The Missing Passover

[Humanistheart]

S-words answer: My dear friend, you may choose to disbelieve God’s Holy Word

HHeart Answer: Belief, or disbelief in this case, is not a choice. If you think it is ask yourself, could you choose to believe in Allah and then truly believe? Could you choose not to believe in any diety? To become an atheist?


S-words answer: The facts are, that the bible reveals the approximate year of the birth of Jesus. According to those who believe the Word of God, the simple fact that Herod, who believed Jesus to be somewhere between one and two years old, had died in 4 B.C., is evidence that Jesus was born, in the years prior to his death and the fact that Jesus was still a baby, when Joseph was forced to seek refuge for his wife and her child in the land of Egypt, and returned to Galilee with the baby Jesus shortly after the death of Herod, is evidence that Jesus was born somewhere between 7and 6 B.C. What the detractors of the Word of God believe, is totally irrelevant.

HHeart's answer: You're only discribing Mathew here. Not luke. And it's not a fact that herod believed this. This is only mentioned in the bible. The bible does not stand as empiracle fact, so this is a belief, not a fact.


S-words answer: First of all let’s clear up you ignorant statement “This argument is founded on the idea that the Herod story (recorded by Matthew) is in fact the correct one.” Matthew’s account of Herod, the wise men and the slaughter of the innocents, is not only the correct one; it is the only record of that event."

HHeart's answer: My apologies, I must not have made my point clear here. When I said the Herod story I was refering to the one containing the slaughter found in Mathew. The point was that there are of course two stories of jesus birth, not that there are other stories of herod performing a mass infanticide, as niether this event nor jesus' birth is found outside of the bible. Mathew, as you pointed out, has jesus originating in bethleham, but Luke shows his family starting in Nazareth. And, if the story containing the magi is the only correct version of jesus' birth than aren't you outright disregaurding the birth story in Luke, in which jesus' family moved without incident? And if your disregaurding the first part of Luke than you must be ignoring that entire gospel as well. If the bible is god's word why include two contradictory stories in it, and how can you disregaurd any of it?

The answer is that when the authors of these gospels began their writing they needed to get jesus to Bethlahem somehow for him to be counted as a messiah, so each came up with seperate explanations. Plus there were no eye witness' to this event still alive when these gospels were written, and there was no tradition of these stories prior to them that would suggest that they were known. Look at the works of Paul the apostle. Nothing in his writing hints at a virgin birth, or anything to do with bethlahem and his works predate the earliest gospels by at least 10 years.




And I suppose that you can provide the historical document which states that Herod did not order the slaughter of the innocents, if not then you lie?

HHeart's: Why would there be a historical document saying that something made up years later didn't happen? I do not need to provide anything to suggest herod did not order a slaughter, as you can provide no evidence to suggest he did. No one can prove a negative after all, so the burden of proof is on you. And as for the 'word of god' bit, unless you can prove that A) your god actually exists and that B) the bible is indeed his word this is not an argument but faith.



S-words answer: Lake Country Astronomical Society --- 'Astronomy, Astrology, and the star of Bethlehem'. ...John Clevenger
Did any unusual astronomical phenomenon occur between 8 and two B.C.? As it happens there were several Notable celestial event during that period. The Chinese (Whose ancient records of heavenly events, has proved very reliable) reported two comets during that time. The comet of 5 B.C., in Capricornus and visible for 70 days, was reported to have a tail. Professor Humphreys of Cambridge University believes that this comet, which he describes as having a vertical tail, appeared at the time of the Jewish Passover.

Prof Humphreys believes that this started the Magi, who were knowledgeable of the Jewish prophecy recorded in the Book of Micah, concerning the birth of a Jewish King, (And the prophecy in Numbers 24: 17-19) on their journey. If right about the vertical tail, this could agree with the Biblical account in Matthew that the star “Stood over where the young child was.

HHeart's answer:This bit however is interesting. I'll certianly have to look this up. My only question's to this offhand, without doing some additional needed research, are if these are recorded as comets and planets, why then does the bible incorrectly call it a star? If the people involved with this event were indeed advanced enough to track these events then surely they'd know the difference. Also, is the idea of it being a star necessary or is that beside point?

 

[Humanistheart]

The Missing Passover

We are starting Passover here in Israel. But since the wheels of the Truth cannot stop rolling, I want to bring to your attention the Passover of the year 30 CE. It was supposed to be the last one that Jesus would partake of, and he missed it.

According to John 19:31, that Sabbath was a solemn Sabbath, which is what we call in Hebrew a Shabbaton. That's when a festival falls on the Sabbath. The KJV brings: "For that Sabbath day was a high day."

That Sabbath was the 14th of the month of Nissan; the first day of Passover. The beginning of it is celebrated with the Passover Supper at the evening of the previous day, or Friday in that year. That's what we call the Seder Meal.

In the year 30 CE, the Passover Supper was held on the evening of that Friday. No wonder, everyone somehow connected with the events taking place on the Calvary that day, had to leave it in a hurry to prepare themselves and their houses for the Passover Supper.

Jesus missed that Passover Supper because he was on the cross, and soon afterwards, in the tomb. But then again, how to understand that he celebrated his Passover Supper on the evening of Thursday, which was the 13th of Nissan? He didn't. In Israel, no Jew would celebrate Passover in a different day alone or in a small group when everyone else would be doing it next day.

This discrepancy is perhaps due to the fact that the gospel writer, writing somehwere in the world, and realizing that the Jews in the Diaspora would celebrate every festival in two days, thought he could have Jesus celebrate the Passover Supper on the 13 of Nissan. It would have worked if Jesus was a Diaspora Jew; but in Israel there is no such a thing.

There is an option in Judaism to celebrate the Passover later, even a month later, if the person was not for some reason ready for it; but NEVER before. It means that, definitely, Jesus missed that Passover celebration, because his reported "Last Supper" did not have anything to do with the Passover Supper.


Ben

Ben I had two questions for you. You'll probably have informative answers for them. One on both sides of the argument.

There were other issues that support your claim aren't there? Such as the suggestion that the bread dinned on at the last supper was unleavened? Or John 13:29, in which the deciples wonder if judas, keeper of the money box, was going out to buy supplies for the feast?

And against the argument, is it true that the Saducess traditionaly celebrated passover on the earlier date? If so, jesus could simply have been following that tradition.

 

[S-word]

This is a Scriptural debate, if you are here to say nothing other than, “Prove to me that the Bible is true, because I believe that it is fictitious rubbish,” then I have no desire to continue talking with you. I will debate the facts, and we who believe that the Bible has but one author, who has used many scribes to record the chapters of his book, believe that the word of God is factual, it is a living story.


S-words answer from previous post: My dear friend, you may choose to disbelieve God’s Holy Word

HHeart Answer: Belief, or disbelief in this case, is not a choice. If you think it is ask yourself, could you choose to believe in Allah and then truly believe? Could you choose not to believe in any diety? To become an atheist?
S-word: What! Are you attempting to make up some excuse for your non-belief? Did some supernatural spirit who dwells within you, choose what you can and cannot believe? Get a good grip of yourself old mate.

S-words answer from previous post: The facts are, that the bible reveals the approximate year of the birth of Jesus. According to those who believe the Word of God, the simple fact that Herod, who believed Jesus to be somewhere between one and two years old, had died in 4 B.C., is evidence that Jesus was born, in the years prior to his death and the fact that Jesus was still a baby, when Joseph was forced to seek refuge for his wife and her child in the land of Egypt, and returned to Galilee with the baby Jesus shortly after the death of Herod, is evidence that Jesus was born somewhere between 7and 6 B.C. What the detractors of the Word of God believe, is totally irrelevant.

HHeart's answer: You're only discribing Mathew here. Not luke. And it's not a fact that herod believed this. This is only mentioned in the bible. The bible does not stand as empiracle fact, so this is a belief, not a fact. S-word, It is a Biblical fact that Matthew states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea which is corroborated by Luke who expands on Matthews statement by revealing that Mary and Joseph had left Nazareth to go to Bethlehem where Jesus was born and that the family returned to Nazareth when Jesus was about 4 months old, which was about a year before the comet of 5 B.C. which led the wise men to Israel where they visited Mary and her child in the house in Nazareth where they then lived, not the stable or the Inn at Bethlehem of Judea which they had left nearly a year previously.

And it is a fact that after the wise men were warned in a dream not to return to Herod, Joseph also dreamed that an angel told him to get out of bed and to take Mary and her child and to find refuge in Egypt as the secret police of Herod who had eyes and ears throughout Israel would have known approximately to where the wise men had been led by the comet in its return to the orbit of Jupiter which was in the Northern sky. This was just before the great slaughter in the district that surrounded Nazareth, Bethlehem of Galilee which is today called Beitlahm, and Sepphorus, that majestic Hellenistic city that suffered so much damage in those riots and which city was restored by Herod’s son in 3 B.C., after his father had died in April of 4 B.C., and that is an historical fact.

The answer is that when the authors of these gospels began their writing they needed to get jesus to Bethlahem somehow for him to be counted as a messiah, so each came up with seperate explanations.... S-word: No, no, no, no, noooo, how ignorant can you be? It is impossible to separate Luke from Matthew, the one compliments the other, they are two stories told of different periods in the life of the one man Jesus. Nowhere does Matthew contradict Luke who states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, and that two months later the family returned to their home in Nazareth, then makes no more mention of Jesus until he is about 12 years old.

Neither does Matthew contradict Luke, as he speaks of the period in the life of Jesus of which Luke’s record is unconcerned with. In Matthew’s account, the wise men who came to pay homage to the prophesied Messianic King which they were convinced was over one year old, as is revealed in that they told Herod that they had first sighted the star which had heralded his birth almost two years before it had developed its brilliant tail in 5 B.C.

And we know from Luke, that the family of Jesus was living in Nazareth at that time, and although Herod advised the wise men that it was prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem of Judea, “which he was,” as recorded by both Luke and Matthew, but when the wise men left Herod, the comet that had previously been hidden, presumably in its orbit around the sun before being flung back to its aphelia in the orbit of Jupiter in the northern sky, appeared once again and O what Joy was theirs, as they followed it toward the north of Israel where there in the deepening evening northern sky, low to the horizon with its brilliant vertical tail streaming up into the heavens, it appeared to ‘Stand Over’ the little insignificant village of Nazareth, of which Josephus the historian who records every town and village in Galilee, makes no mention.

And if your disregaurding the first part of Luke than you must be ignoring that entire gospel as well. If the bible is god's word why include two contradictory stories in it, and how can you disregaurd any of it?

Although you may not be able to see the truth through the dark swirling mists of ignorance that clouds your mind, I disregard no part of the gospel of Luke. I believe that Joseph with Mary the young unmarried pregnant woman to whom he was engaged, as he did not consummate their union until she had birth the first of her three biological sons, had left Nazareth and travelled to Bethlehem of Judea where Jesus was born which is corroborated by Matthew who agrees that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea.

But Matthew is unconcerned as to where Joseph and Mary lived. I believe Luke who states that 8 days after the birth of Jesus he was circumcised, and 33 days later, according to the law of Moses, Mary carried her child openly to the Temple of Jerusalem, which is something she could not have done if there had been any slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem of Judea, which of course there is no evidence of any upheaval in or around Bethlehem of Judea in 6 B.C. when Jesus was born: unlike the Bethlehem of Galilee in which district so many Israelite families lost their lives in 4 B.C. as recorded in history. I believe Luke who states that after Mary had performed all that was required of the law, and when Jesus was about 2 months old, the family returned to Nazareth. I also believe Matthew who states that in 5 B.C., when Jesus was somewhere between one and two years old, the wise men visited the family in Nazareth.

 

[S-word]

Continued from post 63.

S-words answer from previous post: And I suppose that you can provide the historical document which states that Herod did not order the slaughter of the innocents, if not then you lie?

HHeart's: Why would there be a historical document saying that something made up years later didn't happen?

HHeart's: However, historically we know Herod ordered no such slaughter of infants. S-word: Because you said there was old mate, those are your exact words. HHeart's: nor are there any historical observances of a new star, comet, or any other phenominon that could account for this story. Wrong again old mate, you really don’t know too much do you?

S-words answer from previous post: Lake Country Astronomical Society --- 'Astronomy, Astrology, and the star of Bethlehem'. ...John Clevenger
Did any unusual astronomical phenomenon occur between 8 and two B.C.? As it happens there were several Notable celestial event during that period. The Chinese (Whose ancient records of heavenly events, has proved very reliable) reported two comets during that time. The comet of 5 B.C., in Capricornus and visible for 70 days, was reported to have a tail. Professor Humphreys of Cambridge University believes that this comet, which he describes as having a vertical tail, appeared at the time of the Jewish Passover.

Prof Humphreys believes that this started the Magi, who were knowledgeable of the Jewish prophecy recorded in the Book of Micah, concerning the birth of a Jewish King, (And the prophecy in Numbers 24: 17-19) on their journey. If right about the vertical tail, this could agree with the Biblical account in Matthew that the star “Stood over where the young child was.


HHeart's: My only question's to this offhand, without doing some additional needed research, are if these are recorded as comets and planets, why then does the bible incorrectly call it a star?
Every light in the night sky is called a “Star,” in ancient Hebrew there’s no word for comet or planet.


HHeart's: I do not need to provide anything to suggest herod did not order a slaughter, S-word: In other words when you said that historically you knew Herod ordered no such slaughter of infants, you were simply talking through your hat as asual. HHeart's: as you can provide no evidence to suggest he did. I can provide Biblical evidence that Herod did order the slaughter of the innocents; you can provide nothing but the imaginations of your clouded, confused and ignorant mind.

HHearts: No one can prove a negative after all, so the burden of proof is on you. And as for the 'word of god' bit, unless you can prove that A) your god actually exists and that B) the bible is indeed his word this is not an argument but faith.
S-word: Any person reading any ancient manuscript of any historical event can only believe by faith that the author has recorded accurately, the events that are referred to in those documents.

HHeart's: Look at the works of Paul the apostle. Nothing in his writing hints at a virgin birth
or anything to do with bethlahem and his works predate the earliest gospels by at least 10 years.

S-word...Why would He? There is nothing in the entire Bible that hints at a virgin birth, for there was never any miraculous conception. That other Jesus who was supposedly born of some miraculous virgin birth, was never preached by the Apostles, and was introduced by the followers of the anti-christ who refused to acknowledge that Jesus was a man, and not some hybrid half god half man as they would have you believe, and they refused to acknowledge that he had come as a human being, Read 1st John 4: 1-3, and 2nd John verse 7.

Isaiah’s famous prophecy stated that an unmarried woman would conceive and bear a son. The Hebrew has a specific term for virgin, which is “Bethulah”, but as Isaiah was not referring to a virgin, he used the Hebrew, “Almah, which means, “CONCEALMENT----Unmarried female”. Because the Greek language had no specific word for virgin; Matthew, in his attempt to transcribe accurately Isaiah’s prophecy that an unmarried woman would conceive etc, was forced to used the Greek, “Parthenos” which carries the basic meaning of girl or a girl who had never been married and can only mean virgin by implication, but as we know that he was transcribing Isaiah’s prophecy that an unmarried woman would conceive etc, we can be absolutely positive that he was not implying that Mary was still a virgin when she conceived in her womb, Jesus, the biological son of her half brother, 'Joseph the son of Heli'.

Luke reveals that Mary, the daughter of Heli, was not found to be pregnant until she returned from her visit with her cousin ‘Elizabeth’, and that she had never had sexual intercourse with a man before she travelled to the gathering of the family and friends of her cousin, who was a Levite of the daughters of Aaron, where apparently she met for the first time, Joseph the Levite from Cyprus to whom her spirit was attracted, who, apparently, unbeknownst to Mary, had also been sired by her father Heli the Levite, who is a direct descendant of Nathan the son-in-law and step-son of David, and the biological son of Uriah who became a Levite by his marriage to Bathsheba, another of the daughters of Levi.

This Joseph, who should not be confused with Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah who is a direct descendant of Solomon the half brother and brother-in-law to Nathan; for this Joseph who married Mary, did not know her sexually until she had given birth to the grandson of Heli who is the father of both of the Parents of Jesus. Much the same as ‘Terah’ was the father of both the parents of Isaac who just like Jesus, was born of God’s promise according to the workings of the Holy Spirit, and was offered up as a sacrifice by his father and on the very mountain upon which Jesus was crucified. And Luke reveals in 3:23; this Joseph the son of Heli, to be the biological father of Jesus.
The act by which Mary the obedient servant to the spirit of our lord whose kingdom is within us, was not considered to be a sin, as it was CONCEALED in the shadow beneath the wings of the Lord of Spirit which had covered her.

 

[Humanistheart]

This is a Scriptural debate, if you are here to say nothing other than, “Prove to me that the Bible is true, because I believe that it is fictitious rubbish,” then I have no desire to continue talking with you. I will debate the facts, and we who believe that the Bible has but one author, who has used many scribes to record the chapters of his book, believe that the word of God is factual, it is a living story.

It's your liberal sprinkling of the word 'fact' throughout your comments that's a problem. As you said those who BELIEVE in the bible might take it as fact, but the word belief denotes fact. If you want a scriptual debate, reference the scripture, but do not claim it's fact, in which it then becomes a historical issue, and the bible does not stand as a history book in any empiracle circles.

S-words answer from previous post: My dear friend, you may choose to disbelieve God’s Holy Word

HHeart Answer: Belief, or disbelief in this case, is not a choice. If you think it is ask yourself, could you choose to believe in Allah and then truly believe? Could you choose not to believe in any diety? To become an atheist?
S-word: What! Are you attempting to make up some excuse for your non-belief? Did some supernatural spirit who dwells within you, choose what you can and cannot believe? Get a good grip of yourself old mate.

You bypassed the argument here completely. Your claiming something without proof. And you failed to address the problem that belief is not a choice. I need to excuss for disbelief, rofl! Again, if you think belief is a choice, try believing in Islam.


The answer is that when the authors of these gospels began their writing they needed to get jesus to Bethlahem somehow for him to be counted as a messiah, so each came up with seperate explanations.... S-word: No, no, no, no, noooo, how ignorant can you be? It is impossible to separate Luke from Matthew, the one compliments the other, they are two stories told of different periods in the life of the one man Jesus. Nowhere does Matthew contradict Luke who states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, and that two months later the family returned to their home in Nazareth, then makes no more mention of Jesus until he is about 12 years old.

Neither does Matthew contradict Luke, as he speaks of the period in the life of Jesus of which Luke’s record is unconcerned with.


HHearts asnwer: For someone who loves the 'word of god' so much your remarkably unaware of it's content. No, luke and mathew do not complement each other. They are completely different and conflicting stories. In the mathew version the magi come visit jesus, in the manger. Yet you've just claimed that the 5 bc commet led them to the house found in Luke. The bible shows that the magi only came to the manger, the sheperds came to the house. Have you ever actually read the bible? More specifically, mathew show him born in the manger, while luke depicts him as being born in the house. He can't be born twice. Thus the contradiction. There's also the curious fact that the magi appear in this one story, in a very short bit of it. If you were to travel houndreds of miles, studying for years on prophicy and charting the stars to find this child, would you just drop by give a present and pop out of his life again forever? I really daubt it. If the magi were real, why did they not stay with or near there so called king? Because they didn't exist.





And we know from Luke, that the family of Jesus was living in Nazareth at that time, and although Herod advised the wise men that it was prophesied that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem of Judea, “which he was,” as recorded by both Luke and Matthew, but when the wise men left Herod, the comet that had previously been hidden, presumably in its orbit around the sun before being flung back to its aphelia in the orbit of Jupiter in the northern sky, appeared once again and O what Joy was theirs, as they followed it toward the north of Israel where there in the deepening evening northern sky, low to the horizon with its brilliant vertical tail streaming up into the heavens, it appeared to ‘Stand Over’ the little insignificant village of Nazareth, of which Josephus the historian who records every town and village in Galilee, makes no mention.

HHearts answer: Neither stars nor commets cross our nights sky in the pattern of 'standing over' that you mentioned. And again, no one was left alive who'd been witness to that sopposed event when these gospels were being written. The earliest christians had no concept of either story. The aposle paul gives us some of the earliest works of the bible and he mentions nothing about this. Clearly the story was made up in an attempt to fulfill the scripture in hindsight, putting jesus at bethlahem. Another Issue with the story of mathew is that the reason for the move to bethlahem was that there was a census going on, and men were called back with there families to the family hometown. This is not how rome did cencus', in which people merely stayed in the town they now lived in. Which does make more sence. Again invalidating mathew's account.

And if your disregaurding the first part of Luke than you must be ignoring that entire gospel as well. If the bible is god's word why include two contradictory stories in it, and how can you disregaurd any of it?

Although you may not be able to see the truth through the dark swirling mists of ignorance that clouds your mind, I disregard no part of the gospel of Luke.

HHearts: Resorting to name calling is the last refuge of a child. If you can't make an argument and thus have to resort to childish tactics such as this, you may not be mature enough for the boards. But that's your issue. To specifically address your multiple usage of 'ignorance' you obviously didn't look at my profile, and are ironically ignorant to it's content. I have a degree in religious studies. I daubt very much you have the same level of education.

 

[S-word]

I haven't got time to cover your entire post right now as we have to go to town this morning, but I will tonight when i have more time. but I cannot leave without pointing out Just how ignorant you are. HHeart: The bible shows that the magi only came to the manger, S-word: Matthew 2: 9 to 11; "And so they left Herod and the star they had seen in the east appeared once again and O what Joy was theirs! It went ahead of them until it "stood Over" where the young child was, did you notice that? Not the baby wrapped in swaddling cloth, but the young child; now let's continue, and when they were come into the house, not the manger or the inn, but into the HOUSE, they saw THE YOUNG CHILD with his mother, and fell down and wroshipped him etc. Now you show me where it is said anywhere in scripture, that the wise men went to the manger.

HHeart: it wasthe sheperds came to the house. Have you ever actually read the bible? More specifically, mathew show him born in the manger, while luke depicts him as being born in the house.

Yes I have read the Bible mate, but you have shown that if you have at anytime read the Bible, you did so with your eyes tightly closed.

HHeart: luke depicts him as being born in the house.

Luke 2: 7: She gave birth to her first son, wrapped him in swaddling cloth and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them to stay in the Inn.(Hey what bible you bin readin from mate)


HHeart: it wasthe sheperds came to the house. Have you ever actually read the bible? More specifically, S-word: Yup, I certainly have old mate and this Is what I read in Luke 2: 16; So they, the shepherds, hurried off and found Mary and Joseph and saw the baby, lying in the MANGER.

Did you notice that? Luke says the shepherds saw the BABY in the MANGER, while Matthew who is speaking of a later period in the life of Jesus, has him as a YOUNG CHILD, in the HOUSE to which the comet of 5 B.C. had led them to. I honestly cannot believe how dumb you are, even one of my little grandsons could teach you the scriptural truths.

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben I had two questions for you. You'll probably have informative answers for them. One on both sides of the argument.

There were other issues that support your claim aren't there? Such as the suggestion that the bread dinned on at the last supper was unleavened? Or John 13:29, in which the deciples wonder if judas, keeper of the money box, was going out to buy supplies for the feast?

And against the argument, is it true that the Saducess traditionaly celebrated passover on the earlier date? If so, jesus could simply have been following that tradition.

Hi Humanistheart, the name is "contradiction" due to lack of knowledge about being Jewish was in the Hellenist Gentiles who wrote the gospels. We always follow, as we have always followed the Lunar Calendar in the celebration of our festivals. Passover, since the very first, at the time of Moses, has fallen on the 14th of the month of Nisan. There is an attenuation so to speak, to celebrate the Passover after the 14th of Nisan if one is not ceremonially clean or prepared
or due to any other reason, to partake of it at the same time with everyone else, BUT NEVER BEFORE.

There was another calendar, the Solar Calendar, which, it seems to me, a small part of the Sect of the Essenes would use as part of their grudge against the Priests. But because the year according to the Solar Calendar was longer than in the Lunar Calendar, the 14th of Nisan would ALWAYS fall almost a month later and NEVER BEFORE.

With regards to the Sadducees, my 101 percent cerfified answer is NO. The Sadducees celebrated the Passover in the same day (14th. of Nisan) with everyone else.

That supper Jesus had Thursday evening was a regular supper with his disciples. Elements of a Passover meal are introduced because the guys who wrote the gospels, knew close to zero about Jewish customs as festivals were concern. The truth is that Jesus indeed missed the Passover of that year which fell on that Friday evening.

 

[S-word]

HHearts asnwer: (That's 'Answer) For someone who loves the 'word of god' so much your (That’s you’re) remarkably unaware of it's content. S-word: It is not I who am unaware of that which is recorded in God’s word, it is you my friend. They don’t call me S-word for nothing.

HHeart: No, luke and mathew do not complement each other. S-word: Yes they do. (That’s Matthew)

HHeart: They are completely different and conflicting stories. S-word: No they’re not.

HHeart: In the mathew version the magi come visit jesus, in the manger. S-word: No they don’t. (And that's Matthew too)

HHeart: Yet you've just claimed that the 5 bc commet (That’s comet) led them to the house found in Luke. S-word: No, Luke makes no mention of a House, it is the manger in which the baby Jesus (Not the young child Jesus), who was visited by the shepherds, that Luke refers to.

HHeart: bible shows that the magi only came to the manger, S-word: No, the Bible shows that the Magi went to the house where the Young child (Not the baby) lived with his mother in Nazareth.


HHeart: the sheperds (That’s shepherds) came to the house. S-word: No, the shepherds went to the stable in Bethlehem of Judea where they saw the baby Jesus, (not the young child Jesus) lying in the manger.

HHeart: Have you ever actually read the bible? S-word: Yep, pity you can’t say the same thing, as everyone who reads this post will know.. HHeart: More specifically, mathew show him born in the manger, S-word: No he don’t. (Matthew)

HHeart: while luke depicts him as being born in the house. S-word: No he don’t.

HHeart: He can't be born twice. S-word: But he was! First of all, he was born of physical parents as all human beings are, then secondly he was born of the spirit when he arose from the baptismal waters and was filled with the spirit of the Lord as the voice from heaven was heard to say, “You are my beloved in whom I am well pleased, this day I have begotten you,” see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 23.

HHeart: Thus the contradiction. Sword: Ain’t no contradiction between Matthew and Luke old mate, except in your ignorant and clouded mind.


HHeart: There's also the curious fact that the magi appear in this one story, in a very short bit of it. If you were to travel houndreds (That’s hundreds) of miles, studying for years on prophicy (That’s prophecy) and charting the stars to find this child, would you just drop by give a present and pop out of his life again forever? S-word: No, If they hadn’t been warned in a dream to leave and not to return to Herod, they may have stayed longer, but as Joseph had also been warned that night to get the family out of there immediately, none of them dared to hang around longer than they had to.

HHeart: I really daubt it. (That’s doubt) If the magi were real, why did they not stay with or near there (That's their) so called king? Because they didn't exist. S-word: I see that you like to answer your own questions, well I suppose you have to, because that’s the only way you’ll ever get the answer that you want. But nah mate, the wise men left because they didn’t want to be killed, as were all the children, who were two years and below and those who tried to protect them, in the great slaughter that is historically recorded as having occurred in 4 B.C., in the district around Sepphorus, Bethlehem of Galilee and Nazareth, from which the family of Jesus had to flee.

HHearts answer: Neither stars nor commets (That’s comet) cross our nights sky in the pattern of 'standing over' that you mentioned.
S-word: Not only have you proven to all who will read this post that you are totally ignorant to that which is recorded in God’s word, but now you are going to show everyone that you know absolutely nothing about the movement of comets also.
When we observe a comet with its huge tail in the night sky, It appears to remain in a stationary position, unlike meteorites or shooting stars as we call them. If you were standing out in open country walking toward a small town or village in the distant, and behind that village, low to the horizon in the deepening evening sky, you were to observe a comet with its vertical tail streaming off into the heaven above, it would appear to you, to be stationary and Standing over that village, and the term “Stood Over” as recorded in the Bible, in ancient literature refers to comets and comets only.

HHeart: And again, no one was left alive who'd been witness to that sopposed (That’s supposed) event when these gospels were being written. S-word: I could fill a book with historic events that were orally handed down and finally record in written form long after every witness to those events were dead, even the five books that we know as the books of Moses were not recorded in written form by Ezra, until hundreds of years after all the witnesses to those events were dead.

HHeart: The earliest christians had no concept of either story. S-word: And you can show that the earliest followers of the new way had not heard about those events which had been orally passed around the scattered communities, can you?

HHeart: The aposle paul (That’s Apostle Paul) gives us some of the earliest works of the bible and he mentions nothing about this.
S-word: Correct! Neither does Peter, James, Jude, John, Mark, or Luke, and nor do Paul, Peter, James, Jude, John, Mark or Matthew, mention the fact that Jesus as a twelve year old boy was lost to his parents, who found him three days later debating with the elders in the Temple in Jerusalem, but both are true.

To continue to debate with someone like yourself who has proven to everyone who reads your post, that you know near to nothing about that which is written in God's word, could be likened I suppose, to some mental monster whose sharp two edged tongue cuts mental children to pieces, and as I have done with your friend who describes himself as a poison spitting comical cobra who crawls on his belly eating dust, I must end this debate here. Perhaps one day when you have read the Bible and have learned enough to engage in a sensible debate, we might speak with each other again. Or before, if you continue to rubbish God’s word of which you have absolutely no understanding.

 

[godmarskronos]

This entire thread is kind've pathetic ...

You want to "defend Judaism" because you the bible gives Jews a bad name because they wanted to kill Jesus. Your reasons being that Jesus was killed for political reasons and the story of when he had passover is 1 day too early.

Well you know what...what did the Jews do to false prophets? They stoned them. And if Jesus was causing quite a stir and claimed to be the Son of God what would the High Priests do? Nothing? That's my argument for your "political reasons".
The reason the Romans consented to crucifying him was because of what you say...declaring to be the king of the Jews. You will find in the bible that Jesus doesn't say he's the king of the Jews...He calls himself the Son of Man and the Jews interpret that as their Messiah and King.

It is not anti-Semitic to say the Jews killed Christ. You believe him to be false. Christians believe him to be Christ. To you he is nothing but a false prophet and deserved death...its only Anti-Semitic because Christianity is the dominant religion in terms of population. The Pope's apology was a political move to to smooth things over just as other religions are coming together saying "well...we're all the same"

And in order to pin down what day passover was in that year you have to know what YEAR it is. Who's calendar were we using at that time? There was no BC or AD and there wasn't an offical switch until much later to go BC and AD so who actually knows what year it was?
There is no conclusive date for what year it was when Jesus died and therefore you cant say if it was a day early.

If you want to argue something ...argue the faith and the doctrine and what is right / wrong about it

 

[Ben Masada]

This entire thread is kind've pathetic ...

You want to "defend Judaism" because you the bible gives Jews a bad name because they wanted to kill Jesus. Your reasons being that Jesus was killed for political reasons and the story of when he had passover is 1 day too early.

Well you know what...what did the Jews do to false prophets? They stoned them. And if Jesus was causing quite a stir and claimed to be the Son of God what would the High Priests do? Nothing? That's my argument for your "political reasons".
The reason the Romans consented to crucifying him was because of what you say...declaring to be the king of the Jews. You will find in the bible that Jesus doesn't say he's the king of the Jews...He calls himself the Son of Man and the Jews interpret that as their Messiah and King.

It is not anti-Semitic to say the Jews killed Christ. You believe him to be false. Christians believe him to be Christ. To you he is nothing but a false prophet and deserved death...its only Anti-Semitic because Christianity is the dominant religion in terms of population. The Pope's apology was a political move to to smooth things over just as other religions are coming together saying "well...we're all the same"

And in order to pin down what day passover was in that year you have to know what YEAR it is. Who's calendar were we using at that time? There was no BC or AD and there wasn't an offical switch until much later to go BC and AD so who actually knows what year it was?
There is no conclusive date for what year it was when Jesus died and therefore you cant say if it was a day early.

If you want to argue something ...argue the faith and the doctrine and what is right / wrong about it

That's okay, I cannot get into an argument with you because you haven't understood a line of the thread. Read it again and organize your sentences.

 

[godmarskronos]

Those were your words from an earlier post.

I'll simplify it for you. Nobody can conclusively say what year it was when Jesus died therefore you cannot conclusively say what DAY he died on.

The Jews killed Jesus and its not anti-Semitic to say so. To them he was a blasphemer and deserved death.

Simple enough?

 

[Ben Masada]

Those were your words from an earlier post.

I'll simplify it for you. Nobody can conclusively say what year it was when Jesus died therefore you cannot conclusively say what DAY he died on.

The Jews killed Jesus and its not anti-Semitic to say so. To them he was a blasphemer and deserved death.

Simple enough?

Jesus was born in the Spring of te year 4 BCE, on the same year that Herod died, which was on the Summer of that year. Jesus was immersed in the Jordan River by John the Baptist in the year 27 CE when he was 30 of age. And he was crucified in the year 30 CE at the age of 33, on a Friday just prior to 3pm.

The only thing sure you say above in your post is that no one can say when Jesus died. That's true. Because, to tell you the truth, if you ask me, he did not die on the cross. I am almost sure that he survived the cross. Other Jews were known to suffer even up to 4 days on the cross still alive. Jesus was taken off the cross after just about three or four hours.

The Jews did not kill Jesus and this has been a 2000 years old lie that just refuses to die, even after Pope John 23rd asked publicly the Jewish People to forgive Christianity for this false accusation. But anti-Semites need this kind of lies in order to keep alive.

Jesus was never a blasphemer. If he had blasphemed, he would have committed a sin and you could no longer say he was sinless. On the contrary, he came to confirm God's Law to the letter, and warned us all to teach God's Law without any change whatsoever, under threat to lose the Kingdom of God. (Mat. 5:19)

Yes, you are right, simple enough.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Jesus was born in the Spring of te year 4 BCE, ....

Prove it.

J..., on the same year that Herod died, ...

Prove it.

Jesus was immersed in the Jordan River by John the Baptist in the year 27 CE when he was 30 of age. ....

Prove it.

And he was crucified in the year 30 CE at the age of 33, on a Friday just prior to 3pm.

Prove it.

You are so full of it ...

 

[Ben Masada]

Prove it.
Prove it.
Prove it.
Prove it.

You are so full of it ...

Full of it could be of wisdom. But to someone empty of it like you, it won't help at all to quote the Scholars whose books I have taken my information from. But let's start with Jesus' birth. And let's take the NT ad the first of four sources. According to the guy who wrote the gospel of Matthew, Joseph, Mary and Jesus returned from Egypt at the moment they got the news that Herod had died. That was about the Fall of year 4 BCE. At least, the NT is an evidence for the birth of Jesus in the same year that Herod died. Jesus was almost a year old. Read Matthew 2:19-23.

As second source, you can read from Josephus about the death of Herod in the year 4 BCE, a few months after the Revolt of the Pharisees, which almost deposed him, were not for the Roman legion stationed in Syria, which Caesar ordered to pass over to Israel and put down the revolt, in the beginning of the year.

The third source is from a German Scholar of the 19th Century whose name was Erick Hinnerman, in his book, "The Myth of the Pax Romana." He mentions the Revolt of the Pharisees, birth and death of Herod, and a lot more, even in others of the Roman provinces.

And last but not least, for the dates of Jesus' birth, baptism and death, the author was a Monk Frei Rogerio Constancio in his "Calendar of Sacred Events." It's very interesting how he describes the struggle in the 4th Century to set the division in History to fit Jesus' birth with zero between BCE and CE. Or as he says in the book, BC and AD. A few years later a mistake was found of four years in the computation, when no longer fit to fix. Then, the year for Jesus' birth became known as 4 BCE, the same year Herod died according to the NT.

Now, tell me, are you any wiser with these proofs? I didn't think so. So, what's the use for "Prove! Prove! Prove? It's much easier to visit a good Library and check different sources.

 

[lockyfan]

The Missing Passover

We are starting Passover here in Israel. But since the wheels of the Truth cannot stop rolling, I want to bring to your attention the Passover of the year 30 CE. It was supposed to be the last one that Jesus would partake of, and he missed it.

According to John 19:31, that Sabbath was a solemn Sabbath, which is what we call in Hebrew a Shabbaton. That's when a festival falls on the Sabbath. The KJV brings: "For that Sabbath day was a high day."

That Sabbath was the 14th of the month of Nissan; the first day of Passover. The beginning of it is celebrated with the Passover Supper at the evening of the previous day, or Friday in that year. That's what we call the Seder Meal.

In the year 30 CE, the Passover Supper was held on the evening of that Friday. No wonder, everyone somehow connected with the events taking place on the Calvary that day, had to leave it in a hurry to prepare themselves and their houses for the Passover Supper.

Jesus missed that Passover Supper because he was on the cross, and soon afterwards, in the tomb. But then again, how to understand that he celebrated his Passover Supper on the evening of Thursday, which was the 13th of Nissan? He didn't. In Israel, no Jew would celebrate Passover in a different day alone or in a small group when everyone else would be doing it next day.

This discrepancy is perhaps due to the fact that the gospel writer, writing somehwere in the world, and realizing that the Jews in the Diaspora would celebrate every festival in two days, thought he could have Jesus celebrate the Passover Supper on the 13 of Nissan. It would have worked if Jesus was a Diaspora Jew; but in Israel there is no such a thing.

There is an option in Judaism to celebrate the Passover later, even a month later, if the person was not for some reason ready for it; but NEVER before. It means that, definitely, Jesus missed that Passover celebration, because his reported "Last Supper" did not have anything to do with the Passover Supper.

The gospel writer had either no idea what he was writing about or simply thought we would never find out about his blunder.

Ben

He didnt miss the passover.

Luke 22: 1-20

 Now the festival of the unfermented cakes, the so-called Passover, was getting near. Also, the chief priests and the scribes were seeking the effective way for them to get rid of him, for they were in fear of the people. But Satan entered into Judas, the one called Iscar′iot, who was numbered among the twelve; and he went off and talked with the chief priests and [temple] captains about the effective way to betray him to them. Well, they rejoiced and agreed to give him silver money. So he consented, and he began to seek a good opportunity to betray him to them without a crowd around.

The day of the unfermented cakes now arrived, on which the passover [victim] must be sacrificed; and he dispatched Peter and John, saying: “Go and get the passover ready for us to eat.” They said to him: “Where do you want us to get [it] ready?” He said to them: “Look! When YOU enter into the city a man carrying an earthenware vessel of water will meet YOU. Follow him into the house into which he enters. And YOU must say to the landlord of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you: “Where is the guest room in which I may eat the passover with my disciples?”’ And that [man] will show YOU a large upper room furnished. Get [it] ready there.” 13 So they departed and found it just as he had said to them, and they got the passover ready.

At length when the hour came, he reclined at the table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them: “I have greatly desired to eat this passover with YOU before I suffer; for I tell YOU, I will not eat it again until it becomes fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And, accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: “Take this and pass it from one to the other among yourselves; for I tell YOU, From now on I will not drink again from the product of the vine until the kingdom of God arrives.”

Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: “This means my body which is to be given in YOUR behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” Also, the cup in the same way after they had the evening meal, he saying: “This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in YOUR behalf.


So he actually replaced the passover Covenant with a New Covenant. and the Passover with what we call "the memorial"which is what we are asked to do. Keep doing this in remembrance of me. Its the only religious thing that Jehovahs Witnesses do.

The new Covenant is one placed between him and the 144000. The fact that they will become priests and kings next to him in God's Kingdom and that they will be the only ones ressurected to heaven, while the rest of us are a "great crowd".

As you can see the "great crowd"is unnumbered (Revelation 7:9-17) whereas there are only 144000 that are anointed and in heaven (Revelation 14:1-5)
Therefore two different groups of people who are surviors and two different hopes. A heavenly and an earthly hope. Not one but two.

 

[Ben Masada]

He didnt miss the passover.

Luke 22: 1-20

 

Now the festival of the unfermented cakes, the so-called Passover, was getting near.[/ quote]

Keep in mind that Luke is talking about the Jewish Passover.

Also, the chief priests and the scribes were seeking the effective way for them to get rid of him, for they were in fear of the people.

The Jewish leaders would never try to get rid of a Jew who had come to confirm God's Law to the People. Thus, contradiction.

But Satan entered into Judas, the one called Iscar′iot, who was numbered among the twelve; and he went off and talked with the chief priests and [temple] captains about the effective way to betray him to them.

Interesting that in Judas, Satan wuld rush Jesus to the cross. In Peter, he would try to prevent Jesus' death. Thus, contradiction.

Well, they rejoiced and agreed to give him silver money. So he consented, and he began to seek a good opportunity to betray him to them without a crowd around.

Judas had not asked for money. The Jews would not volunteer money when they could get something for free. Contradiction.

The day of the unfermented cakes now arrived, on which the passover [victim] must be sacrificed; and he dispatched Peter and John, saying: “Go and get the passover ready for us to eat.”

They said to him: “Where do you want us to get [it] ready?” He said to them: “Look! When YOU enter into the city a man carrying an earthenware vessel of water will meet YOU. Follow him into the house into which he enters. And YOU must say to the landlord of the house, ‘The Teacher says to you: “Where is the guest room in which I may eat the passover with my disciples?”’ And that [man] will show YOU a large upper room furnished. Get [it] ready there.” 13 So they departed and found it just as he had said to them, and they got the passover ready.

Here, Jesus is being framed by the Pauline mind of the gospel writers to take responsibility for the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology by celebrating the Passover on the 13th of Nisan, when it was impossible in Judaism before the 14th.

At length when the hour came, he reclined at the table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them: “I have greatly desired to eat this passover with YOU before I suffer; for I tell YOU, I will not eat it again until it becomes fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And, accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: “Take this and pass it from one to the other among yourselves; for I tell YOU, From now on I will not drink again from the product of the vine until the kingdom of God arrives.”

Keep in mind that this is no longer the Jewish Passover but the one fabricated by the gospel writers. Replacement Theology.

Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: “This means my body which is to be given in YOUR behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” Also, the cup in the same way after they had the evening meal, he saying: “This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in YOUR behalf.

The Pauline policy of Replacement Theology hit the target. Jesus has been framed. Now, Passover would no longer remind freedom from Egypt but Jesus' New Covenant from his blood.

So he actually replaced the passover Covenant with a New Covenant. and the Passover with what we call "the memorial"which is what we are asked to do. Keep doing this in remembrance of me. Its the only religious thing that Jehovahs Witnesses do.

Now, you are read to read my thread, "Replacement Theology." And now, because this is the only relilgious thing "Jehovah's Witnesses" do, is the punch line for the joke. What does it mean to a Jew. Have you forgotten, you are answering my thread?

 

[S-word]

Jesus was born in the Spring of te year 4 BCE, on the same year that Herod died, which was on the Summer of that year. Jesus was immersed in the Jordan River by John the Baptist in the year 27 CE when he was 30 of age. And he was crucified in the year 30 CE at the age of 33, on a Friday just prior to 3pm.

The only thing sure you say above in your post is that no one can say when Jesus died. That's true. Because, to tell you the truth, if you ask me, he did not die on the cross. I am almost sure that he survived the cross. Other Jews were known to suffer even up to 4 days on the cross still alive. Jesus was taken off the cross after just about three or four hours.

The Jews did not kill Jesus and this has been a 2000 years old lie that just refuses to die, even after Pope John 23rd asked publicly the Jewish People to forgive Christianity for this false accusation. But anti-Semites need this kind of lies in order to keep alive.

Jesus was never a blasphemer. If he had blasphemed, he would have committed a sin and you could no longer say he was sinless. On the contrary, he came to confirm God's Law to the letter, and warned us all to teach God's Law without any change whatsoever, under threat to lose the Kingdom of God. (Mat. 5:19)

Yes, you are right, simple enough.

Herod had died in April of 4 B.C., and before his death he had sent his henchmen out to slaughter all the boys two years and below in a certain district.

The wise men had come to Jerusalem in search for the child in the year of 5 B.C., when the comet appeared, but at a secret meeting with Herod, they had told him the exact time that they had first seen the star that had heralded the birth of the messiah, which presumably was in 6 B.C with the triple conjuntion of Jupiter as it was in accordance with the information that Herod had received from those wise men from the east, that he determined the age of the boys that were to be slaughtered.

Your wrong again old mate. You just can't ever seem to get things right, can you?

This is from your post number 74

Full of it could be of wisdom. But to someone empty of it like you, it won't help at all to quote the Scholars whose books I have taken my information from. But let's start with Jesus' birth. And let's take the NT ad the first of four sources. According to the guy who wrote the gospel of Matthew, Joseph, Mary and Jesus returned from Egypt at the moment they got the news that Herod had died. That was about the Fall of year 4 BCE. At least, the NT is an evidence for the birth of Jesus in the same year that Herod died. Jesus was almost a year old. Read Matthew 2:19-23.

This is from your post 72

Jesus was born in the Spring of te year 4 BCE, on the same year that Herod died, which was on the Summer of that year.

Not only can't you ever seem to get anything right, you don't even know what the hell you're talking about. Was Jesus born in the spring of 4 B.C., as you have stated, or was he born in the fall of 4 B.C., as you have also stated, or was Jesus almost one year old when Herod died in April of 4 B.C., as you have also stated?

 

[Ben Masada]

Herod had died in April of 4 B.C., and before his death he had sent his henchmen out to slaughter all the boys two years and below in a certain district.

The wise men had come to Jerusalem in search for the child in the year of 5 B.C., when the comet appeared, but at a secret meeting with Herod, they had told him the exact time that they had first seen the star that had heralded the birth of the messiah, which presumably was in 6 B.C with the triple conjuntion of Jupiter as it was in accordance with the information that Herod had received from those wise men from the east, that he determined the age of the boys that were to be slaughtered.

Your wrong again old mate. You just can't ever seem to get things right, can you?

This is from your post number 74

Full of it could be of wisdom. But to someone empty of it like you, it won't help at all to quote the Scholars whose books I have taken my information from. But let's start with Jesus' birth. And let's take the NT ad the first of four sources. According to the guy who wrote the gospel of Matthew, Joseph, Mary and Jesus returned from Egypt at the moment they got the news that Herod had died. That was about the Fall of year 4 BCE. At least, the NT is an evidence for the birth of Jesus in the same year that Herod died. Jesus was almost a year old. Read Matthew 2:19-23.

This is from your post 72

Jesus was born in the Spring of te year 4 BCE, on the same year that Herod died, which was on the Summer of that year.

Not only can't you ever seem to get anything right, you don't even know what the hell you're talking about. Was Jesus born in the spring of 4 B.C., as you have stated, or was he born in the fall of 4 B.C., as you have also stated, or was Jesus almost one year old when Herod died in April of 4 B.C., as you have also stated?

Jesus was born in the Spring of year 4 BCE, and Herod died in the Summer of the same year, when Jesus could be able to return from a trip that he had never gone but in the contradictional mind of Matthew. Jesus could have been almost a year old: 10 or 11 months. Where am I wrong?

 

[S-word]

Jesus was born in the Spring of year 4 BCE, and Herod died in the Summer of the same year, when Jesus could be able to return from a trip that he had never gone but in the contradictional mind of Matthew. Jesus could have been almost a year old: 10 or 11 months. Where am I wrong?

Oh! I see, so what you are saying, is that Herod, who died in either late March or early April of 4 B.C., shortly after a failed suicide attempt: Perhaps his suicide attempt, which may have been the cause of his death, was connected to his monumental botch up, in the district around northern Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the great Hellenistic city of Sepphorus, which in 3 B,C. the first act of Herods son, 'Herod Antipas,' was to rebuild that beautiful city after the damage it suffered in the revolt against Herod by the peasants in that district when so many families lost their lives, which historical uprising occured in 4.B.C.

Knowing from the holy scriptures, Luke 2: 22; that the young child Jesus, who, when he was only a 40 day old baby, was carried in his mothers arms, from the southern town of Bethlehem of Judea, to the temple in Jerusalem, where his mother performed the ceronomy of purification at the time which was in accordance to the Law of Moses, immediatly after which, she returned to her house in Nazareth, which is but a stones throw from the northern town of Bethlehem, which town is today called "Beitlahm," to where the wise would later travel in order to pay homage to the promised King.

These were the visitors, who Herod had called to a secret meeting and enquired of them the exact time that they had first sighted the star that had heralded the birth of the promised King, and who later determined the age of the boys who were to be slaughtered, in accordance to the time that he had learned from the wise men, when thay had first seen the Star.

Now you expect the people to believe that the one who Herod believed was somewhere between 1 and 2 years old, and had sent his henchmen in 4 B.C., just prior to his death, to slaughter all the boys in Bethlehem and its surrounding districts, in the hope of eliminating the threat to his throne, was born in January-- February of 4 B.C., Good heavens you crack me up old mate. You must tell me where you are going to perform your next standup comedy routine, I would love to watch your performance. P.S., You're really wasting your time on this forum, as the majority of people here are devoid of any sense of humour.

 

[AK4]

Oh! I see, so what you are saying, is that Herod, who died in either late March or early April of 4 B.C., shortly after a failed suicide attempt: Perhaps his suicide attempt, which may have been the cause of his death, was connected to his monumental botch up, in the district around northern Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the great Hellenistic city of Sepphorus, which in 3 B,C. the first act of Herods son, 'Herod Antipas,' was to rebuild that beautiful city after the damage it suffered in the revolt against Herod by the peasants in that district when so many families lost their lives, which historical uprising occured in 4.B.C.

Knowing from the holy scriptures, Luke 2: 22; that the young child Jesus, who, when he was only a 40 day old baby, was carried in his mothers arms, from the southern town of Bethlehem of Judea, to the temple in Jerusalem, where his mother performed the ceronomy of purification at the time which was in accordance to the Law of Moses, immediatly after which, she returned to her house in Nazareth, which is but a stones throw from the northern town of Bethlehem, which town is today called "Beitlahm," to where the wise would later travel in order to pay homage to the promised King.

These were the visitors, who Herod had called to a secret meeting and enquired of them the exact time that they had first sighted the star that had heralded the birth of the promised King, and who later determined the age of the boys who were to be slaughtered, in accordance to the time that he had learned from the wise men, when thay had first seen the Star.

Now you expect the people to believe that the one who Herod believed was somewhere between 1 and 2 years old, and had sent his henchmen in 4 B.C., just prior to his death, to slaughter all the boys in Bethlehem and its surrounding districts, in the hope of eliminating the threat to his throne, was born in January-- February of 4 B.C., Good heavens you crack me up old mate. You must tell me where you are going to perform your next standup comedy routine, I would love to watch your performance. P.S., You're really wasting your time on this forum, as the majority of people here are devoid of any sense of humour.

S-word i thoroughly enjoyed watching you make a fool out of ben here. It seems in every thread of his someone does this and shows his "wisdom" to be stupidity.

I just feel sad for the people he said he has converted into his judaism. It would have to take a cloudy cloudy mind for this to happen

Kudos for exposing his "wisdom". Caution though, because if you do it too much like i have done also, he will ignore you. When he does that you will have one less thing to laugh at