Normally, the Memorial service for Jehovah's Witnesses is based on the Jewish calendar for Nisan 14. My understanding is that Nisan 14 is always the first full moon after the Spring (or Vernal) equinox, which happened on Wednesday 20 March 2024. This year, 2024, Nisan 14 falls on April 22 when there is a full moon. But the Memorial service is going to be on Sunday March 24 this year. ***Could this discrepancy have anything to do with fact that 2024 is a Jewish leap year?*** NOTE: According to a Jewish web site I found, there are 13 months in the Jewish calendar. The first month (Aviv/Nisan) in 2024 starts on Monday April 8 but to link to our calendar, we need to start with Shevat on January 10th, 2024. Shevat: January 10 - 11th month in Jewish calendar Adar 1: February 9 -12th month in Jewish calendar Adar 2: March 10 - 13th month in Jewish calendar - full moon 25 March Aviv/Nisan April 8 - 1st month in Jewish calendar - full moon 22 April

This is an odd question I know and I'm not very hopeful I'll find a good answer. But has it ever stricken you odd that in Luke 7, the woman who comes to see Jesus just straight walks into the Pharisee's house unannounced? I'm an American, and I could never imagine a random stranger walking into anyone's house and it be acceptable. So, was this a normal thing in Jewish culture at this time period?

According to mainstream Christians, is it lawful for a born-again male Christian to wear an ear ring? The Bible seems to have warned against this practice through a letter Paul wrote to the church in Corinth. *1 Corinthians 6:9 (KJV)* > Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, **nor effeminate**, nor abusers of themselves with mankind It seems as if this is a warning to all male Christians to avoid effeminate habits which includes wearing ear rings and other behaviors associated with women, is that enough for male Christians who behave that way?

One poster ask me the above question. Does anyone have a scriptural answer? I have one and will post it soon.

[John 10:22–24 (NIV)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+10%3A22-24&version=NIV) says: > **22** Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, > **23** and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. > **24** The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will > you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.” Does the "Festival of Dedication" refer to Hanukkah? If so, does this mean that Jesus was present at the temple to celebrate Hanukkah?

Dale Tuggy, a Biblical Unitarian, more formally presents Jesus' argument at John 10:34-36. > "34 Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you > are gods’? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and > the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 then what about the One whom the > Father sanctified and sent into the world? How then can you accuse Me > of blasphemy for stating that I am the Son of God?" Tuggy's formalization of Jesus' argument is 1. The Scriptures do not blaspheme. (premise) 2. The Scriptures address human recipients of God’s message as “gods.” (Psalm 82) 3. The Scriptures do not blaspheme when they address human recipients of God’s message as “gods.” (1, 2) 4. Jesus is God’s Messiah. (“the one whom the Father… sent into the world”) (premise) 5. [Jesus is greater than those human recipients of God’s message.] (4) 6. [The title “Son of God” (i.e. Messiah) is a less exalted title than “god” or “God”.] (unstated premise) 7. Therefore, it is not blasphemy to describe Jesus as God’s Son. (3, 5, 6) where premises assumed in the discussion between Jesus and the Jews are in brackets. As Tuggy continues, > "Jesus’s opponents grant 1 and 2, and so they must grant 3, which > follows from 1 and 2. They would also grant that 4 implies 5. But > they’re resisting 4, though Jesus has given them plenty of evidence > for 4, in the form of his miraculous works, given him by God to > validate his ministry. His opponents also assume, and would have to > grant 6, and that 7 follows from 3, 5, and 6. **If calling these lesser > people “gods” isn’t bad, then it just can’t be bad to give this > greater person (the Messiah) the lesser description, God’s Son.** > > In sum, **the whole issue hinges on 4.** The argument is valid (3 follows > from 1 and 2, and 7 follows from 3, 5, and 6), and they would have to > grant all the other other premises (1, 2, 6). In their blind anger, > they want to say that he’s blaspheming by saying that he and God are > “one” (i.e. working together). But **that charge of blasphemy, Jesus > brilliantly and forcefully points out, depends wholly on their > stubborn belief, against the preponderance of evidence available to > them, that Jesus is not God’s Messiah**. Deftly, he shows how their > charge of blasphemy assumes the very point at issue; it assumes that > he’s not the Messiah." According to Trinitarians, does Tuggy get Jesus' argument right? If not, where does Tuggy make a mistake?

Matthew 1:19 > Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not > want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to **divorce her > quietly**. In these modern days, in my country, something about "secret/quiet" in a marriage - for example like this : - A. A couple already engaged. Because of something, the man ---after considering--- finally decided to cancel the marriage. But in order not to expose the woman to public disgrace, the man still do the marriage ceremony, living together in a same house, but the "husband" don't do sex at all with his "wife". It's just a staged marriage so everyone else think that they are married couple as the normal husband and wife. - B. A married couple. Because of something, the husband ---after considering--- finally decided to divorce his wife. But in order not to expose the wife to public disgrace, they still live together in the same house, but the husband don't do sex anymore with his wife. It's just a staged marriage so everyone else think that they are still a married couple. The "considering" from the man then indirectly is also about to have sex with the woman or not to have sex with the woman. So, in general ... a "secret/quite divorce" in my country is also about there is no sex between the couple besides other things. But still to public, the couple is a husband and wife. Since I don't know the custom in Israel let alone during Joseph & Mary times, that's why I wonder what kind of a situation is a "secret/quite divorce" in those days ?

A simple word search for "baptism" in the Old Testament turns up no matches. However by the time John the Baptist shows up on the scene and starts dunking people and calling it "for forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4 ) people seem to already have an understanding of what baptism is. In fact, it seems there might have been other sorts of baptisms practiced at the time other than what John and later Jesus talked about. In particular the questions that pop up seem to be about who was doing the baptizing and on what authority. Nobody seems be too concerned about the act itself -- as if it was a well understood thing already. Since the OT doesn't seem to speak of it and the NT jumps right in with everybody seeming to understand that such a practice exists (even if there is some question as to who/what/how/when), what happened in between the Testaments? Was baptism something that was done by anybody for any reason? If so by who and what for? Did the religious Jews of the time have such a practice?

At Exodus 12:11 we see the Lord instructing the Israel on how to go about the first Passover : " This is how you shall eat it: your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it hurriedly. It is the passover of the Lord." We also see Jesus celebrating with His disciples,the Passover which has since come to be called the Last Supper: "So the disciples set out and went to the city, and found everything as he had told them; and they prepared the Passover meal." (Mk 14:16) Now, it is reasonable for one to assume that the Jews had their Passover meal from year to year, in the same manner as their forefathers had had before their flight out of Egypt , that is, standing up ! But we are made to believe, at least through images, that Jesus sat down with his disciples to have the Passover meal. My question is : Is there any denomiation which believes that Jesus had his Last Supper standing ?

What are some of the Jewish (mishnaic) traditions regarding keeping the Sabbath, that were not specified in Torah? I am interested in knowing the traditions especially prevalent during the time of Jesus. Kindly cite either the scripture or authentic Jewish sources. An example would be the "Sabbath Day's Journey": >KJV Acts 1:12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. I have heard that this is a tradition described by the Jews as a lawful distance that can be traveled on Sabbath. But don't have any Jewish sources. Edit 1: By Mishnaic I meant the traditions that were in existence during the time of Jesus. I gather that Mishna is a compiled written form of these traditions that were created during the time intervening between Malachi and Jesus. Further clarification: 1. This question is particularly relevant here at Christianity, as I am interested in traditions that the Jews accused Jesus of breaking, especially regarding those on Sabbath. 2. I am not interested in just Sabbath Day's Journey - but others like it. So it is not a duplicate.

In the situation with Priscilla and Aquila, name order is often an argument within the egalitarian/complementation debates. Listing order has been used to point out significance or importance in a number of areas and commentaries of biblical text. It seems to be an accepted norm and most sources refer to well known cultural and traditional standards of the practice. I have not been able to find any basis for this. I’m not disagreeing with it but I would like to find a source where this is clear rather than just referencing “that what everyone says”. What are the origins of this teaching?

It was claimed that the recent tradition in Judaism to give a name to babies while doing circumcision, is documented already in the New Testament. Is it true? I'm looking for the source / reference.

Proponents of a rapture sometimes say that Jewish weddings staged a mock kidnapping of the bride, which is a symbol for the future rapture of the church. For example [another answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/16808/6071) quotes [Nancy Missler who writes](http://www.khouse.org/articles/2011/987) > The second part of the Jewish marriage was called the nissuin or the marriage ceremony itself. The groom often surprised his bride by his unexpected or early return. > >All Jewish brides were said to be “stolen, caught up, or snatched up by surprise.” The bride was then led to the groom’s house by a wedding procession of women carrying lighted lamps, similar to the Parable of the Ten Virgins This aspect of rapture theology would make a lot of sense if it were true. There would be a strong multi-stage parallel between the Jewish wedding custom and the history of the Church: - an initial betrothal - the departure of the groom for a time to build a house (John 14:2-3), while the bride prepares herself (Rev 19:7) - the surprise return of the groom who snatches away the bride for a short time - the public wedding ceremony and banquet with the families and community (many passages use a wedding banquet as a symbol for the afterlife) The surprise return of the groom is easy to see in, for example, the parable of the ten virgins/bridesmaids (Matt 25:1-13), but I'm sceptical of the staging of a mock kidnapping of the bride. I haven't seen rapture proponents give any reliable references to ancient Jewish sources describing such a custom. So is there evidence of such a custom? Or should I conclude that it was made up by rapture proponents?

I remember something about the ancient Jewish Wedding Ceremony being a foreshadowing of Christ and the Church. Kay Arthur authored a novel that illustrates this idea, entitled *With an Everlasting Love *. So, what are the specifics of the ancient Jewish Wedding ceremony and how do they foreshadow Christ and the Church?

Why did the ancient Jews use a candelabrum with 7 candles? I don't understand why it's not 8 or 6 or 10 or 6 or 1 or 1 or 2? Can you please assist me with this matter of the upmost importance? Do any Christian denomination use 7 candles?

I've been pondering this question for a while. With Easter right around the corner, I figured this is the perfect time to ask. See these verses: > Most of the crowd spread their cloaks on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and spread them on the road. And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!” Matthew 21:8-9 (ESV) > The next day the large crowd that had come to the feast heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem. So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him, crying out, “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel!” John 12:12-13 (ESV) Why did the people lay palm tree branches on the road that Jesus entered on? Did this have a special significance in Jewish culture at the time?

When I studied Mohammed's religion, I thought the insistence and enforcement of 7th century Arabian culture (e.g. diet, clothing, marriage, law) on the entire planet unreasonable, and evidence it was false. "The creator of the universe would not cause such diverse human experience only to insist that everyone adopt the culture of one region a millennia ago," I reasoned. Yet I find Christianity doing basically the same thing: I sat in Mass today and realized the Japanese were reciting an Old Testament passage about 'the cedars of Lebanon' and the Israeli exile to Babylon (what, 587 BC?), despite the fact that likely no one in that church had ever even *seen* a Lebanese cedar, and likewise that exile more than 2,000 years ago has nothing to do with them today, or any relevance to the Japanese at any point in history. I realized that the Catholic Church is pushing ancient Jewish culture on people worldwide in the same way that Mohammed's imams push Arabic culture on people worldwide. Why does God want us to fixate on that region at that point in time? How is that good for mankind? How is it relevant for us today? Why is it not evidence that the Christian faith is unreasonable and the Bible obsolete?

"Extra" in the sense that these beliefs were kept by the Jews but not found in the (39 book) old testament, but nevertheless recorded in the new testament books. >And coming he dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled **which was said by prophets**: That he shall be called a Nazarene. Matthew 2:23 >Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, Saying: **The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses**. Matthew 23:1-2 >When Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, contended about the body of Moses, he durst not bring against him the judgment of railing speech, but said: The Lord command thee. Jude 1:9 >Now as **Jannes and Mambres resisted Moses**, so these also resist the truth, men corrupted in mind, reprobate concerning the faith. 2 Timothy 3:8 >Elias was a man passible like unto us: and with prayer he prayed that it might not rain upon the earth, and it rained not for three years and six months. James 5:17

Kosher food laws are part of Judaism, from which Christianity grew. But what Christian denominations or traditions follow, or historically have observed Kosher food laws?

Two verses connected two 'palm branches' are: >They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, "Hosanna!" "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!" "Blessed is the King of Israel!" (John 12:13, NIV) > >After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. (Revelation 7:9, NIV) It seems that this ‘palm waving’ is understood by everybody as a symbol of triumph and victory, but which culture did this practice come from? Was it a Jewish tradition, or was it only Jewish tradition as part of a wider cultural tradition at that time of world history? Of course by asking the question I do not have any hidden agenda against Palm Sunday, its just a curiosity as I have not researched an answer.