Concerning the feasts of the LORD, these are MY FEASTS - Lev. 23

[jamie]

Paul hurried to Jerusalem to do so...

To do what, participate in offering animal sacrifices?

Paul told the assembly, "And see, now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there..."

Did all of the adult males in the assembly go to Jerusalem to observance Pentecost as the law required?

 

[chair]

It's separated into 3 sections: (1)Leviticus (2)Genesis [Cain/Abel Adam/Eve] (3)Job
This just establishes that sacrifices for sin (transgressions), of an innocent animal, goes way back.

No, it doesn't do any such thing, except in your feverish imagination.
Why would Cain or Abel bring a sin-offering? What was their sin? Why would Cain even try to bring a vegetarian sacrifice if this was about blood sin offerings?

 

[TweetyBird]

These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons. - Lev 23:2

Holy Convocations: מִקְרָא miqrâʼ, mik-raw' - an assembly, a rehearsal

God says that the seven feasts are His feasts.
(1) Passover - what's the significance of this feast of God, what is it "rehearsing"?

The convocation was for the reading of the Law of Moses, not that the feast itself was a rehearsal. What exactly do you think needs to be rehearsed?

Are you part of the nation of Israel? The feasts were given to them under the Old Covenant and required burnt offering sacrifices, They were not given to believers in Christ.

 

[TweetyBird]

It's separated into 3 sections: (1)Leviticus (2)Genesis [Cain/Abel Adam/Eve] (3)Job
This just establishes that sacrifices for sin (transgressions), of an innocent animal, goes way back.

There were no sacrifices for sin until the Mosaic Law. It had to be animals and only by the Levitical Priesthood.

- Gen 46:34 Shepherds and sheep were an abomination to Egyptians, the children of Israel dwelt In Goshen.

The text does not say that sheep were an abomination to the Egyptians.

34 that ye shall say, Thy servants’ trade hath been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers: that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians.

 

[jamie]

anyone who obeyed and put the blood on the doorpost was passed over...

Only the firstborn were in jeopardy. The Passover meal was for everyone, but the blood was only for the firstborn.

 

[clefty]

Only the firstborn were in jeopardy. The Passover meal was for everyone, but the blood was only for the firstborn.

Yup so technically everyone was passed over

but only anyone who obeyed and put blood on the door was passed over...unscathed

 

[jamie]

Yup so technically everyone was passed over

Yes, everyone was passed over but the blood was for the firstborn just as it is today. The Lamb's blood is for the preservation of the firstborn during this present evil age. The Lamb's blood will be for the preservation of everyone else at the second resurrection.

Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep." (John 10:11)

Not everyone now is part of his flock.

 

[beameup]

Except Abel is not in Leviticus. And not all sacrifices were for sins. But you would know that, being an expert on scriptures.

Here, I'll post the appropriate portions of Leviticus:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.

 

[chair]

Here, I'll post the appropriate portions of Leviticus:
For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein.

You need to be beamed back down to earth. I know Leviticus. It is not relevant to events that occurred many centuries earlier. And you have focused entirely on sacrifices as sin-offerings, but haven't bothered to notice that there are many other sacrifices.

But I am wasting my breath. There is no information or facts that will ever change your mind. You are on your own planet, living in your own fantasy world, where one can even modify verses as needed.

 

[beameup]

You need to be beamed back down to earth. I know Leviticus. It is not relevant to events that occurred many centuries earlier. And you have focused entirely on sacrifices as sin-offerings, but haven't bothered to notice that there are many other sacrifices.

Job was quoted for you, but you choose to ignore that.
Blood sacrifice for sin was the "norm" from the beginning.

Historian Josephus reports that there were 300 priests continually slaughtering sheep during the Passover; so much so that the Gihon stream ran blood several feet deep.

 

[chair]

Job was quoted for you, but you choose to ignore that.
Blood sacrifice for sin was the "norm" from the beginning.

Historian Josephus reports that there were 300 priests continually slaughtering sheep during the Passover; so much so that the Gihon stream ran blood several feet deep.

Much depends on when Job lived.
But irrespective of that- you repeatedly ignore the fact that many sacrifices had nothing to do with sin.

 

[beameup]

Much depends on when Job lived.
But irrespective of that- you repeatedly ignore the fact that many sacrifices had nothing to do with sin.

Leviticus gives us many sacrifices and offerings, but they are dependent on the Temple and the Levitical priesthood.
I see no such organized sacrificial system prior to that among the Patriarchs like Job. There are clues in Job which date it.

According to the historian Josephus, there were 300 priests serving during Passovers in the 1st century. There were thousands of sheep offered and the amount of blood flooded the Gihon to a depth of several feet. The priests garments were white cloth which required a large number of changes of clothes because of all the blood. I don't know how you could discount the "bloodiness" involved in most of the sacrificial system.

 

[clefty]

Yes, everyone was passed over but the blood was for the firstborn just as it is today. The Lamb's blood is for the preservation of the firstborn during this present evil age. The Lamb's blood will be for the preservation of everyone else at the second resurrection.

Jesus said, "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep." (John 10:11)

Not everyone now is part of his flock.

Right...

Those of His flock do as He does...just like the Passover when only those who have faith and then obeyed were passed over...

Anyone can have faith...but those saved were only the ones that did something to show it

 

[jamie]

Those of His flock do as He does...just like the Passover when only those who have faith and then obeyed were passed over...

And on the day he died, Jesus changed the law regarding Passover. He was the Lamb and no other lamb is now required.

The Passover acknowledges his death until he comes to sit on his throne.

Those who don't observe Jesus' Passover don't truly acknowledge his death. Instead, they follow the traditions of men and their worship is in vain.

Too bad.

 

[clefty]

And on the day he died, Jesus changed the law regarding Passover. He was the Lamb and no other lamb is now required.

one can observe the Passover as merely a memorial as no lamb can be sacrificed as there is no temple...etc...

Like remembering the birthday of a deceased loved one...they are not there to eat the cake so why bake one? Why light candles they can not blow out...But why forget the date?

The Passover acknowledges his death until he comes to sit on his throne.

sure and our freedom from sin...as from Egypt...

Those who don't observe Jesus' Passover don't truly acknowledge his death. Instead, they follow the traditions of men and their worship is in vain.

Technically Passover was not institituded by man so it can never be a tradition of man...

And what was celebrated that last supper was not the Passover...

We are encouraged by Paul to celebrate the feast with the new unleavened bread of spirit and truth...

Too bad.[/QUOTE]

 

[jamie]

And what was celebrated that last supper was not the Passover...

Well, of course not. And why would Jesus think it was? Did he not know better?

When the hour had come, He sat down and the twelve apostles with Him. Then He said to them, “With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, for I say to you I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

Then He took the cup and gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among yourselves for I say to you I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”

And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you, do this in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:14-19​

 

[clefty]

Well, of course not. And why would Jesus think it was? Did he not know better?

When the hour had come, He sat down and the twelve apostles with Him. Then He said to them, “With fervent desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, for I say to you I will no longer eat of it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

Then He took the cup and gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among yourselves for I say to you I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”

And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you, do this in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:14-19​

Ok...

Just checking...lol ya know around here...

Many do think and teach the last supper was the Passover meal...

 

[chair]

... I don't know how you could discount the "bloodiness" involved in most of the sacrificial system.

Of course there was plenty of blood. I never denied that. I am pointing out that not all sacrifices were about sin. There were holiday sacrifices, thanksgiving sacrifices.

Now. Read what I wrote a second time, before answering.

 

[beameup]

Of course there was plenty of blood. I never denied that. I am pointing out that not all sacrifices were about sin. There were holiday sacrifices, thanksgiving sacrifices.

However, the one for atoning for the soul is the blood sacrifice, and it requires the death of an innocent.
For the life of the flesh is in the blood:
and I have given it to you upon the altar
to make an atonement for your souls:
for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
Leviticus 17:11

PS: the sacrifices, for the most part, fed the Levitical priesthood.

 

[chair]

However, the one for atoning for the soul is the blood sacrifice, and it requires the death of an innocent.
For the life of the flesh is in the blood:
and I have given it to you upon the altar
to make an atonement for your souls:
for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
Leviticus 17:11

PS: the sacrifices, for the most part, fed the Levitical priesthood.

Hello? Anybody home?
Yes, some blood sacrifices were for atonement. But no, not all blood sacrifices were for atonement.

It is not that difficult.