Posted on 09/26/2005 6:29:50 PM PDT by laney
4 Oct is the anniversary of Sputnik.
So you would agree that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is the fulfillment of this "everlasting ordinance", with the type (the killing of an animal and shedding of its blood) giving way to the antitype (Christ's sacrifice on the cross)?
If the sacrifice of animals, an "everlasting ordinance" is not longer in effect, why do some propose that the (bloodless??) festivals are still legitimate, rather than also being fulfilled in Christ? Where do "bloodless" festivals find legitimacy in Scripture?
It's an odd position.
t54>So you would agree that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is the fulfillment of this "everlasting ordinance", with the type (the killing of an animal and shedding of its blood) giving way to the antitype (Christ's sacrifice on the cross)? If the sacrifice of animals, an "everlasting ordinance" is not longer in effect, why do some propose that the (bloodless??) festivals are still legitimate, rather than also being fulfilled in Christ? Where do "bloodless" festivals find legitimacy in Scripture? It's an odd position.
In a study of the Seven Feasts of the L-rd,
Y'shua fulfilled Pesach, hag Matzoh and fruits fruits on the day of the feast and in the metaphor as identified and in the place as defined.
On the "feast of weeks", Shavuot which is seven weeks and a day from the Feast of First Fruits. This would make it Fifty days ( Pentecost in the Koine Greek) the Ruach haKodesh descended and filled those who were assembled as they were required to by the Law in Jerusalem.
This leaves the Feast of Trumpets, Yom Kippur and Succoth yet to be fulfilled by the L-rd. on the day and in the metaphor as described in Leviticus 23.
b'shem Y'shua
b'shem Y'shua
Revelation 11
The Two Witnesses
7 Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them.
(Jews and Christians)
10 And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.
(Muslims)
That's a theory. It's not a very good one, but it's a theory. There is no reason to believe that Christ did not fulfill all the feast days at His first coming. Scripture says He fuliflled "all righteousness" (Matt. 3:15), and "all the law" (Matt. 5:17). Otherwise Christ did not fulfill "all the law", and you are dead in your trespasses and sin.
(Jews and Christians) ...
(Muslims)
How delightfully allegorical ...
Please quote in the context given.
Matthew 3:
13 Then Jesus arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him.
14 But John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?"
15 But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he permitted Him.
Matthew 5:
16 "Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
17 "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.
18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished.
b'shem Y'shua
It's in Hebrews. Hebrews chapter 8, 9 and 10 clearly present that the Levitical priesthood has been replaced by a new, better priesthood in Christ. Chapters 9 and 10 especially make clear that animal sacrifices and burnt offerings are not needed. HOWEVER, nowhere does it say that God's Holy Days are not to be observed, or are of no effect.
Obviously the writer of Hebrews wasn't afraid to buck the system of Judaism. He made a major change by outlining why sacrifices and the priesthood were not needed. Yet he did not make a case that God's Holy Days were no longer to be observed. It is certain that in biblical times Christians celebrated the Lord's feast days. They certainly didn't celebrate Easter, Christmas or any other holiday that we associate with Christianity today.
Oops. Sorry. Fault.
If you read very carefully, or actually not so carefully, you will see that Hebrews is speaking of a change from one system to another; from the Levitical Order of the sacrificial system to the Melchizedekian Order of Jesus Christ. "As He also says in another place: 'You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek'" (Heb. 5:6). It was not a change of the Levitical Order. It was an abolishment of the Levitical Order.
The "holy days" were part and parcel of the Levitical system. Melchizadek never kept the festival days of Leviticus.
"But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises." (Heb. 8:6)
The imperfect Levitical system was completely replaced by the perfect one after the Order of Melchizedek.
Try again. Where is there an divinely authorized change to the Levitical system so that bloody festivals become unbloody. (I'll give you a hint, there is only one, and it is directly referenced in the establishment of the new covenant.)
Which part of the law didn't Jesus fulfill in His life or, specifically, when He went to the cross?
If Christ did not fulfill all the law, then you are under a curse. "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.'" (Gal. 3:10).
"Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. And I testify again to every man who becomes circumcised that he is a debtor to keep the whole law. You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Gal. 5:1-4)
"Circumcision", in this passge, is Paul reference to the bondage of the ceremonial system of the old covenant. He could have just as easily said "passover keeping" or "Leviticus 23 keeping" or "keeping kosher". If you willing place yourself under these things, there is no hope for you since you nullify Christ's work on your behalf. You deny that He came to set us free from the demands of the law, esp. the ceremonial law. He is our fulfillment. Either it is a complete fulfillment, or you are still in your sins.
Context, context!
The writer of the book called "to a group of Messianic Jews" or Hebrews is quoting Psalm 110:4
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, "Thou art a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."
b'shem Y'shua
NASBu Psalm 110:1 A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand, Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet."
2 The LORD will stretch forth Thy strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of Thine enemies."
3 Thy people will volunteer freely in the day of Thy power; In holy array, from the womb of the dawn, Thy youth are to Thee as the dew.
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, "Thou art a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."
5 The Lord is at Thy right hand; He will shatter kings in the day of His wrath.
6 He will judge among the nations, He will fill them with corpses, He will shatter the chief men over a broad country.
7 He will drink from the brook by the wayside; Therefore He will lift up His head.
Yes, I know that quote is from the Psalms.
It changes nothing of what I said, but it's a nice try at a diversion. Do you have anything substantive to say?
Is no where in the Law, it is only in Rabbinical Judaism.
b'shem Y'shua
Is no where in the Law, it is only in Rabbinical Judaism.
Leviticus 11
The argument is over whether the fact that we no longer slaughter animals demonstrates that that the commandments of God expressed in the Old Testament are obsolete. My position is that the demand for a blood sacrifice has not been abolished by the death of Christ on the cross, but rather it has been fulfilled.
"I did not come to abolish the law, but fulfill it," -- Jesus Christ.
"Not one jot or tittle of the law shall be repealed until the return of Jesus Christ in all his glory" -- St. Paul.
Incidentally, the feast of St. Francis is not a feast in the sense used by the Book of Common Prayer; there is no mandated observance of anything.
That is correct. The demand was fulfilled. The system which expressed that demand in the keeping of ceremonial laws was abolished.
Leviticus 11 contains dietary restrictions, but they are not Kosher. For instance, the Talmud says that one must not eat a calf which has been boiled in its mother's milk. Rabbinical law forbids the consumption of any diary product at the same time as the consumption of any beef product.
Jesus argued that the essence of the law was love of God and love of neighbor; such expansions of the law made the law burdensome to follow. Jesus also argued that we must keep in mind the purpose of the law: Man is forbidden from labor on Sunday so that he might have that day reserved to glorify God; when Jesus glorified God by curing a sick man, the rabbis criticized him for "violating" the law. Jesus argued not that it was OK to violate the law, but that what he had done fulfilled the spirit of the law; the rabbis were, according to Jesus' logic, taking a single verse out of context.
>> The demand was fulfilled. The system which expressed that demand in the keeping of ceremonial laws was abolished. <<
Careful not to make a non-sequitor there, though. It is true that the lamb, Christ, is not slaughtered over and over again; but neither does it exist merely in the past. The sacrifice is eternal, or, "outside time." Our obligation to participate in the sacrifice is not removed, but rather it is transformed from an occasional observance to an eternal observance.
We have lost the meaning of "to remember," substituting it as a synonym for "to recall." When one remembers, one does not remember something which is gone, but rather one becomes mindful of something. One RECALLS making an appointment, but one REMEMBERS the appointment itself. Hence, when Jesus commands, "Do this is remembrance of me," he does not mean to re-enact an event of the past, but to become deeper once more part of Himself.
Hence, Christians did not avoid sacrifice, but recognize that they were committed to obey the command given through St. Paul that we must "take up my cross and follow [Jesus]."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.