Questions about the Apocrypha

BenTsion

Yeshua Worshipper
Nov 20, 2003
224
7
44
✟7,869.00
Faith
Messianic
simchat_torah said:
Well, achi... since you're the one making the claim... I think the burden of proof lies upon you. ;)

Quote us the references, and through proofs, show us how your claims are made valid.

shalom,
yafet

Not actually, YOU claimed that my interpretation was wrong or out of context. So the burden of proof is on you. ;)
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
46
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
lol... achi, this can go back and forth all day long. I will take it upon myself when I get home to look up each of your claims (listed below) and show the context and where the fail to go against the Torah:
1 - In the book of Tobit, the 'angel' of G-d not only lies, but also encourages witchcraft to expel demons;

2 - The book of Tobit inplies that almsgiving saves;

3 - The book of Tobit commands us to place bread on the grave of the righteous (what for, beats me...);

4 - The book of Wisdom 1:13 states that G-d did not create death;

5 - The book of Wisdom 3:16-19 states that children of adulterers will go to hell no matter what - That pretty much puts Solomon and all his lineage (since they are his sons) in hell;

6 - Wisdom 13:6 implies that sins done out of ignorance or 'good will' are not to blame - while Torah even provides atonement for sins committed out of ignorance;

7 - Wisdom 16:21 contradicts the account of Numbers 11:5-6

8 - Ecclesiasticus 3:3 teaches that honoring fathers atones for sins.

9 - Ecclesiasticus 3:30 also teaches almsgiving atones for sins.

10 - Ecclesiasticus 12:4-7 not only teaches us NOT TO help sinners but also says G-d will punish us with TWICE the evil if we do so;

11 - Ecclesiasticus 32:19 says we are not to regret it if we do something wrong.

12 - Ecclesiasticus 42:14 says a wicked man is better than a good woman.

13 - 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 is the classic Purgatory text - atoning for the dead is possible.

14 - The prayer of Manasseh (Ortodox Catholic canon) actually says the Patriarchs did not sin.

15 - In 3 Macabees (Ortodox Catholic canon) 6:18, men actually see the face of G-d and do not die (contrary from what G-d told Moshe)
These are teh claims I am referring to... they have gone unproven. Yes, your claims are listed, but no proof is given. I'll take it upon myself to do the work.

shalom,
Yafet.
 
Upvote 0

BenTsion

Yeshua Worshipper
Nov 20, 2003
224
7
44
✟7,869.00
Faith
Messianic
These are teh claims I am referring to... they have gone unproven. Yes, your claims are listed, but no proof is given. I'll take it upon myself to do the work.

Well I didn't bother quoting them since I did give the reference and assumed everyone who was interested could look it up. I was simply avoiding a lengthy post. But if you want quotes, I can give you quotes... most of them are pretty clear anyway...

In Messiah,
Ben Tsion
 
Upvote 0

Christy4Christ

Pro-Christ
Jan 30, 2004
4,948
117
53
Hollywood, FL
✟5,762.00
Faith
Catholic
I have a reply to the contradictions from The Apocrypha. I do not have certain scriptures that you have in the Torah so I can only use the scripture I do have. :D


Wisdom 1:13 DOES state that God did not make death, however I think it might be the way you interpret this verse. I take it to mean that God did not make death because those of us who walk with Him will not die. We will not know death so to speak. If we choose to walk on the other side then surely we will know death. Here is the verse of 13 along with the two surrounding verses. You must make your own interpretations:

1:11 Keep yourselves, therefore, from murmuring, which profiteth nothing, and refrain your tongue from detraction, for an obscure speech shall not go for nought: and the mouth that belieth, killeth the soul.

1:12 Seek not death in the error of your life, neither procure ye destruction by the works of your hands.

1:13 For God made not death, neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living.

I do not find any contradiction here but that is my opinion.


This next passage doesn't look TOO much different than alot of the dreaded and scary verses of the OT. This is why it was so wonderful when Jesus came to set us free. No man or child of sin had much hope without His blood. This is what I have been taught anyway. (Not trying to impose my views on your forum just telling you my opinion)

As far as Wisdom3:16-19
16 But the children of adulterers shall not come to perfection, and the seed of the unlawful bed shall be rooted out.

3:17 And if they live long, they shall be nothing regarded, and their last old age shall be without honour.

3:18 And if they die quickly, they shall have no hope, nor speech of comfort in the day of trial.

I am going to now show you something from the OT canon that we DO have today that also looks just as dreadful.

This is from Genesis 38:7

And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

This speaks of a new born baby being wicked in the eyes of The Lord. To me it is not much different than the above passages from Wisdom. (Not in my interpretation anyway)



Wisdom13:6
But yet as to these they are less to be blamed. For they perhaps err, seeking God, and desirous to find him.

Compare-

Numbers 15:28 - And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.


Here is Number11:5-6
We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick: But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes.

here is Wisdom16:21

For thy sustenance shewed thy sweetness to thy children, and serving every man's will, it was turned to what every man liked

It is my opinion that these two verses are addressing totally different situations. I do not see them as being a contradiction per say.


I am sorry but concerning Ecclesiasticus 3:3 I will give the whole story and not just the one verse. We start with verse 2 and end with verse 9
3:2 Children, hear the judgment of your father, and so do that you may be saved.

3:3 For God hath made the father honourable to the children: and seeking the judgment of the mothers, hath confirmed it upon the children.

3:4 He that loveth God, shall obtain pardon for his sins by prayer, and shall refrain himself from them, and shall be heard in the prayer of days.

3:5 And he that honoureth his mother is as one that layeth up a treasure.

3:6 He that honoureth his father shall have joy in his own children, and in the day of his prayer he shall be heard.

3:7 He that honoureth his father shall enjoy a long life: and he that obeyeth the father, shall be a comfort to his mother.

3:8 He that feareth the Lord, honoureth his parents, and will serve them as his masters that brought him into the world.

3:9 Honour thy father, in work and word, and all patience,


Here is what we have today on this subject.

12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Again I don't clearly see a contradiction above.

Compare these:

ECCLESIASTICUS3:30
The congregation of the proud shall not be healed: for the plant of wickedness shall take root in them, and it shall not be perceived.

Job 40:12
Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Here is ECCLESIASTICUS 12:4-6
Give to the merciful and uphold not the sinner: God will repay vengeance to the ungodly and to sinners, and keep them against the day of vengeance.

12:5 Give to the good, and receive not a sinner.

12:6 Do good to the humble, and give not to the ungodly: hold back thy bread, and give it not to him, lest thereby he overmaster thee.

To me this is the same as:


Psalms1:1-6
Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish

I do not see this as teaching that we are not to regret if we do something wrong.

ECCLESIASTICUS 32:19
He that seeketh the law, shall be filled with it: and he that dealeth deceitfully, shall meet with a stumblingblock therein


Ecclesiasticus 42:14 says a wicked man is better than a good woman.

Here is what the whole story says:

Ecclesiasticus-
42:11 Keep a sure watch over a shameless daughter: lest at anytime she make thee become a laughingstock to thy enemies, and a byword in the city, and a reproach among the people, and she make thee ashamed before all the multitude.

42:12 Behold not everybody's beauty: and tarry not among women.

42:13 For from garments cometh a moth, and from a woman the iniquity of a man.

42:14 For better is the iniquity of a man, than a woman doing a good turn, and a woman bringing shame and reproach.

*Note* Better is the iniquity, etc. . .That is, there is, commonly speaking, less danger to be apprehended to the soul from the churlishness, or injuries we receive from men, than from the flattering favours and familiarity of women

You said: 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 is the classic Purgatory text - atoning for the dead is possible.


39: On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers.
40: Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.
41: So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden;
42: and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
43: He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection.
44: For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
45: But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought


The question isn't as to whether or not this is TRUE the question as I see it is: Is there something in the Old Testament to contradict this? I couldn't find anything and so I welcome any scripture that does, some of you probably know your OT better than me. I notice that you have other books that I do not have and so this is why I say I'd welcome anything you may have on this. I am in a really bad position right now and this is a VERY important study for me because the path I take depends on this study. I know that many of you may not understand where I am coming from. I MUST get to the bottom of this and I must know for sure that MY church (The Catholic Church) has the right doctrine. So far in my studies I am finding that they do but I need to know for sure. Any opinions that are brought forth will be more than welcomed and then I can do my own studing based on the sources you might provide for me. Thank you all for your help. Thank you also for allowing me to be involved in your discussions here. I think we are all on the same side :D
 
Upvote 0

BenTsion

Yeshua Worshipper
Nov 20, 2003
224
7
44
✟7,869.00
Faith
Messianic
Christy4Christ said:
Wisdom 1:13 DOES state that God did not make death, however I think it might be the way you interpret this verse. I take it to mean that God did not make death because those of us who walk with Him will not die. We will not know death so to speak. If we choose to walk on the other side then surely we will know death. Here is the verse of 13 along with the two surrounding verses. You must make your own interpretations:

Wisdom doesn't say G-d is displeased with death, or will give eternal life it says G-d did not create death. Period. That couldn't be farther from the truth.

This next passage doesn't look TOO much different than alot of the dreaded and scary verses of the OT. This is why it was so wonderful when Jesus came to set us free.


There is a difference between a passage being SCARY and it being HERESY.

As far as Wisdom3:16-19
16 But the children of adulterers shall not come to perfection, and the seed of the unlawful bed shall be rooted out.

3:17 And if they live long, they shall be nothing regarded, and their last old age shall be without honour.

3:18 And if they die quickly, they shall have no hope, nor speech of comfort in the day of trial.

I am going to now show you something from the OT canon that we DO have today that also looks just as dreadful.

This is from Genesis 38:7

And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

This speaks of a new born baby being wicked in the eyes of The Lord. To me it is not much different than the above passages from Wisdom. (Not in my interpretation anyway)

First of all, you didn't answer how it is possible that children of adulterers will be beyond hope on Judgement Day. This goes against pretty much everything you can draw from scripture (both Testaments) regarding atonement and eternal life. Avoiding the verse is not the solution.

Second, I don't think you read the context from which you drew the verse about Judah's first born. If we look at the verses before and after it, here's the context:

Now Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name {was} Tamar.
But Er, Judah's firstborn, was evil in the sight of the LORD, so the LORD took his life. Then Judah said to Onan, " Go in to your brother's wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother."

Since when do newborn babies have wives? I don't know where you got the idea that Er was a baby.

Wisdom13:6
But yet as to these they are less to be blamed. For they perhaps err, seeking God, and desirous to find him.

Compare-

Numbers 15:28 - And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.

My point exactly! If they are less to be blamed, why are they being provided atonement for? Makes no sense to me.

Here is Number11:5-6
We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick: But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes.

here is Wisdom16:21

For thy sustenance shewed thy sweetness to thy children, and serving every man's will, it was turned to what every man liked

It is my opinion that these two verses are addressing totally different situations. I do not see them as being a contradiction per say.

Again, you seem to be missing the context. Wisdom 16:20 reads:

Instead whereof thou feddest thine own people with angels' food, and didst send them from heaven bread prepared without their labour, able to content every man's delight, and agreeing to every taste.

So, here it is speaking of manna. It is actually saying manna tempered itself to taste according to what men liked. NOW, do you see the contradiction? It doesn't match the description of Numbers.

I am sorry but concerning Ecclesiasticus 3:3 I will give the whole story and not just the one verse. We start with verse 2 and end with verse 9
3:2 Children, hear the judgment of your father, and so do that you may be saved.

3:3 For God hath made the father honourable to the children: and seeking the judgment of the mothers, hath confirmed it upon the children.

3:4 He that loveth God, shall obtain pardon for his sins by prayer, and shall refrain himself from them, and shall be heard in the prayer of days.

3:5 And he that honoureth his mother is as one that layeth up a treasure.

3:6 He that honoureth his father shall have joy in his own children, and in the day of his prayer he shall be heard.

3:7 He that honoureth his father shall enjoy a long life: and he that obeyeth the father, shall be a comfort to his mother.

3:8 He that feareth the Lord, honoureth his parents, and will serve them as his masters that brought him into the world.

3:9 Honour thy father, in work and word, and all patience,


Here is what we have today on this subject.

12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Again I don't clearly see a contradiction above.

Don't you see the difference between following a commandment and being ATONED FOR by such commandment? Ecclesiasticus 3:3 reads:

Whoso honoureth his father maketh an atonement for his sins

Compare these:

ECCLESIASTICUS3:30
The congregation of the proud shall not be healed: for the plant of wickedness shall take root in them, and it shall not be perceived.

Job 40:12
Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

Ecclesiasticus 3:30 actually reads the following (according to my Catholic Bible):
Water will quench a flaming fire; and alms maketh an atonement for sins.

How is the idea of almsgiving for atonement supported in the Torah? It goes against the whole concept of atonement within scripture.

Here is ECCLESIASTICUS 12:4-6
Give to the merciful and uphold not the sinner: God will repay vengeance to the ungodly and to sinners, and keep them against the day of vengeance.

12:5 Give to the good, and receive not a sinner.

12:6 Do good to the humble, and give not to the ungodly: hold back thy bread, and give it not to him, lest thereby he overmaster thee.

To me this is the same as:


Psalms1:1-6
Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous. For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish

Perspective is everything here. Psalms 1:1-6 talks about how G-d (and G-d alone) deals with sinners. It is not commanding you not to help sinners. Ecclesiasticus makes judges out of men. The whole idea in Ecclesiasticus has no foundation. Torah comands kindness and makes no distinction. Also, imagine would have happened if Yeshua followed the advice of Ecclesiasticus...


I do not see this as teaching that we are not to regret if we do something wrong.


ECCLESIASTICUS 32:19
He that seeketh the law, shall be filled with it: and he that dealeth deceitfully, shall meet with a stumblingblock therein

In my Bible Ecclesiasticus 32:19 reads:
Do nothing without advice; and when thou hast once done, repent not.


Ecclesiasticus 42:14 says a wicked man is better than a good woman.

Here is what the whole story says:

Ecclesiasticus-
42:11 Keep a sure watch over a shameless daughter: lest at anytime she make thee become a laughingstock to thy enemies, and a byword in the city, and a reproach among the people, and she make thee ashamed before all the multitude.

42:12 Behold not everybody's beauty: and tarry not among women.

42:13 For from garments cometh a moth, and from a woman the iniquity of a man.

42:14 For better is the iniquity of a man, than a woman doing a good turn, and a woman bringing shame and reproach.

*Note* Better is the iniquity, etc. . .That is, there is, commonly speaking, less danger to be apprehended to the soul from the churlishness, or injuries we receive from men, than from the flattering favours and familiarity of women

I fail to see any basis to equate 'better' with 'less danger'

You said: 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 is the classic Purgatory text - atoning for the dead is possible.


39: On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers.
40: Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen.
41: So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden;
42: and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen.
43: He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection.
44: For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
45: But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought


The question isn't as to whether or not this is TRUE the question as I see it is: Is there something in the Old Testament to contradict this? I couldn't find anything


First of all, the very fact that the idea of atoning for the dead is not present in the Torah already makes it highly suspicious. Because the Torah were the instructions given by G-d to His people. If He wanted the dead to be atoned for, He'd have commanded them to do so.

I just looked at the clock and have to go to work now... so I'll go back to the purgatory issue when I come back home...

In Messiah,
Ben Tsion
 
Upvote 0

Christy4Christ

Pro-Christ
Jan 30, 2004
4,948
117
53
Hollywood, FL
✟5,762.00
Faith
Catholic
We are obviously reading two different translations. I am read from the Douay-Rheims bible. Alot of the things you wrote and I wrote are VERY different. In my other Catholic bible I compared one of your verses and it was the same and NOT the same is in the Douay-Rheims. However in my Catholic bible (the international student catholic bible) there is a HUGE difference in something you said. Sirach 32:19 reads: Does not a little suffice for a well bred man? When he lies down, it is without discomfort. I don't see the similarites.

Let's start over here. Which bible are you reading so we can synchronize ?
 
Upvote 0

Christy4Christ

Pro-Christ
Jan 30, 2004
4,948
117
53
Hollywood, FL
✟5,762.00
Faith
Catholic
Oh and you were right about Er not being a newborn baby. Sorry that was a big oversight on my part. I was looking for a quick example of some of the things I found dreadful in the OT and that was the first I found. I am not well versed in OT matters and I do not claim to know the scripture by heart which is why I said you probably know it alot better than me. My main concern is to see where the obvious contradictions are. I am sorry for that oversight. I guess it would be fair to say a newborn baby would not have a wife !
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
46
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Jethro made an oath to G-d that the first thing that came out of his hosue when he came home he would sacrafice. Jethro then sacraficed his daughter as she was the first thing out of his house. He sacraficed her to G-d.

Is this a good example Christy?
 
Upvote 0

Henaynei

Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Echud! Al pi Adonai...
Sep 6, 2003
21,304
1,805
North Carolina - my heart is with Israel ---
✟43,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Constitution
simchat_torah said:
Jethro made an oath to G-d that the first thing that came out of his hosue when he came home he would sacrafice. Jethro then sacrificed his daughter as she was the first thing out of his house. He sacrificed her to G-d.
simchat_torah said:
Is this a good example Christy?


*Henaynei whispers to simchat_torah --- "Yitro/Jethro was Moshe's pappa-in-law"


Horning in with my $0.02 worth :)

There is no internal or external evidence that this means she was killed.

Shoftim(Judges) 11:29 Then the Spirit of the L-RD came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead, and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon. 30 And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the L-RD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, 31 Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the L-RD'S, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. 32 So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon to fight against them; and the L-RD delivered them into his hands. 33 And he smote them from Aroer, even till thou come to Minnith, even twenty cities, and unto the plain of the vineyards, with a very great slaughter. Thus the children of Ammon were subdued before the children of Israel. 34 And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: and she was his only child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 And it came to pass, when he saw her, that he rent his clothes, and said, Alas, my daughter! thou hast brought me very low, and thou art one of them that trouble me: for I have opened my mouth unto the L-RD, and I cannot go back. 36 And she said unto him, My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the L-RD, do to me according to that which hath proceeded out of thy mouth; forasmuch as the L-RD hath taken vengeance for thee of thine enemies, even of the children of Ammon. 37 And she said unto her father, Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and bewail my virginity, I and my fellows. 38 And he said, Go. And he sent her away for two months: and she went with her companions, and bewailed her virginity upon the mountains. 39 And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed: and she knew no man.And it was a custom in Israel, 40 That the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite four days in a year.





There is no doubt that the girl belonged to G-d, but G-d has forbidden human sacrifice. I believe the Midrash says that she served in the Temple, a virgin all her days (hence the statement in blue above).



Let us look at other instances when the life of a child is forfeit to the L-rd:



Sh’mot/Exodus 13:2

Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine.



Sh’mot/Exodus 13:13

And every firstling of an *** thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.

How were they redeemed?? What cost that their life be returned to their parents??

V’yikrah/Numbers18:15
Every thing that openeth the matrix in all flesh, which they bring unto the L-RD, whether it be of men or beasts, shall be thine: nevertheless the firstborn of man shalt thou surely redeem, and the firstling of unclean beasts shalt thou redeem. 16 And those that are to be redeemed from a month old shalt thou redeem, according to thine estimation, for the money of five shekels, after the shekel of the sanctuary, which is twenty gerahs.




This child was promised and was given outright to G-d.



Sh’muel Alef/1stSamuel 1:11
And she vowed a vow, and said, O L-RD of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but wilt give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the L-RD all the days of his life, and there shall no razor come upon his head.
Sh’muel Alef/1stSamuel 1:25
And they slew a bullock, and brought the child to Eli. 26 And she said, Oh my lord, as thy soul liveth, my lord, I am the woman that stood by thee here, praying unto the L-RD. 27 For this child I prayed; and the L-RD hath given me my petition which I asked of him: 28 Therefore also I have lent him to the L-RD; as long as he liveth he shall be lent to the L-RD. And he worshipped the L-RD there.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Christy4Christ

Pro-Christ
Jan 30, 2004
4,948
117
53
Hollywood, FL
✟5,762.00
Faith
Catholic
Simchat- I am glad you see what I meant when I said there were things in the OT that I found dreadful. I have a feeling the reason for that is that I never really UNDERSTOOD the OT. I wish I could read everything in it's original language because I have a feeling I'd have a much better grasp on what everything meant :|

BenTsion- Just so you know, for me this is a study. I am not posting my views to educate you. I wouldn't dream of trying to educate a single person here. I am here as a student and for the most part I am clueless. I felt it was important for me to post what MY interpretations were to each scripture so that I might be corrected if I was wrong. Believe me, I couldn't debate this subject if I wanted to, not enough knowledge on my part. If we were talking about the reasons Mary is so highly esteemed in the Catholic church I might have a leg to stand on! As far as OT scripture, not my area at all. Thats what I need people like you and Simchat and the others who post here regularly for, to help me learn and understand. :D

Even if this subject turns into a "debate" between others on this thread, I will not be able to add any wisdom. I am here hoping to gain wisdom.
 
Upvote 0

Henaynei

Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Echud! Al pi Adonai...
Sep 6, 2003
21,304
1,805
North Carolina - my heart is with Israel ---
✟43,691.00
Country
United States
Faith
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Constitution
simchat_torah said:
oops, Jephthah. ;) close...

I guess I had the beverly hillbillies on my mind. *shrug*

They ain't no fish in that there ce-ment swimmin' hole!!
 
Upvote 0

BenTsion

Yeshua Worshipper
Nov 20, 2003
224
7
44
✟7,869.00
Faith
Messianic
Christy4Christ,
I am sorry but I won't be able to continue the discussions on this thread (at least not for the next couple of weeks). Reason is I'm taking a pre-service training course at the school I was hired to teach at. It started today and I can see that I will have very little time to actually go online on weekdays for the next couple of weeks. Anyway, the translation I'm using for quotation is an online version (though it matches the text of my Catholic Bible in Portuguese). Here's the address:

http://www.biblenet.net/library/apocrypha/

In Messiah,
Ben Tsion
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

koilias

Ancient Hassid in the making
Aug 16, 2003
988
44
51
Cambridge MA
Visit site
✟1,388.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Christy4Christ said:
We are obviously reading two different translations. I am read from the Douay-Rheims bible. Alot of the things you wrote and I wrote are VERY different. In my other Catholic bible I compared one of your verses and it was the same and NOT the same is in the Douay-Rheims. However in my Catholic bible (the international student catholic bible) there is a HUGE difference in something you said. Sirach 32:19 reads: Does not a little suffice for a well bred man? When he lies down, it is without discomfort. I don't see the similarites.

Let's start over here. Which bible are you reading so we can synchronize ?
I've not been paying attention...All of a sudden I find a real meaty, informative discussion on CF! Who'd a thought???:D ...And all behind my back...Way to go MJ forum!

Anyway, I won't add too much, I don't want this discussion from spinning into oblivion. ;) I just see here Christy that you put the finger on the problem. The problem is we don't know ancient Jewish culture, how they handled the Tenakh, and most importantly, their language well enough. You need to have a good grasp of these things first.

You think there is a difference between these two versions of Ben SiraH, which are based on the Septuagint? You should read the difference between the Septuagint Ben Sira and the ancient Hebrew manuscripts discovered in the Judean desert!! Boy, is there a difference!

This is the problem of textual transmission. What we read and what ancient readers read are two very different things. Add to the mix the transmitors (editors) who handed the ancient documents to us, and you can often end up with a meaning which might even contradict the original. Sometimes the transmittors "got it"; but sometimes they didn't understand and mucked things up quite a bit.

Jesus knew and read Ben SiraH, the Rabbis quote it as if it was Scripture. Nothing in my studies of the first century suggests that Jews considered Ben SiraH a "non-cannonical book". The only thing that prevented its inclusion into the Tenakh was its late date. The reasons Protestants didn't include it is because of their anti-tradition snobbery.

One point of interest: First Maccabees was written in Hebrew first. Second Maccabees tells basically the same story but it was written in Greek from the beginning. Compare and contrast and you will see what "translation Greek" sounds like in distinction to good Greek, for those of you who read Greek. First Maccabees sounds a lot like Luke, and parts of Matthew and Mark.
 
Upvote 0

Linda8

Active Member
Aug 10, 2003
326
1
South West
✟471.00
Faith
Messianic
koilias said:
.

One point of interest: First Maccabees was written in Hebrew first. Second Maccabees tells basically the same story but it was written in Greek from the beginning. Compare and contrast and you will see what "translation Greek" sounds like in distinction to good Greek, for those of you who read Greek. First Maccabees sounds a lot like Luke, and parts of Matthew and Mark.


Doesn't Maccabees solve the confusion that the so called future

roman emperor people have regarding past events being fulfilled.?

That is why some of the end time "specialists" call Maccabees non canonical.

They want to hide from reality of Daniel 8, 11 being fulfilled.
 
Upvote 0

koilias

Ancient Hassid in the making
Aug 16, 2003
988
44
51
Cambridge MA
Visit site
✟1,388.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Linda8 said:
Doesn't Maccabees solve the confusion that the so called future

roman emperor people have regarding past events being fulfilled.?

That is why some of the end time "specialists" call Maccabees non canonical.

They want to hide from reality of Daniel 8, 11 being fulfilled.
Yes, perhaps. They are the most selective of all Christians...that goes too for the existing cannonical books. You get a feeling that what they can't read allegorically through the lens of eschatalogy they discard altogether...But I won't open that can of worms... :D
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums