- Jan 2, 2017
- United States
Soooo, why is it okay for YOU to use information from wikipedia and other sources without using actual quotes - but it's NOT okay for ME to do the same thing?? I'm quoting fro secondary scholarly Jewish sources for which I have given website information.Yes, TODAY. Today it's is referred to as a WRITTEN Aramaic translation. Today it is accepted, back then it wasn't. Back then it was forbidden. Now have you actually read what he wrote or are you cutting and pasting again?
The more information I present, the more desperate your objections become . . .
I just TOLD you what he was referring to - that ANY portion of an "onah" represents ALL of it.Haha! Yeah... Sure! Why don't you tell us all what he was referring to! Explain this quote in context!
And, as I explained - rather, as Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah explained - a Day and Night is an "Onah".
No - you're stonewalling because you CAN'T explain your way out of the Markan timeline.I will give you a full Biblical timeline once you stop throwing all these garbage references at me.
I seriously doubt you've read any of them. You are just cutting and pasting without researching them.
Your case dies with Mark's Gospel because you've taken ALL of your verses from the other Gospels OUT of their proper context.
I've asked you 4 times now - POINT-BLANK to explain this timeline and you have failed.
You keep using the rabbinic argument as a red-herring - but I refuse to let this go . . .