Sepphoris - National Geographic Channel
crunch
> On Nov 24, 6:45 pm, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>...
> > On Nov 24, 5:36 pm, Dom <DR...@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
>
> > > With respect to the dogmas that were formulated by the first
> > > seven Ecumenical Councils, we must remember that the prevailing
> > > bishops were those who had extensive training in the finer points of
> > > Greek Philosophy (e.g. homoousian versus homoiousian) and whose
> > > forefathers had deified various persons--as in the inscription on the
> > > Arch of Titus DIVO TITO DIVI VESPASIANI F.
>
> > > I recall reading that various Popes, while obviously accepting the
> > > wording of the Nicene Creed and the human and divine nature of Jesus,
> > > have objected to the expression "Jesus is God."
>
> > I believe that Jesus was strictly a human being, a noble
> > reformer. Unlike the quoted Quaker lady, I cannot say
> > Jesus connected to God on such a deep level. IOW
> > he made human mistakes such as taking a whip out on the Essene
> > moneychangers at Qumran.
>
> > Thanks for your intelligent contribution to the discussion and
> > for bringing up Hans Kung.
>
> Several years ago, I saw a documentary in which one pundit speculated
> that Jesus and his father Joseph had been involved in the rebuilding
> of Sepphoris under Herod Antipas. At the time Sepphoris was a
> cosmopolitan city. The pundit speculated that Jesus may have had a
> profound experience through his interactions with different groups
> there. It is quite plausible that Jesus, being a Galilean, would
> develop a much broader religius outlook than the hierarchs in
> Jerusalem. Most advances, both religious and secular, have been
> sparked by outsiders, as was the case with religious movement sparked
> by Jesus and his group of Galileans.
Jesus The Man
http://www.jesuspolice.com/detail_review_section.php?id=29
"There are interviews with archeologist Jonathan Reed (University of
La Verne), Biblical historian Lawrence Schiffman (NYU), Biblical
scholar Marcus Borg (Oregon State), Jodi Magness (University of North
Carolina), Steven Patterson (Eden Theological Seminary), Mordechai
Avian (University of Rochester) and Carolyn Osiek."
"Jesus worked in Sepphoris. Duh! Sepphoris? There is no mention of
Jesus even visiting Sepphoris."
So, is Dom's pundit right here? I say NO.
Peace,
David Christainsen
(<<Kelly>>)
>
> "There are interviews with archeologist Jonathan Reed (University of
> La Verne), Biblical historian Lawrence Schiffman (NYU), Biblical
> scholar Marcus Borg (Oregon State), Jodi Magness (University of North
> Carolina), Steven Patterson (Eden Theological Seminary), Mordechai
> Avian (University of Rochester) and Carolyn Osiek."
>
> "Jesus worked in Sepphoris. Duh! Sepphoris? There is no mention of
> Jesus even visiting Sepphoris."
>
> So, is Dom's pundit right here? I say NO.
Zippori is only a short walk from Nazareth (and I've been there
*actually* doing archaeology, BTW). At the time Jesus was growing up,
Zippori was the center of everything in the Galilee region. Commerce,
scholarship, medicine, art, religion. It is almost certain that Jesus
was there and very possibly worked there with his father while it was
being built and expanded. Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
home.
And let me tell you - the mosaics there are unbelieveable. (chew on
that a while, Soggy ;-)
crunch
True.
> Commerce,
> scholarship, medicine, art, religion. It is almost certain that Jesus
> was there and very possibly worked there with his father while it was
> being built and expanded. Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
> home.
It is almost certain that Jesus was NOT there and
almost certainly did NOT work there with his father
while it was being built and expanded.
Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
> home.
No, it was not.
> And let me tell you - the mosaics there are unbelieveable. (chew on
> that a while, Soggy ;-)
I did, Lazy ;-)
So, plug "Sepphoris mosaics" into Google Images.
Peace,
David Christainsen
(<<Kelly>>)
> True.
Certain to you, maybe - but your uninformed and uneducated opinion
means nothing. What's more, you have no credibility in Usenet, so
your opinion means nothing on a large scale.
> Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
>
> > home.
> No, it was not.
Yes, it was.
Besides, how would you know? You know nothing of Zippori. You're not
an archeologist. You're not a scholar of Biblical times. You're not
even capable of expressing or expounding on anything other than your
Soggy-Words ("Liar!", "Lazy", "Thiering", "Pesher", "Professional
Meteorologist", "Course in Miracles", "Betty", "divorce", "Cambridge
Meeting", "Wellesley Meeting", "pedantic", "Raytheon", etc., etc.,
etc., ad-nauseum)
> > And let me tell you - the mosaics there are unbelieveable. (chew on
> > that a while, Soggy ;-)
> I did, Lazy ;-)
>
> So, plug "Sepphoris mosaics" into Google Images.
I don't have to. I have my own photos that I took myself.
Spectacular, indeed.
crunch
> On Dec 30, 9:48 am, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 30, 12:40 pm, "(<<Kelly>>)" <rosie_be...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> > > > So, is Dom's pundit right here? I say NO.
> > > Zippori is only a short walk from Nazareth (and I've been there
> > > *actually* doing archaeology, BTW). At the time Jesus was growing up,
> > > Zippori was the center of everything in the Galilee region.
> > True.
> > > Commerce,
> > > scholarship, medicine, art, religion. It is almost certain that Jesus
> > > was there and very possibly worked there with his father while it was
> > > being built and expanded. Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
> > > home.
> > It is almost certain that Jesus was NOT there and
> > almost certainly did NOT work there with his father
> > while it was being built and expanded.
>
> Certain to you, maybe - but your uninformed and uneducated opinion
> means nothing.
My opinion is polite and informative; it means a lot.
> What's more, you have no credibility in Usenet, so
> your opinion means nothing on a large scale.
You fail to notice that I am starting to obtain significant
traction on usenet; so, my opinion is gaining weight.
> > Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
>
> > > home.
> > No, it was not.
>
> Yes, it was.
Jesus's mother was an Essene from the tribe of Dan.
> Besides, how would you know? You know nothing of Zippori.
False and bogus.
> You're not
> an archeologist.
I never in my life claimed to be an archaeologist; my
daughter Wendy was once an archaeologist; I have been
on sci.archaeology since 2002.
> You're not a scholar of Biblical times.
The fact that I am a scholar of Biblical times has
been plastered all over usenet since 1997. Do
check the Archives to correct yourself.
> You're not
> even capable of expressing or expounding on anything other than your
> Soggy-Words ("Liar!", "Lazy", "Thiering", "Pesher", "Professional
> Meteorologist", "Course in Miracles", "Betty", "divorce", "Cambridge
> Meeting", "Wellesley Meeting", "pedantic", "Raytheon", etc., etc.,
> etc., ad-nauseum)
Your libel, your bad.
> > > And let me tell you - the mosaics there are unbelieveable. (chew on
> > > that a while, Soggy ;-)
> > I did, Lazy ;-)
>
> > So, plug "Sepphoris mosaics" into Google Images.
>
> I don't have to. I have my own photos that I took myself.
> Spectacular, indeed.
Well, good for you!; you clearly care about something
in this world. Next, may you develop spiritually for
the future with God's help.
Peace,
David Christainsen
(<<Kelly>>)
> My opinion is polite and informative; it means a lot.
Your opinion is very Soggy and Soggy-focused and only means a lot to
your NPD-self.
> > What's more, you have no credibility in Usenet, so
> > your opinion means nothing on a large scale.
> You fail to notice that I am starting to obtain significant
> traction on usenet; so, my opinion is gaining weight.
I fail to notice it because it's not happening in real life. Only in
your delusions. In your world, Soggy-sez-it and it must be true.
IRL, the current threads and Google archives speak the facts.
> > > Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
>
> > > > home.
> > > No, it was not.
> > Yes, it was.
> Jesus's mother was an Essene from the tribe of Dan.
Not. Qumran is hell-and-gone from Nazareth and Zippori. Again, you
show your complete stupidity.
> > Besides, how would you know? You know nothing of Zippori.
> False and bogus.
Doubt it. You're trying to turn it all into something about Thiering
and the Essenes - that's not knowledge about something, it's self-
focused hobbyhorsing-around.
> > You're not
> > an archeologist.
>
> I never in my life claimed to be an archaeologist; my
> daughter Wendy was once an archaeologist; I have been
> on sci.archaeology since 2002.
Someone else's achivement in a particular field has nothing to do with
your life nor your understanding of the subject.
Just more evidence of Soggy's NPD.
Peter Alaca
"My name is David Christainsen and the world will have a VERY
DIFFICULT time dealing with my arguments/evidence." (David)
"I am not a typical 60 year old man. My character and
personality is way too detached; I need intelligent
interaction with a circle of friends and professionals because
no man can do it all alone. I am in a big hurry to become a
force to be reckoned with, to establish a good reputation, to
get a million priorities done." (Carl)
"My role on the NGs is to defend the scholarship of Dr.
Thiering." (David)
"I really dislike reinventing the wheel and really dislike
repeating myself." (Crunch)
- "Archaeologists ABSOLUTELY need to understand this worldwide
and I am not stopping until the finish line." - David 20/11/07
"It is over the top but I believe truth will ultimately re-
assert itself right in this newsgroup." David
"This means war on sci.arch for the rest of the year" (Carl)
"You are quite mistaken about any war that you suppose that I
declared on sci.arch. You owe me an apology." (Carl)
"Actually, you are giving me the opportunity to step up the
pressure on you until you crack and can't take it anymore."
(Carl)
"Moreover, I am not on the NGs just to argue" (Carl)
"If necessary, I will pound this point across the NGs until it
sinks" (David)
"I get great satisfaction in the fact that there is not a
cotton-picking thing you can do to stop my posting." (Carl)
(<<Kelly>>)
Excellent compilation. I think what it shows goes without saying.
Thanks, Peter.
Peter Alaca
"That's right; I have been a TERROR to shock in every
imaginable way to gain an andience or an opening
- which I have now successfully done at last." (crunch)
"You are supposed to stay out of my classroom." (David)
crunch
> On Dec 30, 10:13 am, crunch <pchristain...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > My opinion is polite and informative; it means a lot.
>
> Your opinion is very Soggy and Soggy-focused and only means a lot to
> your NPD-self.
Yet, this is a perfect example of your lazy thinking because
you are Lazy-focused, Lazy.
> > > What's more, you have no credibility in Usenet, so
> > > your opinion means nothing on a large scale.
> > You fail to notice that I am starting to obtain significant
> > traction on usenet; so, my opinion is gaining weight.
>
> I fail to notice it because it's not happening in real life.
You fail to notice because you are a poor observer.
> Only in
> your delusions. In your world, Soggy-sez-it and it must be true.
> IRL, the current threads and Google archives speak the facts.
You lack the ability to find the accurate and
relevant facts because you miss the forest for
the trees often due to your deep prejudice.
> > > > Besides, Zippori was his mother's childhood
>
> > > > > home.
> > > > No, it was not.
> > > Yes, it was.
> > Jesus's mother was an Essene from the tribe of Dan.
>
> Not. Qumran is hell-and-gone from Nazareth and Zippori. Again, you
> show your complete stupidity.
Except that my source for it is a brilliant scholar
that you have stupidly called a crackpot -
The Widow of Joppa
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1569
"HISTORICAL BACKGROUND.
Scattered throughout Luke-Acts is enough detail to reconstruct the
life of Mary the mother of Jesus, who was the Chief Widow of the
Essene order of Dan. She was born in December, 26 BC, and was 17 ½ at
the time of the conception of Jesus in June, 8 BC. As a virgin she had
been brought into the rule for Essene Virgins, the women chosen to be
the brides of dynasts. The husbands, members of the great dynasties,
did not marry until they were 36. Joseph, born September 44 BC, should
have had his first wedding with Mary in September 8 BC, and conceived
a child in December, but the couple came together in June (Mary arose
with haste! Lk 1:39), and Jesus was born in March 7 BC, with the
lifelong stigma of possible illegitimacy, depending on whether a
strict Pharisee or liberal Sadducee view prevailed. (Jn 2:4 may imply
that he did not get on with his mother.)
Mary and Joseph thereafter kept the dynastic rule, which required that
after a son was born the husband should stay away for 6 years in the
celibate community. James the next brother was conceived in Dec 1 BC,
born Sep AD 1 (Acts 7: 17 , in a passage that actually gives the
history of Joseph). Three further sons were born, Joses, Jude and
Simon (Mk 6:3). The last son, Simon, was born when Mary was 46 ½, in
June AD 22. This is shown in Acts 21:23-24 , where ‘man 4’ is Simon,
the fourth prince, entering marriage by shaving his head in June, AD
58. Joseph died in AD 23, and Mary became a widow. As a widow, she was
‘crippled’ (poor orphans, crippled widows), the ‘crippled woman’ of Lk
13:10-17, who had been ‘bound by Satan in year 18’ (v.16). In AD 23,
(year 18 from AD 6, year 1 of the new dating of the Annas priests),
she had come under the authority of the chief levite, the Raphael,
Judas Iscariot, who ‘bound her’ by keeping her in the Pharisee party
to which Joseph had belonged.
It was possible for a widow to be ‘enrolled’, enter formal ministry,
at the age of 60 (1 Tim 5:9). At the age of 57, in December AD 32, the
season of the episode of the crippled woman, Mary began 3 years’ study
preparing her for this step. In March, AD 33, the season of the
crucifixion, she appeared as the ‘poor widow’ (Mk 12:41- 44),
surrendering her meagre property to a celibate community. At the
crucifixion, Jesus entrusted her to a convent whose superior was John
Mark the Beloved Disciple (Jn 19:26-27).
James the brother of Jesus preferred the Pharisee viewpoint that made
him the legitimate David. Mary, it appears, always sided with him. In
AD 37-38 James and Mary had moved to Damascus in the party opposing
the royal Herods. But when Agrippa I reurned to his country after
receiving the kingship, he employed his usual charm to bring some of
the Damascus Pharisees back to his side. As we have seen, this was one
of the purposes of Saul when he went to Damascus in AD 40. The result
of Agrippa’s efforts was that James, with his brothers and Mary, came
back to Jerusalem, supporting Agrippa whenever he espoused Pharisee
views. According to Clem. Rec. 1, 43, James became bishop of Jerusalem
in AD 40. According to CD 8:2-9 the ‘princes of Judah’ – led by James
as the David prince of the royal tribe of Judah – had deserted the
Damascus party and fallen into sinfulness."
> > > Besides, how would you know? You know nothing of Zippori.
> > False and bogus.
>
> Doubt it. You're trying to turn it all into something about Thiering
> and the Essenes - that's not knowledge about something, it's self-
> focused hobbyhorsing-around.
You doubt; I thought you would be certain and yet, you doubt
and are not sure.
> > > You're not
> > > an archeologist.
>
> > I never in my life claimed to be an archaeologist; my
> > daughter Wendy was once an archaeologist; I have been
> > on sci.archaeology since 2002.
>
> Someone else's achivement in a particular field has nothing to do with
> your life nor your understanding of the subject.
Earth to Kelly: re-think what you are saying; it
sounds really stupid here.
> Just more evidence of Soggy's NPD.
Just more evidence of Lazy's prejudice.
(Peace or not; the choice is up to Kelly),
David Christainsen
Martin Edwards
On the other hand, it is not mentioned in the Gospels. It is far more
likely that the writers were simply busking.
--
As through this world I've rambled, I've met plenty of funny men,
Some rob you with a sixgun, some with a fountain pen.
Woody Guthrie
Martin Edwards
or otherwise of Jesus.
theologynut
Apocryphal or secret literature about Mary and James abounds. In
reality, the entire virgin characterization of Mary sprang from a
translation variant. The Septuagint used the Greek word PARTHENON
(virgin) for the Hebrew word ALMAH (young woman). And spectacular
birth stories were de riguour for caesars and messiahs. We know
little of the ancestry and early life of Jesus--Davidic ancestry and
birth in Bethlehem were pre-requisites for messiahship, but the
genaeologies of Matthew and Luke are incompatible and both writers
have to get Jesus birthed in Bethlehem. The only recorded census took
place in 6 BCE and chaos would have reigned if every male had to
travel to his birthplace to register. Not to mention the fact that
this census was specifically for the purpose of taxation and many
Judeans would have resisted it on principle. Josephus reports a
popular bromide that stated "Cursed is the man that teaches his son
Greek". If a Greek-style city like Sepphoris influenced Jesus, it was
probably adversely. You can almost hear his rural peasant parents
(and even the presumption that they were poor is a guess) saying,
"Avoid like the plague those depraved and degenerate pagans with their
idolatrous tilework and their adulterous pandering to false gods!"
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Virgin Birth—Or Prophetic Slip?
by A.P. Staff
Printer version | Email this article
One of the first miracles recorded in the New Testament is the virgin
birth of Jesus Christ. According to Matthew 1:22-23, Isaiah prophesied
about the virgin birth in Isaiah 7:14. However, some in the scholarly
community (particularly those within the atheistic and agnostic
segments) deny that Isaiah was prophesying about a virgin birth.
Isaiah 7:14 reads as follows in three separate translations:
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin
shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (ASV,
emp. added).
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin
shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (KJV,
emp. added).
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman
shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'u-el
(RSV, emp. added).
The difficulty with the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 lies in the Revised
Standard Version’s translation of the verse, which renders the Hebrew
word ‘almâ as “young woman.” The American Standard and King James
Versions render ‘almâ as “virgin.” If the correct translation of the
verse is “ young woman,” then Matthew misquotes and misuses a section
of Isaiah. According to Sam Gibson, a former-believer-turned-skeptic
and author of the website Cygnus’ Study Debunking the Bible, the Bible
cannot be true since, “there is not one prophecy in the Bible that
cannot be explained away through rational, chronological, interpretive
or other methods without relying on the supernatural” (2001). If
Isaiah is not a prophecy at all, then others like Mr. Gibson will fall
from Christianity, citing the Bible as unreliable.
Those who are opposed to the interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 as a
prophetic passage referring to a virgin birth claim that ‘ almâ does
not mean “virgin,” and that the word used exclusively for “ virgin” is
the Hebrew word betûlâ. Both of these claims, however, are inaccurate.
A careful look at the etymological and semantical aspects of these two
words actually documents the fact that there is no single-word-meaning
for either Hebrew term.
According to John Walton, one of the translations of ‘almâ is “young
woman,” but there are certain nuances to the Hebrew term. After
examining all occurrences of the word, and looking briefly at its
etymology, Walton gave the lexigraphical definition of ‘almâ as “one
who has not yet borne a child and as an abstraction refers to the
adolescent expectation of motherhood.” In application to Isaiah 7:14,
he admitted that virginity seemed to be implied (1997a, 3:415-418). As
to the claim that, if Isaiah had meant virgin, he would have used
betûlâ, Walton refutes that as well. He says that betûlâ is a “social
status indicating that a young girl is under the guardianship of her
father, with all the age and sexual inferences that accompany that
status” (1997b, 1:783). If the passage was a prophecy of the virgin
birth of Jesus, then betûlâ would not apply since Mary, while not yet
married per se to Joseph, was nonetheless no longer under the
guardianship of her father.
The Septuagint renders ‘almâ in Isaiah 7:14 as parthenos, which means
“a female of marriageable age with focus on virginity” (Danker, 2000,
p. 777). Concerning the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew, Dohmen
noted:
It is unlikely that the LXX [Septuagint] tried to import the concept
of a virgin birth, a familiar idea in many religious traditions, into
Isa. 7:14. It is also possible that the unusual translation of the LXX
is an attempt to accommodate the meaning of the text as altered by
both the redaction and the reception of the original prophetic oracle
(2001, 10:160, emp. added).
The translators of the Greek Septuagint rendered ‘almâ as parthenos,
which generally means “virgin,” instead of neanis, which generally
means “young woman” (Danker, p. 667). Jerome, in his translation of
the Bible into Latin, rendered parthenos as virgo, which usually means
“virgin” (Dohmen, 10:160). It is interesting that the translators of
the Septuagint took the thought of the Hebrew passage and translated
it into a Greek word for “virgin.” Since they worked about two hundred
years before Christ was born, then the translators of the Septuagint
could not have been trying to “fit” scripture to a Christian
viewpoint, but instead were merely giving the correct translation for
the passage. Of the passage in Isaiah 7:14, H.D.M. Spence and Joseph
Exell made the following observations:
The rendering “virgin” has the support of the best modern Hebraists,
as Lowth, Gesenius, Ewald, Delitzsch, Kay. It is observed with reason
that unless ’almah is translated “virgin,” there is no announcement
made worth of the grand prelude: “The Lord himself shall give you a
sign—Behold!” The Hebrew, however, has not “a virgin” but “the
virgin” (and so the Septuagint, h parthenos), which points to some
special virgin, preeminent above all others (1962, 10:128, emp. in
orig., italicized Greek words transliterated from Greek characters in
orig.).
The point is well made that Isaiah was emphasizing a special birth,
worthy of being considered a sign from God. With that in mind, the
logical translation for ‘almâ is “virgin.”
Besides Isaiah 7:14, ‘almâ is used in Genesis 24:43, Exodus 2:8, Psalm
68:25, Proverbs 30:19, Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8. In an examination
of the passages using the word ‘almâ, H.C. Leupold concluded that it
“cannot be denied that such a one is to be classified as a
virgin” (1988, 1:156). James Coffman drew an identical conclusion in
his Commentary on Isaiah, citing Homer Hailey’s conclusion that the
word ‘almâ , as used in the Old Testament, must be referring to a
virgin (1990, p. 75). J. Gresham Machen, in his classic book, The
Virgin Birth of Christ, indicated that “there is no place among the
seven occurrences of ‘almah in the Old Testament where the word is
clearly used of a woman who was not a virgin” (1980, p. 288).
In Genesis 24:43, the word ‘almâ refers to Rebekah, who we know from
Genesis 24:16 was a virgin (which, incidentally, is designated by the
term betûlâ). So here both betûlâ and ‘almâ are used to refer to a
virgin girl. In Exodus 2:8, ‘almâ refers to Miriam, the elder sister
of Moses. There is nothing in scripture to indicate that his sister
was married at that time. In fact, it appears that she was not married
and still living at home; therefore, ‘almâ likely is referring to her
virgin condition. The Psalm 68:25 reference uses ‘almâ to designate
young girls who were playing timbrels in what appears to be a
religious parade or ceremony. It is highly unlikely that these girls
were not virgins, since it would be uncommon for either a married
woman or an unchaste girl to be involved in such a procession.
Proverbs 30:19 is a little harder to decipher, but it appears that it
is referring to intercourse between a man and a woman. [“There are
three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know
not: the way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock;
the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a
maiden.”] However, it is impossible to ascertain from the verse
whether or not the woman was a virgin. From the context of Song of
Solomon 1:3 (“Thine oils have a goodly fragrance; thy name is as oil
poured forth; therefore do the virgins love thee”), ‘almâ can refer
only to a virgin. Song of Solomon 6:8 (“There are threescore queens,
and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number”) also is
obviously referring to virgins, as opposed to the queens and
concubines who have lost their virginity.
In Matthew 1:18-25, the apostle Matthew provided a divinely inspired
commentary, citing Isaiah 7:14 as a prophecy fulfilled by the virgin
birth of Jesus Christ. “Now all this was done, that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
‘Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son,
and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God
with us’ ” (Matthew 1:22-23, emp. added).
Therefore, the only conclusion that one can draw respecting the
available evidence is that the Hebrew word ‘almâ, as used in Isaiah
7:14 and elsewhere in the Bible, is properly rendered “virgin.” The
term does not always mean virgin in non-biblical writings, nor do
analogous terms of other Semitic languages necessitate this
translation. Nevertheless, in biblical usage, the only example that
can be found is of a young woman whose virginity is intact. Leupold
commented:
The translation “virgin,” therefore, deserves to be moved out of the
margin [referring to the marginal translation of ‘almâ as “virgin”
that the RSV gives] and into the text; and the translation “young
woman” merits no more than marginal status (1988, 1:157).
While correct on certain other translation points, the translators of
the RSV made an erroneous judgment in the case of Isaiah 7:14.
REFERENCES
Coffman, James Burton (1990), Commentary on Isaiah (Abilene, TX:
Abilene Christian University Press).
Danker, Fredrick William (2000), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press).
Dohmen, C. (2001), “‘almâ, ‘elem,” Theological Dictionary of the Old
Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 10:154-163.
Gibson, Sam (2001), “Cygnus’ Study—The Prophecy Challenge,” Cygnus’
Study Debunking the Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.cygnus-study.com/prophecy.shtml.
Leupold, H.C. (1988), Exposition of Isaiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Machen, J. Gresham (1980), The Virgin Birth of Christ (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker).
Spence, H.D.M. and Joseph Exell (1962), The Pulpit Commentary (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Walton, John (1997a), “‘alûmîm, ‘elem, ‘almâ,” New International
Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan), 3:415-419.
Walton, John H. (1997b), “betûlâ,” New International Dictionary of Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan),
1:781-784.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © 2002 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Alleged
Discrepancies" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as
the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be
designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics
Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain
attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes
that accompany the article must be included with any written
reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly
forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must
be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6)
serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several
parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made
available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7)
articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included
in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in
electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited
or altered from their original content and that credit is given to
Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles
were taken.
For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:
Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
U.S.A.
Phone (334) 272-8558
http://www.apologeticspress.org
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/622
Tom McDonald
<everything to do with archaeology retained -- remainder snipped>
Huh. Nothing left.
Snip irrelevant newsgroups, JWS.
--
Tom "Go Pack" McDonald
Martin Edwards
> by A.P. Staff
>
>
> Printer version | Email this article
>
>
> One of the first miracles recorded in the New Testament is the virgin
> birth of Jesus Christ. According to Matthew 1:22-23, Isaiah prophesied
> about the virgin birth in Isaiah 7:14. However, some in the scholarly
> community (particularly those within the atheistic and agnostic
> segments) deny that Isaiah was prophesying about a virgin birth.
> Isaiah 7:14 reads as follows in three separate translations:
>
refers to the tyranny being endured at the time of writing. Rome was
unheard of outside Italy, or probably Central Italy.
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
FYI - Archaeogists study ancient texts!!!
"Dead Sea Scrolls - Isaiah 53
The Dead Sea Scrolls have provided phenomenal evidence for the
credibility of biblical scripture. Specifically, the nearly intact
Great Isaiah Scroll is almost identical to the most recent manuscript
version of the Masoretic text from the 900's AD. (Scholars have
discovered a handful of spelling and tense-oriented scribal errors,
but nothing of significance.) In light of Isaiah's rich Messianic
prophecy, we thought it would be rewarding to reproduce a portion of
the English translation of the actual Hebrew text found in the Great
Isaiah Scroll. Specifically, the following corresponds to Isaiah 53 in
today's Old Testament. Remember, this text was dated 100 to 335 years
before the birth of Jesus Christ!"
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls-2.htm
Notice word "archaeology" in url.
Jim
Mt 13:14 -
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By
hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall
see, and shall not perceive:
Tom McDonald
> On Jan 2, 3:50 am, Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2...@charter.net> wrote:
>> jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com wrote:
>>
>> <everything to do with archaeology retained -- remainder snipped>
>>
>> Huh. Nothing left.
>>
>> Snip irrelevant newsgroups, JWS.
>>
>> --
>> Tom "Go Pack" McDonald
>
> FYI - Archaeogists study ancient texts!!!
>
> "Dead Sea Scrolls - Isaiah 53
> The Dead Sea Scrolls have provided phenomenal evidence for the
> credibility of biblical scripture. Specifically, the nearly intact
> Great Isaiah Scroll is almost identical to the most recent manuscript
> version of the Masoretic text from the 900's AD. (Scholars have
> discovered a handful of spelling and tense-oriented scribal errors,
> but nothing of significance.) In light of Isaiah's rich Messianic
> prophecy, we thought it would be rewarding to reproduce a portion of
> the English translation of the actual Hebrew text found in the Great
> Isaiah Scroll. Specifically, the following corresponds to Isaiah 53 in
> today's Old Testament. Remember, this text was dated 100 to 335 years
> before the birth of Jesus Christ!"
>
> http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls-2.htm
>
> Notice word "archaeology" in url.
I see the word 'all' in the URL. Does that mean that the URL is
about everything?
I see the word 'about' in the URL. Does that mean the URL is
about gallivanting?
I see the word 'dead' in the URL. Does that mean that the URL is
about the murder of Abraham Lincoln?
I see the word 'sea' in the URL. Does this mean that the URL is
about the novels of Patrick O'Brien?
I see the word 'scrolls' in the URL. Does that mean that the URL
is about a set of very thin saws?
Many things are discovered via archaeological investigation, that
are studied in depth by folks in non-archaeological fields.
You make the mistake many tyros make: if it is old, and it was
discovered by archaeologists, anything to do with it is archaeology.
That's wrong. I wonder if you are interested in learning about
archaeology; or if you are just here for the religion?
> Jim
>
> Mt 13:14 -
> And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By
> hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall
> see, and shall not perceive:
Don't be so hard on yourself.
Being able to distinguish things from other things can be
difficult, especially if one is not very knowledgeable or
experienced in those things to be distinguished from each other.
duke
>One of the first miracles recorded in the New Testament is the virgin
>birth of Jesus Christ.
Don't you mean the conception by a virgin?
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
George
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 15:38:47 -0800 (PST), "jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com"
>
> <jwsheffi...@satx.rr.com> wrote:
> >One of the first miracles recorded in the New Testament is the virgin
> >birth of Jesus Christ.
>
> Don't you mean the conception by a virgin?
Just imagine for an instant this scenario.
Daughter comes home, tells her mum and dad that she's pregnant but its
okay because godidit.
Its virgin on the ridiculous
jwshe...@satx.rr.com
Duh! It says "all about Archaeology"
Which means all about archaeology
for those who can read.
Jim
2Ti 2:15 - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that
needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
crunch
wrote:
>...
> The only recorded census took
> place in 6 BCE and chaos would have reigned if every male had to
> travel to his birthplace to register. Not to mention the fact that
> this census was specifically for the purpose of taxation and many
> Judeans would have resisted it on principle.
A young Messiah sees the failure of warfare
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/qumran_origin/message/1877
"According to Lk 2:1-2, a decree (dogma) went forth from Caesar
Augustus that ‘all the world should be enrolled’. ‘All the world’ pas
hē oikoumenē, has the precise meaning of the Herodian mission
organisation. It owned considerable property, including Qumran where
its money was stored in vaults. With typical Roman efficiency, it was
now required that the ownership of all property should be registered
for legal purposes. When the zealot counter-government was set up,
they made their own legal records in the same way, as shown in the
documents found at Murabbaat and other sites near the Dead Sea.
"At midnight beginning Monday March 1 AD 6 Joseph with Antipas (pantes
of v .3) set out from Ain Feshkha and walked up to Qumran, arriving
there at 3 am, observing the set walking rate of 2000 cubits per hour.
Coming to the area on the esplanade called ‘Judea’, he met with a
Roman official and registered his property. Following the previous
history in which the Herods had taken over Qumran from the Davids,
Antipas owned this part of Qumran, while the Davids were left with the
‘queen’s house’, which was consequently called ‘a city of David’ (Lk
2:4b)."
Peace,
David Christainsen
Newton, Mass. USA
Peter Alaca
Stop your fucking crossposts to sci.archaeology
Seebs
> Stop your fucking crossposts to sci.archaeology
My best guess, given his history of behavior, is that you cannot make
him stop by asking him to stop. You can either use force or completely
ignore him and killfile him. I'd recommend the latter, it's pretty
unlikely that his news provider will shut him down for the relatively
small level of spam he generates.
Which is to say: Please don't bother responding telling him to stop
crossposting. It has no effect on him, and adds non-content traffic to
newsgroups from someone that most of us probably don't want to killfile.
-s
--
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet...@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
(<<Kelly>>)
> On Jan 1, 10:58 am, theologynut <sharonkathleenjohn...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >...
> > The only recorded census took
> > place in 6 BCE and chaos would have reigned if every male had to
> > travel to his birthplace to register. Not to mention the fact that
> > this census was specifically for the purpose of taxation and many
> > Judeans would have resisted it on principle.
> >...
>
>
> "According to Lk 2:1-2, a decree (dogma) went forth from Caesar
> Augustus that ‘all the world should be enrolled’. ‘All the world’ pas
> hē oikoumenē, has the precise meaning of the Herodian mission
> organisation. It owned considerable property, including Qumran where
> its money was stored in vaults. With typical Roman efficiency, it was
> now required that the ownership of all property should be registered
> for legal purposes. When the zealot counter-government was set up,
> they made their own legal records in the same way, as shown in the
> documents found at Murabbaat and other sites near the Dead Sea.
>
> "At midnight beginning Monday March 1 AD 6 Joseph with Antipas (pantes
> of v .3) set out from Ain Feshkha and walked up to Qumran, arriving
> there at 3 am, observing the set walking rate of 2000 cubits per hour.
> Coming to the area on the esplanade called ‘Judea’, he met with a
> Roman official and registered his property. Following the previous
> history in which the Herods had taken over Qumran from the Davids,
> Antipas owned this part of Qumran, while the Davids were left with the
> ‘queen’s house’, which was consequently called ‘a city of David’ (Lk
> 2:4b)."
"‘All the world’ pas hē oikoumenē, has the precise meaning of the
Herodian mission organisation"
Thiering is either really, really bad at translating Greek or she's
just really, really dishonest. "Pas hē oikoumenē" is referring to the
Roman empire and all the subjects of the empire. The Romans
considered the entire world to be Roman territory - hence, the term
"all the inhabited earth. "
If you were capable of doing some real and honest study of the Bible
(Hebrew and Greek)on your own, rather than buying into and believing
everything BT says, you would see for yourself that BT is just really
out to lunch on what the Scriptures say.
Tom McDonald
Huh. Not a word about the Polynesians, or the Oneota, or
Stonehenge, or Durham Walls, or Teotihuacan, or Tiwanaku, or Abu
Simbel, or Great Zimbabwe, or . . . well, anything except a small
sliver of Biblical research, not all of it even close to archaeology.
So it is not "all about archaeology", now, is it Jim?
>
> Jim
>
> 2Ti 2:15 - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that
> needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
You have not rightly divided this word, Jim. Perhaps thou needest
to be ashamed a little.
Tom McDonald
Not if you're high, man.
Dom
> [...] . The only recorded census took
> place in 6 BCE and chaos would have reigned if every male had to
> travel to his birthplace to register.
Can you provide a reference that discusses this census? Thanks.
zayton
>
> Duh! It says "all about Archaeology"
>
> Which means all about archaeology
> for those who can read.
>
> Jim
For those who can read, however, the "about us" paragraph on the site makes
no claim that those who put the site up are Archaeologists, or know anything
about Archaeology:
ABOUT US
We believe the pursuit of truth is the highest calling of humanity. We are a
collection of people who have wandered many paths, but all discovered that
same truth. We are passionate about sparking authentic life journeys and
sharing compelling content with skeptics, seekers, believers, and a hurting
world.
We seek to be non-threatening, practical, and informative, using the
technology of the Internet to pose tough questions and seek candid answers
about God, Creation, Life, Humanity, Thought, History, and Truth.
Many people refer to us as "Christians," but we consider ourselves followers
of Jesus. Like Jesus, we reject many of the issues found in "organized
religion" (man-made attempts to reach God through rules and rituals).
Actually, we believe religion has kept more people from the truth than
anything in history.
Although we reject man-made religion, we consider the personal pursuit of
God as tantamount in each of our personal life journeys. We also believe
that ultimate, saving Truth is found only through God's Son, Jesus Christ.
George
:-)
Grass is natures way of saying 'High'
Martin Edwards
That is a fair point in itself, but many well known passages in the
Bible have alternative translations. For example that famous centurion
actually said, "He truly was a son of a god", just what you would say if
it bucketed down before you could go home.
crunch
Point of clarification -
When Dr. Thiering says "All the world pas hē oikoumenē,
has the precise meaning of the Herodian mission
organisation, she means it does in Thiering pesher.
-----
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lk%202:1&version=NIV
Luke 2:1 (New International Version)
Luke 2
The Birth of Jesus
"1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that
a census should be taken of the entire Roman world."
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lk%202:1&version=AMP
Luke 2:1 (Amplified Bible)
Luke 2
"1 IN THOSE days it occurred that a decree went out
from Caesar Augustus that the whole [a]Roman empire
should be registered."
-----
Midnight beginning Monday March 1, 6 AD,
the solar unintercalated 30th. (Luke 2:1)
(For the blue section click an underlined word or phrase
for Thiering pesher meaning, which will appear in a small
window at the top of the screen)
Official Thiering website
http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/index_WFW_verse.html
"1. It came about in the Days Those, a dogma came out beside of Caesar
Augustus to be written-from All the household.
1. March 1 in 6 AD fell on a Monday that was also the unintercalated
solar 30th of the south lunisolar year 3941. The Roman occupation came
officially into force on the 1st of the Julian month. As is recorded
by Josephus, it was marked by a census imposed by Quirinius the
governor of Syria. He was also liquidating the estate of Archelaus,
and required written records of its extent (Josephus, Antiquities 18,
2 )."
"At midnight beginning March 1, 6 AD, the Roman occupation came fully
into force, implemented by a census."
Peace (after the Quaker fashion),
(<<Kelly>>)
Sorry - that whitewashing doesn't cut it. She's using Biblical
Scritpure as reference and telling us what *she* thinks it means. The
big problem is - what she's telling us is incorrect. Again, Thiering
is taking Scripture and forcing it to fit her "pesher" by changing the
original meanings and intents.
Bad form.
But, I imagine that's why true Biblical scholars and theologians blow
her off.
zayton
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 17:31:23 -0600, "zayton" <zay...@newwavecomm.net>
> wrote:
>
>> jwshe...@satx.rr.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Duh! It says "all about Archaeology"
>
>>
>> site makes no claim that those who put the site up are
>> Archaeologists, or know anything about Archaeology:
>
>
> MORONS, is my first AND ONLY guess.
Yep.
Like Sheffield, they have no idea what Archaeology is.
zayton
>
> That is a fair point in itself, but many well known passages in the
> Bible have alternative translations. For example that famous
> centurion actually said, "He truly was a son of a god", just what you
> would say if it bucketed down before you could go home.
Really?
No A's before Son or God in Matthew.
duke
Joseph cared for her.
Martin Edwards
Absence of an article is understood as indefinite. What's that? You
meant in English? I assume you are from Arkansas.