That is true.
Jesus' word is the center of Christianity.
- Thread starter meshak
- Start date
That is true.
God's Truth
New member
Leviticus 17:11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life.
The blood of animals made the Israelites OUTWARDLY CLEAN.
Hebrews 9:13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.
Thank you.
Hebrews 9
13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh,
14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
God's Truth
New member
That is right. The blood of animals made a person outwardly clean, but the blood of Jesus makes us INWARDLY clean.
HOWEVER, God COMMANDED one to use the blood of animals.
Do you understand the significance in that?
I see the words outwardly clean in whatever translation you have presented.
I shared a translation.
I am not sure what you mean.
God's Truth
New member
The cleansing of the flesh statement in the translation you used is, about, the, flesh, and that is about OUTWARDLY.
It is the person. The verse after it talks about in Jesus.
God's Truth
New member
The scripture is talking about the blood of animals making a person outwardly clean. God commanded it. One must do whatever God says.
God's Truth
New member
We are not to do animal sacrifices. You are not making sense. Stay focused.
Yes, but there is no temple. When was Hebrews written? I believe the verb is past tense. I actually don't see a verb.
God's Truth
New member
Why are you arguing against the blood of animals being a commandment from God that is no longer required?
Zeke
Well-known member
Notice the sacrifice of the blood of Christ is spiritually applied, and wasn't about saving the flesh/physical tent/tabernacle in the wilderness that represented our flesh or lower conscience of the animal/beast mind that needed changed/reconciled with our spirit/innerman Genesis 33:4 .
Even the blood of animals wasn't really about temporally saving the physical body which is only a temporal house for our spirit/soul.
The rudimentary story of Jesus vs his flesh is symbolic, 2Cor 5:16 is like believing in Santa or the Tooth Fairy until one grasp that they represent something about our states of conscience that teach a principle of behavior and getting a reward for it, OT milk doctrine Galatians 4:1-3 1Cor 13:11. In short Galatians 4:23-28 explains the symbology portrayed in Allegorical stories through out scripture concerning these two states of maturity concerning the two Kingdoms of God and "where they are located while in either state of mind" Galatians 3:1-3. Matt 11:11, Luke 17:20-21, John 1:9-10, The carnal mind can't see the spirit until the OT veil is removed within.
The literal is a fairy tale, good lessons to teach children by, but if we never get past seeing them as literal then it keeps you in childish ego/fear/boasting/religions fighting like little spoiled kids the goes in egocentric circles, I did it for years time to get past it and become one in the spirit/more excellent way 1Cor 12:31, that is all things to all people 1Cor 13:1-13.
But the Church is the temple.
I don't think I am. Is that what you are saying?
Let me explain what I believe about animal sacrifice.
In Hebrews it appears that it has been done away with.
If you think of when Jesus died for us, reading the gospels and learning about his burial also and resurrection, with His death and resurrection or we might say after the resurrection or upon His death our sin debt was paid. Some say that this means there was no more need for animal sacrifice to take away sin. Did animal sacrifice (ever) take away sin?
When you consider that there still was animal sacrifice even after the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom, remember Paul and his vow (edit- see below) in Acts?, was it when Jesus died or rose from the dead that there was then no more animal sacrifice (some say God would no longer accept it) or was it when the temple was destroyed in AD 70? And how do I know there will not be another temple? I don't know there will not be another temple. There very well may be. But I have to start at the beginning to research it. Ezekiel's temple is not the first or second temple as far as I know. That's where I am at with it right now. Jesus Christ died once for all.
Actually, four men were under a vow.
Acts 21:23-26 NASB - 23 "Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law. 25 "But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication." 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, purifying himself along with them, went into the temple giving notice of the completion of the days of purification, until the sacrifice was offered for each one of them.
I don't know what you think is literal. But there are things that are literal, to be sure!
I believe the Bible is to be interpreted literally, or in other words understood for what it says.
I am talking about how the second temple was destroyed in AD 70.
Zeke
Well-known member
I don't know what you think is literal. But there are things that are literal, to be sure!
I believe the Bible is to be interpreted literally, or in other words understood for what it says.
The eternal spiritual kingdom, vs the temporal carnal Kingdom which is a shadow of the invisible played out in dramatic fashion in stories to deceive/hide and also teach/reveal, Matt 11:11 shows what Jesus was representing spiritual birth within man, his spiritual Mother depicted by Mary was a drama/symbol Galatians 4:26, which makes us like Isaac not born of the will of the flesh Galatians 4:28.
You think Abraham and Sarah were physical beings that lived in history, when its the teaching of those lives extroverted historically or introverted spiritually within our own experience that divides their meanings, 2Cor 3:6.