King James Bible Adam Clarke Bible Commentary Martin Luther's Writings Wesley's Sermons and Commentary Neurosemantics Audio / Video Bible Evolution Cruncher Creation Science Vincent New Testament Word Studies KJV Audio Bible Family videogames Christian author Godrules.NET Main Page Add to Favorites Godrules.NET Main Page




Bad Advertisement?

News & Reviews:
  • World News
  • Movie Reviews
  • Book Search

    Are you a Christian?

    Online Store:
  • Your Own eBook/eBay Business
  • Visit Our eBay Store

    Automated eBook Business



  • PARALLEL HISTORY BIBLE - Leviticus 23:17


    CHAPTERS: Leviticus 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27     

    VERSES: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44

    TEXT: BIB   |   AUDIO: MISLR - MISC   |   VIDEO: BIB


    ENGLISH - HISTORY - INTERNATIONAL - FACEBOOK - GR FORUMS - GODRULES ON YOUTUBE

    HELPS: KJS - KJV - ASV - DBY - DOU - WBS - YLT - HEB - BBE - WEB - NAS - SEV - TSK - CRK - WES - MHC - GILL - JFB

    LXX- Greek Septuagint - Leviticus 23:17

    απο 575 της 3588 κατοικιας 2733 υμων 5216 προσοισετε αρτους 740 επιθεμα δυο 1417 αρτους 740 εκ 1537 δυο 1417 δεκατων σεμιδαλεως εσονται 2071 5704 εζυμωμενοι πεφθησονται πρωτογενηματων τω 3588 κυριω 2962

    Douay Rheims Bible

    Out of all your dwellings, two leaves of the firstfruits, of two tenths of flour leavened, which you shall
    bake for the firstfruits of the Lord.

    King James Bible - Leviticus 23:17

    Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD.

    World English Bible

    You shall bring out of your habitations two loaves of
    bread for a wave offering made of two tenth parts of an ephah of fine flour. They shall be baked with yeast, for first fruits to Yahweh.

    World Wide Bible Resources


    Leviticus 23:17

    Early Christian Commentary - (A.D. 100 - A.D. 325)

    ecf02Oz23z16 *margins


    Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24


    Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1


    Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9


    Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37


    Npnf-201 iii.xiii.xiii Pg 9


    Npnf-201 iv.vii.xviii Pg 37


    Anf-01 viii.iv.xxvii Pg 2
    Isa. lviii. 13, 14.


    Anf-01 ix.vii.xxxv Pg 9
    Isa. lviii. 14.

    This is what the Lord declared: “Happy are those servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find watching. Verily I say unto you, that He shall gird Himself, and make them to sit down [to meat], and will come forth and serve them. And if He shall come in the evening watch, and find them so, blessed are they, because He shall make them sit down, and minister to them; or if this be in the second, or it be in the third, blessed are they.”4754

    4754


    Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 171
    Catal. Scrippt. Eccles. c. 18.

    and on Ezek. xxxvi.;55

    55 P. 952, tom. iii. Opp. ed. Bened.

    and by Gennadius of Marseilles.56

    56 De Ecclesiæ dogmatibus, c. 55.


    Anf-01 ix.vi.xxvii Pg 22
    Num. xvi. 15.

    In this way, too, Samuel, who judged the people so many years, and bore rule over Israel without any pride, in the end cleared himself, saying, “I have walked before you from my childhood even unto this day: answer me in the sight of God, and before His anointed (Christi ejus); whose ox or whose ass of yours have I taken, or over whom have I tyrannized, or whom have I oppressed? or if I have received from the hand of any a bribe or [so much as] a shoe, speak out against me, and I will restore it to you.”4167

    4167


    Anf-03 iv.ii Pg 49
    See Judg. ix. 2 sqq.

    and perhaps, too, to the “thistle” of Jehoash’s.31

    31


    Npnf-201 iii.xv.ix Pg 24


    Npnf-201 iv.vi.i.xxxviii Pg 12


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-02 vi.ii.viii Pg 17.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 72.1


    Anf-02 vi.iv.v.xiv Pg 109.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.ii.iv Pg 3
    Isa. xl. 18; 25.

    Human circumstances may perhaps be compared with divine ones, but they may not be with GodGod is one thing, and what belongs to God is another thing. Once more:2371

    2371 Denique.

    you who apply the example of a king, as a great supreme, take care that you can use it properly. For although a king is supreme on his throne next to God, he is still inferior to God; and when he is compared with God, he will be dislodged2372

    2372 Excidet.

    from that great supremacy which is transferred to God. Now, this being the case, how will you employ in a comparison with God an object as your example, which fails2373

    2373 Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument.  In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

    in all the purposes which belong to a comparison? Why, when supreme power among kings cannot evidently be multifarious, but only unique and singular, is an exception made in the case of Him (of all others)2374

    2374 Scilicet.

    who is King of kings, and (from the exceeding greatness of His power, and the subjection of all other ranks2375

    2375 Graduum.

    to Him) the very summit,2376

    2376 Culmen.

    as it were, of dominion? But even in the case of rulers of that other form of government, where they one by one preside in a union of authority, if with their petty2377

    2377 Minutalibus regnis.

    prerogatives of royalty, so to say, they be brought on all points2378

    2378 Undique.

    into such a comparison with one another as shall make it clear which of them is superior in the essential features2379

    2379 Substantiis.

    and powers of royalty, it must needs follow that the supreme majesty will redound2380

    2380 Eliquetur.

    to one alone,—all the others being gradually, by the issue of the comparison, removed and excluded from the supreme authority. Thus, although, when spread out in several hands, supreme authority seems to be multifarious, yet in its own powers, nature, and condition, it is unique. It follows, then, that if two gods are compared, as two kings and two supreme authorities, the concentration of authority must necessarily, according to the meaning of the comparison, be conceded to one of the two; because it is clear from his own superiority that he is the supreme, his rival being now vanquished, and proved to be not the greater, however great. Now, from this failure of his rival, the other is unique in power, possessing a certain solitude, as it were, in his singular pre-eminence. The inevitable conclusion at which we arrive, then, on this point is this: either we must deny that God is the great Supreme, which no wise man will allow himself to do; or say that God has no one else with whom to share His power.


    Anf-02 v.ii.ix Pg 5.1


    Anf-03 v.iv.v.xiv Pg 31
    Isa. lxv. 13, 14.

    And recognise these oppositions also in the dispensation of Christ. Surely gladness and joyous exultation is promised to those who are in an opposite condition—to the sorrowful, and sad, and anxious.  Just as it is said in the 125th Psalm:  “They who sow in tears shall reap in joy.”3963

    3963


    Anf-01 v.xvi.i Pg 8
    Eccl. ii. 25 (after LXX.); Zech. ix. 17.

    Give attention to reading,1273

    1273


    Anf-01 ix.vii.xiii Pg 2
    Isa. xxv. 8, LXX.

    And again, “God has wiped away every tear from every face.” Thus that former life is expelled, because it was not given by the Spirit, but by the breath.


    Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 52
    Suggested by the ἰσχυσας of Sept. in Isa. xxv. 8.

    “O death, where is thy sting?”5676

    5676


    Anf-03 v.iv.vi.x Pg 54
    Isa. xxv. 8 and (especially) Hos. xiii. 14.

    —to Him will belong the gift, that is, the kingdom, who proclaimed the word which is to be accomplished in the kingdom.  And to none other God does he tell us that “thanks” are due, for having enabled us to achieve “the victory” even over death, than to Him from whom he received the very expression5678

    5678


    Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 3
    Isa. xxxv. 10.

    Well, there is nothing eternal until after the resurrection. “And sorrow and sighing,” continues he, “shall flee away.”7729

    7729


    Anf-03 v.viii.lviii Pg 4
    Ver. 10.

    The angel echoes the same to John: “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;”7730

    7730


    Anf-01 viii.iv.xxv Pg 5
    Isa. lxiii. 15 to end, and Isa. lxiv.


    Anf-03 v.viii.xxxi Pg 4
    Isa. lxvi. 14.

    because the grass also is renewed by the dissolution and corruption of the seed. In a word, if it is contended that the figure of the rising bones refers properly to the state of Israel, why is the same hope announced to all nations, instead of being limited to Israel only, of reinvesting those osseous remains with bodily substance and vital breath, and of raising up their dead out of the grave? For the language is universal: “The dead shall arise, and come forth from their graves; for the dew which cometh from Thee is medicine to their bones.”7492

    7492


    Edersheim Bible History

    Temple xxi Pg 19.2


    Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge, Chapter 23

    VERSE 	(17) - 

    Nu 28:26


    PARALLEL VERSE BIBLE

    God Rules.NET