Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Luke 2:22 casts DARK SHADOWS on Aramaic Primacy
#25
You make a good point that, in Luke 2:22 the word for "their" can be or should be referring to Y'shua and Mary. However, (oh that pivitol word) I think there is something very obvious that we (or just I, have missed.) Where in the Torah(mainly first 5 books of Moses, does it state that the newborn child is ceremonially unclean until the day of his circumcision?? I can not find it in the book of the Law or Torah anywhere!

Your point, Paul, is taken very well that "ceremonially unclean" does not necessitate sin. okay then. But when I did some study over the weekend I could not find one reference in the Old Law/Testament or Torah that a newborn baby(whehter the first, 2nd,3rd, 5th or 10th) is in any way "unclean" until the 8th day - day of his cirumcision. So, this would mean that Y'shua is not only w/o any sin; He is not even "ceremonially unclean."

Courtiously,

Mike

Reply


Messages In This Thread
Luke 2:22 is Clear as Day - by Stephen Silver - 11-08-2008, 07:00 PM
Re: Luke 2:22 casts DARK SHADOWS on Aramaic Primacy - by Mike Kar - 11-17-2008, 10:11 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)