A Critique of Frank Nelte’s Passover (I)

A Critique of Frank Nelte’s Passover (I)
Passover On The 14th or 15th?

Frank W. Nelte — Ex-WCG Pastor

April 2019
THE PASSOVER WAS AT THE START OF THE 14TH OF NISAN

Draft I

See the source imageThis is a Critique of Frank Nelte’s Passover, an article posted on his website. Besides the main issue of whether the Passover is on the early or late fourteenth of Nisan, of great importance is the true meaning of ben ha arbayim, erev and boqer, and whether the name “Passover” is the Death Angel “passing over” or is it the emphasis of the lamb as the sacrifice.

Quoted are excerpts from Frank Nelte’s article, date April, 2019. These excerpts are in block form, in PINK, and indented so as to differentiate it from other quotes or comments. The Scriptures, in RED, must be our primary focus and guide, and sometimes the Scriptures, which include the Septuagint and the Targum, say things very different from what we think!

And so with that in mind, we’ll start:

When it comes to choosing between believing the Bible or believing their traditions (i.e. “the traditions of the fathers”, as they have been preserved in the Talmud), then the Jewish religion today will by and large always go with the traditions, even when those traditions contradict biblical instructions and biblical revelation.

In this way the Jewish religion is no different from the Catholic Church, which places the teachings of the “church fathers” ahead of what the Bible actually says. This is also evident from published statements in “The History of the Talmud” by Michael J. Rodkinson. It is a fact … the Jewish religion doesn’t really accept the Bible, whenever the Bible contradicts its accepted traditions.

It would be foolish to blanket all traditions as bad. Traditions help to expound the laws, statutes and ordinances, simply because the Torah often offers only outlines, and usually the details are not given. Here are numerous evidence that Paul uses many traditions when he writes the epistles:

“I profited in the Jews’ religion beyond many of my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers” Galatians 1:14.

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold to the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle” II Thessalonians 2:15.

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother who walketh disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us” II Thessalonians 3:6.

1 Peter 1:17-20 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear. 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, 20 who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.

See the source imageTo say all traditions are bad is just too simplistic. Blind Guides! Good traditions are good precepts, derived from judicial cases, ones that have been acquired and accumulated from cases and judges developed and accumulated since the days of Moses.

Deuteronomy 17:18 Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment. 19 Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, nor take a gift: a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.

Deuteronomy 17:11 According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 12 And the man who will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest who standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die.

In the book of Deuteronomy Moses spoke and explained unto all Israel “according unto all that the Lord had given him” as to how to keep all the laws, the blessing they would have if they obey, or cursing if they disobey, even that man shall die, because these judges are acting in place of God , Elohim. Below are the places where “elohim” (H430) in the Hebrew are translated either as “God” or “judges,” with some comments of mine

See the source imageExo 18:16 When they have a matter, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God (elohim), H430 and His laws. — God is the original Judge, from whom all authority are derived from.

Exo 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges (elohim); H430 he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever. — God delegates His authority to judges, and those judgements are as if they come from God.

Exo 22:8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges (elohim), H430 to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods. — God delegates His authority to judges, and those judgements are as if they come from God.

Exo 22:9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges (elohim); H430 and whom the judges (elohim) H430 shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour. — Judges derive their authority from God.

Deu 16:18 Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the LORD thy God (elohim) H430 giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment.

Deu 17:12 And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD thy God (elohim), H430 or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. — God delegates His authority to judges, and if any man rejects their judgements presumptuously, the penalty is death.

See the source image

Men may have good intentions, but may do things seen as presumptuously, especially expressed in Deuteronomy 17:12; its penalty is death. This is a serious offence because it is deemed a transgression or an evil before God. So what is a person deemed presumptuous or presumptuously before God or before judges?

Here are their synonyms:

Arrogant, bumptious, cavalier, chesty, haughty, high-and-mighty, high-handed, high-hat, huffish, huffy, imperious, important, lofty, lordly, masterful, overweening, peremptory, pompous, presuming, pretentious, self-asserting, self-assertive, sniffy, supercilious, superior, uppish, uppity.

After Moses had appointed judges it was left for Joshua to do the same, hence the instruction above. A good judge shouldn’t be a respecter of persons, shouldn’t take gifts, be able to filter through all sorts of “evidence” and “testimonies” to arrive at a correct decision. Evidently they established precedents. Which precedents are sound, which precedents are shaky? Consequently those precedents established in interpreting those laws, statutes, and legal interpretations became known as the “Torah that is on the mouth” and eventually known as the Oral Law.

And Moses warned those found to be guilty of persisting with this contemptuous spirit, a serious charge before God, would be put to death. These Oral Torah were passed down orally in an unbroken chain from generation to generation until its contents were finally committed to writing following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, when the Jewish civilization was faced with an existential threat.

To justify their traditions, Jewish religious leaders have in the past, amongst other things, invented new meanings and new ways of interpreting Old Testament biblical Hebrew words. In this article we will look at what the Bible says. We’ll use the Bible itself to explain Hebrew words, where religious authorities have tried to twist the meanings of those words, for the sake of supporting their traditions.

See the source image

Not really, the term erev “evening” had always been interpreted as from the time when the sun begins to incline towards the west, which is from the sixth hour [noon or 12 o’clock] and onwards. But for ben ha arbayim it is in the plural erevim [“evenings”] because there are TWO EVENINGS. So the term “between the two evenings” is from the time that the sun begins to decline as one evening, and the other evening is after the sun has GONE DOWN. It is the space of time in between which is meant by “between the two evenings.” It was the Samaritans who came later and reinterpreted ben ha arbayim as “between sunset and dark,” or “twilight.”

For us the question then boils down to this:

Do we believe the Bible, and how the Bible itself explains those Hebrew words? Or do we believe Jewish “experts” who clearly have a vested interest in the outcome, and who have come up with “new meanings” for Hebrew words in situations where their traditions absolutely depend on those “new meanings”?

One example is the Jewish claim that the Hebrew word “shabbath” can also mean “week”. That claim is absurd, when judged by everything that is written in the Old Testament. “Shabbath” never means “week”.

Do not be mistaken, the Bible isn’t a dictionary. Sometimes it could hint what a word means, but doesn’t normally explain its meaning. Most of these words were known orally, and later they were written down in the Talmud. In fact the Hebrew Text that Moses wrote didn’t have any vowels, thus the Text couldn’t give any clue how the words were to be pronounced, least the meanings of each of those words. Sometimes a word has only one meaning, sometimes another word has multiple meanings. One may ask, “Why wasn’t the Bible written in such a way that each word has only one specific meaning?” Well, this observation is the same as “why Christ spoke in parables?” — so that they (normally referring to the wicked) wouldn’t understand . . .

The King James Version says in Leviticus 23:15:

“And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, H7676 from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths H7676 shall be complete:16 Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath H7676 shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD.

Leviticus 23:15-16 seven sabbaths [h7676 shabbat] — according to Strong’s Concordance, this shabbat could be translated as:

(a) sabbath
(b) day of atonement
(c) sabbath year
(d) WEEK
(e) produce (in sabbath year)

According to Strong, this word “shabbat” could be translated as a weekly sabbath or an annual sabbath like the Day of Atonement. It is also the same word for the seventh year where the land needs a rest. But the most important point in Strong’s Concordance is that it could also mean week, or a block of seven days. The JPS 1917 and the New JPS 1988 translate Leviticus 23:15-16 as follows:

Leviticus 23:15 And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the day of rest (footnote: Sabbath), from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the waving; seven weeks shall there be complete; 16 even unto the morrow after the seventh week shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall present a new meal-offering unto the LORD. (JPS 1917)

Leviticus 23:15 And from the day on which you bring the sheaf of elevation offering—the day after the sabbath—you shall count off seven weeks. They must be complete; 16 you must count until the day after the seventh week—fifty days; then you shall bring an offering of new grain to the LORD. (New JPS 1988)

Note: the word sabbath [h7676 shabbat] could be translated as week. To restrict the word to only the weekly sabbath is misguided. To restrict the word to just only Sabbath is as if Moses had written the Original Scriptures in the English James King Version. Those who insist on this approach are full blown stupid; they are simply Blind Guides!

The three “translations” have accepted the established meaning for “evening” as “the period of dusk or twilight”. The three “interpretations”, on the other hand, don’t care about the actual meaning of the Hebrew phrase they are supposedly translating. Instead, they insist that the word “evening” also includes parts or all of “the afternoon”. It is, in fact, absolutely essential for these three “interpretations” to insist that “evening” must surely include parts of the afternoon before sunset.

Without their changed definition for the word “evening” their entire position collapses. They are the same people who insist that the Hebrew word “shabbath” must also mean “week”, or else their teaching about Pentecost also collapses.

A Story was told of a Gentile named Ephraim who went to Hillel, a Rabbi and said to him, “I want to learn the Bible, but I want to accept only the Written Torah. Just leave me the Oral Torah.”

See the source imageBut Hillel suspected that Ephraim wasn’t sincere, and that he had a misconception of the Oral Torah. So Hillel began to teach him the Aleph Bet Gimel Dalet.

The next day, Hillel taught him the same first two letters but reversed the last two—he showed him the letters aleph bet, but for the next two he called them “dalet and gimel.”

But Ephraim objected, “but yesterday you taught them the other way!”
“Well, then, do you need me, a Rabbi, to teach you the Aleph Bet Gimel and Dalet? So you have to trust my knowledge of the tradition of these letters. You can’t read the alphabet if no one tells you in which order they are pronounced. And you think you don’t need the Rabbis’ knowledge of Oral Tradition or to understand the words and meanings of the Written Torah?

But Ephraim felt offended; he remembered his father had told him he was special boy, he had intelligence double as that of others and Pride got into him, and he had an ethnocentric sense of self-esteem to reflect on. So after some self absorbing thoughts, he felt he could study the Torah on his own. So he started the alphabets aleph bet, but reverse gimel and dalet. He left the Rabbi to study on his own, and insisted in his thoughts that those rabbis were there to mislead him. So he persisted in his self assurance and new egocentricity, and today, there is a proliferation of different beliefs among many of the splinters in the CoG Communities, each has their own way of interpreting what erev is, what boqer should be, when to start counting toward Pentecost, how to figure when to start a new year. And each insisting they are absolutely right! History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes as such narcissism limits and obstruct their ability to see issues clearly. Blind Guides!

The above eleven translations should suffice to illustrate what has happened. Let’s divide these eleven translations into three groups: firstly, the Greek language LXX translation, produced by the Catholic scholar Origen in the 200’s A.D. Next, we have the translations produced by Christian translators. And thirdly, we have the translations produced by Jewish translators.

Group 1 = Greek language LXX

This translation (“toward evening”), made in the 200’s A.D. (proof for a supposed B.C. origin for the LXX simply does not exist!), reflects the Jewish tradition of a late-14th Passover. This is not a correct translation of the Hebrew text. Rather, it is a reflection of the prevailing Jewish custom at Origen’s time.

The truth is, seventy-two Jewish scholars were asked by the Greek King of Egypt Ptolemy II Philadelphus to translate the Torah from Biblical Hebrew into Greek for inclusion in the Library of Alexandria.

King Ptolemy once gathered 72 Elders. He placed them in 72 chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one’s room and said: “Write for me the Torah of Moshe, your teacher”. God put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did (Tractate Megillah 9a, Babylonian Talmud).

See the source imagePtolemy II Philadelphus (308/9 – 246 BC) was the pharaoh of Ptolemaic Egypt from 283 to 246 BC. He was the son of Ptolemy I Soter, the Macedonian Greek general of Alexander the Great who founded the Ptolemaic Kingdom after the death of Alexander, and queen Berenice I, originally from Macedon in northern Greece. The Jewish Encyclopedia says, “The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New are in the main taken from the Septuagint.”

Hence the Septuagint was already in existence during the NT times for their’ writers to quote from. It translates Isaiah 7:14 as “a virgin shall conceive and bear a child” whereas the later Masoretic Text translates it as “a young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son” (1988, NJPS). This fact is picked up directly by Matthew and indirectly by Luke:

Matthew 1:23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel” (which being interpreted is, “God with us”).

Luke 1:31 And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb and bring forth a Son, and shalt call His name Jesus. . . . 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, “How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?”

Compared to the Masoretic Text, where they quoted from:

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel (1917, JPS).

A virgin giving birth is miraculous and therefore as a sign would be appropriate, but how could a “young woman” going to conceive a son be a sign? How could Matthew quote from a work that came later than them? Hence the fact is that the Septuagint WASN’T “made in the 200’s A.D” as quoted by Nelte. This lie could only be promoted by serial liars!

My Comments

Notice Footnotes 16 – 18. These footnotes make quite clear just how the Jewish “religious authorities” push the facts around! For supporters of the Jewish explanation for Exodus 12:6 this is an absolutely devastating quotation!

When it suits them, then twilight belongs to the start of the day. And when it suits them, then twilight belongs to the end of the day!

Isn’t it obvious that when it suits them, then 3:00 p.m. represents the start of the evening. And at other times, when they have nothing to defend, then they will acknowledge that the evening is the period of dusk.

There are many hundreds of just such double-talk examples throughout the Talmud. At no stage do they ever accept God’s standards or God’s definitions! That becomes glaringly obvious when you examine the Talmud for yourself. Thus how God defines a day in Genesis chapter 1 never enters the discussion.

Keep in mind that this was written by Jews who understood Hebrew very well! Note that they do not base their understanding on any inherent linguistic features of the Hebrew words or expressions used!

They have simply “reasoned” regarding what seems expedient or suitable to them. And in so doing two men who each understood Hebrew as well as the other man, reach diametrically opposite conclusions … one placing the period of twilight at the start of the day, and the other placing twilight at the end of the day!

A full day could be divided into two halves – erev and boqer – 12 hours each. Half of erev is day (mid noon till nightfall) and half is night (nightfall to midnight). And therefore the night portion of erev is the beginning of a 24-hour day, like the Sabbath, and the day portion of erev is the end of a day. So it is perfectly correct to say that erev is the start and end of a 24-hour day.

But one may protest that there is only one erev in Genesis 1:5. And here lies the trick.

In Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

See the source image

The trick is that the erev mentioned in Genesis are a full erev, consider this instance as primary erev, and this primary characteristic could be broken to two erevim as in Exodus 12, each considered as secondary. A bouncer may order a footlong from Subway and given a one-foot sandwich, but two ladies next in queue may order a sandwich each, but six-inches each. And both ladies are happy with their sandwiches. And that’s the principal difference between the erevs stated in Genesis 1 against those mentioned in Exodus 12.

My Comments

Here the biased Jewish reasoning is again clearly exposed!

They acknowledge that the Bible says “… and the whole assembly shall kill it at dusk”! They don’t deny that “at dusk” is a correct translation of the Hebrew term used, also acknowledging that it literally means “between the evenings”. But they reason that this only means that one cannot kill the lamb “before midday”! They imply that it is okay to kill the Passover any time after midday.

If Jewish scholars themselves admit that “at dusk” is a correct translation of the expression used in the Bible, how can non-Hebrew-speaking members of the Church of God possibly claim that the Hebrew expression refers to “before dusk”? Are people in God’s Church also going to define “dusk” as “any time after 12:00 noon”?

Here, like elsewhere, ben ha arbayim, has been translated as dusk, but when asked to define what dusk is, as in Exodus 12:6, Rashi said: From six hours [after sunrise] and onward is called בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם, literally, between the two evenings, for the sun is inclined toward the place where it sets to become darkened. It seems to me that the expression בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם denotes those hours between the darkening of the day and the darkening of the night. The darkening of the day is at the beginning of the seventh hour, when the shadows of evening decline, and the darkening of the night at the beginning of the night. עֶרֶב is an expression of evening and darkness, like “all joy is darkened (וְעָרְבָה).”

Ben ha arbayim is the time between the eves of two evenings. It is the time between the eve of the first decline of the day (at noon) and the eve of the night (at nightfall). Another way of saying is this: there are two evenings, one from the time the sun begins to decline is one evening, and the other evening is after the sun has gone down.

(28) This being the literal meaning of the Hebrew “beyn ha-arbayim”. I.e., between the evening of the fourteenth (which he counts as until dawn) and the evening of the fifteenth, hence the whole day of the fourteenth.

My Comments
Footnote (28) very clearly and very openly exposes the Jewish justification for interpreting “between the evenings” to refer to the late afternoon!

They interpret the expression “between the two evenings” as covering the whole 24-hour day of the 14th day of Nisan. That allows them theoretically to choose any part of that 24-hour period for conducting their Passover. And so they choose between noon and sunset.

See the source imageThe Talmud is a great discussion forum where issues are dissected and deliberated. Occasionally one or two rabbi would come up with some stupid ideas and other rabbi would feel the need to put those ideas down. This is the same with our legal situation, whether in the United States or the United Kingdom. One judge would reason in a certain direction, but another judge, usually in a higher court, would override such reasoning upon appeal. On hindsight we could see how absurd some reasonings were. The one in the Talmud quoted above by a Ulla the son of R. Ila’i that “between the two evenings” covers the whole 24-hour day is one such case. He wouldn’t stand a chance that his definition would be taken further by other rabbi.

Here is the point for us to understand:

The Jews misunderstand what God means by the expression “between the two evenings”!

In Exodus 12:6 God uses this expression to pinpoint the period between sunset and total darkness (i.e. the period of dusk or twilight). This was correctly understood by all Israelites in the days of Moses, and down throughout the whole Old Testament period.

Here is a great lie: in Exodus 12, verse 8, the Ezra-inspired Targum had made it clear that the Passover was a late fourteenth and the eating was on the fifteenth: “And you shall eat the flesh on that night, the fifteenth of Nisan . . .” the Targum says.

After the return of the Exile, the Jews under Ezra were back in Jerusalem that the law was explained in the Aramaic language where they could understand that were originally written in Hebrew, since most of the people, after 70 years of Exile, had lost the knowledge of the ancient language to such a degree that they need the Word of God, not only translated, but explained in the vernacular.

In Nehemiah 8:6 And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God. . . . 7 . . . .and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law; and the people stood in their place. 8 So they read in the book, in the law of God, distinctly, and gave the sense and caused them to understand the reading.

See the source imageIn order to give “the sense and caused them to understand the reading,” they need to understand the Scriptures in Aramaic, hence this gave rise to the origin of the Targum version of our modern Bible.

Ezra was “a scribe skilled in the law.” Ezra 7:10 For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments. The Voice translated this same verse as “He (Ezra) was a second Moses, and tenaciously studied, practiced, and taught the Eternal’s law to Israel.”

Again they freely acknowledge that the Bible states at dusk was to be the Passover.
The translators of the JPS were also quite familiar with the Talmud, the teachings of the Pharisees. And the use of the word “dusk” in the JPS is in full agreement with how the word has been used in the Talmud going back almost two millennia.

When an Othodox rabbi mentions about “dusk” in the Talmud or elsewhere he generally means it as Rashi did which was already quoted earlier in this post, but in summary here, it usually means “from noon to nightfall,” depending on the original Hebrew and its context. But when the JPS translates it as “dusk” their translators could intend it to mean “sunset to total darkness” as the Samaritans, Sadducees and Boethusiasns would. The JPS were translated by those involved in the “Reform Judaism” whose Movement “rejects any fixed, permanent set of beliefs, laws or practices,” striving in the endeavour to move away from the “Bondage of Judaism.”

THE FOOLISHNESS OF A LATE AFTERNOON PASSOVER

When we consider the day that God selected for the Passover to be killed, then it is absurd to believe that you could spend the first part of that 14th day by: watching a movie or even going to a party at the start of the 14th (i.e. after sunset in the night of the 14th before the Passover was supposedly killed on the next late afternoon), then play a round of golf in the morning (the early daylight part of the 14th), then go fishing for a couple of hours around noon (i.e. from noon till 2:00 p.m.), before at around 3:00 p.m. starting to get ready to kill the Passover lamb at perhaps around 4:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m.

Obviously these people watching movies, fishing or playing golf are only affordable by some South African Bullies who could have ten slaves to work for him, and it is foolish to assume they have any Christian traits if these hypocrites couldn’t put their hypocrisies aside. If they have some brains, they would be helping out preparing the Passover: deleavening the house, preparing food, setting tables and getting a hundred other things ready; quite different to those who have a tradition of, when the time comes, taking just a wafer of bread and a goblet of wine, like the Catholics do!

Consider Exodus 12:22 again.

And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning (Hebrew word is “boqer”). (Exodus 12:22)

Now some Jewish scholars may define “boqer” as starting after midnight. But the Bible does not support that contrived definition. King David used the word ‘boqer” shortly before his death, when he wrote:

And he shall be as the light of the morning (“boqer”), when the sun rises, even a morning (“boqer”) without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain. (2 Samuel 23:4)

What is the Bible definition of “boqer”? It is “when the sun rises”. How plain is that? The claim that “boqer” starts at midnight is a perversion of the truth. King David provided the obvious meaning for “boqer”. The added expression “a boqer without clouds” shows that the obvious meaning refers to a beautiful clear sky at sunrise.

Anyone who claims “boqer” starts at midnight is not being truthful. This means that belief in a late-14th Passover requires one to believe a lie.

A full day in Genesis 1:5 could be divided into two halves – erev and boqer – 12 hours each. Boqer is from midnight to midday. Moses was asked not to leave their houses until boqer, which mean they could leave after midnight, and it could mean several hours after midnight. King David said about “when the sun” rose, which could be 6 AM and is still within the confines of boqer.

But a full day could also be divided another way into day and night – light (yom) and dark (lailah) – again, 12 hours each. Boqer and night overlaps by 6 hours (midnight to 6 AM).

Perhaps an analysis of Genesis 1 would be helpful:

Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day (yom), and the darkness He called Night (lailah). And the evening (erev) and the morning (boqer) were the first day (yom but a 24-hr day).

In the above context, the Roman time for light Day (yom) is 6 AM to 6 PM, assuming it is spring or autumn; Night (lailah) is 6 PM to 6 AM. — 12-hr day and 12-hr night totalling a 24-hour day.

Whereas the second part of the verse, evening (erev) is from Noon to Midnight (12 hours) and morning (boqer) is from Midnight to Noon (12 hours) — 12-hr erev and 12-hr boqer to make up a 24-hour day.

Those who persisted in saying the Jews don’t know their Hebrew language are misguided, distorted or serial liars! An awful penalty awaits those who are found guilty of been presumptuously as expressed in Deuteronomy 17:12 — its penalty is death.

THE NAME “PASSOVER”

The name “Passover” has nothing to do with the lamb! The name is not connected to the lamb. Rather, this name describes something that God was going to do. As God told Moses:
“… and when I see the blood, I will pass over you …” (Exodus 12:13)

So the Passover is named directly for something that God was going to do.
It is downright foolish to claim that God would call the 14th “the Passover” when God all along only intended to “pass over” the Israelites on the 15th! If God REALLY was only going to “pass over” the Israelites on the 15th, then God would have called the 15th “the Passover”, as the Jews do today.

See the source imageIf the lamb is not associated with the name Passover, then the Scriptures become distorted. This term “the Lord’S Passover (h6453),” mentions in Leviticus 23:5 On the fourteenth day of the first month at evening is the Lord’S Passover (h6453), the emphasis is on “the Lord’S Passover” as a Sacrifice — “And thus shall ye eat IT: with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat IT in haste; IT is the Lord’S Passover” (h6453) Exodus 12:11. The emphasis is on the Lord’S Sacrifice (h6453).

The sacrifice of the Lord’s LAMB is of primary importance. The Death Angel “pass over” is also important, but only secondary. If the Passover name is named “after God’s passing over,” it is placing the cart before the horse. Cause and effect, or cause and consequence. How could the Gospel writers wrote about “eating the Passover” (Matt 26:17, Mark 14:12); or “killing the Passover”? (Luke 22:7) Picture that in your mind — that eating or killing the Passover is “the Lord’s pass over” — and it just doesn’t make sense.

Also, in the Old Testament, references of Passover as the sacrificial lamb being made:

(a) “to eat the Passover”— Exodus 12:43;
(b) ”to kill the Passover” — Exodus 12:21, II Chronicles 35:6;
(c) “to sacrifice the Passover” — Deuteronomy 16:2;
(d) “to roast the Passover” — II Chronicles 35:13.

AND NOW THE VERDICT

The significance of the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD should not be understated. It came forty years after John the Baptist had given a stern warning about another consuming fire recorded in Luke 3:16. The number 40 generally symbolizes a period of testing, trial or probation.

Because of their perversion, God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah during Abraham’s time, using FIRE. The Blind have ignored John’s warning about another consuming FIRE recorded in Luke 3:16. John WARNS:

See the source image“I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I cometh, the straps of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose. He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with FIRE (pyr g4442). 17 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His floor and will gather the wheat into His garner; but the chaff He will burn with FIRE (pyr g4442) unquenchable” (Luke 3:16-17).

The word “F-I-R-E” is highlighted above, with a hope that the Blind could finally see. When we look back, one cannot avoid concluding that God had deemed that the Sadducees and the Boethusians (the Essenes too, who had a distorted calendar of their own) were counted worthy of extinction during the AD 70 INFIRNO. Everything about the Sadducees and the Boethusians were destroyed. A large portion of the Shammai Pharisees also followed them into the fire; only the Hillel branch of Pharisees limped off to Yavne and survived.

If this AD 70 firestorm was only a microcosm, a foretaste, how could the the CoG Communities, who have similar deceptive beliefs as the original Sadducees and Boethusians, escape John’s warning of being F-I-R-E-D during the Last Days?

((( CRITIQUE OF FRANK NELTE PASSOVER )))

~ by Joel Huan on December 20, 2019.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: