Which Passover Should You Observe?

Wednesday, April 4, 2012 (All day)

We find the original Passover in Exodus 12 and the one kept by Christ in the Gospels. Which should you observe today?

See video

Media Download Options [ Download Media: right-click on link ]
Audio
MP3 Audio -

 

[Steve Myers] Christ Himself gave a very direct command to all of His followers. In fact, He told us that we are to imitate Him, we're to follow Him. And over and over and over again He told those people who were with Him to follow Him—in other words, to do the things that He would do. And it's no different when it comes to this time of the year when we realize there's a Passover that Jesus Christ Himself kept. Now questions come up because there's a couple of Passovers that are mentioned in scripture. And so which Passover should we be keeping as New Testament Christians?

[Darris McNeely] The original Passover we find in Exodus chapter 12 where the Israelites left Egypt and they killed a lamb that had been kept up until the 14th day. They kept the blood of that lamb and put it upon the doorpost. And that night the Lord passed through Egypt and killed the firstborn of the Egyptians. But it spared the firstborn of the Israelites. That entire sequence and that whole story in Exodus 12 and 13 is the original Passover (Exodus 12:1-50 & Exodus 13:1-16). But that was for a different time. And that's not our practice, custom or example today. In fact, there is a New Testament Passover—the one that Jesus Himself kept—in which He changed the symbols, which the Apostle Paul gave instruction for the Church to keep and marks then as our example and our model for observing the Passover today. In 1 Corinthians 11:23 Paul writes, "I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread." The same night in which Jesus was betrayed was the Passover that He kept just before He died and it is the example, the timing, the entire Passover service that we seek as Christians today to emulate according to that example.

[Steve Myers] In fact, that's the Passover where He said, "With fervent desire I desire this Passover to eat with you," (Luke 22:14-15) is what He told His disciples when He instituted that Passover. And that's the one that Paul is talking about—that one that celebrates His death, honors Him and we recognize the sacrifice of Christ. That's the Passover we are to keep and we do that on the very night that He was betrayed.

[Darris McNeely] It is not a Passover that has—it does have a connection with that of Exodus chapter 12, but it's different symbols. It's a different meaning because Christ instituted different symbols and His entire death then, which took place a few hours after that night when he took that last Passover meal with His disciples—that is the example to which we always go back and is the benchmark for observing the New Testament Passover for a sincere Christian.

[Steve Myers] That's BT Daily . We'll see you next time.

42 comments
Submitted on Apr 4, 2012, 12:54 pm

Luesenheide

Luesenheide's picture

I prefer not to use "old testament" or "new testament" as terms. Perhaps we should use "version" numbers like the software makers use.

So instead of "old testament" , perhaps we can call it "Testament 1.0"

For "new testament" we can call it "Testament 2.0"

In regards to Passover, we have got to be sure we are using the right version , Testament 2.0, and that we are using the right hardware... which is OURSELVES with a repentant , contrite heart.

My sincere desire that everyone finds deep meaning, change of soul, and deliverance joy in this coming Passover/Days of Unleavened Bread season.

Your Friend,
Bill Luesenheide



Submitted on Apr 4, 2012, 5:35 pm

queenrenasmith

queenrenasmith's picture

Dear Brother Believers:

There is only one "Passover." Yehshua (Jesus) did not come to change the Law, but to make it full (of meaning.) The "passover" in Exodus 12 was a foreshadow of the "passover" sacrifice of Yehshua as the eternal "Lamb of Salvation." That is why He was nailed to the cross and died at the same time as the high priest was sacrificing the traditional lamb in the temple.
You are correct that we are currently not in physical captivity and that Pharaoh is not made us slaves...or has he?
Do your own homework on this. Please do not just take the word of those who sit in the seat of authority. Don't even take my word for it, but I pray that my words inspire you to look it all up for yourself.
The Passover was and is always about Yehshua (Jesus.) But beware those who say that HE did something different from what the Father did or said or taught...In Yehshua's (Jesus) own words that is a very dangerous thing.

May the peace of Yehshua be yours.
Rena



Submitted on Apr 4, 2012, 5:35 pm

Michael Gardner

Michael Gardner's picture

I find myself studying the "Old Testament" almost as much as the "New Testament". This is because much of the "Old Testament" is in the New Testament. Many things would/could not be fully understood unless you study both.
It is also important to understand that the symbols of the Old Testament Passover was changed by Jesus Christ, who was the only person authorized to change those symbols. See John 1:14 and then review John 1:1-5.

One more thing. The more I learn about the Bible and being a Christian, the more I understand I really know very little of the both of them. I will keep on learning. Perhaps in the future I may know a little.



Submitted on Apr 5, 2012, 12:09 pm

jgehrke

jgehrke's picture

@Rena,

Thank you Rena for your words. I have been a bit troubled this week with counting hours and debating with others even in my own family exact timings this week and I hope to reflect on Scripture and words such as yours in prayer this week to seek His will for me and His meanings for me. I very much believe Yehshua is our Lamb.



Submitted on Apr 5, 2012, 8:23 pm

queenrenasmith

queenrenasmith's picture

jghrke:

I never post on places like this so if it helped, I am thanking HIM for it must have been for you.

I too am studying HIS CALENDAR...and have found no easy answers, but a few have some very interesting info for consideration...
119 Ministries and Michael Rood..if you are interested.

For those that have ears to hear and eyes to see..

Peace/Shalom



Submitted on Apr 6, 2012, 7:22 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

From what I understand, there are differences between changing the Law and a change of the Law plus adding to the Law.

The first allows for turning people away from the Lord (De 13), the second is about focus such as Levitical priesthood in comparision to Melchisedec's (Heb 7), both being OF the Law. The third is about adding traditions, do they or do they not introduce and allow for a compatible way to follow the Lord (Mt 15,Mk 7)without transgressing the previous testament (De 13).

Concidering jgehrke's comment about "counting hours" and "exact timings", I ask myself what the apostle Paul originally implied when writing in Gal 4:10. For some reason the word "paratereo" is translated as 'you observe' here, but every other time it is used within the NT, it consistently gets translated as 'they{a group of people} watched'. (Mk3:2, Lk 6:7, 14:1, 20:20, Acts 9:24)

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionaries defines that word as, "1. to inspect alongside, i.e. note insidiously or scrupulously". So what were the Galatians guilty of, watching for timings or observing them? This is a very serious question in my view because of what the apostly Paul immediately wrote right after in Gal 4:11, "I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed on you labor in vain."



Submitted on Apr 22, 2012, 10:34 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

What people don't understand is that the OT Passover was observed during the early hours of the 14th day, not during the afternoon or late hours of the 14th day. I could take the time to explain Exodus chapter 12, but this forum limits the amount of characters that can be typed. Although, its easier to point out 2-Chron 35 - Josiah's Passover. This Passover event in 2-Chr 35 is a demonstration of the law. These people (in 2-Chr 35) read Exodus 12 and understood WHEN to observe the Passover. They observed an early 14th Passover timing as like Christ did in the NT. Verse 1 of chapter 35 says that Josiah performed the Passover. Verse 12-14 informs us that the priests prepared the Passover lambs (most likely due to the impurity of the Israelite people), AND this service went into the NIGHT. Drop down to verse 16 and we're informed that the entire service was performed on the same day. The only possible way that the entire service which they performed was completed on one day is if it began during the beginning evening hrs of the 1814th day, not the late hrs.

There is something else most people don't truly understand. The OT and the NT are truly two separate covenants. I see way to many people misunderstand and misapply Matthew 5:18-19. Firstly, LAWS are not necessarily a "covenant" and vice versa. Laws can be placed inside of a covenant tho. The Greek word translated as "fulfil" in Matthew 5:17-18 is Strong's Concordance #4137 and means, to make full so that nothing shall be wanting, to complete. Therefore, Christ told us why He came to this earth. He came to "complete" the law and the prophets. Again Christ said, "I am not come to destroy, but to 'fulfil.'" In other words, Christ CAME (in the flesh) to "complete," the law and the prophets. This same Greek word for "fulfil" is used in Luke 24:44-48, and these said verses say the same thing, but its said slightly differently. Christ spoke the words recorded in Luke 24:44-48 after He arose from the grave.

Christ fulfilled what was written in the law of Moses, prophets and Psalms. Again, Christ came to "complete". He didn't leave any of it incomplete before He died. And, Christ said His disciples were witnesses. Therefore, jots and tittles and certain laws within the Mosaic code are no longer applicable. That's because the Mosaic covenant was made null and void at Christ's death. (Zech 11:7-14, Is 28:18, Heb 10)



Submitted on Apr 22, 2012, 12:51 pm

queenrenasmith

queenrenasmith's picture

@Felicia
I grew up with this very "Doctrine." I was only 11 when I began to see the problem with this thinking of "Men." The Bible says that THE WORD was in the beginning. We all know that Yeshua(jesus) was THE WORD made flesh. So that gives us a clue that there is only ONE STORY. In the OT, when speaking of the LAW, God said "Always" and "Forever" repeatedly. It also is written that "GOD DOES NOT CHANGE." So, your "theology" is untrue or GOD is a liar. Fact is that the HEBREW words that Yeshua(jesus) spoke about the LAW were that He had come to make them full of meaning (again), never to do away with them and start something new. If you understood the OT, you could better see that. However, so many think in the ways that they have been told to think, and interpret the Bible so. I challenge you to search out the matter for yourself. To learn of other ways of looking at the Bible:throwing out what is not consistant with the WORD and keeping what is. Keep in mind that THE WORD is the ONLY authority that can prove or disprove THE WORD. I know that if you truly do that, you will find more than you ever hoped for.
Here is a free teaching series that may help you in that endeavor:
**Link removed to comply with comment policy**
I pray that you choose not to take offense at my reply. I truly mean it in the spirit of brotherhood.
Peace (Shalom)
Rena



Submitted on Apr 22, 2012, 9:10 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@RENA

I am fully aware what the scriptures say. I am also a firm believer in the NT. For example: Hebrews chapter ten informs us that "the law" was a shadow of things to come. "The law" in context here is reference to the animal sacrifices. The animal sacrifices are no longer required. So this is proof that jots and tittles have been taken away in NT.

YHWH is not required to give everyone the same covenant/contract. For example: Deuteronomy 5:3 says, "YHWH did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are alive." Moreover, people who are now hearkening back to the Mosaic covenant seem to think that the OT Mosaic covenant is the end all covenant. It is not. (Nor is the NT)

Christ -who was the WORD in the OT, He was the One who contracted/covenanted with the ancient Israelites in the desert. Because this is true, when He died, that OT Mosaic covenant/contract become null and void. If this wasn't the case, you need to ask the question: why will YHWH (God) give the physical Israelites another covenant/contract after Christ returns? Ezekiel calls it the PEACE covenant. This PEACE covenant contains animal sacrifices, but some of the terms are different than what you'll find in the Mosaic covenant.

There is no way I want the Mosaic covenant. The apostle Peter (in Acts 15:5-10) said that the fathers within that Mosaic covenant were not able to bear the laws of Moses. The apostle Peter likened the laws of Moses to a yoke around one's neck. There are other factors to this said covenant that are not favorable. There are death clauses for the
people. (Ref: Deut28:58-61, Romans6:23, 8:2, Deut30:15,17-18, Deut29:16-20, Exodus32:33, Deut27:26 but not limited to.)

Additionally, Deut 31:26-27 reads, "Take this book of the law, and put it beside of the ark of the covenant of YHWH your Elohim (opposed to inside of it), that it shall be there as a WITNESS AGAINST YOU for I myself know your rebellion and your stiff neck. ..." The entire Mosaic contract/covenant with all its laws stood and remains standing as a witness against all of the ethnic tribes of Israel. Again, this Mosaic contract was not in the ethnic Israelites' favor.

Does this mean that the NT contains no laws? Not so. It does contain laws/stipulations. The NT is actually Christ's WILL and TESTAMENT. For this reason, it was instituted before Christ died.



Submitted on Apr 23, 2012, 5:45 am

nathanalbright

nathanalbright's picture

Felicia,

When you enter into the thicket of covenant studies, you have to ask yourself a lot of questions. For one, you have to recognize the true failure of the Mosaic covenant, a failure correctly noted by the author of Hebrews (as well as Moses in Deuteronomy) which points to the fault in the absence of an obedient heart and spirit in the mindset of the rebellious Israelites who received the Mosaic covenant. Far too often people who consider themselves Christians show an unwarranted hostility to God's laws and desire a "content-free" new covenant that allows for salvation while free of the burdensome legal obedience of the Mosaic covenant.

We don't find that sort of reduction of the legal standard when we look closely at the "new" covenant, though. We find that Jesus Christ Himself points to adultery as being more than merely sex outside of marriage, but even lustful desire, a vastly more difficult standard. Murder is not only the actual murder, but is hostility and hatred, again, a vastly more difficult standard. Certain interpretations of Jewish law thought it was acceptable to hate one's enemies and only love one's brethren. This allowance was explicitly removed by Christianity. The Royal Law of James even shows that partiality and bias on our part is sin. The legal standard that seems so onerous in the Penteteuch is far more difficult in the New Covenant, but what has changed is that God has promised to dwell within us and to change our hearts and minds to become in the image of the Eternal (in concert with our own faith and obedience). You fall short by showing your hostility to the supposedly burdensome commandments of the Mosaic covenant without properly putting the fault on the physically and carnally minded recipients of that covenant who did not have the heart or the faith to obey God as He commanded. It was in finding fault with them that God promised a new covenant, open to all who would hear and obey it (see Psalm 87, 117, Isaiah 56, among other places), regardless of their national origin, to become a part of the Israel of God.



Submitted on Apr 23, 2012, 8:33 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@Nathan-
No offense intended, but you have completely misunderstood and misinterpreted just about everything I wrote. The ten commandments (including the seventh day Sabbath), the Holy Days and some other laws are in affect within the NT. Regarding the OT: I agree that the problem/failure was with the ancient Israelites. Perhaps you might reread what I wrote without any preconceived notions.

My entire "covenant/contract" premise was actually to validate the NT timing of Passover and when Christ partook of the bread and the wine. There is an entire host of people that are discrediting the NT. (I am NOT included in this group.) For example: they twist Matt 26:17-20 and say that Christ really wasn't being truthful when He told His disciples to prepare the Passover.

I don't have time to delve into this subject much deeper at the moment. I have an appointment soon. Nevertheless, I will say again: A LAW IS NOT NECESSARILY A COVENANT/CONTRACT AND V.S. And, as scripture informs us, the Mosaic covenant is no longer in affect. Read Zech 11:7-14, and Is 28:18. If you believe that the OT covenant/contract remains in affect, are you sacrificing animals? Are you wearing a blue thread in the hem of your garment?, etc. There is a huge list of Mosaic laws that I rather doubt you are following.

I will also quickly say that the ten commandments and the Holy days were instituted in Genesis. If you do some research, you can find demonstrations of these laws in Genesis. For example: Gen 1:14, Gen 2:2-3, Gen 4:6-8 I make mention of this because they were NEVER exclusive to the Mosaic covenant.



Submitted on Apr 23, 2012, 9:15 am

nathanalbright

nathanalbright's picture

Indeed, you are misunderstanding what I (and others) say, partly because there seems to be no agreed upon meaning in your conversation about law and covenant. We all tend to speak a bit imprecisely about such matters, particularly because laws written about in the Mosaic covenant had an existence prior to the Mosiac covenant and in the "new" Covenant as well, but with different contexts. The relationship between laws under the Mosaic covenant and laws under the "new" covenant is not very straightforward. Some laws are clearly included and intensified. Some laws remain valid but in unfamiliar ways (for example, circumcision was necessary to take the Mosaic covenant Passover, while baptism and self-examination are necessary to take the New Covenant Passover, and the sacrificial law remains valid because blood is necessary to cover our sins, but Jesus Christ's sacrifice remains fresh once and for all so that bulls and goats and lambs and rams and turtle doves no longer have to be killed). In addition, some laws presumably remain valid but are unenforceable without a righteous civil government, and which we may have to simply obey ourselves as best as we can understand and seek to understand as best as possible the spiritual meaning of laws that are obviously physical. These are matters we all have to struggle with as believers, and you seem to suggest they are easy and cut-and-dry, which leads you to point the finger at others for not following your own standard of interpretation.



Submitted on Apr 24, 2012, 12:18 am

KARS

KARS's picture

Alright! Time out! let us all put this into perspective. First of all the Aaronic priesthood was replaced by our Savior's ultimate sacrifice. Not only did the High Priesthood transfer over to the tribe of Judah with an everlasting High Priest, Jesus Christ our Savior (YAHOO!!); He also was our living sacrifice without blemish; the sacrifical lamb. He did this once and for all; past, present and future. That is how He fulfilled the law. He reconciled us to our Father in heaven otherwise we would die and that would be the end of it.
Now has for the other laws, commandments, and so forth. They are still in tact with new meanings. Like it has been stated above, Jesus being the God of the Old Testament gave it spiritual meaning. No longer would it be carnal. Now if you look at a women and lust after her (this happened to me on Sunday, I was given the middle finger), Jesus said it is a sin. Plain and simple. Sin begins in the heart and then into the mind. If you don't do something about it asap; it will manifest itself into the physical and then trouble with a capitol T. Circumcision must come from the heart. Romans 2:29 So, it is impossible for man to please God without His Holy Spirit. For even with His Holy Spirit we fight against our fleshly desires. It is a constant battle of the mind both day and night. We must stay close and attached to our Savior and never let go. He has brought us repentance a daily necessary tool and part of a christians life. I will enjoy letting my veggie gardens of 6 years take a rest next year. I will be starting 2 new ones while the others rest. God is an awesome God and knows how to work His own land. So I am just following the leaders sound advice on how to use His soil. :o)



Submitted on Apr 24, 2012, 8:57 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@Nathan
I am a bit baffled at your following statement. You wrote:
"These are matters we all have to struggle with as believers, and you seem to suggest they are easy and cut-and-dry, which leads you to point the finger at others for not following your own standard of interpretation."

1. What do you mean by,"these are matters we all struggle with"? Do you mean you are not sure what laws and/or doctrines are relevant in the NT v.s. the OT? (Or, something else?) I just want to be sure I understand you correctly.

2. You say I seem to suggest they are easy and "cut-and-dry". What is "they" referring to? Again, I just want to be sure I understand you correctly.

3. I am not pointing the finger at anyone in particular. You and someone else made direct responses to me on my general statements, therefore I answered directly back.

Does this have anything to do with my comment about Matt 26:17-20? If it does (and I'm not entirely sure it does), this website/UCG supports an early 14th day Passover (opposed to a late 14th). I am in agreement with UCG on this issue. For this reason, I felt free to make my comment about the Passover statement in Matt 26:17-20.

And, in my view there are doctrines that are "cut-and-dry" whether you agree or not. And, I firmly believe that the OT Mosaic covenant is not applicable for NT Christians. I don't mean to offend anyone by this statement. You all are free to believe what you will.



Submitted on Apr 24, 2012, 9:57 pm

nathanalbright

nathanalbright's picture

Kars, I'm glad to see that you understood what I was saying at least. And I would argue that the law always had a spiritual meaning, and that it was meant for more than physical observance, and that the physical observance always pointed to some deeper spiritual truths, even under the Mosaic covenant.

Felicia, I did notice earlier that you agreed with the UCG practice of an early 14th Passover. That said, I find your beliefs about the covenant wanting. My question for you (and the work I see it necessary for you to do) is to wrestle with the content of your belief in the covenants. After all, it is the terms of the New Covenant that we have in (apparent) disagreement. And it was the terms of the obsolete Mosaic covenant that were unable to be kept by the people of Israel because the law was merely physical for them (as it seems to be for you). Jeremiah makes it plain that what makes the new covenant new is not new laws (or no laws) but rather the laws being written on the tablets of our hearts rather than the tablets of stone. Moses had recognized this problem at least as early as Deuteronomy. Likewise, the author of Hebrews finds fault with the ancient Israelites and not with the law itself. The purpose of the law was never to save, not under the Mosaic covenant or the 'new' covenant, but accepting the freewill offering of Jesus Christ and the death row pardon that includes does not give one carte blanche to ignore the law when we are freed from the penalty of sin. And we do not know sin apart from the standard of law that determines the acceptable boundaries of our thought and behavior. Thus we must wrestle with the law and its continuing and deeper applicability for Christians.



Submitted on Apr 25, 2012, 7:19 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

Felicia,

When you wrote, "And, I firmly believe that the OT Mosaic covenant is not applicable for NT Christians."

What should be made of time the apostle Paul returned to Jerusalem and was told by the leading men there of the accusation against him in Acts 21:21 "And they are informed of you, that you teach all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs." Then he was directed to do the following in Acts 21:24 "Them take, and purify yourself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning you, are nothing; but that you yourself also walk orderly, and keep the law."

And what about Jews, do they need to understand that the truth is the OT Mosaic covenant needs no longer to be applicable for them in order to become true NT Christians?



Submitted on Apr 25, 2012, 3:47 pm

dusty

dusty's picture

Since we are discussing Passover and timing issues thereof, perhaps someone can answer a question for me.

The 1st new moon this year occurred late on March 22nd making Friday March 23rd the 1st day of Abib. Now according to Leviticus 23:5 and Exodus 12:2-6 the Passover is to be observed on the 14th day of Abib at twilight. Therefore, beginning with Friday, March the 23rd (day 1) and counting to day 14 you arrive at Thursday, April 5th.

Therefore my question is: Why did all the COGs observe the Passover on Friday, April 6th?



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 6:18 am

KARS

KARS's picture

Hi Nat! No arguement here. I know that too. It is not my place to preach a sermon on it. That belongs to the ministry of UCG. :o)
Have a good one Nat.

KARS



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 8:46 am

KARS

KARS's picture

Hi Dusty!
Under the title heading "Publications" above there are two booklets titled: God's Holy Day Plan and Holidays or Holy Days. There you will find the answers to questions you may have.
All booklets and magazines are free of charge we don't ask for any money. We members of UCG pay for all shipping and handling.
On Beyond Today it says "free means free" and that is exactly what we mean. To good to be true I know; but it is true.
Have a good one,
KARS



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 9:49 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

WHAT IS A COVENANT?
To understand covenants, people have to start thinking like the ancient Hebrews and put aside the modern mindset of signing ones name by the "x" as like a modern contract. There is "blood" involved in the covenants in most cases (but not all) within scripture. But, please know that an OT blood-covenant DOES possess many similarities with our modern day contracts. Before moving forward and explaining the "blood" aspect of this; I want to make sure one understands the elements of a modern contract because of its similarities to the ancient Hebraic blood-covenants.

A modern contract is a binding agreement between two people or two parties. Contracts have stipulations,... "you will do this, I will do that." If the contract stipulations are agreeable to both
parties, both parties sign their names on a line below all of the stipulations. After signing, the contract becomes both legal and binding.

Contract "stipulations" can also be called contract "terms". A term can be a period of time, or it can be conditions or stipulations that define the nature and limits of an agreement. For example, consider the phrase: "Peace Treaty Terms." The words "stipulations" and "terms" can be interchangeable.

A contract "clause" is a section in the contract. A "clause" can be a compound sentence, more than one sentence, and/or more than one stipulation. Contracts can impose penalties for violating stipulations in the contract. And, they can include rewards too. I'll give you a hypothetical example of a contract to demonstrate the various elements of a contract.

Hypothetical Contract:
John contracted with his neighbor, Sam to mow his lawn every Sunday. The contract terms/stipulations, penalties and rewards written in the contract are as follows: John is expected to mow Sam's lawn every Sunday. If John mows the lawn in the afternoon on Sunday, Sam will be paid $20.00. If John mows the lawn in the morning, he will be rewarded with extra pay of $5.00. If John fails to mow the lawn anytime on Sunday without giving Sam any notice, John suffers a financial penalty. John has to pay Sam $20.00. If Sam fails to pay John the amount owed upon completion of the mowing job every Sunday, John is no longer bound to the
contract, and Sam is expected to pay an extra $5.00 as a late fee. Sam provides the lawn mower. If the mower fails to work, ...CONTINUED IN NEXT POST>>>



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 10:14 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

>>CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST>>
If the mower fails to work, John is not obligated to mow the lawn until the mower is fixed, or Sam provides another lawn mower.<END of hypothetical contract.>

Hopefully, one can see the various obligations both people have in this hypothetical contract. John has his obligations to the contract, and Sam has his obligations to the contract. If either party fails to uphold their obligations, there is a penalty enacted for whichever person broke the terms of the contract. One final note: when I speak of this hypothetical covenant, I can call the
penalty stipulations, the penalty clause because there is more than one sentence and statement about penalties. In other words, the several penalties = the penalty clause.

The OT blood-contracts have either some or all of what I explained, minus one. Blood-contracts don't require hand written signatures. In scripture, many times blood was required when Elohim/God made a covenant with man. Blood was required by cutting and separating flesh. (ie., circumcision, animals - Jer34:18)

Why is cutting the flesh and separating that flesh conjoined with YHWH's contracts? Answer: man is expected to agree to life or death. When anyone enters into a contract with YHWH, its very
serious business. Since life is within the blood (Refs: Gen 9:4, Lev 17:11), one can either be covered by the blood (covered by the life) or be separated (separated from the life) which leads to
death. YHWH does not give a third option. You're either in the death camp or in the life camp. The life camp is covered by the blood - the life. The death camp is represented by the separated flesh. This is true for all of YHWH's blood-covenants with mankind.

I showed in a previous post that the OT Mosaic covenant had curses and death clauses. I also provided scripture references which I won't re-post here. THE ONLY ESCAPE THE ANCIENT ISRAELITES HAD FROM THESE CURSES AND DEATH CLAUSES IS IF THE ONE WHO CONTRACTED WITH THEM... DIED. Christ was the One who contracted with the OT Israelites and He died. The Mosaic blood-contract became null and void. Hebrews 9:15 reads, “..., (Christ’s) death having taken place for redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, ...” The apostle Paul made this point very clear in Romans 7:1-4. >>>CONTINUED IN NEXT POST>>>



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 10:32 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

<<<CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST>>>
The apostle Paul made this point very clear in Romans 7:1-4. But, I will begin by quoting the last verse in chapter 6. It reads,"For the wages of sin is death, but the favorable gift of Elohim is everlasting life in Christ Jesus/Yahushua our Master. Or do you not know, brothers - for I speak to those knowing the law - that the law rules over a man as long as he lives. For a married woman has been bound by law to the living husband, but if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then, while the husband lives, she shall be called an adulteress if she becomes another man's. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is not an adulteress, having become another man's. So, my brothers, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ..." The El Shaddai/YHWH Personage in the OT was the Personage who was married to the Israelites in
the desert. (Ref: Ex 24:3-11) He died, freeing the Israelites from the Mosaic blood-covenant.

Please read Zechariah 11:7-14. This passage describes the time when Christ hung on the cross. And, verse 10-11 says, YHWH broke the covenant (the contract) with all the people on THAT day. Which
day? The day Christ died. (Additional Ref: Hebrews 9:16) This is the day when the OT contracts became null and void. Also consider Isaiah 28:14-29. Firstly, the Israelite rulers understood that they had a death covenant in verse 14. And, YHWH didn’t deny it. In fact, YHWH confirmed it by saying in verse 18, “And your covenant of death shall be annulled, and your vision of the grave shall not stand. /...” (Additional ref: Heb 8:6-13)

Before anyone reader of this post starts jumping up and down and proclaiming, “the law hasn’t been done away with!”....I say, 'I agree.' Please understand the difference between a contract and a law. A contract and a law are not the same thing. A law is just that. A contract is an agreement between two parties. A law can be established outside of a contract or it can be included in a contract.

WHAT LAWS ARE WITHIN THE NT COVENANT/CONTRACT? This is another subject. Hence, I'll quit for now.



Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 12:30 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

>>CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST>>
The apostle Paul made this point very clear in Romans 7:1-4. But, I will begin by quoting the last verse in chapter 6. It reads,"For the wages of sin is death, but the favorable gift of Elohim is everlasting life in Christ Jesus/Yahushua our Master. Or do you not know, brothers - for I speak to those knowing the law - that the law rules over a man as long as he lives. For a married woman has been bound by law to the living husband, but if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then, while the husband lives, she shall be called an adulteress if she becomes another man's. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is not an adulteress, having become another man's. So, my brothers, you also were put to death to the law through the body of Christ..." In other words: The El Shaddai/YHWH Personage was the Christ Personage who was married to the Israelites in the desert. (Ref: Ex 24:3-11) He died, freeing the Israelites from the Mosaic blood-covenant.

Please read Zechariah 11:7-14. This passage describes the time when Christ hung on the cross. And, verse 10-11 says, YHWH broke the covenant (the contract) with all the people on THAT day. Which
day? The day Christ died. (Additional Ref: Hebrews 9:16) This is the day when the OT contracts became null and void. Also consider Isaiah 28:14-29. Firstly, the Israelite rulers understood that they had a death covenant in verse 14. And, YHWH didn’t deny it. In fact, YHWH confirmed it by saying in verse 18, “And your covenant of death shall be annulled,
and your vision of the grave shall not stand. /...” (Additional ref: Heb 8:6-13)

Before anyone reader of this post says, “the law hasn’t been done away with!”....I’ll say, 'I agree.' Please understand the difference between a contract and a law. A contract and a law are not the same thing. A law is just that. A contract is an agreement between two parties. A law can be established outside of a contract or it can be included in a contract.

WHAT LAWS ARE INCUMBENT UPON NT BELIEVERS? This is a different and lengthy subject in itself. So, I'll end here.



Submitted on Apr 28, 2012, 9:25 am

dusty

dusty's picture

Hello KARS:

Can’t find the answer to my question in the books you recommended. If you know where this issue is addressed, could you provide page and paragraph numbers? Or perhaps you or someone else here knows the answer. I’ll repeat the question. (And OK, I’ll admit it’s rhetorical :>) )

The 1st new moon this year occurred late on March 22nd making Friday March 23rd the 1st day of Abib. Now according to Leviticus 23:5 and Exodus 12:2-6 the Passover is to be observed on the 14th day of Abib at twilight. Therefore, beginning with Friday, March the 23rd (day 1) and counting to day 14 you arrive at Thursday, April 5th.

Therefore my question is: Why did all the COGs observe the Passover on Friday, April 6th, which was Abib 15?



Submitted on Apr 29, 2012, 8:04 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

Felicia,

There is an age old problem that comes along with interpretations about the words in the Bible.

Are they "clear" or are they being "selective"?

As of writing this now, I can only view your post dated, Submitted on Apr 27, 2012, 10:14 am. Its' closing words are ">>>CONTINUED IN NEXT POST>>>", but there is no next post. Was it a typo or something? I have a few observations that could be interesting, but I would rather wait until you finished.



Submitted on Apr 30, 2012, 7:26 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

dusty,
When it comes to the timing of holy days, even as informative as the UCG material is, it only scratches the surface once a person begins to look more deeply into the subject. Carl Franklin has written extensively about calendar issues in a much more indepth and scholarly fashion. You can find his papers by searching for "friends of the sabbath". That site also contains a large resource about CoG history and the development of sabbath keepers in America in general.

Felicia,

I like the idea the apostle Paul wrote down in 1Cor 4:6 “'not to go beyond what is written,' so that none of you will be puffed up in favor of the one against the other" as the NET Bible puts it. More tradional versions have it as "ye may learn not to think above that which hath been written, that ye may not be puffed up one for one against the other". It can have a broad application when comparing the scriptures to ideas that are proclaimed to be found in the scriptures.

From my reading, to use Romans 7:1-4 as a basis that God's covenant with the children of Israel is void; is going beyond and above what Paul intented by his analogy. He believed covenant breakers had a depraved mind (Rm 1:31). Basically to state that "The apostle Paul made this point very clear in Romans 7:1-4.... The El Shaddai/YHWH Personage in the OT was the Personage who was married to the Israelites in the desert. (Ref: Ex 24:3-11) He died, freeing the Israelites from the Mosaic blood-covenant." is conjecture and reading something into his words that is not found in the way he was leading his life.

There is the saying, actions speak louder than words. What are the people to believe when faced with Paul's actions in Acts 21:24 yet are confronted with ideas about his writings that speak the opposite? The Pharisees Jesus mostly talked about were those that would teach one thing but do another, is that the kind of example Paul was to those he taught? (1 Cor 11:1)



Submitted on Apr 30, 2012, 5:15 pm

KARS

KARS's picture

Ok Dusty what most people do not understand is that God tells His time different than man. We have a 24 hour clock. If you read Genesis chapter one after you pray,then you will see how to keep time correctly according to God our Father. Then you will understand Mr. McNeely and Mr. Myers presentation. :o)

P.S. Please approach the throne of our God with respect; after all He is our creator both of beast and man.



Submitted on May 1, 2012, 7:19 pm

dusty

dusty's picture

Norbert Z and KARS:

Oh come on guys. It is a very simple, straightforward question with a solid scriptural foundation—Carl Franklin’s “scholarly” ideas on the calendar (of which I am very familiar) nothwithstanding. Would you like for me to give you the answer? Mmmmm, probably not.



Submitted on May 2, 2012, 5:38 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@ Norbert Z -
What's your take/understanding then of the following:

1) Zechariah 11:7-14
2) Isaiah 28:14-29
3) Do you believe that Christ was NOT the God/El/YHWH who covenanted with the Israelites in the desert?

I THINK UCG believes it was the Christ Personage. If my memory doesn't serve me correctly, someone can please correct me on this.



Submitted on May 2, 2012, 11:16 pm

KARS

KARS's picture

Dusty if you really wanted to know the truth you would pray first for understanding. You would look up all the scripture references in the booklets, blogs and articles offered instead of all this circular reasoning.

Many are called but few are chosen. If you are not being called at this time by God our Father; all the proof in the world will never satisfy you. Our conversation is over and the contention will stop with this last post from me. I have studied long and hard and intend to continue doing so.

It's a percious gift from God our Father to be called and finally except His calling with humility and obedience. It brings peace of mind and healing. Take it from me I know.



Submitted on May 3, 2012, 9:09 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

Dusty and Felicia,

I am certain that I know more than I understand. Giving answers to anyone does not mean as much as finding the truth of them out for themself.

When it comes to calendar issues and scriptures of prophetic significance there are different teachings about them that oppose each other. It creates a circumstance similiar to Prov 18:17 "​​​​​​​The first to state his case seems right, ​​​​​​until his opponent begins to cross-examine him."

Everyone has to deal with that, you, I and the other guy. The thing is there are plenty of people that wish to tell people directly or indirectly what to believe and just as many looking for someone to make up their mind for themselves.

I believe in an approach to learning about living in a way given in Ps 32:9 is possible for every person to attain, but we're all not at the same level.

"Be you not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding(unintelligent): whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle, lest they come near to you." But it needs to be governed by the idea given within Prov 3:5 "​​​​​​Trust in the LORD with all your heart, ​​​​​​and do not rely on your own understanding".

There is a time for everything and there is nothing wrong witholding direct answers sometimes. Prov 12:23 "A prudent man conceals knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaims foolishness". In my view both Darris and Steve or any offical representative of the UCG receive a fair amount of flak at times for handling the word of God prudently.

And Felicia, with certainty there is and always has been a King of Israel, sometimes the people tried to follow Him and numerous times the people reject His ways. But I do not fully understand what to make of the word "Personage".



Submitted on May 3, 2012, 9:15 am

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@Dusty:
Your question was, "Why did all the COGs observe the Passover on Friday, April 6th?" You also said that the new moon was on March 22.

Actually, the astronomical new moon was on March 22. This astronomical new moon, sometimes known as the dark moon, occurs by definition at the moment of conjunction in ecliptic longitude with the Sun, when the Moon is invisible from the Earth. This moment is unique and does not depend on location.

Although, in Jerusalem the time of the dark moon occurred at 4:38 pm on March 22. And, sunset on this said day was at 5:52 pm. I mention this because the COG's calendar is based upon Jerusalem time.

UCG and the rest of the COG's don't follow the astronomical new moon / dark moon phase. Historically, no one has to my knowledge. UCG and the rest of the COG's follow the mathematical calculated Hillel calendar based upon the molad. "Molad" is a Hebrew word that means "birth". The molad is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds after the previous molad moment. In other words in light of your question, the molad moment in Jerusalem didn't occur on March 22, but rather March 23.

Please know this: this particular year - 2012, was/is unique. People who follow the first crescent new moon from either Jerusalem or by local visibility, were in line with the Jewish/Pharisaic Hillel calendar this year. In all of these three said calendar systems, Passover occurred on April 6.



Submitted on May 3, 2012, 4:12 pm

dusty

dusty's picture

Felicia:

You are correct in stating that a “molad” in the Jewish/Pharisaic calendar of Hillel II is not the time of the actual new moon but is calculated on the basis of the average time between conjunctions or “new moons”—although it can be as much as 15 hours off the actual conjunction.

However, the molad calculations of said calendar are only concerned with establishing the first day of the seventh month, or Tishri. The molad of Abib may or may not have occurred on March 23 but that is totally immaterial because Abib 1 is not established on Hillel II’s calendar by calculating the molad for that month.

It’s calculations first establish the first day of the seventh month. For 2012 it is on the correct day. Then the calculations always count back 177 days to establish the first day of the first month. This works just fine—sometimes. The problem is:

On certain years there are 176 days between the first and seventh months and on other years there are 178 days, and 2012 happens to be one of those 178-day years. Therefore, counting back only 177 days from Tishri 1 places the Jewish/Pharisaic first day of Abib one day late, i.e. the actual Abib 2, thus making Passover also one day late.

Furthermore you stated to the effect that to your knowledge no one has based a calendar on the astronomical new moon/dark moon phase. Allow me to point out distinct possibility contained in Col. 2:16. Here Christians in Colossae were being judged by their pagan neighbors for various religious practices including the observance of new moons.

The Christians in Colossae were not having meetings or services on the new moons. They were simply taking note of their passage. It was their calendar! It enabled them to observe the annual Feasts at God’s appointed times. Thus, for this odd calendar custom, they were being judged. Keeping track of the passage of new moons on their own was the only way for Christians in Colossae to observe the annual Holy Days. There simply was no other correct "calendar" available to them.

The Christians in this isolated community could not possibly have had access to a calendar maintained in Jerusalem and it was still 300 years before Hillel II would make the calendar computations available to the Diaspora. The only thing they could have done was keep an accurate record of all new moons and base their observance of the Feasts and the Holy Days on th



Submitted on May 4, 2012, 12:59 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

Hi Dusty: Col 2:16 (based upon Jewish history) is referring to the first visible crescent moon. This is different from a molad which cannot be spotted with the naked eye. This is one definition of the word. The Hebrew word, "molad" is a bit ambiguous. See Wikipedia for a fuller explanation of "molad".

Encyclopedia Judaica, copyright 1971, under "New Moon", it reads as follows: "Originally, the New Moon was not fixed by astronomical calculations, but was solemnly proclaimed after witnesses had testified to the reappearance of the CRESCENT of the moon." (Emphases my own.) [Note on above: the witnesses saw the crescent light of the moon with the naked eye.]

QUOTE CONTINUED:
"By the middle of the fourth century, the sages had established a permanent calendar(the Hillel calendar) and the public proclamation of the New Moon was discontinued."
[Note: The Hillel calendar was solidified by the Hillel dynasty and is a calendar based upon mathematical equations.]

Dusty, I see, based upon your answer, you have done some "calendar" research. (That's great!) So, I will assume here that you understand that not all years have twelve months. Some years have thirteen months. Its called, intercalation when a year is added. Without further explanation, and with this said, I'll quote the Encyclopedia Judaica again.

Encyclopedia Judaica, copyright 1971, under "Calendar" reads as follows: "In Temple times this intercalation was decided upon in the individual years according to agricultural conditions. Later; however, it was fixed to be in the years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 of the cycles."

[First Note: agricultural conditions is referring to the ripeness/readiness of the barley, the first grain harvest in ancient Israel. In other words, the first new moon of the year had to coincide with the condition of the barley for the wave sheaf offering. Reference Deut 16:1 and Ex 34:18. Abib/Aviv is in reference to the condition of vegetation. Second Note: Every 19 years, all comes back into alignment. Its like a clock starting over.]

FWIW: The World Wide Church of God, in 1970-71, printed a booklet titled: God's Sacred Calendar. It was authored by Kenneth C. Herrmann. In this said booklet, it explains the crescent new moon.



Submitted on May 4, 2012, 1:00 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

I will add one more piece of info here: (Dusty, I don't know what you know or don't know. But, in-case you are not aware or perhaps for other readers, I'll just add this one more comment.) Genesis 1:14 says that the LIGHTS are for signs, appointed times, and for... If you look up the meaning of the Hebrew word for "appointed times" (King James I think says "seasons"), you'll see that its the same Hebrew word used in Lev 23:4 for God's/YHWH's appointed times such as Passover, etc. In other words, the LIGHTS were made so we can determine His Holy Days. Again, I don't see how the dark moon/conjunction can be used to determine Holy Days when we're told that the LIGHTS were made for this purpose. I don't know of anyone in history that has used the conjunction - the dark phase of the moon to determine Holy Days.



Submitted on May 6, 2012, 6:04 pm

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

Dusty,

When you mentioned, "Thus, for this odd calendar custom, they were being judged. Keeping track of the passage of new moons on their own was the only way for Christians in Colossae to observe the annual Holy Days. There simply was no other correct "calendar" available to them."

I would question the assumption about the availablity of calendars.

From my reading, Col 2:16 does not carry a hint that they were on their own keeping track of the passage of new moons. It just states they were keeping them but not how they were doing it.

However Gal 4:10 may imply and hint at; that group was guilty of looking to the sky to hold holy days, albeit it does not say which days (I've read explanations that they could of been keeping their own pagan days in the name of Christ). However note the "You observe" in the original greek at the beginning of the passage. Every other time that same word is translated within the NT, it is about men watching(observing) scrupulously at something. Mk 3:2, Lu 6:7,14:1,20:20,Acts9:24

Concidering the intellectual capablities of that time that can be seen today in the evidence of the Antikythera mechanism may point too(google it). It is not beyond a reasonable doubt that civilization, including the Jewish province of Israel, were able to make available calendars for any city that was in need of one.



Submitted on May 7, 2012, 1:26 pm

dusty

dusty's picture

Christians in Colossae didn’t need just any old calendar. They needed one that would accurately define the EXACT days of God’s commanded assemblies (if only modern Christians were so diligent). The only calendar that fills that requirement is one that establishes the first day of the first month based on the first new moon following the spring equinox.

Starting from this first new moon and following the instructions in Exodus 12 and Leviticus 23, the dates for all God’s Holy Days can be correctly established. Additionally, there will always be sufficient ripe grain for the wave offering during the Days of Unleavened Bread and all of the Feast of Tabernacles will be in the autumn, a requirement established by Exodus 34:22.

There is no need for elaborate calculations or decisions by religious elites in secret councils, i.e. Hillel II and his fellow Chief Pharisees. It’s really not all that complicated.



Submitted on May 13, 2012, 11:32 am

Norbert Z

Norbert Z's picture

Dusty,

When you summarize your opinion, "It’s really not all that complicated."

Knowing that Roman roads not only transferred goods but also knowledge, otherwise we would not have the apostle Paul's letters. How did Jewish communities outside of Israel maintain their year and days of biblical worship? What happens when clouds keep those at Jerusalam from seeing the sky, what then? How do those Jewish communities outside Israel know which day the year begins?

It's just as likely that the knowledge of a calculated calendar could be supplied by those in Moses seat via those same Roman roads. That is also really not all that complicated.

Following Jesus is one very important thing, knowing that very shortly after the quartodecima controversy arose, calendar UNDERSTANDING undoubtedly does become much more complicated. Anyone with knowledge has to strive to put all the pieces together in understanding.

Besides concidering your wording in your comment timed at May 7, 2012, 1:26 pm. Who today can see so clearly that they can go beyond explaining and "declare specifically" what the people actually needed near two millenia ago? In commenting so specifically, it can and may come across to other people with the same impression as what Paul wrote about in 1Tim 1:7, "Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm."



Submitted on May 18, 2012, 12:59 pm

dusty

dusty's picture

Hello Norbert Z:

YOU ASKED:

1) “How did Jewish communities outside of Israel maintain their year and days of biblical worship?”

ANSWER: The same way those inside Israel did it—by visual observation of the first crescent moon of the year.

2) “How do those Jewish communities outside Israel know which day the year begins?”

ANSWER: Same answer as # 1.

3) “What happens when clouds keep those at Jerusalem from seeing the sky?”

ANSWER: When the first faint crescent of the new moon was above the horizon and usually visible 10 minutes or so after sunset, sometimes eyewitnesses could not see it because that part of the western sky was overcast. Thus a month was started ONE DAY LATER than it theoretically should have been had clouds not obscured visibility during those crucial 10 minutes.

YOU STATED:

1) “It's just as likely that the knowledge of a calculated calendar could be supplied by those in Moses seat via those same Roman roads.”

MY RESPONSE:

Even if those roads had been 6-lane super highways, they could not transport—nor could those in Moses Seat provide—something that didn’t exist in the 1st century. The calculated calendar was not finalized, published, and distributed to the Diaspora until the mid-4th century.

2) “Knowing that very shortly after the quartodeciman controversy arose, calendar UNDERSTANDING undoubtedly does become much more complicated.”

MY RESPONSE:

That statement is absolutely correct when determining the times for God’s Holy Days according to the way the Pharisees tell us to do it—by following their calculated calendar. However, following the instructions God gives to us in His Word is quite simple.

3) “Anyone with knowledge has to strive to put all the pieces together in understanding.”

MY RESPONSE:

Again you are correct—concerning the Jewish/Pharisee calendar—and through much “striving” I have gained considerable knowledge about that particular subject. Most of it I found quite astonishing. For example:

The calculations for each year are based on a fictitious starting date of 3761 BC, which is supposed to be the molad of Tishri preceding the year of the creation of Adam and Eve. However, Adam and Eve were created by God more than 200 years before 3760 BC. Therefore, THE QUESTION IS: Where did Hillel II get this date of 3760 BC for the creation of Adam and Eve?

THE ANSWER IS: There is only one document in all Jewish litera



Submitted on May 21, 2012, 10:25 am

dusty

dusty's picture

Comment Continued:

THE ANSWER IS: There is only one document in all Jewish literature from which this wrong date can come and that is a work known as THE SEDER OLAM RABBAH or THE GREATER SEDER OLAM. It is a chronological record extending from Adam to the revolt of Bar Kokba in the reign of emperor Hadrian in the 130's AD. It is terribly flawed in the chronology it presents because the Persian period was shortened by over 200 years; thus the claim Adam was created in 3760 BC.

However, there is a very specific reason why the Seder Olam is so flawed. It is not as if the Jewish historians suddenly lost all knowledge of the Persian period. Rather, it is evidence of a Jewish attempt to deliberately suppress the fact that the dating of Christ's ministry fulfilled the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9. In the Seder Olam, the history of the Persian period was deliberately shortened so the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel 9 would point to Simon Bar Kokba instead of pointing directly to Jesus Christ. It was a direct attempt to DIVERT ATTENTION AWAY FROM CHRIST'S MINISTRY.

Is it any wonder Christ referred to the Pharisees as liars, a generation of vipers, sons of hell, and hypocrites whose inward parts were full of greed and wickedness?



Submitted on May 21, 2012, 10:44 am

KARS

KARS's picture

There must have been some sort of record keeping from the time of Adam to Noah when he and his family went into the Ark. However, did it survive long enough to be re-written?

Did it even have the date written in the anual when Adam and Eve where created? If so, then Moses would of told us the exact date.

Another thing, if God didn't let us know the percise date of Adam and Eve's day of birth (which by the way was awesome) then why should He tell us what percise day His Only Begotten Son was born?

Well,God the Father made sure we don't know the precise day His son was born.

He is a awesome God with a head on His shoulders. We will never ever be able to out do our God. Satan learned that the hard way and will be sent to outer darkness when all is said and done.



Submitted on May 26, 2012, 5:23 pm

Felicia

Felicia's picture

@Dusty:

I have also done some research on the J's. The parable Christ gave in Mark 12:1-12 says a lot. They truly knew what they were doing because verse 12 says that the J's understood that Christ was talking about them. They have been attempting to subvert Christ ever since the first century and their attempts have remained throughout the centuries.

Most people don't know that the NT writers used the OT Greek Septuagint. The OT in our modern English bibles comes from corrupted Masoretic text. And, the oldest Masoretic version is from A.D. 9-10 century. I'll give you some examples of where the J's attempted to subvert Christ and the NT message.

NT Quotes the OT:
Matt. 12:21 says, "And in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust)."

Matt 12:21 comes from Isaiah 42:4 in the Septuagint. However, the J's twisted this verse in the Masoretic (MT) and it reads, in the MT as "...and the isles shall wait for his teaching."

Note: The J's hate the fact that the gentiles have been grafted in.

NT Quotes the OT:
Luke 3:5-6 says, "And all flesh shall see the Salvation of God."

The Septuagint in Isaiah 40:4-5 says the same thing. But, in the Masoretic text, in your English version, this verse is completely expunged.

NT Quotes the OT
Heb 1:6 reads, "And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." (This is speaking of Christ, the first-born.)

In the Septuagint, you'll find this quote in Deut. 32:43. However, in the Masoretic text it is completely expunged. Additionally, the text that speaks of the gentiles (shown in the LXX in Deut 32:43+) is also expunged.

Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament).

The Greek Septuagint OT is much older than the Masoretic text. The oldest current complete copies that have been preserved date to around the 4th century A.D./C.E. Although, the oldest Septuagint fragments date to 100 B.C./B.C.E

The Hebrew Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) scrolls were discovered supporting many scriptures in the Septuagint. Emanuel Tov of the Hebrew University, (and Editor-in-Chief of the international Dead Sea Scrolls Publication Project,) wrote: the biblical texts from Qumran have "taught us no longer to posit MT at the center of our textual thinking."

Read: Jer 8:8



Login/Register to post comments
© 1995-2013 United Church of God, an International Association | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. All correspondence and questions should be sent to info@ucg.org. Send inquiries regarding the operation of this Web site to webmaster@ucg.org.



X
You may login with either your assigned username or your e-mail address.
The password field is case sensitive.
Loading