Posted on 11/30/2022 11:20:01 PM PST by Tzaphon
25 Kislev 3756 - Chanukah / Conception of Yeshua
15 Tishri 3757 - Sukkot / Birth of Yeshua, September 14, -4
15 Nisan 3790 - (30 C.E.) Pesach / Crucifixion of Yeshua
Now for some real fun!
Go to the website Your Sky and generate the view from Jerusalem for Passover 30 C.E. The full moon passes right through Virgo (Betulah in Hebrew) literally the birth of the new covenant!
Your Sky
http://www.fourmilab.ch/yoursky/
Select Nearby City
Choose Jerusalem
Select Universal Time and
copy and drop this date and time into the appropriate box…
30-04-05 18:00:00
And you will see the great sign of the birth of the Brit Chadashah!
Cycle through the eveining and you’ll see the full moon pass right through the constellation Virgo, a birth, ouch!
Now when you look at the header from Your Sky the day will say Wednesday, but when you look at the same date from this site, same company BTW.
Calendar converter
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/calendar/
It will say Friday which is correct. Pope Gregory adjusted the calendar by ten days, count from Wednesday to Friday (count Wednesday) and you’ll hit Friday.
Happy Chanukah!
In the Old Testament, they believed the trees the cut down and decorated were alive and worthy of worship. I don’t believe anybody here thinks Christmas trees are alive and worthy of worship.
Having said that, I believe Romans 14 is the proper advisement. If you think it is wrong, don’t have one. If it is nothing tonyiu, feel free to have one.
Only the dates were removed, not the days.
O Tannenbaum
Trees are forbidden to be worshiped as the Jeremiah Scriptures say. We are even warned to not trade gifts "like the pagans do".
No one worships Christmas trees.
Also, you should say “Jesus was born” not “The human Jesus was worn”.
Your language is bifurcating the two natures of Jesus - the Divine and the human. That’s a no-no for Christians, and even if meant in a proper sense, is far worse a practice than having a Christmas tree.
I don’t see how saying “The human Jesus was born” separates the two natures of Christ. The human part of him was indeed born, but that doesn’t take away his divinity, it just solidifies that he is the God Man (God the Son). I think it is clearer to those who don’t understand the two natures. Atheists and non-trinitarians could use your argument and say “see, Jesus was born (created)”. You give them fuel for the objections.
All of him was born. All of him died on the cross. He's one divine person, not a divine person somehow connected to a human person.
Christmas trees started in the middle ages as props in morality plays, which started by depicting the fall in Genesis. The prop which became the Christmas tree represented the "tree of life," and the ornaments on it represent the forbidden fruit.
That is all fine and good except nobody ever saw a Christmas Tree until Martin Luther made the first one.
Next somebody will say God had a mother. Jesus had a mother. God was, is and always will be.
You do understand that Jesus is fully God and fully Human, right? His Human body is right now, in Heaven. Albeit a non-corruptible body, but a body none the less.
If you read the Scriptures correctly, you will see what is called Theophanies before the birth of Jesus. If Jesus is truly God, then he formed the earth in Genesis, and nothing formed was made without Him. He was the one that appeared before Joshua as The Commander of the Lord's Army. He wrestled with Jacob and injured his leg, and many other appearances in the Old Testament.
What you are arguing is there is more than one God. What Scripture says is there is but one God that can appear in many forms. Instead of using the word "Trinity", it would be more accurate to use "The Triune God", or One God in 3 forms. In order to pay the sin price for Adam, Jesus appeared in human form otherwise He couldn't pay the wages anymore than apples and oranges are the same fruit.
I always have this question for people that read the Bible and call themselves "Christian", "When you know that Christmas was a made up holiday to celebrate a pagan god, why would you continue to celebrate it using what is clearly forbidden in Scripture. Every year I watch Christians bend into a pretzel trying to make a pagan day fit into some kind of "Holy Day". Something Holy is set apart only to God. What is Santa Clause, Christmas trees, elves, reindeer, ect. What does Easter rabbits, chicken eggs, ect, have to do with the death of Jesus or His Resurrection? These are all man made holidays substituted with what God Himself prescribed in Leviticus 23, and Jesus observed them all.( what would Jesus do= what did Jesus do?) Jesus never put up a tree in His home or hunted Easter eggs. He observed Passover and Tabernacles as Scripture taught.
When the angel declared His name to be "Emanuel" he was saying that God was with them just as He was in the wilderness Tabernacle. When Jesus returns to earth, He will appear as the Lion of Judah, not the Lamb of God. To learn more about that just read Revelation and there is a description of Him there.
Zech 14:16 says in the Last Days God will require earthings to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. Christmas is about the birth of Tammuz. He was the son of Nimrod, a type of Antichrist.
If you know Christ was born on Tabernacles and not Dec 25th, why would you continue celebrating the wrong day when God has provided the proper days to observe and what to do on those days. You can't make stuff up and please God.
If you read Joshua, you will see the northern king set up 2 golden calves and worship them on the wrong days and use non-Levite priests so as not to compete with the southern kingdom. He chose the eighth month, fifteenth day vs. the true day on the seventh month, fifteenth day.
Jos 24:14 "Now therefore, fear the Lord, serve Him in sincerity and in truth, and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the River and in Egypt. Serve the Lord!
Jos 24:15 And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."
“What you are arguing is there is more than one God.”
No, not at all. I am arguing - and the argument is already settled by Christians - that the Second Person of the Trinity took on flesh and in that flesh was called Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus was born. Not his nature. Women do not give birth to natures. They give birth to persons, children.
“When you know that Christmas was a made up holiday to celebrate a pagan god, why would you continue to celebrate it using what is clearly forbidden in Scripture.”
1) The fact that it is called Christmas means it was not “made up” to celebrate a pagan god. Christ is not a pagan god. And if that is your level of logic, then you really should sue the government over the poor public education you got.
2) Every day - every single one - had a pagan god celebrated on it somewhere sometime. Our days are literally named after pagan gods (e.g. Thursday = Thor’s day). On Maundy Thursday, however, we are not celebrating or worshipping Thor, but Christ. If you don’t see the difference there, then you really have a problem.
“Every year I watch Christians bend into a pretzel trying to make a pagan day fit into some kind of “Holy Day”. Something Holy is set apart only to God. What is Santa Clause, Christmas trees, elves, reindeer, ect.”
Christmas is a holy day. It literally says so on my liturgical calendar. Santa Clause is a distortion of St. Nicholas and a rather benign and innocent one until about 200 years ago in the United States. Christmas trees are simply decorations and beautiful ones at that. The only group that really believes they are religious is the Moravians and they’re Protestants. If you can’t separate the genuine Christmas traditions, which come from scripture, from kitsch of the last few centuries, then, again, you’re the one with the problem. I know children who do it without any problem. Why can’t you?
“What does Easter rabbits, chicken eggs, ect, have to do with the death of Jesus or His Resurrection?”
Simple:
1) It’s literally part of the season - the Spring.
2) eggs are representative of the tomb and New Life springing from it.
Seriously, do you not know this? Are you really that poorly educated? https://www.britannica.com/story/what-do-eggs-have-to-do-with-easter#:~:text=The%20egg%20itself%20became%20a,even%20in%20modern%20secular%20nations.
“These are all man made holidays substituted with what God Himself prescribed in Leviticus 23, and Jesus observed them all.”
The Resurrection is not in Leviticus 23. So you’re saying we can’t celebrate it. Again, your logic fails.
“( what would Jesus do= what did Jesus do?) Jesus never put up a tree in His home or hunted Easter eggs. He observed Passover and Tabernacles as Scripture taught.”
Jesus is not bound by the mosaic law regarding anymore than I am since His resurrection. He fulfilled the Law. If He wants to wear woolen and linen blends (banned by the law) He can. In the NT we see Christians celebrating the Eucharist on the first day of the week - Sunday. Christ fulfilled by the law.
Then amazingly, you say this: “Zech 14:16 says in the Last Days God will require earthings to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. Christmas is about the birth of Tammuz. He was the son of Nimrod, a type of Antichrist.”
No. Tammuz was a Sumerian god. Nimrod was an actual biblical figure, a great grandson of Noah. You actually think a man, Nimrod, is the father of a pagan god, Tammuz? You make mistake after mistake, after mistake. Have you never actually read the Bible? Have you ever read an actual book of any note? If you want to know about the supposed father of Tammuz, look up Enki. What you’re spouting is a 19th century distortion of myths and the Bible. Anyone who knows anything about this would know half of what you’re carping about is trash invented by Alexander Hislop - trash that was praised and then debunked by his formerly most ardent sycophant Ralph Woodrow: https://www.equip.org/articles/the-two-babylons/
You’re lack of genuine knowledge is embarrassing. You should be ashamed of being such a sciolist.
Simple.
He was born. There was no “human part of him” that was born.
Parts are not born. Persons are born. He was born.
He took on humanity. He was not part human. He was all human and all divine. Not part human and part divine.
Persons are born. Natures are not. He was born. His human nature was not.
When you deny the reality of the incarnation - which is what you’re doing - you’re denying Christ Himself by denying who He really was - all man and all God. Not part man and part God. All man, all God, forever after.
Human part=bodily form. Does that clear it up? How do you come up with me denying who he is (not was, by the way, who he is), from me stating that he was bodily born?
There is no Christmas or Easter in Scripture anymore that Thanksgiving and July 4th.In fact, Eze 8 speaks on abominations that sound like Christmas and a Sunrise service.
I received a good public education and I received a good Biblical education. It sounds like your Biblical education is what is lacking. Until you do some more Bible study, I'm kinda over trying to convince you that Christmas trees were forbidden in Scripture. To save you any bother, here tis,....
Jer 10:2 Thus says the Lord: "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles; Do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, For the Gentiles are dismayed at them.
Jer 10:3 For the customs of the peoples are futile; For one cuts a tree from the forest, The work of the hands of the workman, with the ax.
Jer 10:4 They decorate it with silver and gold; They fasten it with nails and hammers So that it will not topple.
Jer 10:5 They are upright, like a palm tree, And they cannot speak; They must be carried, Because they cannot go by themselves. Do not be afraid of them, For they cannot do evil, Nor can they do any good."
Jer 10:6 Inasmuch as there is none like You, O Lord (You are great, and Your name is great in might),
Now put the tree up if you want, but just know God doesn't approve. Why not dedicate quality time with the Lord instead of defying Him. Is this not any different that reading the Bible and insisting that sodomy is love so God must be for it as the Democrats insist? I can read 50 verses saying God wants you to worship Him on the Sabbath, but almost 95% say He wants us to worship Him on Sunday. This is why many will follow the Antichrist because they don't know what Scripture says. Jesus even warned that they wouldn't believe Him but would follow a man that comes in his own name.
“How do you come up with me denying who he is (not was, by the way, who he is), from me stating that he was bodily born?”
Jesus was born. There was no “human part” of him that was born. Persons are born. When you were born, you were born with a soul (which is eternal). Your “human part” was not born. YOU were born with an eternal soul.
To say otherwise is to deny the reality of the incarnation. There is no human part of Jesus. He’s not 25% human. He’s not 50% human. He’s all man and all God. To say anything else is to logically deny either His humanity or His divinity.
You’re so wrong and you have no idea. I’ll demonstrate with just one example:
“There is no Easter in Scripture.”
Well, you better tell the translators of the King James Bible.
Acts 12:4
And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
Easter - as the KJV translators knew - is just the word used in Germanic language countries for the Resurrection/Passover of Christ. The resurrection is most definitely in scripture.
You completely avoid mentioning Hislop and Tammuz - which tells me I was right.
Did the Word become flesh or not? Did he tire? Did he hunger? You still haven’t explained how I am denying the incarnation. Did I once say he was 25%, 50%...? No. He is fully God and fully man. That doesn’t sound like denying the incarnation to me.
Vladimir, we are both acknowledging the incarnation of Jesus Christ. I may not be saying it in the proper “Christian-ese”, but I am plainly saying the incarnation is real.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.