Difference between revisions of "Harmony of the Gospel (Conservative Version) longer form Chapters 1-7"

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

literal Greek Ἁγίου Πνεύματος
"Agiou Pneumatos"

literal Greek Θεόφιλε "Theo-phil-e"
Latinized "Theophilus".
See James 2:23 where Abraham is called "the friend of God".

In ancient times the formal title "Friend of the King" was bestowed on government officials who were strongly supportive of the ruling power—trusted advisors and counsellors—who could be expected to act as representatives or ambassadors expressing in word and deed the mind and intention of the ruler, and in return were entrusted with positions of authority. Compare 2 Samuel 15:32-37 ("David's friend") and 2 Samuel 16:15-19; 1 Kings 4:5 ("Zabud...was priest and king's friend"); 1 Maccabees 11:27, 14:38-39, 15:32 ("king's friend"); John 19:12 (Pilate's title "Caesar's friend"), and James 4:4 ("friend of the world").

preferred to "eternal good news"
See Revelation 14:6.
"Good News" The literal meaning of the words "gospel" and "evangel". See definition and discussions of the word "gospel" in the following brief articles

• Roman Influence on the Birth of Christianity: The Term "Gospel", By Barry Benning pdf
• Baker's Evangelical Dictionary: "gospel"
• Catholic Encyclopedia: Gospel and Gospels

"the mystery of godliness" (Greek eusebeias)
"Great is the mystery of our religion" (RSVCE)

See 1 Timothy 3:16 and interlinear text

The Greek word εὐσεβείας eusebeias also means "religion" and "piety" (in the active sense of belief and practice, i.e. complete "living faith [noun]").
See multiple translations of 1 Timothy 3:16 and Strong's number 2150 εὐσεβεία eusebeia: godliness, holiness, piety, worship.
See also Religion - Catholic Encyclopedia (catholic.org)

Many Christians firmly proclaim that true Christianity is not a Religion. They define the word "religion" as an institutionalized, formal, organized system, based solely on accumulated traditions of men, useless pietistic devotions, hollow ritualistic ceremony, superstitious customs, unintelligent sentimentalism, ignorance of Scripture, a doctrine of salvation by works alone, fear, and oppressive legalism. Translating εὐσεβείας in 1 Timothy 3:16 as "religion" is denounced as a false reading on the basis of this formulated definition. See

• Christianity Is Not a Religion?
• Is Christianity a religion or a relationship?
• Christianity is a relationship not a religion

The majority of Christians, Catholic, Orthodox, Lutherans and others declare that real Christianity is religion, the True Religion of God, founded by Jesus Christ, animated by the Holy Spirit, received from the Apostles, proclaiming salvation in Christ alone through faith and obedience to him and to those leaders who are authorized to speak in his name, compiling the Bible, the Church visible and invisible against which even the "gates of hell" shall not prevail, which has been faithfully handed down and preserved to this day as the Christian Religion, Christianity. All others falsely pretend to religion "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof". 2 Timothy 3:5; Acts 17:16-34.

Translating εὐσεβείας in 1 Timothy 3:16 as "religion" is seen as an accurate reading of the text, on the basis of linguistic studies of first century Greek language, and the documented consistent use of the word in Christian writings from the first through the fifteenth centuries which describe Christianity as religion, and not merely as "a" religion, one among others. See

• Bill Mounce Greek Dictionary: εὐσεβία
• definition of "religion" at dictionary.com

"Truly Godly Religion." Again: "The majority of Christian believers in the United States and throughout the world declare that real Christianity is religion, the True Religion of God."

• The Catholic Church is the world's largest Christian body comprised of several distinct "Rites". The Catholic Church (Latin Rite) is the largest religious body in the United States, with over 60 million adherents (4 times as large as the second largest church, the Orthodox).
  —“The Global Catholic Population,” © 2011, Pew Research Center.
  —The Largest Catholic Communities
• The Eastern Orthodox Church, officially called the Orthodox Catholic Church, and also referred to as the Orthodox Church and Orthodoxy, is the second largest Christian church in the world, with an estimated 225–300 million adherents, most of whom live in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Russia.
  —The Greek (Eastern) Orthodox Church. Greek Orthodox Archdiocese Of America (1983). Retrieved on 7 May 2014.
  —Christianity:Basics:Eastern Orthodox Church Denomination. about.com. Retrieved on 22 May 2014.
• Christianity. Major Branches of Religions Ranked by Number of Adherents. adherents.com. Retrieved on 22 May 2014.
• See Percentage of Christians in Protestant Denominations (29.5%).

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

Mark 1:2-3
—Mark quotes Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3

Quotations of Septuagint texts (LXX), not Hebrew.

Both Hebrew and Septuagint Malachi 3:1 say,
—"prepare the way before me".

See LXX Malachias 3:1; LXX Esias 40:3

See Septuagint (LXX).

Greek Κυρίου, from Κυρίος Kyrios

Kyrios = "Lord" (that is, "God").
In the Greek New Testament the word Kyrios in all its forms designates God as "Lord" 700 times. The word is emphasized in boldface print in this chapter to highlight the fact that it is always the same word Kyrios (God) with the same meaning each time throughout the entire NT. In the Orthodox and Catholic rituals of worship it is included in the phrase "Kyrie eleison (Lord, have mercy on us)".

Abijah is the eighth division listed in the First Book of Chronicles.

1 Chronicles 24:1-19

literally, "a just"

KJV "being a just man"
NAB NRSV "righteous man"
REV "man of principle"
NJB "upright man"

Luke 1:28.

Many modern translators avoid the literal rendering of the angel's words to Mary according to the Greek text.
"HAIL" (Greek χαίρε chaire) is a formal salute of heartfelt respect to one worthy of honor, rendered by one who ranks as a subordinate of the one so addressed, announcing good news to the high superior, similar to "Hail, Caesar!" See
Strong's number 5463 "Hail", "all Hail", "rejoice", etc.
"Full of grace", or "filled with grace", by the favor of the Lord, is an assertion by the angel Gabriel, by one who "stands before the Lord", that there is already at that moment no grace lacking in her. She is "full" of grace because she has been "filled" with grace by God: there is actually little or no difference in meaning. This implies the fullness of the grace of salvation is and has been already bestowed on Mary by God her Savior in preparation of her to become the mother of the incarnation of the holy Word of God, the Son of God. Linguistically, this can apply to that very moment, or to the very moment she was first conceived, either way, in preparing her immediately, or in anticipation long beforehand, to be the grace-filled mother of the Messiah.

• interlinear Greek-English text of Luke 1:28
• multiple versions of Luke 1:28
• multiple commentaries on Luke 1:28

See also Mary (mother of Jesus)

Orthodoxy strongly affirms instead against the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, that Mary was cleansed from sin by God at the moment of Gabriel's greeting to her, that she was according to nature accounted with the human race simply as a sinner among sinners before the Incarnation of the Lord, and was cleansed of sin as Isaiah was, in preparation for her to become the mother of Christ who is God, mother of God, Theotokos, but that the grace bestowed on her was immeasurably greater. (Isaiah 6:7).

Evangelicals and Fundamentalists declare without hesitation that Mary was a mortal human being no better than the most filthy sinner steeped in sin, and as equally lost as they, along with all of the rest of damned humanity, and that she was not saved, and could not be saved, before the total sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and his resurrection from the dead, and not before she accepted Him as her personal Lord and Savior afterward.
The Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and the Orthodox and Catholic doctrine that Mary is the Mother of God (Greek Theotokos) and Queen of Heaven are utterly abhorred as abominations and denounced by Evangelicals and Fundamentalists as pagan doctrines of the Devil straight out of the pits of hell, "doctrines of devils", and that those who believe these things are damned and lost, as long as they do not totally reject such teachings, renounce the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and come out of them, and accept Jesus as their only Lord and personal Savior. (Isaiah 52:11; Jeremiah 44:16-23; 1 Timothy 4:1; 6:3-16; Acts 4:11-12; 17:30-31.)
“It is a sin to recognize, pay tribute to, honor, sing about, worship or elevate Jesus' mother as being anything more than a vile, guilty, filthy, dirty, rotten, SINNER!” — David J. Stewart — “Jesus' mother was a dirty, rotten, sinner just like Adolf Hitler or any other sinner.” — David J. Stewart — [1] [2] [3]
Compare:
Titus 1:15-16
Matthew 12:7 "the guiltless"
Matthew 12:50
1 Peter 3:2-5 "holy women";
Titus 3:4-5
John 10:27-29;
Acts 10:15;
Matthew 23:12
Luke 1:30
Luke 1:35
1 John 4:13
Matthew 12:30-37
Luke 1:41-43
Luke 1:45-49
Luke 2:14
Luke 14:11
Romans 8:28-30
Acts 2:26-28
1 Corinthians 15:51-53
1 John 4:15
Acts 1:14;
Revelation 12:1-2
Revelation 12:5
Revelation 12:13
Matthew 12:30-37
Titus 1:15-16
Revelation 22:11
2 Timothy 3:12-17
2 Thessalonians 2:13-15
1 John 3:1-3 and 1 John 3:11-15;
James 4:11-12.
See Council of Ephesus.
This sequence of scriptural texts represents the position of the majority of Christian believers (about 70.5% world-wide →Chapter One, Bible text marginal note column: scroll down to "Truly Godly Religion.") regarding the dignity of Mary the mother of Jesus, Catholic, Orthodox, and mainstream Protestant Anglican, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Reform (First Things: "Evangelicals and the Mother of God", by Timothy George, 2007 (firstthings.com)).
A minority of Christian believers (about 29.5% world-wide, less than one-third) most firmly maintain and agree that “It is a sin, an abomination and an affront to God and to His Son, to recognize, pay tribute to, honor, sing about, worship or elevate Jesus' mother as being anything more than a vile, guilty, filthy, dirty, rotten, SINNER just like Adolf Hitler or any other sinner.” They proclaim this boldly and without any hesitation whatsoever, to please Jesus Christ her son and acknowledge him as our King, as the one Lord and Savior, to render all honor and glory and praise to Him, and to Him alone, the risen Son of God the Father on His throne of eternal glory. If it were possible, they would happily, joyfully, crush to powder every basilica, church, building, shrine, statue, painting, mosaic, stained glass window, tapestry, vestment, rosary, medal, emblem, banner, flag, knick-knack, music, hymn, song, book, and T-shirt, sweatshirt, blouse and dress dedicated to Mary Queen of Heaven, and rid the earth of every vestige of honor to her, that Jesus Christ alone might be exalted.

It is worth noting that the sinner's prayer is found nowhere in the Bible, but has become a standard requirement of salvation added to the teaching of the Bible by those who teach it. (Many regard it as a violation of the Evangelical and Fundamentalist Protestant principle to "not to go beyond what is written" 1 Corinthians 4:6; see Sola scriptura.) According to its critics, it has become a tradition of men from outside of the Bible, and therefore, "it represents a corruption of the pure Gospel" because "it's not in the Bible".

See The Heresy Of Having To "Pray" To Be Saved, by David J. Stewart (soulwinning.info) In particular, the author expresses especial concern regarding the Sinner's Prayer as a formula for unconditionally assured salvation.
See Eternal security (salvation).

In the above linked article, "The Heresy Of Having To 'Pray' To Be Saved", author David J. Stewart quotes Pastor Harry Ironside (1876-1951):

“The Gospel is not a call to repentance, or to amendment of our ways, to make restitution for past sins ... Nor is the Gospel a demand that you give up the world, that you give up your sins, that you break off bad habits, and try to cultivate good ones.”—Dr. Harry A. Ironside, from the sermon What is the Gospel? (full text)

David J. Stewart asserts, "Nor does a person have to “say 'Jesus is Lord'” or “turn from their sins” to be saved", and he says that "repentance is TO believe, and not a separate act of forsaking sinful behavior as perquisite to placing one's faith in the Gospel"
NOTE: It is important to read in full both David J. Stewart, "The Heresy Of Having To 'Pray' To Be Saved" and the sermon by Dr. Harry A. Ironside, "What is the Gospel?", so that nothing is misunderstood or taken here as misrepresented or distorted out of context.
In answer to their teaching, compare the following Bible verses:

James 2:17 and 19 and 24
Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 7:21; 9:13; 11:20
Mark 1:15; 2:17; 6:12
Luke 5:32; 13:3 and 5; 15:10; 24:47
Acts 2:38; 3:19; 14:15; 17:30; 20:21; 26:18 and 20
Romans 2:4 and 10
2 Corinthians 7:10; 12:21
Ephesians 2:10
2 Timothy 2:25
Hebrews 6:1
2 Peter 3:9
Revelation 2:5; 3:3 and 19
Ezekiel 18:21-24
See also the definition of "repent": “turn away from sin”:
—Repentance Bible Verses (biblestudytools.com)
—Bible Concordances: Nave's Topical Bible: Repentance (studylight.org).
—Compare the Catholic doctrine of salvation in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) Part Three: Life in Christ. Section One: Man's Vocation: Life in the Spirit. Chapter Three: God's Salvation: Law and Grace. Article 2: Grace and Justification. I. Justification. II. Grace. III. Merit. IV. Christian Holiness. – CCC numbers 1987-2029 (scborromeo.org)

Compare Antinomianism and Licentiousness.

"shall"—present future tense ἔσται estai "shall", indicating both now and for the future
"How shall (ever) this be?"

Literal Greek:
"I do not know (have sexual relations with) man"
"pos estai moi touto, epei andra ou ginosko"
πῶς ἔσται μοι τοῦτο, ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω
"I do not do this", instead of "I have not done this"

WEB "seeing I am a virgin"
DR "because I know not man"
KJV "seeing I know not a man"
RSV "since I have no husband"
hence: "How can this be?"

"I am a virgin" is not the same as "I have no husband". See the interlinear text of Luke 1:34. Mary was already betrothed as a wife to a husband, according to the meaning of Jewish betrothal, which was and still is much more than an engagement to be married. Because she was already betrothed (Luke 1:27), she could not have said, "I have no husband."

Every Jewish maiden betrothed to be married knew how she would naturally have a child after the wedding night. If she was not a consecrated virgin, she would not ask how this could be. Clearly, she did not think this was possible.
compare:
Leviticus 27:1-6 and
1 Samuel 1:27-28 and
Numbers 30:1-16 and
Leviticus 22:1-3 and
Leviticus 22:31-33

If Mary was consecrated to God as a virgin by her parents, she could not have relations with a man, KJV "seeing I know not a man", WEB "seeing I am a virgin", and if she was sole heiress of her father's property, then by the law of Moses, which made no exception, she must be given in marriage to a member of her father's clan, which presents a dilemma resolved only by betrothing her to be lawfully married to a "just/righteous" member of her father's clan who could be trusted to fulfill the law of Moses regarding inheritance in Israel, and at the same time not violate her consecration to God as a virgin; and according to the simplest and plainest reading of scripture this would explain why she said, "How can this be?".

Compare the Greek text of John 4:17 "I have no husband / man" (οὐκ ἔχω ἄνδρα "[I] with not man")
with the RSV reading of the Greek text of Luke 1:34 "I have no husband" (RSV)—"I have no husband" has not the same meaning as "since I know not man" (ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω "therefore man [I] never know"):
DR reading "I know not man",
KJV and others "I know not a man",
ESV and majority "I am a virgin".

Some readers believe that Mary had never met a man before, other than her father, because she "knows no man", or that he had died, and that her mother kept Mary in seclusion so that she had never in her life seen any man, or at least that she never got to know any man socially, even her neighbors, apart from the most limited awareness of men seen apart from a distance during the segregated worship within the local synagogue from behind the screen separating the women from the men.
The RSV reading here, "I have no husband", is a misleading paraphrase which alters the meaning of the text "I do not know man" by avoiding any suggestion that Mary was under a vow of virginity, and suggests instead that she was a normally eligible maiden who was deliberately kept in innocent ignorance of the full meaning of her already existing betrothal to a husband (which was virtually marriage), culminating in the definitive act of consummation of the marriage with him on their wedding night, in the full expectation of becoming pregnant with a child. Such a reading represents Mary as understanding Gabriel to mean that she was to immediately consummate marital relations with Joseph before the end of the one year betrothal period and that Joseph was not her husband before the end of that time, which completely misrepresents the meaning of Jewish betrothal. In Matthew 1:20 Joseph is not told to "take Mary as your wife"; he is told to "take Mary your wife". During the betrothal she is already his wife, and he is already her husband. Mary therefore could not have said, "I have no husband", when she was already betrothed to Joseph. The literal meaning of ἐπεὶ ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω is "I man not know", "I know not man" (Amplified: How shall this ever be, for this is something I do not do: I do not have relations with any man, I know not man, I am a virgin).

See
multiple versions of Jeremiah 8:8
and commentaries.

Text from Hebrews 10:4-7 and 1:6.

Hebrews 10:4-7 quotes Psalm 40:6-8

Hebrews 1:6 quotes Deuteronomy 32:43 (but only from the LXX); and indirectly Psalm 97:7
KJV Psalm 97:7 says,
—"worship him all ye gods."

Quotations of Septuagint texts (LXX), not Hebrew.

LXX ennumeration of the psalms differs from Hebrew text enumeration of the psalms.

See LXX Psalm 39:6-8 (KJV 40:6-8);
LXX Deuteronomy 32:43; LXX Psalm 96:7 (KJV 97:7)

See Septuagint (LXX).

Note:
The (biblestudytools.com) Septuagint w/ Apocrypha LXX Brenton translation site does not include the Book of Psalms (access date 4/29/2018)—it has been entirely omitted by biblestudytools.com without comment or notification.

The (ellopos.net/elpenor) Septuagint LXX Brenton translationsite does include the entire Book of Psalms (including Psalm 151).

According to tradition and archaeology this is the actual name of the town of Zachariah and Elizabeth.

Luke 1:42

An allusion to the Septuagint, Judith 13:18

that is, "mother of my Kyrios (Lord)".

Greek Κυρίου from Κυρίος = "Lord" (that is, "God").

Here in Luke 1:43 the Holy Spirit Himself, speaking through Elizabeth, addresses Mary as "mother of my God (Kyrios)". She does not say the NT word for "King (Basileus)", or "Ruler (Archon)", or "Governor or Prince (Hegemon)" in Greek, not even the Hebrew or Aramaic equivalents, Melek, Nasi, Pechah. From this basis in scripture Orthodox and Catholic Christians call Mary "the Mother of God" and "Blessed". And according to constant Christian doctrine, Jesus, even from the moment of his incarnation in the womb, is, and always has been, "Lord and God" (John 20:28); he was God even before his incarnation, and Mary his true mother beginning from the moment of his incarnation, and he has never ceased being God.

The Orthodox seek to defend the doctrine of the true divinity of Christ Jesus in giving Mary the title Theotokos (Greek: "God-bearer"). He is God and by the fact (Latin factum est) of his incarnation in her womb she became his true mother. And the Ecumenical (whole Church) Council of Ephesus in 431 condemned Nestorians and Pelagians in defense of the reality of the Incarnation of God by declaring, as genuine Christian doctrine, the centuries-old belief in the divine maternity of Mary as the Blessed Mother of Jesus Christ who from the moment of his conception is both Eternal God and man. God before he became man, and God after becoming man, and God in her womb. There has never been a moment when Jesus was not God, and there was never a moment from the first instant of his incarnation that Mary was not his mother, nurturing him in her womb.

All Fundamentalists and most Evangelicals utterly reject as blasphemy any teaching about Mary being called "mother of God". There are many who teach that Jesus emptied himself entirely of his divine nature the moment he became incarnate in Mary's womb, and that during his ministry, passion and crucifixion, and his lying in the tomb before his resurrection, he was not God, and therefore she could not have been mother of God. Compare Nestorianism and Theotokos.

The Apostle Paul in the Book of Acts, teaches that the Church of God was purchased, obtained, by "his own blood", the blood of God (Acts 20:28)—although some ancient authorities, some few extant manuscripts of Acts, do not have the phrase "of God" in Acts 20:28.

Outside the Book of Acts Paul teaches that he was fully God, in saying, "It was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross" (NAS Colossians 1:19-20). The fullness of the Father's divinity was in Christ during His birth, His entire ministry and His passion.

See the arguments for and against this position in Kenosis: Christ "emptied himself" (Philippians 2:7)—also Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) nos. 461-483. If the Son of God was only by nature one finite human first century Jew when he was crucified, and not also by divine nature the infinite God as well, his sacrifice on the cross as one man alone by himself could not have had infinite atoning value and efficacy for the redemption and salvation of "all" (Romans 5:18).

"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
"Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me:..." John 14:10=11.
"I and the Father are one." John 10:30 (context John 10:27-38).

"Why is this to me, that the mother of my LORD should come to me?"—"Jesus is Lord!" Greek Κύριον
(Luke 1:43; Romans 10:9).
See Strong's Concordance entry "LORD", Strong's number 2962 κύριος kurios: God, Lord, master. Compare:
Matthew 1:20-24; 2:13-19; 3:3; 4:7-10; 9:38; 11:25; 22:37; 23:39; 28:2;
Mark 1:3; 5:19; 11:9-10; 12:29-30; 13:20; 16:20;
Luke 1:6-76; 2:9-15 and 22-39; 3:4; 4:8-19; 10:2, 21, 27; 20:37, 42-44;
John 1:23; 11:3, 12-39; 12:13 and 38; 20:28; (etc.)

Luke 1:52

An allusion to the Septuagint, Sirach 10:14

Luke 1:74-75.

This is the essential definition of true religion, internal and external together. 1 Timothy 3:16 "Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion" εύσεβείας eusebeias RSV "religion" KJV "godliness"—see 1 Timothy 3:16 RSVCE and other multiple translations of 1 Timothy 3:16—"true godliness", "faith", "godliness", "godly worship", "religion", "godly religion", "Righteousness", "reverence for God", "reverence", "piety"—all translations of the Greek εύσεβείας eusebeias.
See also Strong's number 2150 εὐσέβεια and 2152 εὐσεβής eusebēs—piety, duty.

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

Matthew 1:18 amplified

"Jesus Christ" is from the Hebrew Yehoshua Meshiach, Joshua Messiah = (Literally) "God's Savior/Salvation Anointed-Deliverer", "LORD's Anointed Salvation".
See the following:

• Origin of the Name of Jesus Christ - Catholic Encyclopedia (newadvent.org)
• Biblical Encyclopedias - 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica: Jesus Christ (studylight.org)

"An educated Greek, who knew something (as many at that time did) of the Greek translation of the ancient Hebrew Scriptures, ... would have known that 'Jesus' was the Greek form of Joshua; that 'Christ' was the Greek rendering of Messiah, or Anointed, the title of the great King for whom the Jews were looking; he might further have remembered that 'the Lord' is the expression which the Greek Old Testament constantly uses instead of the ineffable name of God, which we now call 'Jehovah' "

• What is the Real name of the Messiah:
  Defaming The Messiah.
  "IESOUS" = Hail ZEUS
  "JESUS" = Hail ZEUS
  (hiddenbible.com/jesuszeus)
  The author's source is "Dictionary of Christian Lore and Legend", by J. C. L. Metford, 1998. ISBN-10:0500273731, ISBN-13:978-050027379.
  This article is an attack on the reliability of the text of the Bible itself in support of the Great Apostasy. The author asserts with fully confident assurance that the Catholic Church at the time of Constantine replaced the real Hebrew name of the Son of God with an artificially constructed name designed to promote the worship of Zeus and inserted it into all of the manuscripts of all of the books of the New Testament everywhere—thus everyone who utters the word "Jesus/Iesous" is unwittingly praising Zeus instead, and is therefore actually guilty of committing pagan idolatry by taking the name of another god upon their lips, and the whole Christian world who reveres the name of "Jesus" is proven guilty of blasphemy by replacing the true name of the Lord and Savior with the name of a false god. (Exodus 23:13; Psalm 16:4)

—See Dictionary of Christian Lore and Legend (vicmitorenogseirilinpers.wordpress.com) This page link offers a download of this work.

—See also Constantine's Creation of Jesus Christ (thecreatorscalendar.com)

This directly implies that the spirit that has been guiding the churches that revere the name of "Jesus" is the Devil from hell, and that their worship and deeds of mercy are utterly worthless in the eyes of God. See Matthew 10:24-28; 12:24-37; Mark 3:22-30; Luke 11:14-23; especially 1 Corinthians 10:7-21, 31-32.

Christians have traditionally been warned to avoid misjudging people by how they interpret the meaning of the outward appearance they see without also asking what is the intention in the heart and the mind and the soul that they cannot see. The fundamental issue lies at the heart of what is the real intent in the heart of the worshipers?: are they actually worshiping and adoring another god by uttering the name of "Jesus" or are they actually and truly directing their heartfelt worship to the one Lord and Savior, the Son of God the Father Almighty from Whom proceeds the Holy Spirit of God, according to what they understand and believe is the true meaning of "Jesus"? (What do you, reader, actually mean when you say the name of "Jesus"? Who do you understand is normally being referred to and meant by that name?)
See multiple commentaries on 1 Samuel 16:7 "Do not look on his appearance...man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart."
Compare Matthew 12:31-37 and 1 Corinthians 12:4-30.
Catholic apologists firmly assert that when Orthodox and Catholic worshipers bow down to representations of the Persons of God, and of those who belong to Him as ministers and saints and teachers of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, they are not only not worshiping other gods and goddesses from the pagan pantheon, but are directing their worship to God alone and in his honor are honoring and acknowledging those He has chosen and honored for the glory of His name: to honor them with visible physical representations and songs and prayers of praise is to honor him. They point to the passage of Hebrews 1:3 in which the physical nature of Jesus Christ is made by God to be the very icon and image of God (χαρακτὴρ charaktér = "an exact image"—see interlinear text of Hebrews 1:3). John 14:9-11 and 2 Corinthians 5:16-20.
See Seventh Ecumenical Council (orthodoxwiki). This is the Council which condemned iconoclasm and defended the (by then traditional) Christian use of images as aids to Christian devotion and worship of God.
Evangelicals and Fundamentalists respond that they are not deceived by such arguments, but, like the expression, "If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck, it must be a duck", so it is that "If it looks like idolatry, sounds like idolatry, and appears to us to be idolatry, it must be idolatry."
See Exodus 20:2-6. On the basis of this text alone, both Jews and Moslems charge Christians with committing idolatry by worshiping Jesus as God, Jesus himself as being one of the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity, which they interpret as being three separately individual gods. See Council of Chalcedon. Those Christian groups and churches which firmly reject the definitions of Chalcedon are the non-Chalcedonian Christians of various denominations, among which are included the Church of God, International, and United Church of God, Unitarian Baptists, and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. See Trinitarian Heresies (monergism.com) and Nontrinitarianism - Wikipedia.
The logical argument from these historically and doctrinally documented facts leads most people to the considered conclusion that if individuals have not been instructed, or told, explicitly, that these forms of worship are performed to honor the Roman and Babylonian gods and goddesses (as the religion of Santería uses the images of Christian saints to represent the gods and goddesses of Vodoun), or that the saints and angels and the persons of the Trinity are separate gods and goddesses in their own right, without any relation to God alone as servants of the Supreme God, therefore they are not committing idolatry.
Rejection of this argument is based primarily on Exodus 20:4-6; 23:24; 34:12-17; Deuteronomy 4:23-24; 5:7-10; all of which pertain to pagan gods. God did command the making of an image which healed those who looked at it (Numbers 21:8-9; John 3:14-15; 6:40; Galatians 3:1; Jeremiah 31:31-34).
According to Acts 9:4-5 even living human beings are one with Jesus Christ (see John 17:20-26). To persecute them is to persecute him. And to honor them is to honor him. Whoever honors him, God will honor John 12:26. Compare Genesis 12:3 and commentaries.
The interpretation of any of these scriptures and the acceptance or rejection of any one of these arguments based on them as proof texts is dependent on the acceptance or rejection of the interpretation of a particular denominational tradition or doctrine.

NOTE: It is an historically documented fact that, before his reported conversion to Christianity, the Roman general Constantine did not worship the Greek god Zeus, but either the Roman god Jupiter Optimus Maximus "Jupiter the Best and Greatest" or the Roman God Sol Invictus "the Unconquerable Sun" (Apollo).
—List of Roman gods and goddesses (simple.wikipedia.org)
—See: Emperor Constantine: Pagan, Christian, or first Pope? (biblicalcatholic.com)
—See also: Was the Emperor Constantine a True Christian or Was He a Secret Pagan? (ancient-origins.net) The article presents the controversial argument that there is substantial evidence that Constantine worshiped the Sun (Sol/Apollo) instead of Christ (the article presents no evidence that he worshiped Zeus).

All of the evidence for "sun worship" by Constantine can also conversely be interpreted as substantial evidence that Constantine displaced the Sun God with Christ, the "sun of righteousness" Malachi 4:2; Revelation 1:16.
See multiple commentaries on Malachi 4:2 and Revelation 1:16. Compare Psalm 84:11 and 1 Timothy 6:16.

• Does the name “Jesus” actually mean “Hail, Zeus”? (gotquestions.org) Article regarding false doctrine and the erroneous idea that the name of Jesus actually means “Hail, Zeus.” The author says it doesn't.
• Interlinear Greek and English text of Matthew 1:1
• Multiple commentaries on Matthew 1:1
• What is the connection between Jesus and Zeus? - Nairaland (nairaland.com) "Anyway, Christians have not been able to tell us the real meaning of the name Jesus." (Is that so! This statement is as least a falsehood, if not an outright Lie. See Defamation and Polemic. In any case, such writers do not know what they are talking about. Their baseless arguments and distortions of facts demonstrate conclusively that they cannot be trusted.)

See article Invincible ignorance.

Deuteronomy 24:1a

This indicates the two phases of the betrothal of a wife:

• the man's taking for himself a wife as her husband,
• and then after the year of betrothal, marrying her by taking her into his home and consummating their union.

The period of one year waiting establishes the legitimacy of children born to the couple's union. The law of Moses does not explicitly establish the period of betrothal for one year. It is an ancient custom considered to be "decent form", which is intended to establish the couple's moral self-control and decency, and to eliminate unpleasant gossip.
See Exodus 21:8-9; 22:16; Leviticus 19:20; Deuteronomy 20:7; 22:23-29; 28:15 and 28:30. Compare Hosea 2:19-20.

Another way of expressing this in more modern terms is to say the couple first legally got married, and then waited a full year before consummating their marriage by having legitimate sexual intercourse.

See the following articles:

• Jewish Encyclopedia - betrothal (איךסין in Talmudic Hebrew): By: Marcus Jastrow, Bernard Drachman (jewishencyclopedia.com)
• Jewish Virtual Library (article - Encyclopedia Judaica) - Betrothal (Heb. שִׁדּוּכִין, shidukkhin). Ben-Zion (Benno) Schereschewsky. (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)

Matthew 1:20

No text of the New Testament says that Joseph consulted anyone about the matter. Matthew indicates that he pondered the situation on his own. The fact that he is "a just man" and that he did not want to bring Mary into disrepute, "unwilling to put her to shame" (RSVCE), "not willing to make her a public example" (KJV), strongly suggests that Joseph confided his doubts to no one.

Modern writers of books and screen plays portraying Joseph as consulting his rabbi about what to do are offering their own eisegetical interpretations, most probably to increase the sense of drama for their audiences, interpretations which have no basis in scripture, but only reinforce ignorance of what the Bible actually says. These could just have easily shown Joseph reading the Torah instead, although as a devout Jew of mature years (hearing the yearly cycle of the daily reading of the Torah every year in the synagogue) he would have already known what Moses had written about what a man is to do when he "discovers some impropriety", "some unseemly thing in her" (WEB), "some indecency in her" (RSVCE), "some uncleanness in her" (KJV).

Joseph's dilemma is not how to obey the law of Moses without also condemning Mary to death by stoning, since no one had caught her committing fornication, or, more precisely, no one had caught her in the act of adultery, since she was already betrothed as his wife, but how best to dismiss her with the least possible decree of blame, without shaming her and causing her to be expelled from the synagogue
See Leviticus 20:10-21; Deuteronomy 22:13-29
in particular Deuteronomy 22:25-27 "But to the young woman you shall do nothing..."

The Latin form "Jesus" is from Greek "Iesous" from Aramaic "Yeshua" from Hebrew "Yehoshua" to the Latin form "Joshua" meaning "LORD-saved" (Yeho-shua)—see
Strong's number 3091
Strong's number 2424.

Matthew 1:23

Matthew quotes the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14.

(rendered less emphatically as simply "before").

"Before" is the archaic meaning of "till", "until"
Greek ἕως heos
see Strong's number 2193
even (until, unto), (hither-, un-, up) to

The word here signifies nothing about what occurs afterward, which is utterly unlike the meaning it has in modern American English usage, a meaning which does signify what occurs afterward.
compare:
Matthew 5:18
Matthew 10:23 RSV "before"
Matthew 16:28
Matthew 22:44 Will the Lord then no longer sit at his right hand?
Matthew 1:25 is a statement about both the virginal conception of Jesus in Mary's womb, without any human sexual intercourse, and the chastity of Joseph and Mary during the entire period of her pregnancy from the very moment of conception. It is not a statement about what Joseph did immediately after Jesus was born.

In A.D. 382/3 St. Jerome complained that Helvidius interpreted Matthew 1:25 ἕως heos to mean that Mary had other children, noting especially that this was an entirely "novel" interpretation, a new idea that had never been suggested before the fourth century.
The Perpetual Virginity of Blessed Mary: Against Helvidius, by St. Jerome (cin.org)
Moreover, it is utterly inappropriate to suggest from this text (Matthew 1:25) that Joseph "a just man", was eagerly awaiting an opportunity to have sex with Mary as soon as possible after Jesus was born.

In the sixteenth century the chief Protestant Reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, defended the traditional claim that Mary had only one child, Jesus.

• Martin Luther wrote that Mary was "a virgin before the conception and birth, she remained a virgin also at the birth and after it." (February 2, 1546 - Luther, Martin. Luther's Works. The American Edition. Jaroslav J. Pelikan & Helmut Lehmann, eds. 55 vols. St. Louis & Philadelphia: CPH & Fortress Press, 1955-1986. Vol. 22:214-215)
• Ulrich Zwingli wrote: "I speak of this in the holy Church of Zurich and in all my writings: I recognize Mary as ever virgin and holy." (January of 1528 - Disputation of Bern (Switzerland). The acts of the synod were officially printed at Basel, 1532, again in 1728 sad 1778. Both the original and a modernized text were issued by Lauener, Basel, 1830. Consult M. Kirchhofer, Berthold Haller, pp. 169 sqq., Zurich, 1828; Billeter, in the Berner Beitrge, ed. F. Nippold, Bern, 1884 (especially useful); E. Bloesch, Geschichte der schweizerisch-reformierten Kirchen, i, 74-81, Bern, 1898.
• John Calvin, in his Commentary on Matthew called them "pig-headed and stupid" who insistently interpret the gospel of Matthew 1:25 to imply that Mary had other children—"no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation." (Calvin's Commentary on Matthew 1:1-25).

The Greek word for "brother" adelphos and for "brothers" adelphoi all through the New Testament is always the same word, and it is used broadly

• in reference to male siblings born from the same womb, having the same mother,
• in reference to male relatives having different mothers but the same father who had married again, either a widower or a man who had dismissed a previous wife who had borne him a son or sons or a man who legally has more than one wife, men who are half-brothers (like the twelve patriarchs, sons of the four wives of Jacob/Israel, or the sons of David, and the sons of Solomon's 500 wives),
• in reference to male relatives having different sets of parents, both mothers and fathers, couples who are related by marriage, men who are close cousins,
• in reference to male members of the same family group or members of a larger clan,
• to male members of the same tribe in Israel,
• to all descendants of Jacob (who was given the name Israel),
• and in reference to men who, while physically unrelated, share a common bond of mutual affection, struggle, dedication, political affiliation, or religion.

Paul's letters to the men and women of the congregations of the churches also includes women as "brothers" in Christ, believers, using the same word adelphoi, making them equally heirs of salvation as sons of God by the adoption of saving grace through the blood of Jesus Christ. See
Romans 1:13; 7:1, 4; 8:12, 29; 10:1; 11:25; 12:1; 15:14-15, 30; 16:17;
1 Corinthians 1:10-11, 26; 2:1; 3:1, 3; 4:6; 10:1; 11:2, 33; 12:1; 14:6, 20, 26, 39; 15:1, 6, 50, 58; 16:15, 20;
2 Corinthians 1:8; 8:1; 13:11;
Galatians 1:2, 11; 3:15; 4:12, 28, 31; 5:11, 13; 6:18;
Ephesians 6:10, 23;
Philippians 1:12, 14; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:1, 8, 21-22;
Colossians 1:2; 4:15;
1 Thessalonians 1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25-27;
2 Thessalonians 1:3; 2:1, 13, 15; 3:1, 6, 13;
1 Timothy 4:6
2 Timothy 4:21;
Titus 2:1-5, 11-13; 3:1-2.
See also
Hebrews 2:11-13, 17-18; 3:1, 12; 7:5; 10:19-25; 13:22;
James 1:2, 16, 19-22; 2:1, 5, 14; 3:10-13; 4:11; 5:7, 9-10, 12, 19-20;
1 Peter 1:22; 3:8-9; 5:9;
2 Peter 1:10-11;
1 John 2:7; 3:13-14, 16;
Revelation 6:9-11; 12:10; 19:9-10.
See article The Translation of Αδελφος and Αδελφοι: A Response to Mark Strauss and I. Howard Marshall, by Michael D. Marlowe, 2004 (scribd.com)

Compare especially Galatians 3:25-29. See multiple commentaries on Galatians 3:26

Public worship readings of the Epistles of the New Testament often amplify the intended meaning of the sacred author by reading "brothers and sisters" for the implicitly inclusive adelphoi "brothers". This is for the benefit of those who are unaware of this fact, to correct any impression in the minds and hearts of the hearers that the teachings in the Epistles were addressed exclusively to men, except where women are explicitly mentioned and addressed.

Literally, the Greek adelphos and adelphoi both mean "of the womb"—"[males] of the [same] womb" (see Strong's number 80). However, the one hundred twenty "brothers", adelphoi, of Acts 1:15-16, "brethren" in Catholic Bibles and in the King James Version, could not all have been born from the same woman. The same applies to those entire bodies of the assemblies or congregations of the churches to whom Paul and James and Peter and John addressed their epistles, both men and women.

On this basis, according to the text of the Bible, Protestant Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians using the principle of sola scriptura cannot disprove the tradition and the dogmatic assertion of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches:

the dogmatic assertion that the brothers and sisters of Jesus were not born of Mary's womb—that the brothers of Jesus, James, Joses, Simon, and Judas (and his sisters), that the brothers of Jesus, James, Joseph, Simon, and Jude (and his sisters), were not born of Mary's womb—but were nevertheless closely related to him "according to the flesh" (Romans 1:3).

See discussion of both sides of the controversy based on scripture proof texts:

• Jesus' "Brothers" and Mary's Perpetual Virginity Mark J. Bonocore (ccel.com) The author's conclusions are strictly based on scripture alone.
• Mary's Perpetual Virginity by James Seghers and Totus Tuus Ministries (scborromeo.org)
• Encyclopedia of the Bible - Brothers of Jesus? (biblegateway.com) historical overview of the controversy both pro and con.
• Did Jesus Have Fleshly Half-Brothers?, by Dave Miller PhD. (apologeticspress.org) The author points out that the New Testament has a specific word for "cousins" anepsioi, and cites linguists who state unequivocally that adelphos "never" means "cousin" in the New Testament: Gehard Kittel, Colin Brown, John McClintock and James Strong, Jack P. Lewis, Henry Alford and others. "Indeed, the Greek language had a separate and distinct word for 'cousins'—anepsioi (e.g., Colossians 4:10)."

The word in Colossians is actually the singular form ἀνεψιὸς anepsios, and it occurs only once in the entire Bible: it is not one example among many. The linked article above by Michael D. Marlowe, "The Translation of Αδελφος and Αδελφοι", also clearly demonstrates on the basis of Greek linguistics and cultural usage, and from the Bible, that these words do include the meaning of "cousin/s" and "relative/s". Moreover, anepsios, anepsioi is not the only Greek term that can be translated "cousins", "kindred"—συγγενεῖς syngeneis also translates as "cousin, kinsman/woman".

See interlinear texts:

Colossians 4:10 ἀνεψιὸς anepsios
"Aristarchus my fellow-prisoner saluteth you, and Marcus, sister's son to Barnabas" KJV —"and Mark, the cousin of Barnabas" RSVCE

Luke 1:36 συγγενίς syngenis
"And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age" KJV —"And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son" RSVCE

Luke 1:58 συγγενεῖς syngeneis
"And her neighbors and her cousins heard" KJV —"And her neighbors and kinsfolk heard" RSVCE

These two were half-brothers

They were sons of the same mother, and sons of different fathers descended from David, according to Eusebius.
see Genealogy of Jesus

The father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel was the father of Abiud the brother of Rhesa the son of Zerubbabel.

The father of Eliakim, and Eliakim was the cousin of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the brother of Abiud.

"Behold, the virgin shall be with child..." WEB version

Literally, "the virgin shall conceive"

Matthew 1:23
—Matthew quotes Isaiah 7:14

Quotation from the Septuagint, not Hebrew

See LXX Esias 7:14
The LXX text reads "conceive in the womb". The Hebrew text does not have this phrase.
While Matthew does not include this phrase, "in the womb", many of the Church fathers saw in the LXX text an implication that "the conception did not occur as introduced from a source outside the womb", but that Mary herself by the power given her by the Holy Spirit coming upon her and the power of the Most High, the Word, overshadowing her, still remaining a virgin, without any penetration of her womb from outside, uniquely conceived the child by faith "within her womb" when she uttered her "fiat" (Latin, "let it be so")—"and the Word became flesh".

A parallel example of the divine creative power bestowed on a human being together with the authority to exercise it is found in Exodus 14:15-16, where God says to Moses,

"Why do you cry out to me? Tell the people of Israel to go forward. Lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it".

God told Moses to divide the sea. And he did.

"Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Stretch out your hand over the sea, that the water may come back upon the Egyptians, upon their chariots and upon their horsemen.' So Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to its wonted flow". Exodus 14:26-27

See also 1 Kings 17:1, where Elijah says,

"As the LORD the God of Israel lives, before whom I stand, there shall be neither dew nor rain these years, except by my word."

Compare Joshua 10:12-14. "...the LORD hearkened to the voice of a man."

See What if Mary said, "No"? Gary Zimak (catholicexchange.com)

This is also relevant to Matthew 18:15-20 and 16:18-19.

See the following articles:

• Augustus: Roman Emperor (britannica.com)
• Augustus (31 B.C. - 14 A.D.), Garrett G. Fagan, Pennsylvania State University (roman-emperors.org)
• Augustus (ancient.eu)
• Augustus - Livius (livius.org)
• Auguatus (ancientromanemperors.net)
• Roman Emperors Augustus (romanemperors.com) A list is included of Roman Emperors beginning with Augustus, not Julius Caesar.
• Who Was the Emperor Augustus? The First Emperor (Princeps) of Rome Was Augustus (thoughtco.com)
• Classical Corner: A Comet Gives Birth to an Empire Sarah K. Yeomans, From the September/October 2017 Biblical Archaeology Review (biblicalarchaeology.org)
• Augustus - People's Dictionary of the Bible (studylight.org)
• Augustus - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (studylight.org)
• Augustus (catholic.com)
• Augustus - Wikipedia (Wikipedia.org)

Luke 2:1 ἀπογράφεσθαι apographesthai (register regularly).

The Greek word ἀπογράφεσθαι refers to a census. The capitation tax (poll-tax) that was part of it was incidental to it. Furthermore, this word is a present infinitive, indicating not a one-of-a-kind event but a regular schedule, equivalent to the provision in the United States Constitution for a regular census.

The actual decree did not explicitly state that the "whole world" was to be enrolled, but that the sole remaining exemption granted to Judea under Herod was now rescinded. With this done away, the virtual effect was to subject all of the Roman world to direct taxation, without exception, whenever a census was to be conducted. Luke is expressing the arrogance of increasing Roman dominance and oppression of the whole world subject to Rome.

See Luke and the Census.

Judaea was not formally annexed to the Roman province of Syria before the death of Herod's son, Archelaus; for some years after this time Herod occupied the position of a rex socius. In the event of such an imperial registration being imposed on Judaea during his reign, it was most unlikely that Herod would have claimed exemption for his only nominally independent states. Herod was an attached dependent of the emperor, and in such a matter he would never have opposed the imperial will of his great patron.

Luke 2:4 amplified.

See Luke 2:39 "they returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth".
This internal textual evidence indicates that while all others went to their own cities, that is, to the cities and towns where they normally resided, to be enrolled, Joseph instead ("moreover also" Greek δὲ καὶ ) departed from his own city, Nazareth, to go to Bethlehem, to willingly do his part to insure and establish beyond any doubt, as a documented legal fact, that the child descended from David according to the flesh from the virgin Mary, would be born in Bethlehem, in fulfillment of the prophesy of Micah 5:2-4.

See interlinear text of Luke 2:4.

Luke 2:5 απογραψασθαι apographasthai (register).

Here the aorist infinitive απογραψασθαι (a difference of one Greek letter, α instead of ε in the middle of the word) clearly marks this as a one-of-a-kind event, not the regular event that the previous verse (Luke 2:1) describes.

Herod was king of Judea under the authority of the Roman empire and the emperor. As a client king he paid tribute to Rome, and levied his own taxes on the people in his kingdom; and the people also paid taxes to support the temple; they did not pay Roman tax-gatherers directly. But at the time of Jesus a decree of Augustus Caesar changed somewhat the system of tax-gathering by officially having the taxes in Judea levied by publicans and paid directly to the Roman government. This particular revision of the tax code exempting no people from paying taxes directly to Roman officials was empire-wide.

However, implementation of the decree altering the method of taxation of the inhabitants of the empire was not in every place immediate. According to the prudence of the local rulers and governors the actual payment of taxes directly to Roman tax-gatherers could be delayed. A preliminary census meanwhile established the number of citizens. In many cases considerable time may have elapsed between the enrollment and the subsequent collection of taxes based on the count. It is not improbable that years may have passed before the edict was carried fully into effect, to avoid uprisings. Augustus issued the decree, and the population was enrolled and counted, but the actual payment of taxes directly to Roman publicans did not take place until later, under Quirinius (Cyrenius).

Neither the first century historian Josephus in Antiquities 18.1.1 and Wars 7.8.1, nor the fourth century historian Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History Book 1, chapters 6 through 8, say anywhere in their histories that multitudes, forced by the required enrollment or tax, responded by moving to their "ancestral places of origin" or to their families' "ancient capitals" in order to be enrolled. They say no such thing. Medieval dramas and "pilgimmage plays" from the 12th century and afterward, as performed in European towns and villages even to this day, also have no such scenes. This baseless perception of the shifting of whole populations is an example of eisegesis, of "reading into the text" of Luke 2:3-5 a very recent and totally fictitious interpretation popularized by 20th century novelists, dramatists and screenwriters.

See the following articles:

• Roman Government and Tax Collection in Palestine (kretzmannproject.org)
• The Taxing of Augustus (biblestudytools.com)

See also Luke and the Census.

Luke 2:6

Greek Ἐγένετο Egeneto "It came to pass".

ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ en to einai autous ekei "in the [time] were they there".

The text does not say "the very hour/day/night when they arrived" (a popular image, based on fictitious dramatic exaggerations by commentators, artists, dramatists, and screenwriters of films); it says "while they were there", which indicates a period of time, days, weeks, even months "while they were there", Greek ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ ἐπλήσθησαν αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ τεκεῖν αὐτήν, "And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered".

See interlinear text of Luke 2:6.

(which openeth the womb)

The fullest meaning of this term includes both the fact that this child "opened the womb" and the formal legal designation of him as Mary's heir by law.
An only child is also called the "firstborn".
Compare Exodus 13:1-2, Deuteronomy 21:15-17, 25:6, Numbers 36:1-9.

Israelites who became unclean separated themselves and dwelt apart from others, usually in a place set apart for them to dwell in during the period of their uncleanness. Orthodox Jews observe this commandment even now.
See Leviticus 11 through 15.

The English word "unclean" normally denotes something "filthy, soiled, unsanitary". However, the biblical and Jewish understanding of ritual "uncleanness" generically denotes "separated", and means in general "that which should not be touched carelessly". Touching something diseased renders one "unclean". Touching something holy (such as the Torah scroll) renders the hands "unclean". Giving birth to a living child, and committing murder, both rendered one "unclean".
See Leviticus 4–6, 11–12, 15, 17; Numbers 4, 18; also the discussions in the Talmud regarding what is clean and what is unclean.

• Talmud (biblestudytools.com)
• Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Shabbath: Folios 13 and 14 includes the declaration, for the purpose of precaution against defiling what is holy, that any Book of the Scriptures renders terumah, the [elevated] offering, unclean.
  See What is Terumah? Rabbi Mendy Hecht (askmoses.com)

Usually shepherds in the Middle East keep watch at night in the open field when the ewes of the flock are birthing lambs, normally in the spring of the year, March/April.

Compare 2 Kings 6:15-17 and Luke 2:13-15.

The heavenly host, or "army", may have been visibly standing all around the shepherds on the ground as a vast armed force covering the fields and hills, the whole scene around them illuminated by brilliant light like daylight at noon. (See Isaiah 30:26, in the context of 30:18-26.)
If the word "heaven" means "the sky", then they vanished into the sky and the glorious light faded away.
If they simply vanished from where they were, they simply disappeared into the heavenly realm and the glorious light faded away.
Both readings of meaning are consistent with the Greek text.

An acquired cultural custom based on the imaginative representations of artists of more recent centuries shows the heavenly army as beardless feminine figures with long flowing hair dressed in flowing white robes with wings and sheet music and Irish harps and straight trumpets made of gold floating in the sky yards above the shepherds, and not rather as armored warriors standing in open ranks ready to serve and defend their king and Lord with swords drawn in salute and shouting their praise of acclamation to God. Appearing as a vast host (an "army") would be reassuring to the humble shepherds of a people oppressed by the armies of the Roman Empire under the Roman lord Caesar.

With the sole possible exception of Judges 13:20, and the cloud formations in 2 Maccabees 5:2-4, no passage of scripture in the Old or New Testaments represents angels as being seen up in the sky. The voices of angels have been heard from the heavens, but their visible manifestations were not seen on those occasions by persons awake, nor by persons who were not seeing a vision (no other witnesses), as either ascending to or descending from the sky or flying through the air. They stood on the ground, and they walked. Compare Genesis 18:1–19:23; 21:17; 22:11; 28:12; Isaiah 6:2; Ezekiel 1; Zechariah 5:9; 6:1-8; John 1:51; .

Luke 2:15a—WEB: "When the angels went away from them into the sky" Luke 2:15a

Literally, "When the angels went away from them into heaven." RSV
They did not go "up" into heaven, or "ascend" into the sky. They vanished into heaven out of their sight. Only if the Greek word for "heaven" here strictly means only the visible sky, and it has no other meaning, only then would this passage suggest that they flew, rose, or floated up. But the word οὐρανὸν "heaven" has a much broader meaning.
See

• interlinear Greek-English text of Luke 2:15
• multiple versions of Luke 2:15
• multiple commentaries on Luke 2:15

Compare the wording of multiple versions of Acts 1:9 and 10, and 2 Corinthians 12:2-4.
Paul in 2 Corinthians is not referring to the visible sky. Christianity teaches that Paradise is not in the sky, or above the earth's atmosphere, but is a reality in the spiritual realm.
See commentaries on verses 2 and 3.
According to Paul, Christian believers are even now seated with God in heavenly places ἐπουρανίοις epouraniois in Christ Jesus.
The Greek text is by no means figurative.

The biblical meaning of being in heavenly places ἐπουρανίοις (from οὐρανὸν ouranon) is "occupying positions of authority, ruling power".

For example, "They set their mouths in heaven" Psalm 73:9 NET, ASV, WEB, Young's Literal Translation
(see commentaries on Psalm 73:9);
also "spiritual wickedness in heavenly places" KJV "high places" ἐπουρανίοις epouraniois Ephesians 6:12
(see commentaries on Ephesians 6:12 and interlinear text of Ephesians 6:12).

Compare Revelation 12:7-9—Revelation 12:8 and commentaries on Revelation 12:8.
See also Luke 4:5-7—Luke 4:6 and commentaries on Luke 4:6.

Christians are "seated with God in heavenly places in Christ Jesus"—Christians have a share in the divine authority of Jesus the Lord and Savior as adopted sons of God.
See commentaries on Ephesians 2:6
and interlinear text.
See also Strong's number 2032.

Compare Hebrews 12:18-28 and John 14:23.

This is also relevant to Matthew 18:15-20 and 16:18-19.

A traditional Hebrew system of assigning numerical values to letters of an alphabet, Hebrew or Greek. See also numerology.

A portion of the genealogical record not in Matthew, supported by 1 Chronicles 3:11-12, in which Azariah corresponds to Uzziah. See 2 Chronicles 21:1-2, 21:16–22:1. Jehoram is Joram, whose youngest son, the only one left to him, was Jehoahaz. But instead of Jehoahaz, Joram's "youngest son" Ahaziah was made king in his place. This suggests that Ahaziah was Joram's son by levirate law according to Deuteronomy 25:5.

It is entirely possible that Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah were not directly descended from Joram by natural descent but instead are legally attributed to him as his descendants through levirate marriage, and that Joram was by nature in fact the actual father of Azariah/Uzziah, who became king after Amaziah; for 1 Chronicles lists "son", not "father"; and this would be an entirely reasonable answer to the objection that Matthew "seems to have omitted names" in the genealogy of fathers (not sons) set forth by him. In reality it is entirely possible that he was truthfully relating the actual patrilineal line of natural descent to Joseph while Luke relates the legal line of inheritance from Joseph back to Adam. This wholly reasonable speculation is entirely consistent with the conservative tradition that there is no error in the inspired scriptural record set down in Matthew's Gospel. Compare Genesis 38 in which Judah is the father of Perez and Zerah, who by the law of levirate marriage are accounted his grandsons, the legal heirs of his son Er, who was born to Judah by his wife Shua. As demonstated here in the text, including Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah in the numbering of the names does not alter the count of fourteen generations from David to the Babylonian captivity, since Manasseh was in fact carried away to Babylon, the first of four generations ending with Jechoniah and his brethren "about the time they were carried away to Babylon" (KJV). Matthew's summary account of the natural genealogical descent according to the flesh from David is numbered by names to an event as "from David to the carrying away into Babylon fourteen generations"; it is not numbered by name to name as "from David to Jechoniah fourteen generations".

Adapted from an ancient prayer of exorcism, and applied here to the holy circumcision of Jesus.

This line is added in celebratory imitation of the Jewish formal naming of a male child in the ceremony of the covenant of circumcision.

Hebrew "son [of the] Lord" (God).

The count of the generations excluding Mary is thirteen. Matthew says "fourteen generations".

Many commentators, reckoning only one generation from Joseph to Jesus, speculate either that all the extant texts of Matthew are defective, and reason that it is possible that very early scribal copyists inadvertently omitted a name from the list, and the error was preserved; or that Matthew himself made a mistake and was unaware that he had omitted a name; or they suggest that he knowingly asserted a count of fourteen, having only thirteen names of fathers, hoping that his readers and audience would not notice the discrepancy, or that they would simply dismiss it as unimportant. Thus, by excluding Mary as the thirteen generation after the deportation to Babylon, many commentators present the reader with an apparent error in the Bible text. They propose that the intended audience would not have been seeking a precise exactitude of historical detail, but would receive it as a form of poetic, even mythic, affirmation of the claim that Jesus was descended from David. This would support the liberalist view that the Christian writers falsely "made the facts fit" their claim that Jesus must be the Messiah and that they unashamedly indulged in historical revisionism to make their point.

The conservative scholar, believing in the integrity of the text, on the basis of the very earliest extant biblical manuscripts and the internal textual evidence, takes Mary as representing the thirteenth generation, younger than Joseph by about 25 years (the traditional period of a biblical "generation"), being accorded by Matthew the dignity of a true descendant of the house of David according to the flesh (see Romans 1:3). If Mary were 16 or 17 years old when Jesus was born, and a full generation younger than Joseph, then he, chosen to be the husband and guardian of a consecrated virgin, as a man of maturity, a "just man", would have been about 35-40 years old (not 60-80 years old as some artists have represented him).

See Luke 2:36-37

Taking the customary age that a young woman in Israel was married to a man, being betrothed by a solemn arrangement between their fathers, usually at the age of 13 or 14, and thus consummating the marriage after the betrothal period of 1 year at the age of 14 or 15, with the end of her virginity—then adding "7 years from her virginity", giving an age of 21 or 22, and adding "about" 84 years—the prophetess Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, was about 105 or 106 years old: 14 + 7 + 84 = 105; 15 + 7 + 84 = 106.

Since the text says Anna was "about" that age, she may have been at least 104 years old. If she was 12 years old at her betrothal—the age when she became a woman in Israel (today celebrated at the bat mitzvah, the ceremony when she is acknowledged to be a "daughter of the covenant")—in that case she would have been 13 years old at her marriage, and at least 104 years old when she saw Jesus, Mary and Joseph in the Temple.
See interlinear text of Luke 2:37. Literally, "she was a widow about eighty-four years".

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

Both Jupiter and comet Halley (12 B.C.) have been proposed.
See datings and footnotes in the table at Literalist Bible chronology: Aristobulus II 66–63 B.C.

When Herod was troubled people usually died.
See Josephus,

• Antiquities of the Jews Book 14, Chapter 9 through Book 17, Chapter 8 (Ant. 14.9.2 [158]–17.8.1 [191]);
• Wars of the Jews Book 1, Chapters 11 through 33 (Wars 1.11.1 [219]–1.33.8 [665])

An amplification of the text of Matthew 2:9-11 based on a syntactical and semantic structure. This parallels the ancient practice of appointing a chief herald or minister who went ahead of a traveling king to select and secure a temporary place of residence, and then stood ready, waiting to appear and formally welcome the ruler to the place prepared for him when he arrived.

Compare Acts 20:4-5

"who went on ahead and waited for us at Troas."
verse 5 (NAB)

"These went on and were waiting for us at Troas."
verse 5 (RSVCE)

"These going before tarried for us at Troas."
verse 5 (KJV)

See parallel language:

interlinear text of Matthew 2:9

interlinear text of Acts 20:5.

The structure of the text of Matthew is as follows:
1 The star stood over the place
2 they rejoiced when they saw the star
3 and they went into the house.
The text does not say

when they had heard the king, they rejoiced when they saw the star they had seen in the east going before them, and they followed it till it came to rest over the place where the child was.

While this is the popular reading of the text, that is not what it says. This is an example of eisegesis, of reading into the text what is not there. It does say:

The star stood over the place, and they rejoiced when they saw the star.

The following facts inform a reasonable understanding of the text:

• The star they had seen in the east was a sign to them that the king of Israel was born. (A star was not necessary to show them the way to Israel.)
• They went to Jerusalem and asked where he was.
• Rulers granted petition for an audience during the day, either in the morning or in the afternoon.
• The chief priests and scribes of the people cited Micah 5:2: "Bethlehem, in the land of Judah".
• The location of Bethlehem was known: the ancient road south out of Jerusalem was the way, also called "the Bethlehem road", a journey of about 3 miles. (A star was not necessary to show them the way.)
• The road ran west of Bethlehem, and a turn to the left took the traveler a short distance east up into the village.
• Travel at night in that region was and is still dangerous.
• Stars are not visible in daylight.
• The wise men never say that they follow a star.

If they left Jerusalem after midafternoon, and arrived just outside Bethlehem immediately after sunset, or if they had paused in their journey there outside the town to await a sign, when the stars appeared, the one they had seen in the east and would have instantly recognized also appeared, in the eastern sky, where it rested, positioned in line-of-sight just above the house where the child was, like a man standing on the roof. "When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And when they were come into the house they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down and worshiped him."

They found him with Mary in a house, not a stable.
The popular image of the shepherds and wise men together worshiping the new-born infant Jesus in a stable has no basis in scripture, and is another example of eisegesis. Christians need to guard against carelessly degrading historical reality into sentimental symbolic myth having no basis in fact. Liberal scholars fasten on such popular representations as false evidence that Christianity is a "fabric of lies". Christians, however, know better, and rather understand the symbolism of the Christmas creche in accordance with Psalms 148 and 117.

This is the meaning of the Greek word παιδίον paidion, not a baby.
See Strong's number 3813: "a childling, a half-grown boy, (little, young) child".

If the star seen in the east appeared when Jesus was born, he was about 2 years old and a toddler, according to the time which Herod had ascertained from the wise men. Matthew 2:16.

Matthew 2:16

"sent forth, and slew" (KJV) in this context is seen as a parallel allusion to the text of Wisdom 11:17-19.

Catholic and Orthodox readers of Matthew 2:16 see in this text of the Book of Wisdom an allusion to King Herod who "did not lack the means to send upon them" merciless soldiers "full of rage" to "exterminate men", like the vicious beasts mentioned in the parallel language of this passage in Wisdom 11:17-19.

See Josephus, Antiquities, Book 17, Chapters 8 through 13 (sacred-texts.com); War, Book 2, Chapters 1 through 8 (sacred-texts.com).

"Nazarene" is a paronomasia (biblical word-play) on "Nazareth", "netzer" (branch), and "nazirite" (separated one).
See Strong's numbers 3478, 3479, 3480; also 5342 netzer (branch), 6780 tsemach (Branch), 5139 naziyr, nazir
compare Numbers 6:1-8, Judges 13:5-7, Amos 2:11, Luke 22:18 (nazirite vow?)

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

This phrase explicitly attributes to Jesus, he being the incarnate Word of God, the same factual acknowledgement that Paul gave Timothy regarding his knowledge of the holy scriptures (2 Timothy 3:15a).

These passages are inserted here in the episode of the finding of Jesus in the temple in Luke as representative of Jesus' astonishing intelligence and self-understanding, and also in a more general sense as an illustrative example of the kind of brilliant insight and penetrating query characteristic of intelligent students who frequently astonish their instructors.

Every Jewish boy aged twelve was accounted a man in Israel with the inherent right to comment on the scriptures and to participate in debates with the rabbis, scribes and priests of his people over what is permitted by the law. This kind of debate over the meaning of the Tanakh is found represented all through the traditional teachings collected in the Talmud of the Jews.

See Matthew 22:41-46, Mark 12:35-37a, Luke 20:41-44, Psalm 110:1.
Jesus said, "How can they say...", indicating this is a traditional teaching.

Joseph, son of David, the carpenter and husband of Mary, is not found active in the canonical Gospels after the account of the finding of Jesus in the temple.

According to the constant tradition of Christianity, Joseph apparently died a peaceful death in the presence of his family and relatives and friends shortly before Jesus was baptized by John in the Jordan. Like Moses, the Lord buried him, and no one knows the place of his burial to this day. (Deuteronomy 34:5-6)
Compare Genesis 39:4, 49:26, Sirach 49:15. These verses have been seen as foreshadowing the honor God bestowed on Joseph, the husband of Mary, as the one out of all mankind to be chosen and entrusted by God as the steward of God's house with the care and protection of Jesus and Mary. See 1 Timothy 3:15.

The additional words "began his ministry" (RSV) "began his teaching" (WEB) are not found in the extant Greek manuscript texts, and are not included in the Douay-Rheims and King James versions, but have been inserted by translators of modern versions according to their interpretive eisegesis of the text, which is not a truly critical exegesis of its meaning. See interlinear text of Luke 3:23.

The phrase "when he began" as it appears in the apostolic Greek text—23 Καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα ἀρχόμενος,—exactly parallels those formal OT statements of succession which give the age of the son on the death of his father.
compare:
2 Samuel 2:10 "forty years old when he began"
2 Samuel 5:4 "thirty years old when he began"
1 Kings 14:21 "forty-one years old when he began"
1 Kings 22:42 "thirty-five years old when he began"
2 Kings 8:17 "thirty-two years old when he began"
2 Kings 8:26 "twenty-two years old when he began"
2 Kings 11:21 "seven years old when he began"
2 Kings 14:2 "twenty-five years old when he began"
2 Kings 15:2 "sixteen years old when he began"
2 Kings 16:2 "twenty years old when he began"
2 Kings 18:2 "twenty-five years old when he began"
2 Kings 21:1 "twelve years old when he began"
2 Kings 21:19 "twenty-two years old when he began"
2 Kings 22:1 "eight years old when he began"
2 Kings 23:31 "twenty-three years old when he began"
2 Kings 22:36 "twenty-five years old when he began"
2 Kings 24:8 "eighteen years old when he began"
2 Kings 24:18 "twenty-one years old when he began"
Luke 3:23 (thirty years of age) "when he began".

David is represented in 2 Samuel as thirty-seven years old when "they anointed David king over Israel" and "he reigned over all Israel and Judah"; but it also says most explicitly that "David was thirty years old when he began to reign"—"At Hebron he reigned over Judah seven years and six months; and at Jerusalem he reigned over all Israel and Judah thirty-three years." See 2 Samuel 5:1-5. The formal declaration in the narrative of David's age when he first began to rule over Judah is only stated after King David's anointing over all Israel and Judah. Luke parallels the royal text of the fifth chapter of 2 Samuel by similarly declaring formally the thirty-year age of Jesus "when he began" only after he was anointed with the Holy Spirit and publicly proclaimed by God the Father as his Son at the Jordan River. All of these textual indicators strongly suggest that Jesus was thirty years old when Joseph died and he legally began to succeed him in the line of King David. Only afterward was Jesus baptized by John in the Jordan and anointed by the Holy Spirit and acclaimed by God the Father as his beloved Son.
See the following:

• Multiple commentaries on Luke 2:1 (biblehub.com)
• Multiple commentaries on Luke 3:1 and 3:23 (biblehub.com)
• The Priene [Calendar] Inscription (earlywritings.com)
• The Kingly Messiah - David (heraldmag.org)

Some of the names in the genealogies of Matthew and Luke are variously translated and therefore do not appear the same in comparative parallel readings of the different versions. The genealogy presented here represents the recent World English Bible translation, because it is in the public domain.
Compare multiple translations of Matthew 1:3, 7-8, 10-12, and of Luke 3:27, 30, 32-33, 38.

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

See the following articles

• The Parthians (wfltd.com)
• Parthian Empire (crystalinks.com)

Compare Revelation 16:12 and Matthew 24:6.
See Book of Revelation: The Parthian Attack.

The most generally accepted view for the date of 15 Tiberius is A.D. 28-29.

Based on Luke's probable use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar it can be most probably established that John the Baptist began his ministry between 20 October of 27 and 9 October of 28 as the "fifteenth year of Tiberius." John began his ministry after the arrival of Pontius Pilate, by the fall of 27, and baptized Jesus soon thereafter. See the following three articles:

• New Testament Chronology, Kenneth Frank Doig: Chapter 12 The Fifteenth Year of Tiberius (nowoezone.com)
• Tiberius - Year 15, Ron Wallace (biblefragrances.com)
• On the 15th Year of Tiberius Caesar and Inclusive Counting, by Ernest L. Martin (hope-of-israel.org)

See also the following general articles:

• Tiberius (Conservapedia)
• Tiberius: Roman Emperor (britannica.com)
• Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) Garrett G. Fagan, Pennsylvania State University (roman-emperors.org)
• Tiberius Donald L. Wasson (ancient.eu)
• Tiberius - Livius (livius.org)
• Tiberius (ancientromanemperors.net)
• Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar 14-37 A.D. (romanemperors.com)
• Facts About the Roman Emperor Tiberius, by N. S. Gill (thoughtco.com)
• New Testament Political Figures: The Evidence Lawrence Mykytiuk (biblicalarchaeology.org)
• Tiberius - Hastings Dictionary of the New Testament (studylight.org)
• Tiberius - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (studylight.org)
• Tiberius (catholic.org)
• Tiberius - Wikipedia (wikipedia.org)

Matthew 3:3

Matthew quotes Isaiah 40:3.

Quotation from the Septuagint text, not Hebrew.

See LXX Isaiah 40:3 scroll down the page to the text.

See multiple commentaries on Matthew 3:3

Luke 3:5-6

Luke quotes Isaiah 40:4-5.

Quotation from the Septuagint text, not Hebrew.

See LXX Isaiah 40:4-5 scroll down the page to the text.

See multiple commentaries on Luke 3:5 and 6

John himself declares that his baptism and Christian Baptism are not the same.
See Matthew 28:19 and John 3:6.

John does not say that those he baptized are born again in baptism by the Holy Ghost (KJV). See Acts 19:3-4, Colossians 2:12, 1 Peter 3:21 "even baptism doth also now save us" (KJV), not by the washing of the body, but by washing away sin according to Acts 22:16: "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins" (KJV).
See especially Ephesians 5:26-27 "sanctified and cleansed by the washing of water with the word".

• What was the meaning and importance of the baptism of John the Baptist? (gotquestions.org) The article says that the baptism of John was different in purpose from Christian baptism.

"Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross completely washes away our sins, and we are raised to new life empowered by the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 5:17–21; Romans 6:1–11). With John’s baptism, a person repented of sin and was therefore ready to place his faith in Jesus Christ."

• Was John the Baptist's baptism Christian baptism? (qa.answers.com) The article says "Yes he was actually the first one to give [sic] christian baptism ...It is a sign of obedience."
• Was John's baptism different from Jesus' baptism? - Answer (lavistachurchofchrist.org) "Yes, people who had been baptized by John were baptized again into Jesus' baptism. Much later Paul runs across twelve men who had been baptized by John, but not into Jesus' baptism." (Acts 19:1-5)
• Infant Baptism (catholic.com) John's baptism did not confer the grace of salvation to eternal life, because it was not a sacrament.

This reading is according to DR KJV RSV
"whose winnowing fork is in his hand" WEB

The fan or fork here is a winnowing fan, a broad flat blade or paddle at the end of a handle, like a flat shovel, or a long-handled metal or wooden fork, used on the open air threshing floor as a tool for scooping up the reaped stalks of grain and tossing it into the air. The breeze or wind blowing over the threshing floor blew away the chaff, separating it from the more substantial grain which fell back onto the threshing floor and remained. The accumulated grain was gathered up and stored, and the accumulated pile of blown and drifted chaff was swept away from the threshing floor and burned for fuel.

A reference to the temple, first built on the site of the threshing floor of Araunah the Jubusite, also called Ornan. See
2 Samuel 24:18-25
1 Chronicles 21:18-22:1

What may appear to the reader to be an unnecessary duplicate repetition of the text here, first from Luke 3:7-8 and then from Matthew 3:7-12, is not an editorial error due to a failure to redact them into one, but are presented distinctly to represent the constant repetition of the urgent message of John, to the multitudes in general, and to the Pharisees and Sadducees in particular. And the subtle differences in narration between them are also preserved, so that nothing is omitted.

—in Gregorian Calendar click the cursor in the day, month, or year fields, to highlight selection,
then use [Backspace ←] and [←] [→] right and left arrow keys in the day and year fields,
and [Backspace ←] and [ ↑ ] [ ↓ ] up and down arrow keys in the month field,
then click on [Calculate].

compare 1 Kings 18:41-46. Elijah ran before Ahab's chariot from Carmel to Jezreel.

The word "tempt" is normally understood as "entice", but it also includes the meanings of "test" and "trial", to "prove" (true) and also even (to) "provoke".

Jesus could not be enticed, but he was frequently tested and provoked. Compare Exodus 17:2 and Malachi 3:15. Here he was proved true. The Devil's temptation of Jesus was not directed solely to his human nature, but more completely to God in his divine nature, to provoke the Almighty Lord to accede to Satan's demand to be recognized as equal to God, to be acknowledged as having a "legitimate" claim to worship, to have his own power respected and feared, to be independent of God's absolute, sovereign will.

Luke 4:8 (WEB).

This phrase is according to the Greek Textus Receptus Luke 4:8b Ὑπαγε ὀπίσω μου, Σατανᾶ· (Σατανᾶ, Satana, Satan) as translated into English by the World English Bible, the King James Version, and Young's Literal Translation (YLT). See multiple translations of Luke 4:8.

(or "approached near") indicated by the Greek προσέρχομαι proserchomai "come".
See Strong's number 4334 "came to him"

The word "again" is a key internal textual indication suggesting to the conservative redactor of these texts in Matthew and Luke that the devil had actually tried each temptation twice. See Strong's number 3825 palin (repeat, oscillating repetition) "again". Many scholars read it as simply meaning "moreover", as expressing an emphasis, a rebuttal, "but then again", rather than as a repetition.

The lesson here is one of persistent resistance to the devil. This would most simply explain the difference in sequence in each of the accounts of the temptation in the wilderness. (See Occam's razor.)
Compare the feeding of the five thousand and the feeding of the four thousand as similar accounts of different but similar events of the feeding of a multitude with loaves and fishes, with only some differences in detail distinguishing them.

Hebrews 1:5-6

According to the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses, God made the Archangel Michael, one of the "sons of God", his incarnate Son, making him Jesus Christ. Then when his ministry was completed, he returned to heaven and resumed his position as Michael the Archangel, a son of God (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). See

• Is Jesus Michael the Archangel? - Jehovah's Witnesses Beliefs (standequipped.com)
• commentaries on Hebrews 1:5 and 6

Greek αγγλος agglos, pronounced anglos (the double gamma γγ according to Greek grammar is articulated as νγ "ng", as if it were spelled ανγλος. English angel, means "messenger".
"He makes his messengers winds, and his servants flames of fire".
This is not the same as saying, "He makes winds his messengers, and flames of fire his servants". That is an eisegetical reading; it is not what the text says.

The word of the Gospel blows away the chaff of false teachings, and those who proclaim the Gospel handed down from the apostles are blazing with the truth that consumes the errors of the wicked, reducing them to nothing. Psalm 1:4-6; Malachi 4:1-3 / 3:19-24; Acts 6:10; 2 Corinthians 10:3-6.

Text from Hebrews 1:5-14, quoting Psalm 2:7; 2 Samuel 7:14; [Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX]; Psalm 97:7; 104:4; 45:6-7; [Psalm 102:25-26 LXX] and 102:27; Psalm 110:1.

—The author of Hebrews quotes LXX Deuteronomy 32:43 and LXX Psalm 102:25-26.

Quotations from the Septuagint (LXX), not Hebrew.

See multiple commentaries on Deuteronomy 32:43, and multiple commentaries on Psalm 102:25 and 26.

See multiple commentaries on:

Hebrews 1:6 and 10, 11, 12, 13

See LXX Deuteronomy 32:43 scroll down to v. 43, and LXX Psalm 101:25-27 / 102:25-27 scroll down to text, and verses 25-27.
(Septuagint LXX text at biblestudytools.com does not include LXX Book of Psalms.)

See Septuagint.