Posted on 11/28/2017 12:09:34 PM PST by ebb tide
Oh?
Why not?
In order to bring a sacrifice, one should be worthy to approach that close to G-d, which is something that is very difficult to achieve in our time. A deed which one takes on voluntarily as an additional service to G-d must be done in an especially sincere and holy way. If the additional service to G-d is not performed by these higher standards, it will be considered as blemished before Him. It is obvious that this type of Torah-based Divine service should be instructed and supervised only by a reliable and expert Orthodox Rabbi, which is very difficult to arrange in our time.
Elsie is again making an argument based on the American Evangelical Protestant worldview. The theory is that, since the sacrifices are not being offered in the Holy Temple at this time, then the "sacrifice" of J*sus simply must have taken their place, else G-d would be compelled by His Holiness to destroy and damn the entire human race. They simply do not understand the principals of the Torah.
They forget that this is not at all the only time in history when the sacrifices were not being offered. Not only were they missing during the Babylonian Captivity of seventy years, but they weren't even offered every day at the Tabernacle in the Wilderness. The Torah plainly states that the offerings were made whenever the Israelites were settled down in a single place, but when they were traveling and the Tabernacle was disassembled, there were no sacrifices.
They also don't understand that the chata't (sin offering) only atoned for sins committed inadvertently and did not atone for intentional sins at all. Intentional sins had to be punished by the Beit Din (American evangelicals tend to conflate all punishment of sin with "eternal damnation"). Intentional sins can only be erased through repentance.
They also ignore the fact that, while non-Jews have always been permitted to offer sacrifices, they have never at any time been required to do so. Only Israel was obliged to offer the sacrifices mandated in the Torah.
And finally, they don't understand how difficult it would be for non-Jews to correctly offer a qorban. It would have to be offered on a multi-stone altar that when not being used would have to be buried to prevent it from becoming ritually impure. Non-Jews are permitted to offer only the `olah, the "whole burnt offering," and not sin offerings, trespass offerings, or guilt offerings. Finally, the skin of the sacrifice would have to be presented to a Jewish kohen, all of whom (except the very young) are now ritually impure via contact with dead bodies.
American Evangelical Protestants believe in chrstianity because "the bible" (ie, their Protestant bible) tells them to. They never question how their bible was assembled. They literally assume it is self-evidently true and self-authenticating, and so long as their Protestant bible contains a "new testament" they will never question its validity. Until they learn that it is G-d Who authorizes the Bible and not the other way around, they are hopeless.
One is to ask for forgiveness up to three times. At this point the offended party is required to grant forgiveness or he himself violates a commandment. (Or at least this is what I understand. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Your knowledge is much more systematic than mine.)
The spirit of antichrist is strong with you ...
.
Closest thing in English is simply the KJV but without the deceptive italicised words that were put in to change the meanings in most places.
Funny thing is that most of the texts that claim to be better translations are little more than KJV, with the italicised words, paraphrased carefully enough to copyright.
Westcott and Hort clearly wished to write the diety of our Lord out of the Bible (as their letters unabashedly stated) but now its just about marketing and profit.
.
.
> Elsie is again making an argument based on the American Evangelical Protestant worldview.
I am still not impressed.
> They also ignore the fact that, while non-Jews have always been permitted to offer sacrifices, they have never at any time been required to do so.
Correct.
> American Evangelical Protestants believe in chrstianity because “the bible” (ie, their Protestant bible) tells them to.
It is easy to believe anything. I care about facts and evidence, not subjective opinions.
> Until they learn that it is G-d Who authorizes the Bible and not the other way around, they are hopeless.
Indeed.
.
>> “The spirit of antichrist is strong with you ..” <<
What I am seeing is not so much “antichrist” as it is brggadocio about special gnostic “understandings” mostly picked out of Sohar and Kabbalah.
IOW, a chest thumping contest.
.
Your Roodian eyes are clouded ...
.
No, I’m just used to guys like you :o)
.
Has God come in the flesh, to redeem humankind?
.
“ I care about facts and evidence, not subjective opinions.”
(He said, subjectively)
.
.
He most certainly has!
And his Son, in whose person he came, is returning in a little less than 7 years to gather those that believed his words and ways, and lived in accordance thereto.
(there will be gnashing of teeth)
.
The spirit of antichrist denies that He has come in the flesh ...
I meant there is no specific number of times G-d can forgive.
> One is to ask for forgiveness up to three times. At this point the offended party is required to grant forgiveness or he himself violates a commandment. (Or at least this is what I understand. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.
I checked the Divine Code. It does not say how many times one is to ask for forgiveness. Here is the exact wording:
“It is forbidden for a person who was wronged to be cruel and not let himself be appeased. Rather he should be forgiving and agree to pardon the one who sinned against him, if he asks for forgiveness with a complete and willing heart.”
(It is possible that asking for forgiveness up to three times is the Torah Law for Jews, not the Torah Law for Gentiles)
> Your knowledge is much more systematic than mine.
Thank you for your kind words. There is no competition. You know how much I value your learning and our friendship.
.
I fully agree, but that was not the purpose of his posts.
He was trying to show off how learned he thinks he is.
A side by side comparison of the texts in questions reveals no theological differences between the two.
The Book Rome assembled says even MORE!! Psalm 139:3-5 3 You scrutinize my path and my lying down, And are intimately acquainted with all my ways. 4 Even before there is a word on my tongue, Behold, O LORD, You know it all. 5 You have enclosed me behind and before, And laid Your hand upon me.
Don't give them any more ideas to add to their parallelization with the Lord Jesus, and worship and serve the creature more than the Creator who is blessed forever.
.
I specifically said one must disregard those italicised attacks on the word. (unless you like to be misled)
.
Have you done a side by side comparison of the texts?
LOL. Horse hockey. I disagree bro. So what else is new? Disagreeing with you, has been raised to an art form. Your entire post was so full of inaccuracies, I wouldn’t know where to begin, to refute them. I would never accuse you of lying, but I ABSOLUTELY will say my opinion is, that you have no understanding of spiritual issues and Christianity at all. Daniel, the wise one, AMPU, Ealgeone et al, you all have a better handle on apologetics than I do, but for the Zionist to make a statement like that, is laughable.
You must not read the threads too often on how the canon of the OT and NT were formed and which books should be in each.
Personally I have an excellent book on the history of the formation of the canon....The Canon of Scripture by F.F. Bruce.
The very group you criticize is the first one to admit the Scriptures are inspired by God...not a church. That's the position of the Roman Catholics.
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.