"The fear of יהוה is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Set-apart One is understanding"

Scriptures to ignore, if there is no Lunar Sabbath

For the open discussion of all calendar related issues.

Moderator: Watchman555

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 07 Feb 2008, 16:49

BrotherArnold wrote:RESPONSE, if feast is the same word in verses two and four, would not they be connected? If so, the second part of verse four would connect the first part which inturn is connected to verse two.
Hi Arnold,

Yes, maybe, and that's where the "resumptive repetition" argument would apply.
Chuck Baldwin
By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 07 Feb 2008, 16:52

Boy, that Sabbath being in verse two appears to be really inconvenient for SaturnDay Sabbatarians.

The theories on how to explain it away abound, but it is still there.

Shalom.

Jay Vincent.

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 07 Feb 2008, 17:03

Luneee wrote:So your position is that the Greek exceeds the Hebrew (language) in authority? I am unclear on why the Greek would be authoritative concerning the moedim.
No, i'm saying that the fact that the LXX uses 2 different words, where the MT uses the same word all 4 times, strongly suggests that the LXX was translated from an OLDER Hebrew text, of which the MT is an alteration.

The Peshitta Aramaic also supports this conclusion, since it also uses 2 different words in the same order as the LXX: v2 - feasts, feasts; v4 - feasts, seasons.
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 07 Feb 2008, 17:37

chuckbaldwin wrote:
Luneee wrote:So your position is that the Greek exceeds the Hebrew (language) in authority? I am unclear on why the Greek would be authoritative concerning the moedim.
No, i'm saying that the fact that the LXX uses 2 different words, where the MT uses the same word all 4 times, strongly suggests that the LXX was translated from an OLDER Hebrew text, of which the MT is an alteration.

The Peshitta Aramaic also supports this conclusion, since it also uses 2 different words in the same order as the LXX: v2 - feasts, feasts; v4 - feasts, seasons.


Which one should one base their belief upon, the LXX or the MT, or the original Hebrew text?

I am getting confused on which one gave us the KJV, and/or The Scriptures.

Can you explain which one is most authoritative?

Thank you brother.

Shalom,

Jay Vincent.

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 07 Feb 2008, 23:13

Luneee wrote:Which one should one base their belief upon, the LXX or the MT, or the original Hebrew text?
On the original Hebrew text, definitely. Please send me a copy. :mrgreen:
I am getting confused on which one gave us the KJV, and/or The Scriptures.
As i understand, the KJV OT was translated from the MT (although some say the Latin Vulgate was involved). The "Scriptures" was translated by a South African group - ISR - and i don't know which texts they used, probably the MT.
Can you explain which one is most authoritative?
Not without the original Hebrew text to compare.
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 07 Feb 2008, 23:23

chuckbaldwin wrote:
Luneee wrote:Can you explain which one is most authoritative?
Not without the original Hebrew text to compare.


So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?

Or

Is there an "original" Hebrew?

I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?

Thanks brother.

Shalom,

Jay Vincent.

BrotherArnold
Posts: 327
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 23:22
Location: Conyers, GA
Contact:

Postby BrotherArnold » 08 Feb 2008, 01:00

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts (1) of YHWH, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts (2).
3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of YHWH in all your dwellings.
4 ¶ These are the feasts (3) of YHWH, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons (4).


In the MT: All 4 of the marked words are "moedim".
In the LXX: The 3 words rendered "feasts" are "heorte" (the Greek counterpart of "chag"), while "seasons" is "kairos" (the Greek counterpart for "moedim").

RESPONSE, if feast is the same word in verses two and four, would not they be connected? If so, the second part of verse four would connect the first part which inturn is connected to verse two.

I do not believe the Greek speaking Jews and the Hebrew speaking Jews had a problem here. They both understood the same thing and that is that all the holy convocation appointments were by the moon. i.e. the four phases were for the seventh day and you know the rest. The second part of Verse four connects with verse two because of the first part of verse four being the same as verse two.

We must all remember that the punctuation marks the not appear in the Hebrew but were added by the translators, that being said, can we move the commas around to join everything together?

Read it again and tell me why "seasons" which is an "appointed time" cannot apply to the weekly season of verse two? Look at the Hebrew word for seasons/4150 and see if it the definition applies to the weekly seventh day sabbath. Here it is,

H4150
מוֹעָדָה מֹעֵד מוֹעֵד
mô‛êd mô‛êd mô‛âdâh
mo-ade', mo-ade', mo-aw-daw'
From H3259; properly an appointment, that is, a fixed time or season; specifically a festival; conventionally a year; by implication, an assembly (as convened for a definite purpose); technically the congregation; by extension, the place of meeting; also a signal (as appointed beforehand):—appointed (sign, time), (place of, solemn) assembly, congregation, (set, solemn) feast, (appointed, due) season, solemn (-ity), synagogue, (set) time (appointed).

Notice the weekly sabbath fits this definition as well as the other appointments that are by the moon.

Here is the Greek definition of season


G2540
καιÏ?ός
kairos
kahee-ros\'
Of uncertain affinity; an occasion, that is, set or proper time:—X always, opportunity, (convenient, due) season, (due, short, while) time, a while. Compare G5550.

Notice this definition can fit the weekly sabbath as well as the other feast that are by the moon also.

G5550
χÏ?όνος
chronos
khron\'-os
Of uncertain derivation; a space of time (in genitive case, and thus properly distinguished from G2540, which designates a fixed or special occasion; and from G165, which denotes a particular period) or interval; by extension an individual opportunity; by implication delay:—+ years old, season, space, (X often-) time (-s), (a) while.

Notice the same is true here. My point is that verse four does not cull out the weekly appointment/season from the other seasons that we know to be by the moon in neither the Hebrew text or the Septuagint/Greek text. They would have corrected it, if there had been a mistake and we know there was no mistake because the Greek speaking Jews were at Pentecost at the same time the Hebrew speaking Jews were and they were reading from two different scriptures but they had to be saying the same thing or they could not have arrived at Pentecost on the same day. The reason for this is obvious because of the count to Pentecost. The Greek speaking Jews counted to Pentecost from the morrow after the 15th Sabbath, which we know to be by the moon and the Hebrew speaking Jews counted from the morrow after the weekly sabbath which lunar sabbath observers believe to be the 15th and therefore there would be no contradiction and they both could arrive at Pentecost in the book of Acts on the same day. This is why it is scripturally impossible for them not to have had the same understanding from both text. The whole thing is a smokescreen trying to make someone think that there are two different Sabbaths, one on the 15th during unleavened bread and the tradinal one that can float back and forth through the week of unleavened bread and is not fixed by anything but man's tradition. It does not fit the Hebrew definition of a fixed time/Moed
Lunar Sabbaths is one of the most provable doctrines in Scripture...

Brother Arnold
See www.lunarsabbath.info

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 08 Feb 2008, 05:20

Luneee wrote:So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?
Or
Is there an "original" Hebrew?

I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?
Hi Jay,

You are correct - that's about the size of it. To my knowledge, there is no copies of original Hebrew text.
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

eriqbenel
Posts: 269
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 20:28
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Contact:

Postby eriqbenel » 09 Feb 2008, 04:50

So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?

Or

Is there an "original" Hebrew?

I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?

Thanks brother.

Shalom,

Jay Vincent.



LOL!

I love Jay. I wish I was as skilled at exposing the imprudence of some ideas with such grace. Especially when the "exposeee'" doesn't even realize what's happening.

I usually just say, "that's ridiculous". I appreciate the fine example Jay.
Shalom in the name of YHWH,

Eriq

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 09 Feb 2008, 05:09

chuckbaldwin wrote:
Luneee wrote:So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?
Or
Is there an "original" Hebrew?

I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?
Hi Jay,

You are correct - that's about the size of it. To my knowledge, there is no copies of original Hebrew text.


Thank you for your response brother.

Shalom and be blessed of Yahuah.

Jay Vincent.

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 09 Feb 2008, 05:18

eriqbenel wrote:
So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?

Or

Is there an "original" Hebrew?

I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?

Thanks brother.

Shalom,

Jay Vincent.



LOL!

I love Jay. I wish I was as skilled at exposing the imprudence of some ideas with such grace. Especially when the "exposeee'" doesn't even realize what's happening.

I usually just say, "that's ridiculous". I appreciate the fine example Jay.


Eriq,


I love you too.

I have to defer your praise to the Father, Yahuah. Now, I acknowledge that he has allowed me to live another day, and empowered me with ability for communication, but all of that is His. I am merely beneficiary of the Trust. Absent the benefit of His crucible and the refining that is effected therewith, I am just another guy on the street. I have been firsthand witness to much amusement at watching His power stun, amaze, confuse, and/or heal, depending on the setting. It gives me much delight to say "I couldn't have done that." I bow to Him, and ask Him to lead. And I thank Yahuah for allowing me to be a vertigo catalyst.

Here are the rules:

1. Know who you are. (who created you, and whom do you serve?)
2. Know who has the burden of proof. (I consider this almost as important as the first rule)
3. Never Argue. (If you argue AT ALL, you just assumed the burden of proof. [the maxim of law is that he who asserts, must prove his claim.])
4. Document your remedy.

It's that simple. (not easy, but simple.)

There is one more rule, and that is:

Admission trumps evidence. (If someone admits something, you are relieved of proving that, as their admission seals the fact.)

This approach requires that one must have the knowledge that they cannot convince another party of anything. One must have their eyes opened to learn, and for that to happen, usually crisis is involved (from my experience). Crisis can be as small as realizing that one bases their beliefs upon guesswork, or it can be as severe as you can imagine. Either way, crisis causes us to step back and look from a different perspective, and hopefully, more closely and critical. ("Why did that happen?" and "How can I avoid that again?")

Faith is required to walk this path. But faith cannot be explained, nor can you convince someone to have it.

I cannot prove that my Father Yahuah loves me, but I know it. I have placed the burden of proof on Him many times, and He has proven faithful.

Shalom,

Jay Vincent.
Last edited by Luneee on 09 Feb 2008, 06:13, edited 2 times in total.

JMSchattke
Posts: 89
Joined: 17 Nov 2007, 16:55
Location: Wandering
Contact:

Postby JMSchattke » 09 Feb 2008, 05:36

Luneee wrote:
chuckbaldwin wrote:
Luneee wrote:So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?
Or
Is there an "original" Hebrew?
I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?
You are correct - that's about the size of it. To my knowledge, there is no copies of original Hebrew text.

Thank you for your response brother.
Chuck's response notwithstanding, one can be more or less reasonable in their understanding of the texts we have at our disposal.

Or you could remember what the old texts really said - but that would imply a memory of a time 3500 years ago.
Wandering Kernel of Happiness

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Postby Luneee » 09 Feb 2008, 06:10

JMSchattke wrote:
Luneee wrote:
chuckbaldwin wrote:
Luneee wrote:So, interpretation is not able to be based on the original Hebrew?
Or
Is there an "original" Hebrew?
I guess what I really want to know is if there is no original Hebrew copy to compare to, isn't any dispute on the translation really just guesswork or opinion?
You are correct - that's about the size of it. To my knowledge, there is no copies of original Hebrew text.

Thank you for your response brother.
Chuck's response notwithstanding, one can be more or less reasonable in their understanding of the texts we have at our disposal.

Or you could remember what the old texts really said - but that would imply a memory of a time 3500 years ago.


Jonathan, concerning your post, I don't wish to imply otherwise.

Your response, however, begs the questions:

Can "reasonable" be replaced with "authoritative" in your response above? If yes, by what authority?

What I am wondering is, who, specifically, is with the authority to (beyond a reasonable doubt) say that a word means only one thing in one instance, and all other possibilities are to be excluded?

Is there a man or woman living that can do that?

I saw your "more or less" and perceived those words to be a disclaimer, and not a statement of absolutism. Will you please correct me if my perception is incorrect?

Thanks and Shalom,

Jay Vincent.

HeHoldsMyHand
Posts: 17
Joined: 03 Nov 2007, 15:22
Location: Hampshire, England
Contact:

Two questions

Postby HeHoldsMyHand » 09 Feb 2008, 12:20

Hmmm, sumfink's happening with me. I've spent months ignoring all the to-ing and fro-ing with saturday vs. lunar sabbaths and all the arguing within this forum and Eliyah's. I came to the truth of the Sabbath, thanks to the witness of the Spirit, last spring, and that was quite a shock enough to realise it wasn't sunday, let alone get my head around the idea it wasn't saturday either!

But the last couple of days, I've been feeling different and I can't explain why. I'm convinced now about the moon determining the sabbath, thanks to Lev. 23 but the one thing that's stopping me is because I haven't found a suitable answer (unless I've missed it) to my first question below, so maybe you lunar keepers out there would be kind enough to answer it. The second question is purely out of interest.

1/ If YHWH commands that we work 6 days and rest on the 7th, how can not observing the sabbath between the 29th day of the month and the 8th day of the following month be scriptural? To work 6 days and rest on the 7th certainly implies a repeating cycle of 7 days.

2/ For those who observe lunar sabbaths...how do you do this practically? I should imagine it's almost impossible to hold down a 'normal' job, if you keep having to take different days off each month. Are you mostly self-employed?

I've been led these last few months to become self-employed from home, and am setting up a Virtual Assistant business, so I can leave my job at a doctor's surgery, which makes me work occasional saturdays (not a problem if I was a lunar!), plus handing out morning-after pills to teenage girls etc. I absolutely hate it, but my (unbelieving) husband won't let me pack it in unless I can earn a similar wage doing something else. Being self-employed would also help IF I was convinced lunar was the way to go.

Thank you to anyone who would like to answer me. I'm still observing saturday sabbaths so I will wish everyone a 'Shabbat Shalom'!

Lindsey

Luneee
Posts: 107
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 02:45
Location: Acts 17:28

Re: Two questions

Postby Luneee » 09 Feb 2008, 14:19

HeHoldsMyHand wrote:Hmmm, sumfink's happening with me. I've spent months ignoring all the to-ing and fro-ing with saturday vs. lunar sabbaths and all the arguing within this forum and Eliyah's. I came to the truth of the Sabbath, thanks to the witness of the Spirit, last spring, and that was quite a shock enough to realise it wasn't sunday, let alone get my head around the idea it wasn't saturday either!

But the last couple of days, I've been feeling different and I can't explain why. I'm convinced now about the moon determining the sabbath, thanks to Lev. 23 but the one thing that's stopping me is because I haven't found a suitable answer (unless I've missed it) to my first question below, so maybe you lunar keepers out there would be kind enough to answer it. The second question is purely out of interest.

1/ If YHWH commands that we work 6 days and rest on the 7th, how can not observing the sabbath between the 29th day of the month and the 8th day of the following month be scriptural? To work 6 days and rest on the 7th certainly implies a repeating cycle of 7 days.

2 For those who observe lunar sabbaths...how do you do this practically? I should imagine it's almost impossible to hold down a 'normal' job, if you keep having to take different days off each month. Are you mostly self-employed?

I've been led these last few months to become self-employed from home, and am setting up a Virtual Assistant business, so I can leave my job at a doctor's surgery, which makes me work occasional saturdays (not a problem if I was a lunar!), plus handing out morning-after pills to teenage girls etc. I absolutely hate it, but my (unbelieving) husband won't let me pack it in unless I can earn a similar wage doing something else. Being self-employed would also help IF I was convinced lunar was the way to go.

Thank you to anyone who would like to answer me. I'm still observing saturday sabbaths so I will wish everyone a 'Shabbat Shalom'!

Lindsey


Lindsey,

First, I am a student. I am absent the proficiency of rhetoric of the Torah. What I will say here is opinion and observation. My vantage point is surely different than yours, just as yours is different from the next man or woman down the line.

In the thread called Debunking Eliyah's (Tom's) Article #2, which is here:

http://yahuahreigns.informe.com/forum/d ... -dt94.html

I addressed Tom's quote:

TOM wrote:With either method, Yahweh's command to work six days and rest on the seventh is ignored at the end of every month.


I said: [more misinformation, and this appears to be a lie (intentional or unintentional) from Tom, adding to scripture what isn't there. Yahuah never commands us to work six days. He allows us to work during six days before a Sabbath. He COMMANDS us to rest after six days that we are allowed to work during, then the seventh is the Sabbath. Notice no scripture is given here from Tom for this "command to work six days". Can you imagine working straight for six days with no sleep or rest? My point is not meant to exaggerate, but to show that there is no command to "work six days".

The truth is shown as follows:

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Exo 20:9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

The command is not given to work six days. The command is that we are allowed to work during six days, or else we are all breaking the Torah when we sleep at night.]


ISR (The Scriptures) omits "shalt" in the above verses.

Your question:
HeHoldsMyHand wrote:1 If YHWH commands that we work 6 days and rest on the 7th, how can not observing the sabbath between the 29th day of the month and the 8th day of the following month be scriptural? To work 6 days and rest on the 7th certainly implies a repeating cycle of 7 days.


begs a more than a few questions.

First, where is the command that we are to work for six days? If, in fact, this command exists, are you capable of working for six days? I know that my body could not even stay awake that long, let alone work it straight through.

I am being literal because the implication (the "If" that you use) is that we are commanded to work for six days. The verses do not say for a "portion of six days" or, for "while the sun is up during six days."

I ask you, does Yahuah impose an impossibility on His creation?

Or, does he allow us to work for six days and then we take the Sabbath?

Second, you seem to imply that Lunar Sabbatarians are not keeping the Sabbath during the time from the last Sabbath of the month, to the first crescent.

I and my family do what we believe the Word has commanded us. We take a day of rest after the sixth day (of which we are allowed to work during.) If we do no work during the time from the last Shabbat of the month, to the time of the crescent, (which we observe as a new moon feast and we focus on giving our entirety of life back to Yahuah) then how have we "not kept" sabbath?

Further, the question of where in the scripture the seventh yom ("span of time" which has been translated "day") is defined. I cannot find it, but if I have missed it, I would be receptive to being made aware of that.

I surely want to please Yahuah. :mrgreen:

As you have already surely observed, my ability to talk you into anything is non-existent. For the purpose of this setting, I am just "some guy" on an internet forum.

But the Set-Apart Spirit can teach you what is right. I pray that He does.

Concerning your second question:

HeHoldsMyHand wrote:2/ For those who observe lunar sabbaths...how do you do this practically? I should imagine it's almost impossible to hold down a 'normal' job, if you keep having to take different days off each month. Are you mostly self-employed?


That's classified....

Just kidding.

You are correct in your assessment of "holding down a 'normal' job."

I avoid the words "self-employed," simply because they are jurisdictional, and the "code" and/or "statutes" of the dead have defined those words.

That being said, I work for Yahuah. I do what He tells me to. Most every time, that includes helping someone solve some problem they have. Yahuah sees to it I am taken care of.

This may sound cryptic, but the last paragraph, at least as far as me and my house are concerned, is fact, based on repeated evidence.

I am however, with knowledge of how to help someone work "outside" the system. It's called an "arm's-length" relationship (eliminating presumption of control).

As I stated up front, I am a student. As such, no value is assured these writings of mine.

Romans 3:4 Let it not be! But let Elohim be true, and every man a liar, as it has been written, "That You should be declared right in Your words, and prevail in Your judging."

Shalom,

Jay Vincent


Return to “Calendar Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron