Group Discovers John the Baptist Cave

AP | 8/16/04 | AP

[ChicagoHebrew]

Jesus was uneducated (even the Gospels acknowledge Jesus had no formal Jewish education), and the Gospels were written by Gentiles a century after Jesus, so it's quite likely they misunderstood or misrecorded some things he said.

The only "law" in Isaiah is law that is REPEATED from the Torah. There is no NEW law in Isaiah. The Torah itself says that nothing shall be added to it, and nothing taken away.

[Havoc]

Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect [peace], and at such a time.

A scribe of the law of God - Ezra. Not a part of the mosaic law; but, the Law of Moses is differentiated from the Law of God over and over and over in the OT. It isn't rocket science. All one has to do is punch the words "the law" into an online bible reference and one will find quickly the amount of egg one is wearing on one's face in trying to pick knits on a subject one is blatently out of his depth on. I've given you every hint shy of holding you by the hand and walking you to it. Scripture speaks for itself. What is written in the "law of God" refers to the old Testament - not the law of Moses which is the first 5 books. You'll note that Ezra is not moses nor part of the first five books; but, Ezra is nonetheless a scribe of the law of God- a writer of an old testament Book which deals with God's law.

Ezra 7:26 And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether [it be] unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment.

Law. You'd do well to learn this stuff before attempting to argue what it is or isn't.

[VOA]

if not posted yet...
this was discussed last night (8-18-04) on the "Haven" radio show...here's a link to
the archive page for audio:

http://www.havenministries.com/archives.php

[Havoc]

3551 // nomov // nomos // nom'-os //

from a primary nemo (to parcel out, especially food or grazing to
animals); TDNT - 4:1022,646; n m

AV - law 197; 197

1) anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law,
a command
1a) of any law whatsoever
1a1) a law or rule producing a state approved of God
1a1a) by the observance of which is approved of God
1a2) a precept or injunction
1a3) the rule of action prescribed by reason
1b) of the Mosaic law, and referring, acc. to the context. either
to the volume of the law or to its contents
1c) the Christian religion: the law demanding faith, the moral
instruction given by Christ, esp. the precept concerning love
1d) the name of the more important part (the Pentateuch), is put
for the entire collection of the sacred books of the OT

- also see 322 Netizen.

[ChicagoHebrew]

Nonsense. Law of God and Law of Moses are synonyms that mean exactly the same thing -- just as Israel is sometimes called Jeshurun and Ephraim is sometimes called "tribe" and sometimes called "half-tribe."

[Netizen]

Scripture is law. Mosaic law Is a specific part of that. And the levitical laws are a specific part of Mosaic law. So, one wonders what point you think you are making. Seriously.

Some scripture is law, but not all scripture is law. Law is rule, custom, command. The commandments are law. The Mosaic law and God's law are one in the same. Moses merely presented what God told him to. When Moses said 'Have no strange gods before me, he was quoting YHWH and was not trying to imply that he Moses was God, just as Jesus was not God. It's really very simple to understand when one isn't saddled with the burden of replacement theology.

[Netizen]

The only "law" in Isaiah is law that is REPEATED from the Torah. There is no NEW law in Isaiah. The Torah itself says that nothing shall be added to it, and nothing taken away.

I'm afraid we are wasting our time but I concur.

[Netizen]

If I recall correctly, Ezra, being a scribe of God's law, was entrusted with instructing the Israelites that had been held captive. Having been in captivity most had no knowledge of the law. What Ezra instructed them of, was what was in the first 5 books. As pointed out, he repeated what Moses had said as given to him by God, in the first 5 books.

[Havoc]

No. The law of Moses is the law of Moses. It is part of the law of God. It is not the law in toto. It is what everyone first thinks of; but, Find me in the law of Moses where the law of God expressed in Ecclesiastes 9 is found? The law of the living and the dead. It isn't in there. But it is nonetheless a law of God. The spiritually righteous and the spiritually corrupt share the same fate in that they all die and after that can have nothing more to do with the living so long as they remain dead. The law of God was the old Testament. The law of Moses is part of that. The Bible in toto is the Law of God insofar as it reveals that which God decided we needed to know.

[Havoc]

As I just noted, Ecclesiastes 9 has specific reference as do other passages in other books of the old testament. You say "some scripture". It doesn't matter how small or large the amount of scripture may be, one cannot say the law of God is the mosaic law as it does not contain all of the law of God.
The mosaic law is largely the specific civic and spiritual code by which Israel was to function. But, God, through His prophets and other writers has expounded on Spiritual law that is nowhere in the mosaic law. God's law and mosaic law are not interchangeable terms.

I'm an artist. I've had colored pencil sets that were 12 color sets, 36 color sets, 100 color sets, etc. My current set is a 200+ color set. It is not all the colors. It is all the colors that I could get for the moment. The smaller sets are made up of bits of the larger sets. That does not make the 12, 36 or 100 color sets the whole set of available spectrum nor are they equal to the larger set.

Chrysler makes cars. One cannot say that what chrysler makes is the extent of cars in the US, anymore than one can say that Ford, GM and Chrysler combined make up the extent of cars available on the planet.

You are displaying an ignorance of logic. A part of a set is not the set. That is basic math. It is common sense.
If I sell you an orange from a bushel basket, do I charge you for the full bushel, or just the single orange. The single orange, of course, because you have taken a part of the bushel, not the whole bushel.

See, the moment you admitted there is law in the Old testament that is not found in the Mosaic laws, you admitted that the set "God's law" includes more than "Moses' law" which by any definition means that Moses' law is not God's complete law and therefore is not interchangeble with "God's law" They are only interchangeable if they are in toto exact duplicates of one another.

So, again, the "Law of God" as revealed at that time was the old testament scriptures. The law of Moses is a subset of that. And the Old testament writers did differentiate.

[ChicagoHebrew]

I'm not sure WHAT in chapter 9 of Ecclesiastes you're refrencing, but NOTHING in Ecclesiastes is LAW. Ecclesiastes is in the WRITINGS portion of the Bible. That means, it is ONE MAN's OPINION of life, not ANYTHING divine.

[Petronski]

I'm afraid we are wasting our time but I concur.

Oh yes, with that character, you most certainly are wasting your time.

[safisoft]

As for the brothers and sisters, (I don't know the Greek word) but the word used refers to cousins, not brothers and sisters.

A myth, for public consumption. We are now permitted to read the Scriptures for ourselves. Even in the orginal languages, not just Latin. Here are the references and the Greek.

Matthew 12:47: Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.

The word is adelphos and literally means "of the same womb" from the root delphus which is "womb" in Greek.

Mark 3:35: There came then his brethren [adelphos] and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling Him.

Mark 6:3: Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother [adelphos] of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters [adelphe = feminine form] here with us?

The usage for adelphos is consistent in the Greek Scriptures - it means "brother" and the feminine means "sister" - not cousin. The Greek word used in the Greek Scriptures for cousin is completely different. It is suggenes - which literally means "of the same 'genes' or blood".

An example of this word is Luke 1:36: And, behold, thy cousin [suggenes] Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

[safisoft]

You have heard of Holy Scripture. And I pray that you will learn about Holy Tradition. (handed down in stories - word of mouth - from the apostles)

Some of the Jews of the First Century had their traditions as well. From Pirkei Avot (Mishna, which by the way has some very good and FAR older traditions in it):

Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua; Joshua to the elders; the elders to the prophets; and the prophets handed it down to the men of the Great Assembly.

This is the so-called "oral Torah". Here is what Y'shua [Jesus] said regarding those who think that they have any authority to add to what God commands:

"He answered and said to them, 'Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? ...you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: 'These people draw near to Me with their mouth, and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" Matthew 15:3-9

There is a Greek word used in the Greek Scriptures that reflects this practice of the commandments of men: the word dogma. Ask anyone with a copy of the Greek Scriptures - the word is never used in a positive way. It is used 5 times, and in every case it is decrees of men.

[safisoft]

The Scribes, Sadducees and Pharisees weren't lacking in the knowledge they were lacking in faith. They twisted it to suit themselves.

A correction - some were lacking in faith. Scripture reflects very positively on some Pharisees, and Y'shua [Jesus] Himself calls His own disciples "scribes".

[safisoft]

Jesus was uneducated (even the Gospels acknowledge Jesus had no formal Jewish education), and the Gospels were written by Gentiles a century after Jesus

Have you heard of Shem Tov? A tzaddik from the 15th Century who published a Hebrew version of the Gospel of Matthew. He did it for defense against questions which began in the Inquisition - he wanted fellow Jews to have access to it for successful questioning. The text he claimed was from the original Hebrew source. Historians Papius and Eusebius claim that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. There is no reference to 3 of the 4 books of the so-called "Gospels" coming from Gentiles. The internal evidence (poor Greek grammer and style, and author's claims) are that Matthew was written by a man named Mattityahu Levi; Mark by Yochannan surnamed "Marcus"; and John by Yochannan ben Zadavi. The Gospel of Luke's author may have been Greek because of the good Greek, but there is historical evidence that he was a Proselyte living in the Jewish community in Antioch. His accounts recorded in Acts are very good Greek, and he speaks extremely positively of Torah and Torah zeal (Acts 21).

The only "law" in Isaiah is law that is REPEATED from the Torah. There is no NEW law in Isaiah. The Torah itself says that nothing shall be added to it, and nothing taken away.

You are so correct. There is no new law ever after Torah. This is a fundamental of not only Judaism, but even so-called "Christianity" - because Torah is the basis for canon. If it does not line up with Torah, it is a false prophecy (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and 18:20).

[Havoc]

Actually, Ecclesiastes 9 sets down the boundaries of the law of life and death for physical life and the limits of involvement of the living with the dead. Leviticus and Deuteronomy spell out the punishments for attempts at violating this; but, it does nonetheless define law. If you want to chase your tail on this, I'm sorry; but, it will be a chase from willful ignorance - not from intelligent understanding.

[shroudie]

Re: What about DNA? Did anyone check for DNA in the blood stains [on the Shroud of Turin]?

Permit me to quote from Ray Rogers. Rogers, a chemist, is a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education. In his half-century long career (mostly in weapons research) he has published many scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and U.S. government publications. In 1978, together with several other scientists, he personally examined the Shroud of Turin for several days and collected numerous samples of fibers and particle materials for further study. He continues to study the Shroud today.

First he addresses the blood question:

Alan Adler was an expert on porphyrins, the types of colored compounds seen in blood, chlorophyll, and many other natural products. He and Dr. John Heller, MD, studied the blood flecks on the STURP sampling tapes [Heller and Adler, Applied Optics 19, (16) 1980]. They converted the heme into its parent porphyrin, and they interpreted the spectra taken of blood spots by Gilbert and Gilbert. They concluded that the blood flecks are real blood. In addition to that, the x-ray-fluorescence spectra taken by STURP showed excess iron in blood areas, as expected for blood. Microchemical tests for proteins were positive in blood areas but not in any other parts of the Shroud.

He then goes on to address the DNA question.

Several claims have been made that the blood has been found to be type AB, and claims have been made about DNA testing. We sent blood flecks to the laboratory devoted to the study of ancient blood at the State University of New York. None of these claims could be confirmed. The blood appears to be so old that the DNA is badly fragmented. Dr. Andrew Merriwether at SUNY has said that "… anyone can walk in off the street and amplify DNA from anything. The hard part is not to amplify what you don't want and only amplify what you want (endogenous DNA vs contamination)." It is doubtful that good DNA analyses can be obtained from the Shroud.

It is almost certain that the blood spots are blood, but no definitive statements can be made about its nature or provenience, i.e., whether it is male and from the Near East.

For more information see Shroud Story

Shroudie

[SunkenCiv]

Just updating the GGG information, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
Gods, Graves, Glyphs PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[SunkenCiv]

· GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach · · join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·
	Antiquity Journal  & archive  Archaeologica  Archaeology  Archaeology Channel  BAR  Bronze Age Forum  Discover  Dogpile  Eurekalert  Google  LiveScience  Mirabilis.ca  Nat Geographic  PhysOrg  Science Daily  Science News  Texas AM  Yahoo  Excerpt, or Link only?	Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. Israeli cave linked to John the Baptist cave of john the baptist discovered? New Discoveries Point To 'Cave Of John The Baptist' As Important Site In The Time Of Isaiah To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
· History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword · · Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword ·