PASSOVER STUDIES--- ARGUMENTS ANSWERED
The previous studies were only some of the studies I have done on this Passover issue, especially concerning the debate over the 14th or the 15th.
A man by the name of Steven put forth the following arguments:
Hi Keith and all
Keith wrote:
You 15th Passover observers want me and everyone else to believe,
The Israelites were in their homes IN GOSHEN on the night of the
15th, there till at least midnight as that is when the death
angel came over the homes. You want me to believe (as it is
written) some time lapsed for Moses to get the message that He
and Israel could leave. You want me to believe the Israelites in
Goshen got going that night and all arrived at Rameses (which was
not in Goshen).
Steven:
WCG believed that Israel left the night AFTER the Passover.
I believe (as the Jews do) that Israel left the night OF the
Passover.
RAMESES AND GOSHEN ARE ONE AND THE SAME. RAMESES IS A CITY IN GOSHEN. They did not have to gather in Rameses." See Ungers Bible dictionary and the verses below.
Genesis 47:11 And Joseph placed his father and his brethren, and
gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the
land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded. THIS
TELLS US THEY LIVED IN RAMESES.
My Answer:
You have a strange way of reading the Bible at times Steven.
Nothing here says Rameses was a city IN Goshen. It says the land
of Rameses just as I might say the land of London, meaning the
land that London was the main city thereof, and that would be all
of England. They lived IN Goshen, not in Rameses, but Rameses was
reasonably close by to Goshen, then parts of Goshen were not that
close to Rameses.
Better look at more Bible Encyclopedias and Bible Dictionaries
etc. concerning Goshen and Rameses my friend, just Ungers is not
enough. They prove it was a city but Goshen was a land area. My
NKJV Study Bible has a map on page 104, Exodus 14, showing
Rameses and the land of Goshen were NOT the same, as you
are implying. Also the Israelites had homes and herds of
livestock, such did not all exists inside the walls of Rameses,
possibility about 3 million or even more, plus tens of thousands
or a few million, Egyptians.
Steven:
Exodus 12:37, "And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses
to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men,
beside children." Numbers 33:3, "And they departed from Rameses
in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month;
on the morrow after the Passover the children of Israel went out
with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians." Numbers
33:5, "And the children of Israel removed from Rameses, and
pitched in Succoth."
The above show clearly, dare I say incontrovertibly, that the
Israelites first trek was from where they kept the Passover
(Rameses) to where they first encamped (Succoth).
My Answer:
Says no such thing. None of these verses say the Israelites
observed the Passover IN the city of Rameses. It says they
departed from the city of Rameses ON THE MORROW after the
Passover. Everything I have said and shown in my studies before
posted (over the last two years or more) shows they departed on
the 15th, the morrow after the evening of the 14th when they began to observe the Passover.
Steven:
Genesis 33:17, "And Jacob journeyed to Succoth, and built him an
house, and made booths for his cattle: therefore the name of the
place is called Succoth.
My Answer:
It was not called Succoth until Jacob made booths. The writer
writes in the PRESENT (as the name was given) but then goes back
into the past to tell you how it got that name. No one knows
where Succoth was, they have found no sign post saying, 'This
is Succoth' in any Archaeological digs.
Steven:
The Israelites went to Succoth to pick up their cattle (and
possibly some ducks and geese). The name Succoth means cattle
pens, or rude, crude and temporary structures made of branches
which were use to pen up their cattle.
My Answer:
The Israelites went WHEN to pick up their cattle? Sure was not
at the Exodus, for not one verse gives any teaching of the kind
you are promoting. The verses say they left Rameses WITH their
herds etc.
Steven:
Genesis 33:17 explains to us why Succoth is called Succoth. Do
you seriously believe that the cattle lived right in the city of
Rameses with them like cattle do in Calcutta today?
My Answer:
I've answered this already. Certainly not, for they lived in a
large land area called Goshen, see the Bible Encyclopedias for
the area of where they think this was, and also where they think
the city of Rameses was located.
Steven:
The Bible does not state that they took exactly one day to reach
Succoth - all it states is that Succoth was their first stop
after leaving Rameses - and it was at Succoth that they baked
instant bread (unleavened bread). Being on the move, there was no
time for leavened bread to rise.
My Answer:
I agree, it was not one day to reach Succoth, it was a number of
hours of the 15th, then they pitched their tents (succoth)
and rested overnight, hence where they rested was
tents or succoth, or booths. It was not a town or city as such.
Not one verse says, they marched to the town of Succoth and
there rested.
Steven:
Let s suppose, for arguments sake that I am wrong, and that they
took their cattle with them from Rameses to Succoth. The point
still remains that they removed themselves from Rameses (their
permanent dwelling place) to Succoth (or first temporary dwelling
place - as the name Succoth implies).
My Answer:
No. they lived in Goshen, the land of, and went to the city of
Rameses, and from there set out on the 15th, and went for
a while until they stopped and set up camp, their tents,
until they succothed, tented. You build your case on
a very wrong idea that they all lived in the city of Rameses.
Nothing could be further from the truth of the matter.
Steven:
Here is further PROOF that the Israelites did not dawdle in Egypt
for 18 whole hours, only to leave the following evening. Verse
41, "And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and
thirty years, EVEN THE SELFSAME DAY it came to pass, that all
the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt."
My Answer:
Your understanding is again misunderstanding words. The
Israelites did not leave the land boundaries of Egypt in one day
of 24 hours. So this type of speech or figure of speech means
they were LIBERATED from Egyptian bondage in one day, the 14th
day at even till the 15th day at even. They were FREE from Egypt
and the past life but not free from the literal boundaries of the
land of Egypt until a few days later, that is quite clear from
the rest of the commentary in Exodus.
Steven:
Verse 42, "IT IS A NIGHT TO BE MUCH OBSERVED unto the LORD for
bringing them out from the land of Egypt: this is THAT NIGHT of
the LORD to be observed of all the children of Israel in their
generations. Verse 43, "And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron,
THIS IS THE ORDINANCE OF THE PASSOVER."
The above three verses are talking about one and only one event,
not two separate events. The SELFSAME DAY they left is A NIGHT TO
BE MUCH OBSERVED since they began to leave THAT NIGHT (after) the
PASSOVER.
My Answer:
No, once more you do not understand how the Bible is written.
There were no sentences or punctuations of ANY kind in the
original Hebrew text, one letter and one word just came right
after another. All Scriptures must be taken on any given subject.
The KJV has it correct. Verse 43 starts another thought and
another subject. Back to the Passover ordinance, the verse before
in context and with other Scriptures was the subject of the 15th
when they left Rameses. Then the Lord again speaks unto
Moses concerning the Passover, the other subject of the 15th
for now ending.
Steven:
Don't be confused by the punctuation of the KJV and the little
at the start of verse 43. There is no break in these 3 verses.
My Answer:
The breaks do come and are to be put, but only as other
Scriptures prove what is what. When you see clearly the truth
about the Passover on the 14th (the beginning of) and the
departing from Rameses on the 15th, then you can
know when the subject of one ends and the other starts.
Steven:
Keith's story chose to ignore all the evidence of a speedy
departure. So let's imagine eating supper in haste, all packed
up, walking stick in hand, belt tightened, shoes tied up
expecting the signal to leave at any moment, and knowing that
one will not be coming back. Then at midnight there comes the cry
signalling death to the enemy, and liberty for them. The angel
which dealt death to their enemies would have held no threat for
them. If they were not about to depart right away that night, why
did they not get a good nights rest for the busy day tomorrow?
Because their state of readiness proves conclusively that THEY
WERE JUST WAITING FOR THE SIGNAL TO MOVE OUT.
My Answer:
Fred Coulter and I have gone over this in great detail time and
time again. Your hasty, all done in 4 or 5 hours is just
impossible, unless you ignore verses, have all Israel
living in Rameses, and a feast of 7 days and not 8 as God said.
You really do need to read at least the first half of Fred
Coulter's book on this subject VERY SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY, for all
the truth of all verses is there explained, and they can only
harmonize with a beginning of the 14th Passover and a beginning
of the 15th departure from Rameses.
God did not come over the houses to kill the first born until
midnight, then there had to be time for the Egyptians to realize
fully what had happened, some shock and mourning. Then Moses was
told that they could leave, but not before the morning, which
could have been as early as between 5 and 6 a.m. And that brings
us to your next argument.
Steven:
What about the word morning or boqer (Strongs 01242) in
Hebrew. Here are some verses which show that morning can mean
while it is still dark or night.
Genesis 44:3, "As soon as the morning <01242> was light
<0215>...."
If morning can be light, then early morning must be dark.
Exodus 14:24, "And it came to pass that in the morning <01242>
watch, the Lord looked unto the host of the Egyptians through
the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of
the Egyptians...."
The morning watch Ungers defines as from 2 a.m. to sunrise (see
Ex 14:24; 1 Sam. 11:11). It is around this time in the early
morning that I suppose Israel began to move out (while it was
still dark).
I Samuel 29:10, "Wherefore now rise up early <07925> in the
morning <01242> with thy master's servants that are come with
thee: and as soon as ye be up early in the morning <01242>, and
have light, depart...."
Here is one of 32 times that early in the morning is mentioned.
Clearly some of the times referred to are while it is still dark
or night. Thus morning in Hebrew means what we in English take it
to mean (with perhaps the exception of being from 2 a.m. onwards
not midnight).
My Answer:
Gone over this in detail in my studies. The word clearly
means morning and only in a FEW rare exceptions means
anything different, and then the CONTEXT tells you when those
exceptions are used. If the context does not state the exception
meaning, then the MAIN one is to be taken. And this is exactly
how we today use language. Morning to us means day light and
after, up to 12 noon, UNLESS I say in my context (of language use
and exception to the normal meaning), 'I will see you in the
morning at 3 a.m. while it is dark.' So it was also, in the use
of language in the Bible times, with people then, as it is with
us today.
Only when the context is so defining it for us, making it very
clear how the writer was using the word "morning" does it mean
anything BEFORE sun is risen. Otherwise the very Hebrew word itself
means morning not night. Better look at some GOOD Hebrew
lexicons such as----- THE THEOLOGICAL WORD BOOK OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Only in such works and ----- THE ENGLISHMAN'S HEBREW CONCORDANCE is the Hebrew word "boqer" and all places where it is used expounded to
give the whole truth, which is just as I've stated. The MAIN and
first meaning for morning is when light comes.
The second use is only as the context indicates. In the Passover
context of the books of Moses, only the Hebrew word is used,
nothing more, hence as in all other places where only the Hebrew
word appears, with no other exception context to the norm, the
meaning is then always morning as when light appears. Just as I
may say to you, 'I will see you in the morning' with no other
explanation of context, you are going to understand it as I will
see you when day light appears - the morning, not when it is
still dark or night. I often say this to the fellow I work with,
and he does not expect me to be seeing him in the dark. Our work
does not start till after sun-up. The EXCEPTIONS in the Bible are
clearly explained by the very words within the context. The Bible
uses many NORMS, with some exceptions. The exceptions are just
that....exceptions, not the norm, otherwise the norm would be the
exceptions.
Steven:
Notice how I Sam 29:10 refers to rising up early in the morning,
and waiting for morning light telling us that morning also
means darkness.
My Answer:
Just proves what I have said. The CONTEXT tells you WHEN an
exception to the NORM is being used. No need for guess work, the
Bible INTERPRETS itself when such contexts mean other than when
day light comes. If there's no such context, then morning means
morning, and not one minute before day light comes.
That is the common meaning of morning even to this day, when
nothing else is added in the speech context. And NOTHING was
added in any of the Passover contexts in the books of Moses. So
morning means morning or day light and not before. Again see "The
Theological WordBook of the Old Testament." A two volume set fully expounding the Hebrew of the Old Testament.Any serious teacher of the Bible should or must have this two volume set.
Steven:
Israel moved out early morning on the 15th, a few hours after
eating the Passover meal in haste. This NIGHT, PASSOVER NIGHT, IS A NIGHT TO BE MUCH OBSERVED FOR this SELFSAME DAY God broughtght them out of Egypt.
My Answer:
No, you and the Pharisee Jews of Christ's time and today, have it
all wrong, upside down and backwards. The "night to be much observed" is the night of the 14th, as the context
of Exodus 12 shows.
I'm being quite blunt about this and quite
dogmatic, for Jesus did observe the Passover at
the beginning of the 14th, it is as plain as the nose on your
face. Jesus did not observe some other early meal as some say. It
is written He observed the Passover, and the room was all ready
for them for the night of the beginning of the 14th, as the
disciples went forth and prepared the Passover. So it is
written. Now, just take that clear example and work backwards and
you can then understand correctly Exodus 12 and 13 and the rest
of the passages on the subject of the Passover in the books of
Moses. It is really just that simple.
Like so many other things by the time of Christ the majority of
"religious" Jews under the teaching of the Pharisees, had
perverted and twisted and got things out of sink regarding many
truths of God, as Jesus told them, their man made rules and
traditions had made void the commandments of God (Mark 7).
by
Keith Hunt
No comments:
Post a Comment