For Keypurr

[dialm]

Bs"d

According to you the middle of the 70th week was somewhere around the year 30.

Can you understand that then the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which happened in the year 3831 after creation, for you the year 70 of your lord, comes way too late?

And the sacrifices stopt in the year 3827, for you 66, when the Romans laid a siege around Jerusalem, and no more sheep and bulls could be brought into the city. Exactly in the middle of the last week the sacrifices were stopped.

Around the time of the death of your messiah, the animal sacrifices continued unabated.

On top of that, your messiah was not a messiah, not an anointed king, not a ruler.

So wouldn't you agree that the Jewish interpretation of Daniel 9 makes much more sense?



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

The fact that animal sacrifice continued after the Cruxifition is a central doctrine.

Would like for you to answer something that is very serious

What would the response from the Western nations be if present day modern Isreal reinstated the former animal sacrifices?

 

[Elia]

What would the response from the Western nations be if present day modern Isreal reinstated the former animal sacrifices?

Bs"d

Who cares?



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[jamie]

However, G.d says clearly in the Holy Torah that He will never break his covenant with the Jewish people, even not when they stray away from Him.

The covenant was not just for the Jewish people, it was made with all Israel. The priesthood has been updated but God's covenant remains the same and is applicable to all people, even Jews.

Was the covenant placed in the ark of the covenant?

Moses said, "Then I turned and came down from the mountain and put the tablets in the ark which I had made, and there they are just as the LORD commanded me" (Deuteronomy 10:5 NKJV).

The Book of the Law containing the statutes and judgments for the people of Jacob was placed beside the ark, but not in it.

Moses told the Levites to take this "Book of the Law" and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there as a witness against you (Deuteronomy 31:26 NKJV).

God has not changed his covenant, he has simply obsoleted the statutes and judgments he gave to Israel (not just the Jews) by doing away with his physical Temple and priesthood. Melchizedek is not a Levite, but we now have a High Priest of his order.

Then Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. (Genesis 14:18 NKJV)

Melchizedek is the priest of God Most High forever, long before the substitute Levitical priesthood which is obsolete in the context of God's new testament for all people just as God promised Abraham that through him all families of the earth would be blessed.

 

[Elia]

God has not changed his covenant, he has simply obsoleted the statutes and judgments he gave to Israel (not just the Jews) by doing away with his physical Temple and priesthood. Melchizedek is not a Levite, but we now have a High Priest of his order.

Bs"d

Not one jot and not one tittle of the law will be abolished.

Even your messiah knows that:

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
Matt 5

So how can anyone with two working brain cells claim that the law or part of the law is abolished???



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[Interplanner]

Bs"d

Not one jot and not one tittle of the law will be abolished.

Even your messiah knows that:

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
Matt 5

So how can anyone with two working brain cells claim that the law or part of the law is abolished???



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

That claim can be made 1, by NT verses, 2, by general NT theology principles, 2A, by the principle of Christocentrism. If Christ is referring to himself in that saying, then we have to adjust the sense to understanding his meaning.

If you don't know there are several examples and details in each of these three categories, then brother, you have a long way to go in study of the NT. It is perhaps easiest to grasp by studying the history of Acts and then seeing the doctrines as such behind that history in the letters. Take your pick: which is easiest for you--to get it by going over Colossians 10x or by reading Acts 9-15 10x which is narrative or action?

 

[Elia]

That claim can be made 1, by NT verses, 2, by general NT theology principles, 2A, by the principle of Christocentrism. If Christ is referring to himself in that saying, then we have to adjust the sense to understanding his meaning.

If you don't know there are several examples and details in each of these three categories, then brother, you have a long way to go in study of the NT. It is perhaps easiest to grasp by studying the history of Acts and then seeing the doctrines as such behind that history in the letters. Take your pick: which is easiest for you--to get it by going over Colossians 10x or by reading Acts 9-15 10x which is narrative or action?

Bs"d

Everybody knows that Paul threw all of your messiah's teachings overboard, and discarded the whole law.

But that doesn't change the fact that in Matt 5 he claims that the law stands forever.

And that is of course correct.

"“Celebrate the Festival of Unleavened Bread, because it was on this very day that I brought your divisions out of Egypt. Celebrate this day as a lasting ordinance for the generations to come." Ex 12:17

"In the tent of meeting, outside the curtain that shields the ark of the covenant law, Aaron and his sons are to keep the lamps burning before the LORD from evening till morning. This is to be a lasting ordinance among the Israelites for the generations to come." Ex 27:21]

"‘This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood.’”
Leviticus 3:17

"You must not eat any bread, or roasted or new grain, until the very day you bring this offering to your God. This is to be a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live." .Leviticus 23:14

“‘Now if you as a community unintentionally fail to keep any of these commands the Lord gave Moses— 23 any of the Lord’s commands to you through him, from the day the Lord gave them and continuing through the generations to come" Numbers 15:23

There is much, much more like this, saying the law stands forever, for all generations.

There is no such a thing as: "The messiah will come and abolish the law". It just doesn't exist.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[jamie]

So how can anyone with two working brain cells claim that the law or part of the law is abolished???

Do you keep the law in accordance with Deuteronomy 16:16?

If not why not?

 

[jamie]

Everybody knows that Paul threw all of your messiah's teachings overboard, and discarded the whole law.

You are bearing false witness against Paul. If Paul discarded the law why couldn't the Jews prove it?

When he (Festus) had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.” (Acts 25:7-8 NKJV)​

If Paul had discarded the law why couldn't the Jews prove it?

 

[Elia]

You are bearing false witness against Paul. If Paul discarded the law why couldn't the Jews prove it?

When he (Festus) had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.” (Acts 25:7-8 NKJV)​

If Paul had discarded the law why couldn't the Jews prove it?

Bs"d

Your problem is that you believe that every word in the NT is the highest truth.

If you want proof that Paul discarded the law, then just look at present day Christianity, which is based upon the teachings of Paul.

Is there one Christian church that observes the law of God?

No.

They are all lawless.

What more proof do you want?


"Teach me, O Y-H-W-H, the way of Your statutes,
And I shall keep it to the end.
34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep Your law;
Indeed, I shall observe it with my whole heart.
35 Make me walk in the path of Your commandments, For I delight in it."
Psalm 119


"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[jamie]

So that means you don't observe Deuteronomy 16:16. I didn't think so.

 

[Elia]

So that means you don't observe Deuteronomy 16:16. I didn't think so.

Bs"d

But then again; it would have been very foolish to think that we would be doing commandments involving the Temple while we don't have a Temple.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[jamie]

But then again; it would have been very foolish to think that we would be doing commandments involving the Temple while we don't have a Temple.

It would be even more foolish to promote a law that you don't keep.

 

[keypurr]

Bs"d

But then again; it would have been very foolish to think that we would be doing commandments involving the Temple while we don't have a Temple.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

I am a temple. Bet you do not understand that.
His laws are kept in the spirit as they are spiritual.
Christ is in this temple. Jesus Christ taught us that.

 

[Elia]

It would be even more foolish to promote a law that you don't keep.

Bs"d

Only those parts which involve the Temple we cannot do right now.

But God's prophets tell us that when the third and everlasting Temple is rebuild, then all those laws, including animal sacrifices, will be reinstated again.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

 

[jamie]

Only those parts which involve the Temple we cannot do right now.

Someone said not to modify the law, i.e. don't take away from it and don't add to it. You have said you take away parts of the law which means you don't keep the Law of God given through Moses.

Jesus talked about hypocrites.

 

[Zeke]

Bs"d

Only those parts which involve the Temple we cannot do right now.

But God's prophets tell us that when the third and everlasting Temple is rebuild, then all those laws, including animal sacrifices, will be reinstated again.



"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever.".
Micah 4:5

The literal sacrifice motif was from bad/literal interpretation, the real sacrifice of those figurative/Esoteric animals dealt with Mans behavior in the temple made without hands, and the need to tame them Isaiah 65:25.

The Jewish mind set should realize that the Spirit isn't owned by any one culture, who have borrowed from prior cultures that preceded them, the shadow of Egypt cast its long shadow over much of the Abrahamic religions as does India etc..................No Jew or Gentile exist in the kingdom of light, allegorical props Galatians 4:24-28.

 

[daqq]

The literal sacrifice motif was from bad/literal interpretation, the real sacrifice of those figurative/Esoteric animals dealt with Mans behavior in the temple made without hands, and the need to tame them Isaiah 65:25.

The Jewish mind set should realize that the Spirit isn't owned by any one culture, who have borrowed from prior cultures that preceded them, the shadow of Egypt cast its long shadow over much of the Abrahamic religions as does India etc..................No Jew or Gentile exist in the kingdom of light, allegorical props Galatians 4:24-28.

:thumb: :thumb:

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

The literal sacrifice motif was from bad/literal interpretation, the real sacrifice of those figurative/Esoteric animals dealt with Mans behavior in the temple made without hands, and the need to tame them Isaiah 65:25.

The Jewish mind set should realize that the Spirit isn't owned by any one culture, who have borrowed from prior cultures that preceded them, the shadow of Egypt cast its long shadow over much of the Abrahamic religions as does India etc..................No Jew or Gentile exist in the kingdom of light, allegorical props Galatians 4:24-28.

Christ or anti- christ? :think:

Did Jesus come through Israel in the flesh or Egypt?

Granted the descendants of those that got off Noah's yacht all knew what had happened, all their religions point to a God man.

Yet, no other foundation can be lain other than Christ Jesus.

Only then can you begin comparing spiritual with spiritual.

Just makin' sure you aint confusin' the first and the last.

 

[Wick Stick]

I don't deny the Father, I only deny your messiah. For the simple reason that he was never anointed by a priest, and therefore he was never a messiah. (messiah means "anointed")

All 4 gospels record Jesus being anointed with spikenard.

You are correct that he was not anointed by a Levite, but then, if we are paying attention, the New Testament is fairly adamant that Jesus had no part in the Levitical priesthood, but rather a claim on the Melchizedek priesthood.

The Melchizedek priesthood, then, is the claim of the Jewish king to both enter the holy place and exercise other functions of a priest. In particular the power to intercede with God on behalf of the nation.

Jarrod

 

[Zeke]

Christ or anti- christ? :think:

Did Jesus come through Israel in the flesh or Egypt?

Granted the descendants of those that got off Noah's yacht all knew what had happened, all their religions point to a God man.

Yet, no other foundation can be lain other than Christ Jesus.

Only then can you begin comparing spiritual with spiritual.

Just makin' sure you aint confusin' the first and the last.

Which Mother do you think Jesus/Isaac was born from in the allegorical teaching in Galatians 4:24-28?