Practical application of Pentecostal theology in politics, economy and social issues
And why did the Jews think Jesus was saying that he had seen Abraham when Jesus just spoke of Abraham seeing his day (and therefore him)?
John 8:56-57 (ESV)
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”
57 So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”
What is the logical progression here? Is there a translation issue?
I’m looking for how the Jews leaped to questioning that Jesus had seen Abraham rather than questioning how Abraham had seen this day. If you can show how they would be fine with the latter, you still need to solve why they think Jesus is claiming to have seen Abraham (and not the other way around). Or said differently, how did Abraham seeing Jesus’s day also mean or necessitate that Jesus had seen Abraham?
The main question remains how and/or when did Abraham see Jesus’ day, but I want to make sure your answer then informs our understanding of the Jew’s response.
Varnel Watson
The first mention of the December 25th date comes during the age of the martyrs. Bishop Hippolytus of Rome ( c. 170 AD – c. 235 AD) wrote a commentary on the Book of Daniel sometime around 202 AD in which he claimed: “The first coming of our Lord, that in the flesh, in which he was born at Bethlehem, took place eight days before the Kalends of January, a Wednesday, in the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus, 5500 years from Adam.” This puts the birth of Christ at December 25th, 2 BC. Julius Sextus Africanus claimed the same date in his Chronographiai, which was written around the same time as Hippolytus. Defamers of the December 25th date often suggest that Christians selected their date for Christ’s birth out of jealousy for the celebration of Saturnalia, a pagan festival which occurred around the same time. Had the December 25th date arisen in the fourth or fifth centuries, this argument might hold a little water. But consider for a moment that when Hippolytus and Africanus wrote, Christians were being persecuted by the Roman state. Hippolytus was ultimately martyred for Christ. The love which underwrites martyrdom is a love which cannot be tempted by the things of this earth. Is it reasonable to claim that this same Hippolytus was looking longingly at the things of the same Roman state which would ultimately slaughter him?
Varnel Watson
non takers all day long yet? Link Hudson Tom Steele
Link Hudson
Christmas is extremely busy for some of us.
Ray E Horton
Interesting point that challenges the many detractors that I see here on FB.
Varnel Watson
Ray E Horton I saw your post Feel free to post it as a comment so we can talk about it IMO The first non-Christian to claim December 25th was originally a celebration of Sol Invictus was Julian the Apostate. In the Hymn to King Helios, delivered in 362, Julian claimed that the December 25th date for celebrating Sol Invictus was instituted by none other than Numa Pompilius (8th c. BC), the mythical second king of Rome. The passage in question (section 155, which can be found here) is a remarkable work of rhetorical sleight-of-hand and historical revisionism, and really needs to be read to be believed. I would encourage you to read further on the matter, but suffice to say for now that claiming the Romans had commemorated the goodness of Sol on December 25th since Numa is roughly equivalent to a US president claiming Americans had been celebrating their freedom from Britain on July 4th since the time of Christopher Columbus.
Ray E Horton
Yeah! Quite the contradiction.