew 26:17 - And on the first day of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, and said to him: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the Passover ?  Given the context, we see that the 14th of Aviv is being spoken of.

Luke 22:15 - And he said to them: I have greatly desired to eat this passover with you, before I suffer. This is the parallel account in Luke,  so by context we see this is still referring to the 14th, which is in full accord with the letter of the Law of Lev 23:5.

Now, going backwards in time to before the meal started (we are still talking about  the 14th) we have:

Matthew 26:20 - And when it was evening, he reclined with his twelve disciples.   Matthew 26:17 sets the time period in question to the 14th of Aviv.  Luke 22:15 establishes from Yeshua's mouth that it was a Passover Seder.  Here we see that AT EVENING Yeshua sat down for the meal which would follow.

Now the Rabbinic defintion of Evening in connection with Passover is 3pm. 

Tell me this, Ben Avraham, did Yeshua eat his Passover Meal with the Apostles at 3pm on the 14th?  No, he died at exactly that hour (and the exact timing of Yeshua's death is part of a great mystery).  Either way, as I see it, the Peshitta makes less sense than the Greek.

If you say that Evening in Matthew 26:20 refers to the 13th I will respond that nowhere in Scriptures is the 13th ever considered to be part of the days called 'unleavened bread', and that Matthew 26:17, even in the Peshitta, clarifies that the last supper is on the 14th.

If you can, please explain how the above verses, taken directly from the Peshitta, are to be reconciled.  It is kind of lazy to  always fall back on "the Greek text is bad" when you don't understand something when the Peshitta can be shown to be worse.



Ben Avraham said:

Throughout this whole thread on big issue has come to light in my eyes.

It is very obvious that the Brit Chadashah (New Testament) has been "tampered" with by the xtians.

So, how much of it can we actually trust?

Many, if not all the xtian precepts, are anti-Torah, anti-Tanakh, and it is obvious again the Romans role has been re-written for a Gentile readership, so again, can we trust any of it?

Many go against the "Rabbinical" ways, to embrace the xtian ways and thought, but again, with the advent of tampered scripture how much of this goes against the Word of HaShem for political reasons (xtian).

At least the "Rabbinical" ways are consistent with the Tanakh, and not a "New" Religion and "New" interpretation, I still think 2000 years of our great sages are a lot more trust worthy than people's own "New" translations.

And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.           Numbers 33.3


The word "morrow" here is מחרת (construct form) and typically refers to the morning or next daylight after. The KJV translators correctly rendered this as "morrow" whereas in archaic English "morrow" refers to "morning" (morn, morewen + suffix -ing <- click the link here).


- Shalom

Deut 16:1 says that the Sons of Israel left Egypt at night.  If you consider that fact in conjunction with the verse you quoted you should see that  מחרת   refers to the next calendar day since they left at night, the night of the 15th to be exact.  It is actually impossible that it would mean "morning or the daylight after".

Erik Adoniqam said:

And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.           Numbers 33.3


The word "morrow" here is מחרת (construct form) and typically refers to the morning or next daylight after. The KJV translators correctly rendered this as "morrow" whereas in archaic English "morrow" refers to "morning" (morn, morewen + suffix -ing <- click the link here).


- Shalom

Good point. I don't recall reading that. I'll look into it further. 

Thanks

Yirmeyahu said:

Deut 16:1 says that the Sons of Israel left Egypt at night.  If you consider that fact in conjunction with the verse you quoted you should see that  מחרת   refers to the next calendar day since they left at night, the night of the 15th to be exact.  It is actually impossible that it would mean "morning or the daylight after".

Erik Adoniqam said:

And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.           Numbers 33.3


The word "morrow" here is מחרת (construct form) and typically refers to the morning or next daylight after. The KJV translators correctly rendered this as "morrow" whereas in archaic English "morrow" refers to "morning" (morn, morewen + suffix -ing <- click the link here).


- Shalom

@Ben Avraham

I certainly share your frustrations. However, that is where textual criticism comes into play. It, coupled with the rule of establishing testimony by two or three, can be a friend and rectify most issues.

If you read my book The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds you will see that the Peshitta was revised to better agree with the Byzantine Greek. 

The Old Syriac and Hebrew Matthew and even the other language witnesses to the older more Semitic Western Text type are better witnesses.

Perhaps you should give specific examples of instances that do not evaporate when looked at in the Hebrew and Aramaic with a Jewish perspective.   I have been over every word and know of no such passage.  But perhaps I can dispel some Christian misinterpretations if you give specific examples.



Ben Avraham said:

I have your book, but why are the Gospels and the Pauline letters, anti-Jewish, pro-Roman?

Why is Paul, who is supposed to be a Pharisee quoting Greek Tanakh, instead of the Hebrew Tanakh and getting it wrong?

Much of Paul, it seems is a lie, I even have your book on Paul, but I am still confused.

Everything points to the entire Brit Chadashah being the cause for a Goyim Messiah not a Jewish Messiah.

It seems to disagree with the Tanakh in too many places.

It all boils down to what CAN we trust in the Brit Chadashah?  So far it seems not much....
 
James Trimm said:

If you read my book The Hebrew and Aramaic Origin of the New Testament at http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds you will see that the Peshitta was revised to better agree with the Byzantine Greek. 

The Old Syriac and Hebrew Matthew and even the other language witnesses to the older more Semitic Western Text type are better witnesses.

Ben Avraham,

I hope this topic isn't shaking your faith in the Most High nor in His Messiah.  You said that you feel the NT must be falsified in places, because, I surmise, you can't believe the Rabbis are wrong about anything.  I believe I can prove to you that the Rabbinic Passover practice is incorrect from the Torah alone, independent of any supposed errors in the NT, (and I will post just such a study in the next week or so). Thus it is obvious that the problem doesn't lie in the Greek or Aramaic text of the NT but in the Rabbinic Tradition (and If you can prove me wrong then by all means, please do so).   Instead of becoming disparaged you should try to arrive at the truth via study of God's Word.

You should accept that the Rabbis are not infallible.  Yeshua said that he favors those who follow him wherever he goes (Rev 14:4).  I think you should be open to the idea that to YHWH first, to Messiah second, and a very distant third to the Rabbis should be your allegiance. I am definitely not saying you should become a xtian but why reject every bit of doctrine that conflicts with the Rabbis? They are only human, as a thorough study of the Bible will show.  If you kept the Passover on the 14th would you be less of a Jew?  Of course not; you would be the most enlightened Jew on your block, and if anyone asked you why you could show them precisely why, from Scriptures.

>Paul, states he studied under Gamliel,

>but there is no evidence of this what so ever.

 

Absence of evidence is no evidence of absence.  The Torah says Moses studied in the House of Pharoah but there is no Egyptian record of this fact.

 

I find evidence in Paul's masterful use of the Seven Rules of Hillel (Hillel being Gamliel's grandfather.

 

>Paul,  states under the Judaism in Damascus he hunted down

>the New Believers, however he would have to be working for the

>Romans as a political assassin not the Pharasees.

 

There are actually a number of possiblities.  There were two different bodies knon as the Sanhedrin at the time, a Pharisaic body which we read about in the Mishna tractate Sanhedrin made of 71 members and headed by Hillel and his descendents (who were always of the tribe of Judah) and a political body made up of Pharisees and Sadducees and headed by the High Priest.  This is the Sanhedrin mentioned in the Gospels and Josephus.  The High Priest who headed it was appointed by Rome and was a Sadducee. 

 

Also the believers that Paul pursued in Damascus were described as "the Way" and were probably Essene folowers of Yeshua. 

 

I see nothing about the story that is impossible.

 

>Paul, quotes from the Hebrew Bible in his epistles,

>but he used the Greek Septuagint translation verses

>the Hebrew Translation, no Jewish Pharisee would do that.

>(Macoby, the Mythmaker, page 71)

 

The claim that Paul uses the LXX is without merit.  His quotes do not alwasy agree with the Masoretic Text, but since the Masoretic Text (MT) did not exist until nearly 1,000 years later, it would be disingenuous to expect them to do so.  Paul's quotes sometimes agree with the MT against the LXX, sometimes with the LXX against the MT and sometimes with the Peshitta Aramaic Tanak against one or both of those.  In fact this is characteristic of Hebrew Tanak manuscripts of the Second Temple era as found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, so Paul simply quotes the Hebrew texts that were before him in the first century, and not the much later MT, and this is exactly as it should be.

 

>Paul quotes Hosea 13:14 [1Cor. 15:55] and quotes the Greek Septuagint

>instead of the correct Hebrew Tanakh.

 

Actually Pauls’ quote here also agrees with the Peshitta Aramaic Tanak against the LXX.  The passage has not survived in the Dead Sea Scrolls, so the Masoretic Text stands alone in this reading.  I see no reason to assume that the MT is always “the correct Hebrew Tanak” even when it disagrees with all other major witnesses and even the oldest witnesses.   Especially since many instances where the Dead Sea Scrolls have survived they have often sided with the LXX and Peshitta Tanak when both disagree with the MT (Psalm 22:17(16) is a prime example). 

 

 

>Paul gets Duet 21:23 wrong which a Pharisee would have not.

 

Ok you need to tell me where and how he got it “wrong”….

 

>Even the Ebonites say he was not a born Jew but a convert.  Again Macoby.

 

I am not aware of this can you tell me where this claim actually comes from?  And even if the claim where true, why the Ebionite claim would hold any greater weight than the Nazarene claim?

 

>It goes on and on.

>The Virgin birth seems to be derived by Paganism concepts.

 

Secularists say that the Biblical Creation and Flood stories are derived from pagan concepts.  They also say that the Torah is derived from the Code of Hammurabi and that Ester and Mordecai are derived from pagan Ishtar and Mardek (and I could go on and on).  The point is that an argument that proves to much, proves nothing at all.  We simply already know that HaSatan is a counterfeiter.

 

>The two Genealogies both exclude Yeshua from being a Messiah.

 

They are both compatible and neither does, but if you think they somehow do, be specific.

 

>Judas (Whose name means Jews), seems to be a made up character

>to turn the Goyim against the Jews.

 

Why do you say that?  That is complete speculation.  Judas (Y’hudah) was a very common name.

 

 



Ben Avraham said:

Please do not get me wrong, I am not trying to argue with you at all, I truly am confused.

I read the book Kosher Jesus and it makes much sense in many areas as well as a few of Macobys books.

I always questioned the differences of the Messiah based on xtian and Jewish thought and could not find a common ground.

Paul, states he studied under Gamliel, but there is no evidence of this what so ever.

Paul,  states under the Judaism in Damascus he hunted down the New Believers, however he would have to be working for the Romans as a political assassin not the Pharasees.

Paul, quotes from the Hebrew Bible in his epistles, but he used the Greek Septuagint translation verses the Hebrew Translation, no Jewish Pharisee would do that. (Macoby, the Mythmaker, page 71)

Paul quotes Hosea 13:14 and quotes the Greek Septuagint instead of the correct Hebrew Tanakh.

Paul gets Duet 21:23 wrong which a Pharisee would have not.

Even the Ebonites say he was not a born Jew but a convert.  Again Macoby.

It goes on and on.

The Virgin birth seems to be derived by Paganism concepts.

The two Genealogies both exclude Yeshua from being a Messiah.

Judas (Whose name means Jews), seems to be a made up character to turn the Goyim against the Jews.

I am not questioning Yeshua, do not get me wrong, I am questioning, what can we trust in the Brit Chadashah?
 
James Trimm said:

Perhaps you should give specific examples of instances that do not evaporate when looked at in the Hebrew and Aramaic with a Jewish perspective.   I have been over every word and know of no such passage.  But perhaps I can dispel some Christian misinterpretations if you give specific examples.

Hello Yirmeyahu + Ben Avarham -

 

The only problem I see in the relevant scriptures is the addition of the word "feast" in Matthew 26.17 in the KJV - both the Aramaic original and the Greek translations lack it, and it obviously was not the first day of The Feast of Unleavened Bread.- it was the day before The Passover, which like it or not is the 14th

 

The prepartion for the 14th is the 13th

 

The day the leavening must be removed from the home if The LORD's command that all leaven be out of the home on the 14th.

And Jesus said He fervantly desired to eat that years Passover, but He was unable to because He was dead by the time the Passover was eaten the night after He died, the night of The Passover, the 14th of Abib, that is why The Jewish leaders would not enter the Judgment Hall, so they would not defile themselves before eating The Passover

 

27.  Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.
 28.  Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover       John 18.27+28

 

They were eating it at the right time.

 

The lambs were being slaughtered while Christ was on the cross

 

That is what His prayer in the garden that night:

 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.    Matthew 26.39

 

Christ's fervant desire to eat The Passover that year gave way to The Father's will.

 

Nowhere is the "last supper" ever called The Passover, and there was no mention of any lamb being eaten.

 

And no where does scripture say the eating of the bread and the wine supplants the eating of the lamb,

 

There is no doubt in my mind that the Apostles locked themselves in the upper chamber (they were still holed up days later) and ate The Passover lamb the night after Christ died just as it is supposed to be eaten:

 

And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the Lord's passover.       Exodus 12.11

 

They were scared for their lives - and I bet The Father had a hard time passing over Judah that night

 

And I bet they stayed inside as The LORD commands:

 

 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning.   Exodus 12.22

 

Jesus was out walking around the night He was arrested - it could not have been The Passover or that would have been sin.

 

And we are flat out told it was the day of preparation for The Passover:

 

 16.And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!
 15.  But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar.     John 19.14+15

 

Everything happened exactly according to schedual, Jesus died at the end of the 13th, very beginning of the 14th, exactly when the Passover lambs had to be slain in order for the Israelites to stay in their homes during the dark portion of the 14th while the The LORD passed over Egypt.

 

The reason The Jews no longer remove the leavening on the night of the 13th is because the lambs can no longer slaughtered at the beginning of the 14th, there is no Temple  or Levitical Priesthood, therefore there cannot be a proper Passover.

 

Along the way they quit observing the 14th as Passover, but they do have "The Fast for the Firstborn" during the daylight portion of the 14th, for the Egyptians who died during the night time portion of the 14th - when the LORD passed over.

 

Without The Temple for the lambs to be slaughtered, and with no commanded Sabbath on the 14th they just quit observing the 14th, The Passover, altogether.

 

They start the Passover on the 15th, The First day of The Feast of Unleavened Bread

 

The Passover was the night of the 14th

 

They left Egypt on the night of the 15th - the night AFTER The Passover:

 

  And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.         Numbers 33.3

 

Also the man made days which The Jews observe have kept the Jews from understanding the 7 commanded Holy Days (they haven't noticed they are not observing one of the seven because they made up others to take it's place), as has their moving of the New Year from the spring to the fall.

 

So now they do not understand that the first step in The LORD's plan is The Passover (which they do not observe)

 

And the Peshitta New Testament is entirely trust worthy - the Bible Codes prove that.

 

Blessings -

Jim

 

 

 

 

 

In order for all leaven to be out of the house by the 14ht it must be removed on the 13th - which is the first day of unleavened bread, if a person obeys The LORD and observes the 14th.

 

Jesus never said that taking the bread and the wine was The Passover - He said He desired to eat the Passover with them that year.

 

His prayer was not answered and He was dead before The Passover was eaten the night after He died.

 

Everyone was on the correct schedual and Christ died at exactly the right time and the Pharasees ate The Passover at the correct time.

 

Taking the bread and the wine on the night of the 13th is a new custom and it does not replace taking the lamb on the night of the 14th

 

Blessings -

 

Jim

Yirmeyahu said:

Ben Avraham,

This particular issue isn't an issue with the Greek text.  In fact the Greek text can be interpreted in such a way that it makes sense, which can't be said for the Peshitta.

Please review the following verses taken directly from Dr. James Murdock's translation of the Peshitta:

Matthew 26:17 - And on the first day of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, and said to him: Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the Passover ?  Given the context, we see that the 14th of Aviv is being spoken of.

Luke 22:15 - And he said to them: I have greatly desired to eat this passover with you, before I suffer. This is the parallel account in Luke,  so by context we see this is still referring to the 14th, which is in full accord with the letter of the Law of Lev 23:5.

Now, going backwards in time to before the meal started (we are still talking about  the 14th) we have:

Matthew 26:20 - And when it was evening, he reclined with his twelve disciples.   Matthew 26:17 sets the time period in question to the 14th of Aviv.  Luke 22:15 establishes from Yeshua's mouth that it was a Passover Seder.  Here we see that AT EVENING Yeshua sat down for the meal which would follow.

Now the Rabbinic defintion of Evening in connection with Passover is 3pm. 

Tell me this, Ben Avraham, did Yeshua eat his Passover Meal with the Apostles at 3pm on the 14th?  No, he died at exactly that hour (and the exact timing of Yeshua's death is part of a great mystery).  Either way, as I see it, the Peshitta makes less sense than the Greek.

If you say that Evening in Matthew 26:20 refers to the 13th I will respond that nowhere in Scriptures is the 13th ever considered to be part of the days called 'unleavened bread', and that Matthew 26:17, even in the Peshitta, clarifies that the last supper is on the 14th.

If you can, please explain how the above verses, taken directly from the Peshitta, are to be reconciled.  It is kind of lazy to  always fall back on "the Greek text is bad" when you don't understand something when the Peshitta can be shown to be worse.



Ben Avraham said:

Throughout this whole thread on big issue has come to light in my eyes.

It is very obvious that the Brit Chadashah (New Testament) has been "tampered" with by the xtians.

So, how much of it can we actually trust?

Many, if not all the xtian precepts, are anti-Torah, anti-Tanakh, and it is obvious again the Romans role has been re-written for a Gentile readership, so again, can we trust any of it?

Many go against the "Rabbinical" ways, to embrace the xtian ways and thought, but again, with the advent of tampered scripture how much of this goes against the Word of HaShem for political reasons (xtian).

At least the "Rabbinical" ways are consistent with the Tanakh, and not a "New" Religion and "New" interpretation, I still think 2000 years of our great sages are a lot more trust worthy than people's own "New" translations.

Hi beryl -

 

You are very mistaken, it is only in recent times, maybe the past 300 years or 400 years or so that The Jews have not observed The Passover on the 14th.

 

That is why they were still removing the leavening from their homes on the night of the 13th in medieval times.

 

And the account in Exodus is very clear, they slaughtered the lambs, divided the meat, put the blood on their doors, and stayed in their homes until daylight, gathered in Rameses, and left on the night of the 15th, the night to be much remembered:

 

And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.    Numbers 33.3

 

There really is no other way, and the events in Egypt were the shadow of the reality of Christ's sacrifice, The real Passover, Christ died at the right time, not a day late.

 

Blessings -

Jim



beryl etanah said:

 

hi Jim,

how are you, hope it is well with you and yours.

i have actually reviewed this thread since there is currently a thread somewhat related into this one at point of time, bringing this once again into the front in the hope that your ideas can give light to some members who seem to concur to your position.

 

as for me though i cannot modify my observance. i have the privilege to enjoy the benefit of tradition that has gone for thousands of years now. i can argue and refute many of your points but it can be completely futile since you and i are looking at the two feasts from two different perspectives. i respect your opinion and i know someday you will realize the validity of our people's position. but it can take time for you, meantime i don't want to blight our friendship just for this issue, since each of us has come to the point of closing both ears from the other. :-)

 

please do continue to share your insights for the benefit of others.

 

shalom and good luck.

 

beryl


 

You are very mistaken, it is only in recent times, maybe the past 300 years or 400 years or so that The Jews have not observed The Passover on the 14th.

 

  --excuse me. there was not a moment that my people did not observe pesach.

 

 

That is why they were still removing the leavening from their homes on the night of the 13th in medieval times.

 

  --Jim you are confused. please be reserved in your utterance.

 

 
And the account in Exodus is very clear, they slaughtered the lambs, divided the meat, put the blood on their doors, and stayed in their homes until daylight, gathered in Rameses, and left on the night of the 15th, the night to be much remembered:

 And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.    Numbers 33.3

 There really is no other way, and the events in Egypt were the shadow of the reality of Christ's sacrifice, The real Passover, Christ died at the right time, not a day late.

 

--actually passover and chag matzah are ways of life and creed. to be exact, you or anyone cannot pretend to know more about it by the mere “reading” of texts than the people whose generations lived around those mysteries for thousands of years. let me caution your innocence that by your hasty conclusions what you wanted to do is overturn a tradition that has been for thousands of years (including Yeshua's moment on earth) and that is too much from a person who just came into the realm of torah keeping: this is not a matter of evangelio ad libitum, this is a matter of law to us upon whom injunctions were explicitly imposed and our elders did not sleep in their duties in passing to us what when and why such things are done that way.

 

--i am talking in plain narrative non-argumentative because i don't want to offend your pride and dignity. as i have said you can go on proferring texts for your position with impunity from me so long as you mutually respect my tradition.

 

in one Messiah,

 

beryl

 



Jim Wright said:

Hi beryl -

 

You are very mistaken, it is only in recent times, maybe the past 300 years or 400 years or so that The Jews have not observed The Passover on the 14th.

 

That is why they were still removing the leavening from their homes on the night of the 13th in medieval times.

 

And the account in Exodus is very clear, they slaughtered the lambs, divided the meat, put the blood on their doors, and stayed in their homes until daylight, gathered in Rameses, and left on the night of the 15th, the night to be much remembered:

 

And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.    Numbers 33.3

 

There really is no other way, and the events in Egypt were the shadow of the reality of Christ's sacrifice, The real Passover, Christ died at the right time, not a day late.

 

Blessings -

Jim



beryl etanah said:

 

hi Jim,

how are you, hope it is well with you and yours.

i have actually reviewed this thread since there is currently a thread somewhat related into this one at point of time, bringing this once again into the front in the hope that your ideas can give light to some members who seem to concur to your position.

 

as for me though i cannot modify my observance. i have the privilege to enjoy the benefit of tradition that has gone for thousands of years now. i can argue and refute many of your points but it can be completely futile since you and i are looking at the two feasts from two different perspectives. i respect your opinion and i know someday you will realize the validity of our people's position. but it can take time for you, meantime i don't want to blight our friendship just for this issue, since each of us has come to the point of closing both ears from the other. :-)

 

please do continue to share your insights for the benefit of others.

 

shalom and good luck.

 

beryl

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service