Something has gone horibly wrong the man that preaches UNITY is now going to distance himself or "SEPARATE" from the one who preaches separation. Isn't that a hoot!
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Judy wrote:
> It would have saved a lot of misunderstanding if you
> could have explained as simply as you did in that last
> post rather than take up an offence for Mel Gibson.
Following is how the conversation developed:
On Feb. 28, Terry wrote:
> ... making me wonder how the full moon
> figured in the story.
On Feb. 29, David Miller wrote:
> It is historically accurate that there was
> a full moon on that night.
On Mar. 1, Judy wrote:
> It has nothing to do with history; this comes
> from astronomy and RC Liturgy. There are two
> different calenders and some disagreement so
> apparently they use astronomy/astrology to determine
> what day to celebrate Pascha (see below quote
> from a French RC theologian) quote:
Kevin responded to this with occult rhetoric:
> This movie is LOADED with "HIDDEN" meaning!
> ... ...
You expressed agreement with Kevin. Then I wrote:
> After this event, some Christians worked to separate
> Easter from Passover, so they do some calendar manipulation,
> but at the time Christ died, none of this was going on.
> The Jews used a lunar calendar and they used visual
> observation of the new moon to mark the beginning of
> each month. We know for a fact that the moon was just
> about full when Jesus was in the garden praying to his Father.
That seems pretty clear to me. I said that they used visual observation
of the new moon to mark the beginning of each month.
Then Blaine wrote:
> Full Moon? Hey you guys, there is ALWAYS a full moon
> on the night of the Passover!!! LOL You guys need
> to bone up on your calendar lore--the Jewish calendar
> is what is known as a solar-lunar calendar--Lunar,
> because each Jewish month begins with a new moon.
> Solar, because it is kept in sync with the Vernal
> (Spring) Equinox by adding a lunar month every six
> years. The first month of the calendar, called Nisan,
> begins with the new moon closest to the Vernal Equinox,
> and then the Passover is always held on 15 Nisan.
> Since a lunar month averages 30 days, this places the
> Passover smack dab in the middle of the month--when
> the moon is at full phase!! Always. Take my word
> for it, as an old Mormon boy who holds a temple
> recommend! LOL
Then Judy wrote on Mar. 2:
> OK Blaine, I read your first message and you claim
> the Jewish Calender goes by the moon right? Only
> there are problems with this and the calender they
> use presently is more Babylonian than it is Jewish
> and involves the sun as well as the moon. I doubt
> Mel Gibson was consulting Jewish/Babylonian calenders.
David Miller wrote on Mar 3:
> I'm sure he was consulting the calendar issues
> involved here. Every serious scholar has consulted
> these matters when dealing with Passover and the
> crucifixion. Gibson brought in experts who would
> advise him about all these things, men who had surely
> studied them.
>
> You are making this way too complicated with your comments.
> It all breaks down to this.. The Jews would look for the
> new moon every month. As soon as the new moon was observed,
> they declared the new month to have arrived. Now you just
> count 14 days to the passover (Lev. 23:5). The lunar cycle
> is 29.5 days, so half of that brings us to the full moon.
> There really is no dispute over this at all. I don't know
> why you are arguing about it and not recognizing that Blaine
> has spoken truthfully about this matter.
Judy responded on Mar. 4 with:
> You must not have read the post I sent explaining
> how following the moon alone would put the calender
> off over a period of time and passover would eventually
> wind up in the fall - hence Babylonian adjustments.
> It's not me who is complicating things. The "expert"
> Mel Gibson used is a Jesuit who would have beenof the
> RC liturgical persuasion.
Kevin responded on Mar. 4 with:
> DAVIDM says You are making this way too complicated
> with your comments So I checked some sites on the
> internet. Maybe this will make it clear & easily
> understood. Judy, it really is not that complicated
> can't you see that? LOL
> These sites explanations, sound like a bunch of
> PAGAN Mumbo Jumbo to me.
> ... ...
Then Blaine wrote:
> The Passover for the year 2004 begins on the eve
> of April 5, and the actual Passover is the next
> day, April 6. Go to the site address I have
> shown below, input 6 April, 2004, and it will
> show the moon phase for that date. You may see
> for yourself a full moon shown.
Judy responded:
> Passover for this year wasn't the question,
> Can you tell me what day and what month Passover
> was held in the year 33 AD?
David Miller responded:
> The 14th of Nisan.
Blaine wrote:
> Reread my post. It mentions that the Jewish calendar
> is a solar-lunar calendar, and I explained what is
> meant by that. The current names of the months on
> the Jewish calendar came from the Babylonian captivity
> --prior to that, only the first month had a name,
> which was Abib (see Ex13:4; 23:15). It means,
> "a greening,' or "a green head," referring to the
> greening of the barley heads that were to be used
> in the firstfruits offering. Now that same month
> is called Nisan. But the actual calculating of the
> calendar has not changed much. The Babylonians
> evidentally used a similar calendar.
Then on Mar. 4, David Miller wrote:
> Yes, I read that Judy, right after I read Blaine
> explain it first in better detail. Every calendar
> student knows that Jews insert an intercalary month
> to keep the seasons from migrating too far, but
> that has absolutely NOTHING to do with a full moon
> on Passover. The Jews determine the beginning of the
> month by visual observation, and that along with
> knowledge of how many days it takes for the moon
> to become full is all you need to know to be sure
> that Passover has a full moon.
>
> I tire of arguing about the mundane and clearly
> understood things. It is like arguing that green
> is green and not blue. I don't know why you can't
> grasp the concept Judy, but I assure you that you
> are the one who is complicating things here.
> The rest of us men here seem to understand it just
> fine, even though one is Mormon and one is not! :-)
Kevin responded:
> Green is green
> Blue is blue
> Still, you see no difference between the
> HOLY & the PROFANE Which is why you see
> no doctrine of separation
> If you want to watch movies inspired by
> OCCULTISTS go for it. I care not to indulge.
Kevin responded again:
> There is a CHART with all of them or you could
> write a program to figure it out.
> Unless you are the RAINMAN then you could quote
> them without a chart, program or calendar.
> It's really simple you know.
Blaine wrote on Mar. 5:
> I am not sure anyone knows for sure.
> But choose any other passover, and the
> moon phase will be a full moon. You
> need to do your homework on Jewish calendar,
> then you will understand. I explained it,
> but . . .
On Mar. 6, Judy wrote:
> More experts with a different date and time.
> How is it so simple?
On Mar. 9, David Miller wrote:
> Corresponding dates of the past with our present calendar
> is not always so simple. However, determining that the
> moon was full when Jesus was crucified is VERY simple.
>
> You don't seem to understand that the Gregorian calendar
> was not put into use until 1582. At the time of Christ,
> there was no Gregorian calendar like we use today.
> There were people who visually looked for the new moon
> to determine when the month would start. This day would
> be a rest from worldly business, a day wherein trumpets
> were blown and sacrifices were offered (see Num. 10:10,
> 28:11, Amos 8:5). Therefore, using the Jewish calendar,
> the first day of the month was always a new moon and the
> middle of the month was the full moon. It really is that
> simple. The problem is that you do not believe me, so
> study some history about calendars like Blaine has and
> you too will understand.
Then on Mar. 10, Judy concluded:
> You must be behind on your reading David because
> this thread is resolved; I disagree with you on
> some other issues but this is not one of them.
> I just needed to see and understand it in God's
> Word for myself - I've now seen the movie and
> compared to some of the other controversies the
> state of the moon pales.
>
> Actually I did do my homework and learned that
> watchers in Israel would light fires when the
> saw the New Moon to let everyone know that the
> other was coming along with some other interesting
> trivia.
Ok, so now you say, Judy, that I could have saved a lot of time if I had
just explained it as simply as I did in my last post.
My first post said:
> The Jews used a lunar calendar and they used visual
> observation of the new moon to mark the beginning of
> each month. We know for a fact that the moon was just
> about full when Jesus was in the garden praying to his
> Father.
In my last post, I wrote:
> At the time of Christ, there was no Gregorian calendar
> like we use today. There were people who visually
> looked for the new moon to determine when the month
> would start.
I'm not sure I said anything new at all, but even if I did communicate
poorly, you could have asked me a question instead of speaking as if you
were right in your astrological Roman Catholic witch hunt and I was
wrong.
Why am I taking up so much space to talk about this? Because we took
nearly a week to resolve a simple historical fact! This is disgraceful.
If we are so antagonistic toward each other that we cannot hear one
another on simple physical truth, there is no way we can talk about
spiritual things which have huge doors open for suppositions and
interpretations.
I have to say that unless you and Kevin recognize this simple fact, my
correspondence with you two will become extremely limited on this list.
I am not saying this out of spite, but out of a sense of not wasting my
time with those who just want to argue. If you will review how our
discussion of this progressed over more than a week, I think you should
see that it should have been settled right away like it was with Terry.
If you think it is perfectly fine for it to have drug out so long before
being resolved without so much as a, "oh, sorry, I was wrong, now I see
what you are saying...," then I would definitely like to hear you
explain your perspective. From where I sit right now, such a thread is
outrageous and I can only think of what Jesus said, "wisdom is justified
of her children."
Peace be with you.
David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster.
