Lucifer

[CherubRam]

Neither article substantiates your claims, they only mention that according to Bacher Halafta's statement was directed against "Hebrew Christians". Nothing therein about cutting out the divine name from New Testament scrolls and then burning the rest.

You'll need to try again on that one.

-CryptoLutheran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bible Chronology[edit]

Jose was also a prominent haggadist; and the conversation which he had with a Roman matron, resulting in her conviction of the superiority of the Jewish religion,[24] shows his great skill in interpreting Biblical verses. Jose is considered to be the author of the Seder Olam Rabba, a chronicle from the creation to the time of Hadrian, for which reason it is called also known as "Baraita di Rabbi Jose ben Halafta."[25] This work, though incomplete and too concise, shows Jose's system of arranging material in chronological order.

Jose is known for his ethical dicta, which are characteristic, and in which he laid special stress on the study of the Torah.[26] He exemplified Abtalion's dictum, "Love the handicrafts";[27] for he was a tanner by trade,[28] and followed a craft then commonly held in contempt.[29] A series of Jose's ethical sayings in Shabbot (118b) shows his tendency toward Essenism. As has been said above, Jose was opposed to disputation. When his companion Judah desired to exclude Meïr's disciples from his school, Jose dissuaded him.[30] One of his characteristic sayings is, "He who indicates the coming of the Messiah, he who hates scholars and their disciples, and the false prophet and the slanderer, will have no part in the future world."[31] According to Bacher[32] this was directed against the Hebrew Christians.

Owing to Jose's fame as a saint, legend describes him as having met Elijah.[33] Jose, complying with the levirate law, married the wife of his brother who had died childless; she bore him five sons: Ishmael, Eleazar, Menahem, Halafta (who died in his lifetime), and Eudemus.[34]

 

[danny ski]

I am not going to stop using the New Testament to please him.

He is a Jew, and I am a Judaic Christian. Judaic means: Pertaining to Judaism.

There's no such thing as Judaic Christian just like there's no Judaic Muslim, Christian Muslim or Muslim Christian. We are DIFFERENT religions. Get it through your head. Applying Greek Testament to the Tanakh is no different from applying Koran or Das Kapital- it's unnecessary,misleading, without context and disrespectful when talking to a Jew. And it proves exactly nothing and means nothing. Case in point-Lucifer
A Christian invention that does not exist anywhere in the Tanakh.

 

[CherubRam]

There's no such thing as Judaic Christian just like there's no Judaic Muslim, Christian Muslim or Muslim Christian. We are DIFFERENT religions. Get it through your head. Applying Greek Testament to the Tanakh is no different from applying Koran or Das Kapital- it's unnecessary,misleading, without context and disrespectful when talking to a Jew. And it proves exactly nothing and means nothing. Case in point-Lucifer
A Christian invention that does not exist anywhere in the Tanakh.

Judeo-Christian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian



Judeo-Christian is a term used since the 1950s to stress the common ethical standards of Christianity and Judaism, such as the Ten Commandments.
History of the term ·
Ethical value system ·
Culture wars ·
Basis of a common ...
.

The Center for Judaic-Christian Studies


jcstudies.com

Redemption, Revelation, and Celebration. This series of messages reveals the deeper meaning for Christians of the three great pilgrim feasts of Israel.
.

Jewish Christian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Christians



Jewish Christians, also Judeo-Christians, were the original members of the Jewish movement that later became Christianity. In the earliest stage the community was ...
Related terms ·
Jewish origin of ... ·
The Council of ... ·
Communities whose ...

 

[ViaCrucis]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bible Chronology[edit]

Jose was also a prominent haggadist; and the conversation which he had with a Roman matron, resulting in her conviction of the superiority of the Jewish religion,[24] shows his great skill in interpreting Biblical verses. Jose is considered to be the author of the Seder Olam Rabba, a chronicle from the creation to the time of Hadrian, for which reason it is called also known as "Baraita di Rabbi Jose ben Halafta."[25] This work, though incomplete and too concise, shows Jose's system of arranging material in chronological order.

Jose is known for his ethical dicta, which are characteristic, and in which he laid special stress on the study of the Torah.[26] He exemplified Abtalion's dictum, "Love the handicrafts";[27] for he was a tanner by trade,[28] and followed a craft then commonly held in contempt.[29] A series of Jose's ethical sayings in Shabbot (118b) shows his tendency toward Essenism. As has been said above, Jose was opposed to disputation. When his companion Judah desired to exclude Meïr's disciples from his school, Jose dissuaded him.[30] One of his characteristic sayings is, "He who indicates the coming of the Messiah, he who hates scholars and their disciples, and the false prophet and the slanderer, will have no part in the future world."[31] According to Bacher[32] this was directed against the Hebrew Christians.

Owing to Jose's fame as a saint, legend describes him as having met Elijah.[33] Jose, complying with the levirate law, married the wife of his brother who had died childless; she bore him five sons: Ishmael, Eleazar, Menahem, Halafta (who died in his lifetime), and Eudemus.[34]

Yes, I read that. But that doesn't say anything about Jews supposedly taking the Divine Name out of the New Testament and then burning the rest. Which is what I mentioned in my previous post.

Perhaps you could address that.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[CherubRam]

Yes, I read that. But that doesn't say anything about Jews supposedly taking the Divine Name out of the New Testament and then burning the rest. Which is what I mentioned in my previous post.

Perhaps you could address that.

-CryptoLutheran

Links to the quote:

https://www.google.com/#q=One+cuts+...them+and+stores+them+away,+and+the+rest+burns.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Links to the quote:

https://www.google.com/#q=One+cuts+...them+and+stores+them+away,+and+the+rest+burns.

Good, you can use google.

Now, perhaps, you could provide support for your claim.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[theophilus777]

The man who was king of the nation of Babylon.

Who's buried in Grant's tomb?

A tired Loammi if someone can't give me the quadratic equation for CherubRam's parabolic king of Babylon

 

[Syrokal]

Really, in this day and age people are still interpreting "Lucifer" as something more than a KJV translation error?

 

[smaneck]

Really, in this day and age people are still interpreting "Lucifer" as something more than a KJV translation error?

The error goes back much further than the KJV. It was originally made in the Vulgate which, after all, was the scripture of the western church for a thousand years. Of course St. Jerome also applied that term to Jesus.

 

[Syrokal]

The error goes back much further than the KJV. It was originally made in the Vulgate which, after all, was the scripture of the western church for a thousand years. Of course St. Jerome also applied that term to Jesus.

I always thought the Vulgate wasn't an error merely the cloest Latin rendering and that the error occurred when translators mistook the term for a proper noun while writing the KJV?

 

[smaneck]

I always thought the Vulgate wasn't an error merely the cloest Latin rendering and that the error occurred when translators mistook the term for a proper noun while writing the KJV?

The mistake was not St. Jerome's if that is what you mean, because he assigns the same title to Jesus in a couple of places. In fact, it was so much a title of Christ that Christians would sometimes name their children Lucifer up through the fourth century. However, by the fifth and sixth century it was regarded as the name for a fallen angel, making the idea that Lucifer was the devil's name deeply embedded in people's head well before the KJV translation.

 

[Syrokal]

The mistake was not St. Jerome's if that is what you mean, because he assigns the same title to Jesus in a couple of places. In fact, it was so much a title of Christ that Christians would sometimes name their children Lucifer up through the fourth century. However, by the fifth and sixth century it was regarded as the name for a fallen angel, making the idea that Lucifer was the devil's name deeply embedded in people's head well before the KJV translation.

Really?
Fascinating, can you give me a scholarly source for that last statement please?..I don't doubt you outright, it's just a blow to what I thought I knew I genuinely thought it was a theological term that appeared around the KJV, I want to know more now.

 

[smaneck]

Really?
Fascinating, can you give me a scholarly source for that last statement please?..I don't doubt you outright, it's just a blow to what I thought I knew I genuinely thought it was a theological term that appeared around the KJV, I want to know more now.

You might check this out:

Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages - Jeffrey Burton Russell - Google Books

He doesn't really do a very good job of explaining how Lucifer stops being a name for Christ and becomes a name for the devil, but he does show that Lucifer was equated with the devil by the middle ages.

 

[theophilus777]

Really, in this day and age people are still interpreting "Lucifer" as something more than a KJV translation error?

The Orthodox lay claim to still having access to the same teaching from the early Church, and they have no problem with this understanding so clearly it came about well before KJV

 

[Silent Ocean]

KJV

Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

The word "Lucifer" is not a biblical word, it is not found in the original text.

Secret societies such as the Catholics and Masons who have translated our biblical text, they have inserted their own personal beliefs which has lead to much confusion. The good news is that the truth can be found, if you are willing to study hard enough.

honestly I believe every follower of religion should learn the original language of his/her book, because 'translation' is nothing but people trying to express the meanings of the original book(puting their own understanding), and there is a huge gab between the source language and the target one. When I read Quran in Arabic and the interpretation in English, I feel sorry for the readers of the later...huge difference and different influence.

 

[smaneck]

honestly I believe every follower of religion should learn the original language of his/her book, because 'translation' is nothing but people trying to express the meanings of the original book(puting their own understanding), and there is a huge gab between the source language and the target one. When I read Quran in Arabic and the interpretation in English, I feel sorry for the readers of the later...huge difference and different influence.

I would agree, but you have to keep in mind that the Bible is written in two or three different languages.