Rabbi Tovia Singer Q&A – Passover & Other Early Christian Controversies
I met up with Rabbi Tovia Singer in a Jerusalem hotel lobby for what turned into a revealing Q&A with curious Christians regarding textual difficulties and differences withing the New Testament.
Join us for this year’s Tanakh Tour of Israel!
[sc_embed_player fileurl=”https://truth2u.org/wp-content/uploads/Audio/Truth2U%20-%20Tovia%20Singer%20-%20Passover%20&%20Other%20NT%20Controversies.mp3″ autoplay=”true” loops=”true”]
[sg_popup id=6]
Thank you for posting this and I am grateful that I was able to hear as well as understand it !!
Elena
who got everyone on the same side of the table for the photo opp
Hi Jono! Enjoyed this, thank you, and btw love the new look of newsletter, great job.
What is flesh in Hebrew? Is it basar ? Is the first occurrence, definition, Gen 2:24? …libasar echad , a compound unity of flesh?
In the first 30 seconds Tovia says the conflicting crucifixion day in the gospels cannot be reconciled? Not really, that week had two Shabbats, one of the Feast and of the weeks not on the same day of the week.
Harvey Burger,
Because you know, this is not a real painting. This painting was from a picture where the photographer said: “Who wants to be in the picture, please go to the other side of the table” 🙂
John 1:33 Is the baptist referring to Jesus baptism in Matt. 3:15-17? If God could and did miraculously remove a rib from the sleeping Adam and create from it the woman Eve. Could God not also remove a sperm cell from the sleeping Joseph (Mary’s) husband and implant it (invitreo) in Mary’s womb. Thus it is a regular human being (Jesus) a man, not a God who is born via a virgin. God is not a man – he does not co-habit with women. There is One God but not a ‘God Kind’ in the creation.
Owen, the text says that “which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.” – Matthew 1:20. There is no doubt what the writer of Matthew intended here. It was already a well established myth. http://www.examiner.com/article/immaculate-conception-was-not-unusual-the-ancient-world
Jono -‘of the Holy Spirit’ – Do i understand you to be saying that Jesus was ‘illegitimate’ ? There are a number of places where the ‘Holy Spirit’ acts and informs as well as empowers individuals. Are you intimating that God is a trinity rather than a singular being whose actions are in and through the power of his Spirit. Owen
Owen, the writer of Matthew clearly wants to depict Jesus as some sort of god-man, a demigod not unique from other such myths. The writer rips Isaiah 7:14 from it’s context and totally misrepresents it, applying a different meaning altogether. In doing so the writer makes Jesus’ geneology entirely irrelevant. In anycase, which ever way you choose, Matthew’s or Luke’s geneologies (they are different), or the “virgin birth” story, disqualifies Jesus as a messianic candidate. In fact, even if your theory were correct, you still have to choose one of two geneologies, neither of which will prove legitimate. You might find the last 14 minutes of this program of interest: https://truth2u.org/2013/12/rabbi-tovia-singer-who-is-the-prince-in-ezekiel.html
Jono- thank you for your patience with bringing people ‘up to speed’, myself included. The last 14 minutes of the ‘who is the prince’ is fascinating along with the first part and the ‘shrimps’ recoil pad – my 30-06 recoil pad had the same type of construction. btw – I had come to think that the genealogy’s in Luke are Joseph’s lineage, not Mary’s.
Throughout the gospels Jesus referred to himself as “Son of Man”.
Elena – that is the point of my perception. That Jesus was ‘only’ and ‘just’ a man – a human being, 100% human, not part god and part man in any manner. Joseph had to be his physical father, as Joseph was of the line of David which was a pre-requisite for the Messiah to be authentic. Luke’s genealogy is Joseph’s. The lineage in Luke is the lineage of Joseph as it says Luke 3:23 .Joseph’s lineage is Davidic. Mary along with her cousin Elizabeth is of the ‘house’ of Aaron and thus Jesus is the composite Messiah through David and high priest of the Melchizedek order through Aaron. Jesus birth is ‘virginal’ through Mary, but, his begettal is brought about by God through the implantation of Josephs sperm (in vitreo) by God. A question further is answered by the fact that as Adam was made from the ‘dust’ of the ground and did return to the dust that Jesus as the second Adam is also ‘made’ from the potential ‘dust’ of the ground – Joseph’s perishable seed and Mary’s perishable ovum. The miracle is the ‘implanting’ of Joseph’s seed as a gynecologist might do for a couple unable to conceive. God was not a ‘sperm donor’. Jesus became a son of God at his baptism, ‘spiritually’. He died through crucifixion on a stake not a cross. God is immortal as the scripture says Psalm 90:2 102:27. Isaiah 43:10-11 Jesus was mortal, a man.
Owen, a legitimate messianic candidate must not only come through David, but also Solomon (2 Sam 7:12-14). Further more he cannot come through Jeconiah (Jeremiah 22:24-30). Your theory does not hold up. As for the “Order” of Melchizedek, see the following: https://truth2u.org/2013/02/jono-jason-the-melchizedek-priesthood.html
Jono, 2 Sam. 7:12-14 ‘your seed’ Solomon’s and his Solomons ,’kingdom’. YLT. The seed of Solomon traces down to Jeconiah. After going into the Babylonian captivity under King Jeconiah the next king over Judah is Zedekiah, his uncle, who was not of Solomon’s seed. Jeconiah had sons while in captivity so there never lacked a ‘man’ to sit on the throne of Judah. God says let him ‘Jeconiah’ be childless as far as any of them ever sitting on the throne of Judah is concerned and none of them did. David had many sons as did Solomon. Why must the lineage be traced through Jeconiah rather than through any of the other sons of David or Solomon? Is this decided by Rabbinic tradition? There were high expectations of the Messiahs appearance at the time of Jesus, Why? Does Deut..18.15-18 apply here?: It seems to me that the messiah must be a son of David, not necessarily Solomon. 2 Sam. 7;16 “and stedfast is ‘your’ house and ‘your’ kingdom unto the age before thee,’ thy’ throne is established unto the age. V 17 ‘According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so spoke Nathan unto ‘David’. (not unto Solomon). Owen
Owen, it is Solomon’s throne which will be established forever, thus the coming messiah must come through, not only David, but Solomon. That’s why you cannot use Luke’s geneology, there is no Solomon. Moreover, it is Jeconiah’s descendants who will never “sit on the throne of David ruling anymore in Judah”. That’s why you cannot use Matthew’s geneology, while there is Solomon there is also Jeconiah.
Jono, Do I understand you to say that the throne of David and Solomon ‘sat’ / ‘sits’ empty since Jeconiah and since the throne can only come through Jeconiah, who, with his sons was disqualified. This appears to leave the Messiah no possibility of ever coming and is a box canyon for Judaism. Where could the Messiah ever come from, if not by a miracle of lineage revelation that skips Jeconiah yet incorporates the lineage of David and Solomon? Is this what one waits for? Owen
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_known_children_did_king_Solomon_have#slide=1
Tovia did not quoted correct from Mark:
9 Shortly thereafter, Yeshua came from Natzeret in the Galil and was immersed in the Yarden by Yochanan. 10 Immediately upon coming up out of the water, he saw heaven torn open and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; 11 then a voice came from heaven, “You are my Son, whom I love; I am well pleased with you.”
Tovia Singer do not understanding of Paul because he the the interpretation of the “Christians” who reject the Torah, but Paul as Yeshua did not reject the Torah, but reject the traditions from the oral torah witch are not from YHWH, but teachings of men. If you have sinned Torah of YHWH condemns you and only with sacrifice the sins were atoned. That is what Torah of YHWH teach. Also Torah of YHWH teach the YHWH will provide the Lamb. So Tovia return to the Torah of YHWH and leave the tradition of men.
If not a virgin birth then how will this so called future messiah cover mans sinful nature, since God is not pleased with the scarifices of animals( see king Davids words)? *Let the bible interpret itself,so go to Strongs(on the internet) & write out what each persons name means in the geneology,what does it tell you? *God hovered over the earth & it was created thats a perty big deal, so why would hovering or a female and speaking creation into the womb be a problem for God/Creator? *There is no other geneology of Israel except Yehsua’s the alef & tav,He was sinless. So how will this future messiah/covering prove his connection to king Solomon or king David where will this mircale birth cert come from? Why will you follow him?
Jono,read you mythology site. Mary a ‘cousin/blood relative’ went to Elizabeths home of a Levite priest for 3 months! An affair? ‘Mary would not have gone to a Levites home for protection! Myth: there are stories about Noahs flood are you claiming that the bible is mythology just because mythology exists? Sarah was 99 yrs old when her promise baby was born was that a myth. Mythology is very disjointed at best who was it that flew to close to the sun & his wing melted? Now there are two witness Elizabeth and Joseph. “Modern- Jewish” women sullying a “Levite” Mary who herself stated ‘my soul does magnifiy the LORD’. Mayday… Jono come out of your nose-dive.
no
Hear O Israel you shall love the Lord your God with all of your heart with all your soul with all your mind and you shall love your brother/neighbor as yourself…there is no greater law than this. Yeshua..is your brother He is your neighbor.
Hear O Israel, Yehovah, He is God, Yehovah is one (Deut 6:4). “…there is no other God besides Me, a just God and a Savior; There is none besides Me. Look to Me, and be saved, all you ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” (Isaiah 45:21-22) ““Thus says Yehovah, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, Yehovah of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; besides Me there is no God.” (Isaiah 44:6). “I am Yehovah, that is My name; and My glory I will not give to another…” (Isaiah 42:8) “To whom will you liken Me, and make Me equal
And compare Me, that we should be alike?” (Isaiah 46:5).
There is no other God than/but ‘ Yehovah’ One creator of all that exists. God is the ultimate Savior through his son Yeshua’s agency. Yeshua was brought into ‘being’ at his physical human birth, not before. Yeshua had no pre-existence in any manner, as a building does not pre-exist in the plan or blu-print. Yeshua was planned for , as the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.Just as God worked through the ‘agency’ of King David to deliver Israel, so he will work throught the agency of King Yeshua to save Israel as well as the world/Gentiles.Salvation will come through Abraham as promised – a Father of many nations, not just Israel. Abraham is never called a ‘son of God’ as Saul – David – Solomon and Yeshua are.
Jono – on a different subject. Gen.1:5 “so there was evening ” and then ‘morning’ was the first ‘Day’. rather than – ‘so the evening and morning (were) the first day. Thus the night and the day -12 hours each were not considered a 24 hour day. God called the ‘light’ day. He did not call the ‘night’ day. I understand that saying ‘the evening and the morning’ (combined) were the first day is a Rabbinic enactment.
Its hard to believe that Matthew the ‘Roman tax collector’ missed it on Yeshua’s geneology since he had family records of the Roman (IRS)tax’s and Temple records of who owned what land.
There’s a long list of things that the writter of the Gospel of Matthew missed, like names from the geneology for example. But what makes you think the book was written by Matthew the tax collector?
The 3 days and 3 nights argument is easily resolved by taking the words of Yeshua as recorded. The only sign of his messiahship was the sign of Jonah- as Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the fish, Yeshua would be 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb. The week of the crucifixion, as red letter states ,had an annual Sabbath as well as a weekly Sabbath in it. Yeshua was killed on Nisan 14 at the same time the Passover lambs were killed. He was taken down from the ‘stake’, not a cross, and was prepared for burial by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, who was of the Sanhedrin. Nicodemus brought 100 lbs of spices for the Jewish burial practice and the linen wrappings mentioned by Joseph. The preparation of Yehsua’s body took all night and was likely done apart from the tomb and then laid in the tomb at dawn of the Holy ‘Day’. So, contrary to much mistaken theology, Yeshua was ‘in’ the tomb 3 days and 3 nights a full 72 hours. Some have it ,3 nights and 3 days with the resurrection occurring at the end of the weekly Sabbath (Saturday sunset), which is incorrect. The Roman soldiers could hardly have claimed that Yeshua’s disciples ‘stole’.his body while they were ‘asleep’ at supper time! When the women came to the tomb at daybreak on the first ‘Day’ of the week, the body was gone, (resurrected). Yeshua id not spend the first ‘day’ of the week ‘resting’ as Christian orthodoxy would have it, but, he went to work as his Father did in Genesis on the first day of creation week.
Owen, the problem you are going to have here is the discussion on the road to Emmaus. Luke 24:21 clearly states that that Sunday was “the third day”.
Jono, Does the discussion on the road to Emmaus have the answer to the problem The two, Cleopas and co. are surprised that Yeshua is not aware of these events in Jerusalem, They ‘update’ him on the whole scene and they say that ‘in the context’ of all of these events, the women at the tomb etc.that morning, from that point in time, the third day has ‘ passed’ because they are actually walking and talking together on the 4th. day, not the third day. Is the key word here ‘since’ these things happened? They had explained the ‘events’ that had taken place and relate them to the third day as Yeshua had it, not the time they are on the road to Emmaus. Whatever the case.this conversation does not discount the crucifixion-tomb time and resurrection events Yeshua prophesied.
Owen, again, “Today IS the third day”. Sorry.
Jono, so – when did the women ‘buy’ their spices? Sorry.
Owen, please elaborate, I don’t understand how this question overrides the Road to Emmaus statement. Are you simply clarifying that the New Testament contradicts itself?
Re: who wrote. One can also ask???… who wrote the books of Moses??
Matthew (gift of God) Levi(he will join) Papias made the frist recorded statement.
As for Owens Q’s: you need to do a graph arc like a clock starting with Wednesday at 8 am color it yellow for day light at 8pm color it black do this throught out the time line of day & night hours for Jews time is light & darkness.
thank you Jono for allowing us to convers with you in brotherly love….
Clarification: Jewish time is like a sound wave going out like a line with arc & valley( not like a clock that is round use by man). At the top of the top of the arc in black write Tuesday (day 3) 12 midnight 1 – 2- 3 etc…in the valley of the arc sound wave write in yellow for Tuesday day light in yellow 6 am -7 -8 -9 in morning charting up to the top of the arc 12 noon in yellow decending 1 2 3 until you chart out to 6 pm (night-Wednesday -day 4)write in black numbers of the night going up the sound wave to midnight- day4 to 6 am (day 4) do this in a sound wave horizontaly as a night/day/night. From Yeshuas arrest to the garden.
Jono, Bart Ehrman has done a thorough job of the ‘contradictions’ in the NT. Interpolations etc. On topic -I understand that Keith Johnson has the crucifixion on Thursday with the burial in the tomb Thursday night which makes the High Sabbath of that week a Friday. This gives us two Sabbaths – back to back, Friday and Saturday. The women ‘saw’.how the body was laid in the tomb. Where would they be able to ‘buy’ spices on Friday (Holy) or on Saturday(Holy). Did merchants stay open 24/7 like Walmart on Sabbaths’?
Nicodmus applied X amount of pounds of spices,day of death #4day
Apparently women in Luke/Mark did not know about Nic’s spices,day of death
Luke:unnamed women ‘had’ spices,they went to prepare them,day of death#4day.
Day #5 passover
Day #6
Day #7
Mark: named people bought spices & its now day light of the #1 day, bought is a blanket statment.
Jewish days are #1 2 3 4 5 6 7.
If Mark & Luke matched people would say its fraud. If dont match people would say its fraud.
if one wants to be under Moses law its ok if people want to be under Yeshua its ok…it is written work out your own salvation with fear……
thank you JONO
Been thinking again.
I know much has been made about the lamb slaughtered just before the exodus of Israel from Egypt. It has been called a foreshadowing of events to come by some. That the ‘true, real or final meaning’ of the passover lamb was revealed some 2,000 years ago. But to be truthful, I find this ‘new’ doctrine a very hard pill to swallow, I mean, would God knowingly deceive Israel by telling them face to face the purpose and duration of this observance then tell someone else an entirely different meaning and purpose? I don’t think so, especially since the question why we are to observe this feast had already arisen. The memorial is what God said it is, and it will be that way forever (Ex 12:14).
Now nothing is said as to the reason why a lamb was the animal of choice to be slaughtered. But I have an opinion to share, these last several days all I have been thinking about is the upcoming feast and why a lamb? And lo and behold I had a vision! Not really, a spirit told me! Would you believe I saw in a dream? Actually I woke up the other morning and went hiking. I walked several miles and I was once again thinking of Passover, you know what else I was thinking about? How I should have had something to eat before I made such a long journey.
Which sort of got me thinking why Papa told Israel to take a lamb, slaughter it and eat it in haste. Israel were shepherds so there was I suppose a bunch of lambs to be had. Why did everyone get to eat one without blemish? For starters I think God sees men equally he wanted everyone in the best shape for the journey so nobody ate a lamb which could possibly make them sick. Also one without blemish is a pretty good indicator that a lamb is of the first year, as older lambs teeth are worn down (a blemish in my opinion). Additionally lambs are very nutritious, they’re easier to cook and more tender than mutton and personally I think they taste better too thereby making it easier for everyone to cook and eat it in haste.
Now for my thoughts about the blood. Before the instructions pertaining to the feast were given. God had already said that at “about midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt… that you may know that YHVH does put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel.” (Ex 11:5-7).
I think what distinguished Israel was their obedience and they displayed that obedience to God’s commandment by taking the blood of the lamb they were to eat and apply it to their entry ways like they were told too. The Egyptians would most definitely see and know in the end that because of it, God ‘passed over’ Israel and spared their first born. Contrary to the new belief that blood was not applied to hide peoples sins from God nor was it an atonement for sin. It was applied in obedience to God which in the end most certainly distinguished them from Egypt.
As for burning with fire what was left. Think about it there were probably a truck load of nasty lamb carcass and lamb parts laying around. Burning it promotes good communal hygiene. No disease, no cooties, no funky smells.
David, we will be addressing many of those topics this week. Stay tuned!
Jono, to elaborate on the ‘road to Emmaus’ situation, please note the following interchange between Exton – Norbert and Veller. The conversation is taking place on the 4th. day and i think my original comment re/ ‘since’ these things happened is correct and the crucifixion took place on Wednesday not Thursday or Friday.
@ Mike Exton, What Luke:24:20 clearly points out is a good example of translator bias going on with the original manuscripts. It occurs with other verses as well.
The New Berkeley Version in Modern English– Gerrit Verkugl
“Moreover, three days have already passed, since all these events occurred.”
The Syriac New Testament Translated Into English From The Peshitto Version — James Murdock
“…and lo, three days have passed since all these things have occurred.”
When a person understands that during Christ’s time, the Bible supports the knowledge that those people talked of days inclusively rather than exclusively as we do now. Seems to me, there are two basic views ofLuke:24:20 and one of them is translator bias.
The argument for a Wed crucifixion is solid and people will make conclusions according to their own bias too.
@ Ivan, Imo a person would have to do too many mental cartwheels to land at the conclusion that somehow the resurrection of Jesus adds credence to the weekly Sabbath. I believe that follows a similar kind of reasoning that somehow Sunday is now the authoritative day of worship for Christians. Nether of them have much to stand on in my view.
Submitted on Apr 15, 2013, 1:03 pm
Lily
To Mike Exton-
Thank you for walking us through what God is telling us really happened, and when, the year Jesus was crucified!
Submitted on Apr 16, 2013, 2:04 am
Mike Exton
To Norbert Z,
So you’re saying that the translators of the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NIV, PME, NLT, GNT, ASV, CEB, CJB, RHE, GW, HNV, CSB, LEB, NAS, NCV, NIRV, NRS, DBY, MSG, WBT, TMB, TNIV, WNT, WEB, WYC, YLT, and just about every other translator in the entire world translated Luke:24:20-21 the way they did because they were biased towards a THURSDAY crucifixion???!!!
As I stated in an earlier comment, please do not forget what God tells inHosea:4:6 (NKJV): “…Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you…” Rejecting what God clearly says in His Word is not something that should be taken lightly.
Submitted on Apr 17, 2013, 7:08 pm
Norbert Z
Mike Exton, I stated that translator bias exists and provided evidence as proof; that people read different things into other peoples words. Similar to suggesting my comment could imply that the translators were specifically biased towards a Thursday crucifixion.
I assume you understand the difference between inclusive and exclusive passage of days. And what that does with a verse like Luke:24:21.
Besides if the precedent of having a majority view is always the correct and valid one, then the verses quoting Jesus’ statement about the sign of Jonah should be blotted out from the Bible. Seeing most people believe Easter provides a valid timeline.
People trying figure out where to stand on the question of “How Long He Would Be Entombed?”, need to examine all arguments made for those events. Not only here on the UCG website, but investigate plenty of others with an opposing argument. Then come to their own conclusion.
The way I see it, Hosea:4:6 is NOT relevant to this discussion, there’s plenty of knowledge freely available online. However 1 Tim:1:7 is appropriate, “desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm”
Submitted on Apr 18, 2013, 6:00 am
Ivan Veller
@ Mike Exton,
“‘[He was] condemned to death and crucified’” (Luke:24:21b NKJV). “‘But [1] we were hoping [2] that he was [3] the one who was going [4] to redeem Israel. But in addition [5] to all these things, this is the third day [since] these things took place’” (Luke:24:19-21 LEB 2010).
[1] “moreover” (Biblos Interlinear: Westcott-Hort 1881); “yet” (Scripture4All Interlinear: Scrivener Textus Receptus 1894)
[2] “were hoping”—imperfect indicative active tense (WH); “expected” (TR)]
[3] “is”—present indicative (WH); “is” (TR) [the Messiah]
[4] “is about”—present participle active (WH); “one being about” (TR)
[5] Translating the word ‘alla’ (S235) can be “difficult, Luke:24:21…‘but then there is this,’ ‘in spite of all this,’ ‘too,’ ‘into the bargain,’ ‘this, at any rate, has taken place’” (Darby, “Greek Participles and Prepositions”); “Indeed” (NKJV), “And” (ERV 2008), “Besides” (HCSB 2009), “But” (LEB 2010), “Yes” (ESV 2011), “Anyway” (Voice 2012); “otherwise, on the other hand, but” (Luke:24:21, Biblos Bible Lexicon). A positive rendering breathlessly anticipates the possibility of present fulfillment. A negative one highlights hopes dashed because the days have passed.
Submitted on May 5, 2013, 1:42 pm
Andlu Macar
Thank you Ivan Veller. That puts it in summary as best as one can put it. People can get so hung up on one view that “scotoma” takes place and prevents the mind from seeing what is before one’s eyes. Those disciples were indeed sad and forlorn for an excellent reason. I think only one as loving as our Master/kinsman Redeemer/King would take the time to address those two and their very broken hearts in order to mend them. People today can’t quite understand the depth of their anguish and loss as they contemplated the past years following this young Jewish Rabbi only to see it all end so “tragically” and now, three full days having passed, totally in their eyes…
Submitted on May 8, 2013, 9:40 pm
Ivan Veller
@Mike Exton,
Re: “just about every other translator in the entire world”
Luke:24:21b:
• “‘three days (have passed) since all these things were done’” (Etheridge 1849, Aramaic [Eastern] Peshitta NT).
• “‘three days have passed since all these things have occurred’” (Murdock 1852, Syriac [Western] Peshitto NT)
• “‘việc xảy ra đã được ba ngày rồi’” (Vietnamese Bible 1934).
• “‘Moreover, three days have already passed, since all these events occurred’” (Verkugl 1959, New Berkeley Version in Modern English)
• “‘con tutto ciò son passati tre giorni da quando queste cose sono accadute’” (Conferenza Episcopale Italiana 1971).
• “‘Pero ya hace tres días que pasó todo eso’” (Dios Habla Hoy 1996, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas).
• “‘Till allt detta kommer att han redan har låtit den tredje dagen gå, sedan detta skedde’” (Svenska Folkbibeln 1998, Stiftelsen Svenska Folkbibeln).
• “‘Voilà déjà trois jours que tout cela est arrivé’” (La Bible du Semeur 1999, Biblica).
• “‘já faz três dias que essas coisas aconteceram’” (Portuguese ERV 1999, World Bible Translation Center).
• “‘ya hace tres días que sucedió todo esto’” (Nueva Versión Internacional 1999, Biblica).
(continued below)
Submitted on May 8, 2013, 9:42 pm
Ivan Veller
(concluded)
• “‘Pero ya hace tres días’” (Traducción en Lenguaje Actual 2000, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas).
• “‘all these things since days (have passed) three’” (Younan 2001, “Peshitta Aramaic/English Interlinear NT”).
• “‘с тех пор прошло три дня’” (Russian ERV 2007, World Bible Translation Center).
• “‘Nosotros teníamos la esperanza de que él iba a ser el libertador de Israel, pero ya han pasado tres días desde que sucedió todo esto’” (La Palabra 2010 [versiónes española y hispanoamericana], Sociedad Bíblica de España).
• “‘不但如此，而且這事成就，現在已經三天了’” (Chinese Union Version M.P. 2011 [simplified and traditional versions], Asia Bible Society)
• “‘những việc ấy đã xảy ra ba ngày rồi’” (Bản Dịch 2011, Bau Dang)
• [Footnote: “Codex does not have ‘today’”] “a.路加福音 24:21 有古抄本没有“今天” (Chinese Standard Bible 2011 [simplified and traditional versions], Asia Bible Society)
• “‘Nosotros teníamos la esperanza de que él habría de redimir a Israel. Sin embargo, ya van tres días de que todo esto pasó’” [Updated from: “‘hoy es ya el tercer día’” (Reina-Valera 1995)] (Reina Valera Contemporánea 2011, Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas)
There’s the key, in order to make the passage work you need to argue for Peshitta primacy.
Have you therefore DENIED Yeshua, Jono??
http://www.therefinersfire.org/rabbinical_revisionism.htm