- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Nick,
The Berean's are known to have tested the spirit of what Paul taught using logic as they examined scripture to see if what Paul said agreed with it.
Hi KW,
No they compared the spiritual preaching of Paul with SCRIPTURE.[2Cor 13.1]
They let scripture teach them.Logic was the vain tool of those on Mars Hill[Acts 17]
Nick,
You obviously you do not know what logic is.
It is reaching conlusions based on true premises and valid reasoning.
The Bereans used logic in that they tested scripture to see if the conclusion came up to be that what Paul stated was true.
Premise Zero: Scripture is Always true.
Premise One: Scripture states A
Premise Two: Paul states A.
Conlusion: Paul's statement A is true.That is an argument in logical reasoning.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 05 2010,16:25) Hi KW,
The reasoning of men led to the death of Jesus.
Surely it is better for one man to die…
Paul is known to have reasoned in synagoges and marketplaces in order to spread the word of God, Acts 17:17 and 18:4.His reasoning was based on godly principles wheile those who crucified Jesus based theirs on the priciples of man which is not really reasoning at all as it is flawed.
Kerwin,
You cannot test the word of God with logic.
KJ and 'TT', trinitarian tricks, has shown how 'Logic' and 'Premises' can easily fool the unwary…therefore they must not be trusted.
Quote Premise A: Do you believe there is the Father?
Premise B: Do you believe there is the Son?
Premise C: Do you believe there is the Holy Spirit?
Therefore, you believe in the trinity….boom!Quote (kerwin @ June 05 2010,18:56) Adam, It is with great sadness that I admit that there will be those that twist the scripture because of either their ignorance or corruption but we cannot let their actions destroy our faith.
It is my concern that you have done just that. That is a deadly path to follow.
Thanks for such warning. But I am still not gone far off from the truth.Quote (JustAskin @ June 05 2010,17:08) Kerwin, You cannot test the word of God with logic.
KJ and 'TT', trinitarian tricks, has shown how 'Logic' and 'Premises' can easily fool the unwary…therefore they must not be trusted.
Quote Premise A: Do you believe there is the Father?
Premise B: Do you believe there is the Son?
Premise C: Do you believe there is the Holy Spirit?
Therefore, you believe in the trinity….boom!
I am going to answer you post in the thread on logic. If you would check the answer out there I would be joyful.Your fellow student,
Kerwin
Hi KW,
The Spirit of God in Paul met men where they were.
If their basis was logic he reasoned with them.
That does not glorify logic or reasonNick Hassan,
My argument is it is sinful to condemn the use of logic as a sin because using logic is not an act of the sinful nature. You do not seem to be claiming logic is evil in what you just wrote.
Logic as a tool is glorified (extolled) only when it is used correctly to understand God's and his Word. It is glorified (extolled) only because it is one of the God's wondrous creations.
It is God we are to worship and not his creations.
Paul uses logic correctly and so God's love is displayed by his use of it.
Your fellow student,
Kerwin
Quote (gollamudi @ June 04 2010,21:15) Hi brother Marty,
I appreciate your post above. But the Hebrew Passover was nothing to do with sin atonement except the day of atonement. Early Christians had interpreted every thing as per their will and wish to prove Jesus' death in terms of Jewish traditions. I don't agree with such arguments.
Hi Adam:I disagree with you that the Hebrew passover has nothing to do with Jesus.
You might want to take note that the death angel passed over the household when he saw the blood on the doorposts of the house.
If there is no blood on the doorposts of your heart of the passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world when you die or when the Lord comes for the church, you will die in your sins, and will have to face a second death which will be eternal separation from God through the destruction of your soul.
And so, choose to whom you want to listen.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ June 08 2010,14:20) Quote (gollamudi @ June 04 2010,21:15) Hi brother Marty,
I appreciate your post above. But the Hebrew Passover was nothing to do with sin atonement except the day of atonement. Early Christians had interpreted every thing as per their will and wish to prove Jesus' death in terms of Jewish traditions. I don't agree with such arguments.
Hi Adam:I disagree with you that the Hebrew passover has nothing to do with Jesus.
You might want to take note that the death angel passed over the household when he saw the blood on the doorposts of the house.
If there is no blood on the doorposts of your heart of the passover lamb that takes away the sins of the world when you die or when the Lord comes for the church, you will die in your sins, and will have to face a second death which will be eternal separation from God through the destruction of your soul.
And so, choose to whom you want to listen.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Hi brother Marty,
You are confused about understanding significance of Passover with sin atonement. Christianity misinterpreted Jewish appointed times of God and made Jesus fit into their logics. Passover lamb was never meant for sin atonement. Please read the scriptures properly. I am sorry to say that.Peace to you
AdamAdam,
The blood of the passover lamb's blood was meant to spare certain individuals from a visit of the angel of death.
The blood of Jesus also spares certain individuals from a visit by the death.
One symbolizes the other in that the Passover suggests the power of Jesus' death to lead to eternal life for his adherents as well as deliverance from their oppressor sin.
I state the later as any true adherent of God knows that it is those that obey all of what God commands that will inherit eternal life.
Atone used to mean reconciled though that is now considered an obsolete definition and that is most likely the correct meaning in this case.
So in delivering those that obey all his own teachings from the oppression of sin Jesus is reconciling them to God.
I hope that helps your understanding,
Your fellow student,
Kerwin
Did the Passover Lamb Foreshadow Jesus?
Question:
I want to first commend you on your web site which is laid out quite well and has helped me understand more about traditional Jewish thinking on Christ. Although I am a born again Christian, I do not support groups such as the Messianics who sit on the fence regarding Judaism and Christianity. You either follow Judaism or Christianity; you can't pretend to follow both at the same time. This has led to Jews for Jesus following rabbinic customs that are not a part of the teachings of Christ.With that said, my question to you is: Why have the Jewish people rejected Jesus as their sacrificial lamb who is the sin bearer for mankind when the atoning blood of Jesus is so ever-present in the Paschal lamb in the Book of Exodus. I ask this question because you are a rabbi and profess to believe in the teachings of the Old Testament; so how is it that you do not see the atonement of the blood of the lamb which was placed on the doorposts that first Passover Seder night in Egypt? I look forward to your answer.
Answer:
Thank you for your question. It is not every day that I hear a “born again Christian” condemn missionary groups like Jews for Jesus. If churches committed to Jewish evangelism would present themselves to the Jewish people as forthrightly as you have, unknowledgeable Jews would have a much clearer understanding of the scenario into which they consider becoming involved, and apostasy to Christianity would be an uncommon disease among my people.
With regard to your question, evangelical Christians often draw a comparison between the Paschal lamb and Jesus, insisting that the former foreshadows the latter. This idea is advanced in the New Testament, particularly in the Book of John, where Jesus is portrayed as the fulfillment of the Passover lamb. Yet how valid a point is this? What is the meaning of this holiday sacrifice?
The Bible relates in Exodus 12:3-13 that when the Jewish people were preparing themselves for their momentous exodus from Egypt, God commanded them to slaughter a year-old sheep or goat on the 14th day of the first month (Nissan) and to publicly place its blood on the outside doorposts of their homes. Because Christians insist that the blood of the Paschal lamb foreshadowed the atonement of the blood of Jesus at Calvary, it behooves us to question the soundness of this claim.
The Torah never states or even implies that the Passover sheep or goat atones for sin. The notion that the Paschal lamb is a representation of a crucified savior or an atonement for sin is as foreign to the teachings of the Torah as is the notion of Santa Claus.
A mindful study of the Jewish scriptures reveals that the Torah had alluded to the Paschal lamb long before the exodus from Egypt occurred. Centuries earlier, the Almighty tested Abraham's faith when God commanded him to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac. Genesis 22:7-8 relates that as the two ascended Mount Moriah together, Isaac turned to his father and asked,
“Here is the fire and the wood, but where is the lamb for the offering?” Abraham then replied, “God will see to a lamb for an offering, my son.”
The question that immediately comes to mind is, what happened to that lamb that Abraham promised? A few verses later we find that it was a ram, not a lamb, which was sacrificed! Where was the lamb to which Abraham was prophetically referring?
The answer of course is that our father Abraham was referring to the Paschal lamb. Just as God tested Abraham's faith to show his worthiness to be the father of the chosen people, the young Jewish nation also had to have their faith tested to show their worthiness to participate in the exodus from Egypt, to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai, and to become the progenitors of the covenant people who would forever be known as “a light to the nations.”
In the pagan Egyptian society where the Jewish people were enslaved, the lamb was considered a sacred god, similar to how the cow is deified and worshiped in India today. In ancient Egypt, molesting a lamb in any way was considered a crime punishable by death. That is why, when Egypt was overcome with the third plague of lice, Moses refused Pharaoh's initial offer that the Jews bring their sacrifice to God while remaining in Egypt. In Exodus 8:26, Moses explained to Pharaoh that if the Israelites were to kill these animals before the Egyptians, they would be stoned to death. The Almighty, therefore, used this to test the faithfulness of the Jewish people by commanding them to not only kill Egypt's sacred god, but also to publicly place the lamb's blood on their doorposts for all to see. Only those Israelites who, like Abraham, demonstrated that their fear of God exceeded their fear of the Egyptians, would be deemed worthy to have their homes passed over during the tenth and final plague.
Adam,
Do you understand what your source is saying?
If so them please explain his point to me.
What does he mean by “Foreshadow”?
Why does he compare the sacrifice of a goat by Abraham to the sacrifice of the lamb at Passover?
That connection apears to be mystical.
Do you see any other connection?
Quote (kerwin @ June 10 2010,21:33) Adam, Do you understand what your source is saying?
If so them please explain his point to me.
What does he mean by “Foreshadow”?
Why does he compare the sacrifice of a goat by Abraham to the sacrifice of the lamb at Passover?
That connection apears to be mystical.
Do you see any other connection?
Hi brother Kerwin,
Do you see how the Christian writers differ on their logics of interpreting Jesus' death? Compare the logics of Gospels with the writer of Hebrews he differs with them by stating that Jesus is the high priest offered his blood on the day of atonement than passover. Do you see how these writers look like the our own days' church peachers who interpret scriptures as per their own imagination? Is there any difference?Please read this also..
A Study of the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament)
Here is a partial list of reasons for why the death of Jesus on the cross couldn’t possibly have served as a valid sacrifice – any one of these would render a sacrifice as unacceptable for the purpose of expiation of sins.
GIVEN that, at the time of Jesus’ death, the Second Temple was still standing in Jerusalem and the Hebrew Bible was the Scripture in force, here are some of the reasons why the death of Jesus on the cross cannot be a valid sacrificial offering:
FIRST, the Hebrew Bible requires that the sacrificial ritual be administered by a Priest (see Leviticus Chapters 1-7) — according to the accounts in the New Testament, Jesus was crucified by Roman soldiers (Mt 27:35; Mk 15:24; Lk 23:33; Jn 19:18, 23).
SECOND, the Hebrew Bible requires that the blood of the (sin) sacrifice had to be sprinkled by the Priest on the veil of the sanctuary and on the altar in the Temple (e.g., Lev 4:5-6) — there is no evidence in the New Testament that this was done.
THIRD, the Hebrew Bible requires that the (sin) sacrifice be without any physical defects or blemishes (e.g., Lev 4:3) — according to the accounts in the New Testament, Jesus was beaten, whipped, and dragged on the ground before being crucified (Mt 26:67, 27:26, 30-31; Mk 14:65, 15:15-20; Lk 22:63; Jn 18:22, 19:1, 3). Moreover, as a Jew by birth, Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day after being born, a ritual that leaves a scar (“sign of the covenant”). According to the NT, circumcision is tantamount to mutilation (Phil 3:2, Gal 5:12).
FOURTH, the Hebrew Bible requires that the Passover (sin) sacrifice, a male-goat, be offered on an individual (per household) basis (Num 28:22), not as a communal offering — according to the New Testament, Jesus’ death (termed a “sin sacrifice”) expiated the sins of mankind (Ro 6:10; He 9:12, 10:10, 10:18).
FIFTH, the Hebrew Bible directs that the Paschal Lamb was not to be offered for the removal of sins — it was a commemorative/festive offering (see also under “Fourth” above and “Sixth” below). A more appropriate time for a sin offering would have been on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement; Num 29:11 [individual sin-offering — male goat]; Lev 16:15 [communal sin-offering — male goat]).
SIXTH, the Hebrew Bible requires that the sacrificed Paschal Lamb had to be roasted and eaten, and it’s blood used to place markings on the side-posts and lintel of the doors (Exod 12:7-8) ? there is no record in the New Testament that this was, in fact, done (lest it be suggested that Christianity promotes cannibalism).
SEVENTH, the Hebrew Bible states that the sacrificial sin offering could only atone for unintentional sins, with few notable exceptions as stated in Lev 5:1-6, 20-26 [Lev 6:1-7 in Christian Bibles] (e.g., Num 15:27-31).
EIGHTH, the Hebrew Bible teaches that sacrifices can atone only for sins committed prior to the offering of the sacrifice; no sacrifice could ever atone for sins committed after the sacrifice was offered and, thus, no sacrifice could ever atone for people born after the sacrifice was offered (e.g., Leviticus 1-7). So, even if it were true that Jesus was some kind of super-sacrifice that atoned for all sins of all mankind, then his death could only atone for the sins committed before his death, not for any sins committed after his death by people who were born after he died.
NINTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly forbids (human) vicarious atonement (e.g., Exod 32:31-33; Num 35:33; Deut 24:16; II Kgs 14:6; Jer 31:29 [30 in Christian Bibles]; Ezek 18:4,20; Ps 49:7).
TENTH, the Hebrew Bible strictly prohibits human sacrifices (e.g., Lev 18:21, 24-25; Deut 18:10; Jer 7:31, 19:5; Ezek 23:37, 39).
It is simply astonishing that so many people believe what their preachers “feed” them, as well as how the New Testament writings contradict the teachings of the Hebrew Bible
Source: http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archive….-of-sin
Adam………Your mixing up a (SPIRITUAL COVENANT) with a (PHYSICAL COVENANT) Jesus was the mediator of a NEW COVENANT. WE know GOD is Spiritual and what he did was work with those (carnal) minded Israelites (not just Jews as the Jews were only 1/13 of what composed Israel) in CARNAL WAY. How ever there are many Spiritual principles that were expressed by those Physical Practices they were a Shadow of things to come.
Example……….the word to EAT can be taken as physical to ingest food , but spiritually it means to (take to ones self), and this is what is meant by accepting Jesus' sacrifice for our sins were are to eat his flesh (not literally but take to ourselves his sacrifice for our sins)
Adam, there were (CARNAL) commandments and rituals given for CARNAL minds, but we are a spiritual house that is being built and must learn to apply those old covenant requirements to a Spiritual level. Going back to the lower and carnal things, is not good brother. We are a SPIRITUAL House, they in the old covenant were a CARNAL HOUSE, not the same brother. We are to compare Spiritual things with Spiritual and try to see the Spiritual connections between things. They who are carnal minded (flesh minded) can not see or understand the Spiritual things things, because their minds have not been opened to them yet. We should not go back into the weak and beggarly things brother. Think about it.
Peace and love to you and yours Adam…………………..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 11 2010,01:28) Adam………Your mixing up a (SPIRITUAL COVENANT) with a (PHYSICAL COVENANT) Jesus was the mediator of a NEW COVENANT. WE know GOD is Spiritual and what he did was work with those (carnal) minded Israelites (not just Jews as the Jews were only 1/13 of what composed Israel) in CARNAL WAY. How ever there are many Spiritual principles that were expressed by those Physical Practices they were a Shadow of things to come. Example……….the word to EAT can be taken as physical to ingest food , but spiritually it means to (take to ones self), and this is what is meant by accepting Jesus' sacrifice for our sins were are to eat his flesh (not literally but take to ourselves his sacrifice for our sins)
Adam, there were (CARNAL) commandments and rituals given for CARNAL minds, but we are a spiritual house that is being built and must learn to apply those old covenant requirements to a Spiritual level. Going back to the lower and carnal things, is not good brother. We are a SPIRITUAL House, they in the old covenant were a CARNAL HOUSE, not the same brother. We are to compare Spiritual things with Spiritual and try to see the Spiritual connections between things. They who are carnal minded (flesh minded) can not see or understand the Spiritual things things, because their minds have not been opened to them yet. We should not go back into the weak and beggarly things brother. Think about it.
Peace and love to you and yours Adam…………………..gene
Hi brother Gene,
I appreciate your reply above. But I don't think we should call God's commandments as 'carnal' as you mentioned above. God is faithful towards His people Israel. As Gentiles we are also included in Abrahaic covenant. But I am not able to understand how Jesus' death can be a human sacrifice to atone the sins of the world when one side God hated human sacrifice alltogether. God intended only animal blood for atonement but not the only means, there are other ways and methods through which He atones the sins of mankind(especially Israel's).Please see the inherent contradictions among the writers of NT on these issues for example Hebrews' writer doesn't agree with John or other NT writers. So what do you think was there concensus among these writers?
Love and peace to you
Adam
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
