✪ h11 in OT, g3 in NT. "Abbadon is a Hebrew name for the unbeliever’s side of Sheol or Hades." Ref-0219, p. 748.
✪ "In all four Gospels, finally, Jesus reveals a uniquely intimate relationship with his Father as characterized by the Aramaic word ‘Abba’ (almost, but not quite ‘Daddy’), which would have horrified the Jews, who were accustomed to approaching God with a greater sense of distance and respect." Ref-1282, p. 202
✪ "Abiathar is not Ahimelech (Mark 2:26 X 1 Samuel 21:1) . . . "How he entered the house of God (making Abiathar high priest) and ate the consecrated bread, which only priests are permitted to eat, and shared it with those who were with him.” My rendering is rather different than the ‘in the days of Abiathar the high priest’ of the AV, NKJV and NIV. We are translating three Greek words that very literally would be ‘upon Abiathar high-priest’ (but the preposition here, epi, is the most versatile of the Greek prepositions, and one of its many meanings/uses is 'toward'―the standard lexicon, BDAG, lists fully eighteen areas of meaning, quite apart from sub-divisions). When we go back to the Old Testament account, we discover that David actually conversed with Ahimelech, Abiathar’s father, who was the high priest at that moment (1 Samuel 21:1-9). Within a few days Saul massacred Ahimelech and 84 other priests (1 Samuel 22:16-18), but his son Abiathar escaped and went to David, taking the ephod with him (1Samuel 22:20-23; 23:6). That David could use it to inquire of the LORD rather suggests that it had to be the ephod that only the high priest wore, since only that ephod had the Urim and Thummim (1 Samuel 23:9-12; cf. Numbers 27:21, Ezra 2:63). That ephod was to a high priest like the crown was to a king; so how could Abiathar have it? The Text states that David’s visit filled Ahimelech with fear, presumably because he too saw Doeg the Edomite and figured what would happen. Now why wasn’t Abiathar taken with the others? I suggest that Ahimelech foresaw what would happen (Doeg probably took off immediately, and Ahimelech figured he wouldn't have much time), so he deliberately consecrated Abiathar, gave him the ephod, and told him to hide―he probably did it that very day (once the soldiers arrived to arrest Ahimelech and the other 84, it would be too late). Abiathar escaped, but carried the news of the massacre with him; only now he was the high priest. Putting it all together, it was David’s visit that resulted in Abiathar’s becoming high priest prematurely, as David himself recognized, and to which Jesus alluded in passing (which is why I used parentheses)." Ref-1504, p. 216-217.
✪ ". . . scholars have offered their interpretations for the ‘abomination of desolation’ as a past fulfillment. I will simply list these with a brief observation about each: 1) The Statue of Titus erected on the side of the desolated Temple (popular in Patristic times) is more likely a tradition that developed from the memory of Roman standards erected in the Temple area by order of Titus. 2) 2) Statues erected by Pilate and Hadrian. All we know for certain is that Pilate brought Roman standards into the Temple, which had medallions with an image of the emperor. As to the site of the equestrian statue, John Wilkinson argues that it would not have been at the site of the Temple itself, but that this area would have remained free of such objects so that the site could later be rebuilt by the Jews as a show of Roman benevolence. 3) Caligula’s attempted desecration. The events of A.D. 33-40 are believed to have created a fear that although Caligula had attempted to erect a pagan statue in the Temple and failed, another might succeed. However, this whole theory has been shown to be implausible on textual and historical grounds [see footnote 44 in this text]. 4) The invading Roman army of A.D. 70. If the Roman invasion that desecrated and destroyed the Temple in A.D. 70 was the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation, we are left without a complete correspondence with Daniel 9:27, for both the covenant is missing and the destruction of the desolator would have to be construed differently." Ref-0146, pp. 489-480. "Preterists suggest that the abomination of desolation was one of four possible events. First, they say it could have been the occupation of the temple courts by murderous zealots. These zealots even invaded the holy of holies, placed an imposter in office as high priest, and ordained unqualified misfits to the priesthood. Josephus referred to this in The Jewish Wars. Second, preterists say the abomination of desolation may have been the intrusion into Jerusalem by Idumeans (at the invitation and aid of the zealots), who slaughtered many people, including the chief priest Annus. (This polluted the temple courts with blood and took place before A.D. 70, probably in A.D. 68.) Third, preterists say it is possible that the abomination of desolation refers to the capture and burning of the temple by the Romans. Torching the temple, the Roman soldiers set up their standards opposite the eastern gate and offered sacrifices. DeMar says, “The Roman abomination hypothesis is the most popular since it parallels the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes.” Although Demar felt any or all of the preceding views are possible, he prefers a fourth explanation of the abomination of desolation. He believes it describes the corrupton of the temple by the abominations and defilements of apostate Israel." Stanley D. Toussaint, "A Critique of the Preterist View of the Olivet Discourse," Ref-0200, Vol. 161 No. 644, October-December 2004, 469-490 pp. 479-480. "The Abomination of Desolation referred to in Dan 9:27; 12:11 and in the Synoptic Apocalypse awaits an eschatological fulfillment in the Antichrist. It may be asked whether Hippolytus did not also interpret the “Abomination” of Matt 24:15 (Mark 13:14) in relation to the destruction of the temple by the Romans in AD 70. It appears that in a proper sense he did not. The phrase of Luke 21:20, “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies,” is understood to prophesy the siege of Vespasian against the city, but Hippolytus clearly distinguishes Luke’s account from the eschatological perspective of Matthew and Mark." David G. Dunbar, Hippolytus of Rome and the Eschatological Exegesis of the Early Church, Westminster Theological Journal Volume 45 Number 2 (Fall 1983) pp. 333-334. "But what we would emphasize at this point is that the section beginning “When ye shall see” (Matthew 24:12; Mark 13:14; Luke 21:20) manifestly refers, in each account, to one and the same event the approaching destruction of Jerusalem. “The abomination of desolation standing in the holy place” (Matthew and Mark) means the same thing as do the words “Jerusalem” the holy city “encompassed with armies” (the armies being the “abomination” which was to make the place a “desolation,” Luke 21:20)." Ref-0896, p. 85. "That the words When ye see the abomination of desolation stand in the holy place do not mean the setting up of an idol in the inner sanctuary, further appears by consideration of the fact that it was when the disciples should see the thing referred to, that they were to know it was time for them to flee. Manifestly the setting up of an idol in the inner sanctuary could not be a Sign to the Lord’s people to flee. That would be a thing which only the priests could see. And it could not possibly be a sign to them that be in Judea. Whereas the invading armies would be a sight which all could see." Ref-0896, p. 91. "Some rabbis believed that the abomination that makes desolate (Dan. 9:27) referred to Hadrian’s erection of a pagan temple on the site of the Jewish template after the Bar-Kokbha war (Rashi)." J. Randall Price, Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, Rabbinic Interpretation, Ref-0114, 78-80, p. 80. "In our Lord’s great prophecy which refers to the “abomination of desolation” spoken of by Daniel, the prophet, we find the Greek word “Bdelugma” translated “abomination,” to mean an idol, an image for worship, and therefore an “abomination.” Probably that idol, or image, was the effigy of Caesar on the Roman standard which the soldiers worshiped by imperial command. There is a thrilling account by Josephus, in Jewish Antiquities, of the revolt of the Jews because Pilate had the legion from Caesarea to bring these idol standards and to “introduce” them by might into the holy city. Inasmuch as the desolation of Jerusalem was to be accomplished by Roman armies, and as these armies carried standards on which were idol effigies of Caesar, we can see why Daniel would call the Roman standard an abomination of desolation." An Interpretation of the English Bible by Benajah Harvey Carroll (1843-1914), 1913; 1942 (17 Volumes), Swordsearcher. "Hadrian recaptured Jerusalem in A.D. 135 and issued an edict banishing all Jews from Jerusalem on pain of death. Hadrian also destroyed whatever had been rebuilt on the Temple Mount. To make the destruction complete, he built a temple on the Mount to the Roman trinity: Juno, Jupiter, and Minerva. According to the fourth-century Christian scholar Jerome, Hadrian also placed a statue of himself directly over the site of the Holy of Holies." Ref-1326, p. 106. "In the comments in the pivotal chapter of Matthew 24, he states that "Our Lord appears to have purposely mingled the prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and his own second coming." Spurgeon understands most of the prophecies to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. He understood that many Christians were in Jerusalem at the time prior to its destruction and the main thrust of the prophecies of Jesus were to warn them as to when to flee the city. Of Matthew 24:15-21 and the "abomination of desolation," he states this: This portion of our Saviour's words appears to relate solely to the destruction of Jerusalem. As soon as Christ's disciples saw "the abomination of desolation," that is, the Roman ensigns, with their idolatrous, "stand in the holy place," they knew that the time for their escape had arrived; and they did flee to the mountains." -- Dennis Swanson, Charles H. Spurgeon and Eschatology: Did He Have a Discernible millennial Position?, pp. 35-36. [http://www.spurgeon.org/eschat.php]. See 20161124144019.pdf. "Since the abomination of desolation awaited a future fulfillment in the time of Jesus (Matt 24:15), this rules out a second-century BC fulfillment by Antiochus." -- Mark A. Hassler, The Identity of the Little Horn in Daniel 8: Antiochus IV Epiphanes, Rome, or the Antichrist?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 33-44, p. 39. See 20160522181858.pdf "Those who see “the abomination of desolation” fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans appeal to Luke 21:20. They hold that the wording “when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is night” explains the desolation of Mat. 24:15. However, this argument misses the mark. Luke 21 does not record the same discourse as Matt. 24. It precedes the Matthew account. It was given in the temple (Luke 21:1), whereas Mat. 24:12 was given after “He went out and departed the Temple” (Mat. 24:1) “as He sat upon the mount of Olives” (Mat. 24:3). The discourse in Luke 21 coincides with Mat. 24 as far as v. 11. That is, Luke 21:7-11 corresponds with Mat. 24:3-8. Then the two portions diverge. Luke 21:12 specifically states that the rest of the discourse is a retrospect--that the Lord goes back to what happens before all the things He has just spoken about. Matthew 24:9 clearly indicates that in His second discourse He continues His prophecy of future events, without any retrospect. This yields two important conclusions. First, in view of this, it is impossible to equate the Roman armies compassing Jerusalem to destroy it with “the abomination of desolation.” Second, the prophecy of “the abomination of desolation” remained to be fulfilled after the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans." Ref-1363, p. 4.
✪ "Syrian authorities under Antiochus IV erected an altar to Zeus in the Temple (ca. 167 B.C.). 1 Macc. 1:54 characterizes this as ‘a desolating sacrilege’ (cf. 2 Macc. 6:1-5). . . . The emperor Caligula’s plan to erect a statue of himself in the Temple (ca. A.D. 40) may have been seen by some as at least a partial fulfillment of this ‘prophecy,’ but the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, both written more than twenty years later, associate the abomination with the events to precede the expected return of Jesus as ‘Son of man’ and evidently regard it as yet to be fulfilled (Matt. 24:15-21; Mark 13:14-19)." Ref-0131, s.v. Abomination That Makes Desolate. "In my own study of the phrase in the context of Temple desecration I discovered the phrase served as a technical reference to the introduction of an idolatrous image or an act of pagan sacrilege within the Sanctuary that produces the highest level of a ceremonial impurity, Temple profanation." Randall Price cited in Thomas Ice, "An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25 -- Part XIII", Ref-0181, May 2003, p. 6. "Therefore the abomination of desolation, which the reader is to understand, includes the following elements: 1. It occurs in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem (Dan. 11:31; 2Th. 2:4). 2. It involves a person setting up a statue in place of the regular sacrifice in the holy of holies (Dan. 11:31; 12:11; Rev. 13:14-15). 3. This results in the cessation of the regular sacrifice (Dan. 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). 4. There will be a time of about three-and-a-half years between this event and another event and the end of the time period (Dan. 9:27; 12:11). 5. It involves an individual setting up a statue or image of himself so that he may be worshipped in place of God (Dan. 11:31; 2Th. 2:4; Rev. 13:14-15). 6. The image is made to come to life (Rev. 13:14). 7. A worship system to this false god is thus inaugurated (2Th. 2:4; Rev. 13:14-15). 8. At the end of this time period the individual who commits the act will himself be cut off (Dan. 9:27)." Thomas Ice, "An Interpretation of Matthew_24-25 -- Part XIII", Ref-0181, May 2003, p. 6. "In my own study of the phrase ‘abomination of desolation’ in the context of Temple desecration I discovered the phrase served as a technical reference to the introduction of an idolatrous image or an act of pagan sacrilege within the sanctuary that produces the highest level of ceremonial impurity, Temple profanation." Randal Price, "Historical Problems with a First-Century Fulfillment", Ref-0209, p. 387. Irenaeus sees the abomination yet future: "the Father of our Lord, by whose directions the temple which is at Jerusalem was constructed for those purposes which I have already mentioned; in which [temple] the enemy shall sit, endeavouring to show himself as Christ, as the Lord also declares: “But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, which has been spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let him that readeth understand), then let those who are in Judea flee into the mountains; and he who is upon the house-top, let him not come down to take anything out of his house: for there shall then be great hardship, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Ref-0537, p. 553. "The earliest clear Christian references to Daniel 9:24-27 is by Irenaeus in his Against Heresies (ca. A.D. 180). In Book 5.25.3 Irenaeus clearly linked the prophecy of the little horn in Daniel 7 to 2 Thessalonians 2, and he indicated that the Antichrist will be in power three and a half years. In 5.25.2 he quoted Matthew 24:15 and stated that this will be fulfilled with the Antichrist literally going into the Jewish temple for the purpose of presenting himself as Christ. In 5.25.4 Irenaeus has an extended discussion about the Antichrist, which culminates in his linking this with Daniel 9:27. “And then he [Daniel] points out the time that his [Antichrist’s] tyranny shall last, during which the saints shall be put to flight, they who offer a pure sacrifice to God: ‘And in the midst of the week,’ he says, ‘the sacrifice and libation shall be taken away, and the abomination of desolation [shall be brought] into the temple: even unto the consummation of the time shall the desolation be complete.’ Now three years and six months constitute the half-week.” . . . Although Irenaeus did not give any calculation of the seventy weeks, it is clear from his writings that the seventy weeks were not completely fulfilled in the first coming of Jesus Christ, for Irenaeus said that the half a week in verse 27 is the three and a half years when the Antichrist will reign (5.25.4)." J. Paul Tanner, Is Daniel’s Seventy-Weeks Prophecy Messianic? Part 1 Ref-0200, Vol. 166 No. 662 April-June 2009, 181:200, pp. 185-186. "The difference between the way Matthew describes this sign to flee, and the way Luke describes it, is accounted for by the fact that Matthew’s Gospel was written primarily for circulation among the Palestinian Jews. We can understand, therefore, why the Holy Spirit inspired him to use an expression which would not be understood except by the disciples. But no such reason would exist in the case of Luke’s Gospel, he being the companion of Paul in his journeys through the Greek provinces, and his Gospel having been written primarily for Gentile converts. Matthew and Mark have the significant admonition, Whoso readeth let him understand. But in Luke, where the meaning is stated in clear words, that admonition is not found." Ref-0896, p. 91. "On December 6, 167 B.C., Antiochus polluted the sanctuary’s altar by sacrificing unclean animals such as a pig and by placing in the temple an idolatrous statue of the Greek god Zeus Olympias that bore an image of Antiochus’s own face. This was in keeping with the coinage he issued which showed Antiochus enthroned with the words, “King Antiochus, god manifest.”" Ref-1326, p. 63. "Some may ask, What is the Abomination of Desolation? I cannot tell you positively; Scripture has not clearly revealed it. It seems to be identified with the image of the Beast set up by the false prophet, as predicted in Rev. 13, and which he will cause all men to worship—all who have not the seal of God." Ref-0770, p. 55. "Thus the key to understanding the term "abomination of desolation" is to be found in the prophecy of Daniel where there are three, or possibly four, references to it: Dan. 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; and possibly 8:13. The various Hebrew and Greek terms rendered abomination and abominable carry the idea of something abhorrent, detestable, disgusting, foul, horrible, and impure, and therefore repugnant and unlawful on that account. . . . One of the Hebrew words translated “abomination,” shiqquts, is most frequently used as a description of heathen gods. For example, in 2Chr. 15:8 it is translated “abominable idols,” while in 2K. 23:13 it describes Ashtoreth, “the abomination of the Zidonians,” and Chemosh, “the abomination of the Moabites.” Since shiqquts is the term Daniel uses in Dan. 9:27; 11:31; and 12:11, the strong inference is that the abomination of desolation is an idol placed in the temple in Jerusalem. Desolation (the word is plural in the Greek of Mat. 24:15 and Mark 13:14) signifies a laying waste. Abomination always causes desolation, disaster, and judgment. The presence of an abomination, an idol or anything else the Lord has denounced as repugnant to Him, renders a place unfit for the presence and service of the Lord. . . . The entire phrase, the abomination of desolation, then, obviously refers to an idol, or false god, and its worship, placed in the temple of God and causing desolation." Ref-1363, p. 3. "The abomination of desolation, therefore, is the final and greatest eruption of idolatry, as the Antichrist sets up his abominable worship in the Temple in Jerusalem and proclaims himself to be God." Ref-1363, p. 4.
✪ "These things, then, being to come to pass, beloved, and the one week being divided into two parts, and the abomination of desolation being manifested then, and the two prophets and forerunners of the Lord having finished their course, and the whole world finally approaching the consummation, what remains but the coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from heaven, for whom we have looked in hope?" Hippolytus of Rome, "Treatise on Christ and Antichrist", Ref-0541, p. 218. "Particularly do we ask attention to the fact that when our Lord, in His prophecy on Mount Olivet, quoted from the latter part of Daniel 9:27, He used the words of the Septuagint version, namely, “the abomination of desolation” (Matthew 24:15). Therefore We have a special Warrant for following the sense of the Septuagint. We give the English translation of the entire verse as it appears in the Septuagint. “And one week shall establish the covenant with many; and in the midst of the week my sacrifice and drink offering shall be taken away; and upon the temple shall be the abomination of desolation; and at the end of the time (the age) an end shall be put to the desolation.”" Ref-0896, p. 31. "it is not the standards carried by the armies, but the armies themselves that constituted the abomination of desolation, or that maketh desolate. This conclusion is fully supported by the facts, (1) that where Matthew says when ye see the abomination of desolation, Luke says when ye see Jerusalem encompassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh; and (2) the armies were the agency whereby the desolation was accomplished." Ref-0896, p. 91.
✪ Summary of fetal development: 1 week, travels from fallopian tube, lodges in uterus. 2 weeks, forms amnion (amniotic sac), forms umbilical cord, connects placenta to mother. 3 weeks, heart beats. 4 weeks, spinal column, nervous system, 10,000 times the size of fertilized egg. 2 months, head is 1/2 its birth size, cartilage turns to skeleton. 3 months, two inches long, 1 ounce. 4 months, facial features (like parents), hair on head, sucked thumb, half birth size. 5/6 months, heard and recognized mother’s voice, eyes opened. Statistics: 1.5 million abortions annually in the US. "The common thread among all of these efforts [to overturn the legality of abortion] is the goal to fill what is becoming known as the “Blackmun Hole” in Roe v. Wade. This is where Justice Blackmun implied in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that if the case were established that the pre-born was a person, the argument for abortion collapses. In Roe v. Wade, it is acknowledge that the term “fetus” is fully human, but did not grant the rights of “persons” until birth." "National Watch", Intercessors for America Prayer Letter, Vol. 36, No. 4, April 2009, p. 4. "you shall not practice magic; you shall not engage in sorcery; you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide", The Didache, Ref-0217, p. 150. "During Mary Flipse Walvoord’s difficult pregnancy, her doctors advised an abortion; however, because of their conviction that the child was a gift from the Lord, they brought John to term. The child proved to be robust [living to age 92], and Mary lived to be 102." John Hannah, Walvoord, John Flipse, Ref-0114, 419-421, p. 419. "Chapter two [of the Didache] contains a list of prohibitions, clearly derived from the Old and New Testament ethical admonitions. Of particular interest is Didache 2:2, which states: You shall not murder. you shall not commit adultery. You shall not corrupt children, you shall not fornicate. You shall not steal. you shall not practice magic. You shall not mix poison. You shall not murder a child, whether by abortion or by killing it once it is born." The Testimony of the Didache, Ref-0066, Vol. 25 No 1 Winter 2012, p. 3 "The Church Father, Tertullian of Carthage (160-220 A.D.) commenting on the Roman practice of infanticide by comparing it to the Carthaginian practice of child sacrifice, admonishes: . . . there is no difference as to baby killing whether you do it as a sacred rite or just because you choose to do it. For us murder is once for all forbidden; so even the child in the womb, while yet the mother’s blood is still being drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful to destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes no difference whether one take away the life once born or destroy it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be a man, the fruit is always present in the seed." Andrew White, Ancient Child Sacrifice and Abortion, Ref-0066, Vol. 25 No. 1 Winter 2012, 19-22, p. 19. "Other dark features in the social life [of the Eskimo] were the frequency of infanticide, and the abandonment of the aged and infirm, . . ." Ref-1396, p. 420 "[Among the Hare Indians] the hardships of life caused frequent desertion of the aged and the destruction of female infants. Male prisoners taken in raids were staked to the ground, and their quivering hearts given to the women to devour, a custom that savoured more of the plains’ tribes and the Iroquoians than of the Athapaskans." Ref-1396, p. 395 "Abortion had already been outlawed in most of Europe, but here, too, attitudes hardened. Britain, for example, made abortion a statutory offence in 1929. Any person convicted of ‘intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive’ (defined as a pregnancy of twenty-eight weeks or more) was to be punished by penal servitude for life." Ref-1410, loc. 3711.
✪ "Professor Richard Gardner of Oxford University, a renowned expert on human reproduction and an advisor to Britain’s Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, recently raised the prospect of using organs from aborted fetuses for transplantation into adults. This possibility offers the potential to save or improve the lives of the hundreds of thousands of patients in desperate need of such organs throughout the world, especially the more than 70,000 in the United States waiting for kidneys. While such procedures have never been attempted in humans, research on mice has demonstrated that fetal kidneys develop quickly inside adult animals -- and according to Gardner, fetal-to-adult transplantation is "probably a more realistic technique in dealing with the shortage of kidney donors than others." If aborted fetuses do prove a useful source of organs for transplant, and there is hope to believe that they might, our society may soon have to grapple with the possibility of yet another controversial and startling -- yet potentially beneficial -- phenomenon: a legal market in fetal tissue and organs. Opponents of organ sales fear that transforming transplantation into a financial transaction will lead to exploitation of the poor, particularly in developing nations, and will expose the world’s least fortunate inhabitants to unnecessary medical risks and to exchanges in which they lack equal bargaining power. The striking benefit of a legal trade in fetal organs, unlike adult organs, is that it may provide all of the benefits that supporters desire without resulting in the exploitative harms that opponents fear. Such sales could prove the rare economic transaction in the medical field in which all participating parties can truly be said to benefit. The first striking feature of fetal organs is that their supply, for all practical purposes, is unlimited. Unlike living kidney donors, who must then advance through life with only one functioning kidney, pregnant women who provide fetal kidneys could do so repeatedly without incurring the medical consequences of adult organ loss. Opponents of reproductive choice will object to such a market on the grounds that it will increase the number of abortions -- which will indeed be the logical result. However, such a market might also bring solace to women who have already decided upon abortion, but desire that some additional social good come from the procedure. Like the families of accident victims who donate the organs of their loved ones, these women could well find their decisions fortified by the public benefit that they generate. Someday, if we are fortunate, scientific research may make possible farms of artificial "wombs" breeding fetuses for their organs -- or even the "miracle" of men raising fetuses in their abdomens." Jacob M. Appel, Are We Ready for a Market in Fetal Organs?, Huffington Post, March 17, 2009. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-m-appel/are-we-ready-for-a-market_b_175900.html] accessed 20091110. Jacob M. Appel J.D., is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of Community Health at Brown University, where he teaches courses in bioethics.
✪ "The Greeks lived in fear of large families, for that could mean starvation. Custom and law condoned homosexuality, abortion, and the exposure of infants in woods, mountains, or garbage dumps." Ref-0150, p. 217. "The Roman historian Tacitus. . . expressed contempt for the fact that ‘the Jews even consider it a crime to kill a newborn infant.’" Ref-0152, p. 19.
✪ "Abraham wandered westward, perhaps crossing the Euphrates at Carchemish, where it can be forded during a low-water period." Ref-0150, p. 32.
✪ "Because the covenant of circumcision was first introduced when Abraham was already ninety-nine years old (Gen. 17:1-14); but the covenant of faith and the justification took place before even the birth of Ishmael, and therefore before his eighty-sixth year (Gen. 16:16 cf. Gen. 17:1). Consequently Abraham had been justified already thirteen years before he was circumcised." Ref-0197, p. 96
✪ "“Abraham’s seed,” therefore, is not necessarily equivalent of a Jew or a member of the people of Israel. God’s promise to Abraham encompassed both ‘a great nation’ and ‘all peoples on earth’ (Gen. 12:2-3). Both of these groups, therefore, share the fulfillment of that promise in the salvation of God without being merged into each other. It is significant that when the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise is related to the Gentiles, it is specifically this statement about ‘all nations,’ not any reference to the ‘great nation’ or Israel, that the apostle uses as OT support (Gal. 3:8). Again, there is sharing, but not identity. . ." Robert L. Saucy, "Israel and the Church: A Case for Discontinuity," Ref-0199, p. 254.
✪ h87 - lofty or high father to h85 - father of a multitude (addition of ה (he), = breath of God)
✪ "Abraham is said to have 318 servants in Genesis 14:14. In Rabbinic tradition the 318 is taken as gematria for Eliezer, Abraham’s servant." [http://bibleandscience.com/biblecodes.htm]
✪ "In the Midrashim it is written that the Rock is the Even Akkidah, the ‘Stone of Binding’ and marks the place where Abraham bound his son Isaac and laid him on an altar, but that the Holy of Holies was built over the place where the ram was caught in the thicket, a short distance away. Tradition further contends that the Rock is not only the place where the offering of Isaac was attempted, but that it was also the threshing floor of Arunah the Jebusite which King David purchased and upon which he pitched the Tabernacle." Ref-0144, pp. 163-164. Isaac was 25 years old according to Josephus. Ref-0026, 1.13.2.
✪ ". . . even in the New Covenant era, unbelieving Jews are still referred to as the seed of Abraham. Jesus Himself acknowledges even the Pharisees, whom, just a few verses later, He will call sons of the devil, are the seed of Abraham (John 8:37; cf. 8:44). The rich man in Hades calls out to Abraham and addresses him as “Father” (Luke 16:24). In his sermon in the synagogue of Pisidian Antioch, Paul addresses the Jews there as “sons of Abraham’s family” (Acts 13:26). And finally, in lamenting over the widespread blindness and hard-heartedness of the Jews in his day, he nevertheless refers to them as Israelites, the seed of Abraham (Rom 11:1)." Michael Riccardi, The Seed of Abraham: A Theological Analysis of Galatians 3 and Its Implications for Israel, Ref-0164, Vol. 25 No. 1 Spring 2004, 51-64, p. 57.
✪ "in the rabbinic writings this is a very common term . . . the term . . . is a figure of speech describing a guest at a feast, reclining on the breast of his neighbor. Just as in the Gospel of John. . ." Ref-0219, p. 754.
✪ "The deepest mine in the world (a gold mine in the Witwatersrand area in South Africa) descends 3.5 km into the lithosphere. The deepest humans have ever drilled into the earth is on the Kola Peninsula in Russia, where drill core was retrieved from 12.26 km below the surface. From that point on to the centre of the planet, some 6,365 km, is all ‘unknown territory’." Emil Silvestru, Water inside fire, Ref-0784, 22(1) 2008, 3:4, p. 3. Questionable: Isa. 14:15 (?);