Calling all Law Keepers.

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
amen. it is made to sound like some really difficult religious concept, but when a little kid is engaged in manifesting a vision, tongue curling out, sin just ceases to really even be the focus; the kid is not "trying to stay out of trouble" iow, in that analogy, they are focused on the act of creation. Macaroni art or whatever.
another bad result of Trinity doctrine imo, this believing that God can be defined
The Trinity does not define God.
God cannot be defined.
It's just an attempt to understand the terms the Bible uses...
God
Father
Holy Spirit
Spirit of God
Son of Man
Son of God
Virgin Birth, etc.
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
No, I am not without sin, but neither do I deny the possibility.
ha that is made into such a ball of worms too when ppl are all known by their deeds anyway lol, and if you aren't sure you could just see how hard it is to make them apologize when they didn't do anything wrong or whatever, it isn't a mystery. You are going to be known (judged) by your deeds, whether you need works or not, or need to keep the law perfectly or not--another hairball, covered by forgiveness, we have a new covenant now, that of forgive, and you will be forgiven, that shouldn't be a mystery either imo
ppl just don't want to do it
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus and KBCid

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Certainly more difficult, but so long as the old man is not completely dead, he may still yearn for things that he cannot really have.
ya, if you can't be happy with nothing, you are not going to be happy with anything, anyway.
the value of staying in a cave and fasting until you have...overcome the inevitable crisis cannot be overstated.
that guy just never died to self imo
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

KBCid

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2011
764
292
63
Atlanta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Further thoughts:
Within the Gospel accounts, how oft does the phrase "break bread", or an equivalent such phrase occur before the "Last Supper"? Speaking with regard to 1 Cor 11: I read it much, if not the same, as you when I was at that point.
Most always do. I used to enjoy putting together timelines, tracing down the timelines / frames. And, I have eaten "crow" for not having done so. Me no like "crow".

Sry for long time to respond. I too see the breaking bread point you make and for awhile I too was thinking that way but, as you pointed out before the last supper it was never used except in relation to multiple people eating together.... however, it was after the last supper that people were being brought into the church / community and the new thing was to live communally which if you think about it would elicit a more oft reference to bread breaking right?. The thing that gives it away for me is why they would reference breaking bread and not drinking the cup or for that matter why not simply refer to it as the Lords supper? if that was indeed what was happening?

so let's look at the following accounts as bread breaking references;
Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

If one celebrates the lords supper via bread breaking then why mention the bread and the meat and not the cup?

Matt 14:19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.

braking is mentioned for multiple people right? and this before the last supper so, such terminology was not foreign to the tongue. right? Now my point is that prior to the last supper the whole communal thing was not really a thing in play since the apostles were following Christ around and not attending to the development of a church community. But after that point it became a focal point so the whole communal thing would have grown and elicited more references to that way of living right?

Acts 27:34 Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you. 35 And when he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat.

Here again multiple people and thus breaking must occur. here is a reference from an outside source that seems to have some logic on the subject. Now this doesn't make it truth but it tends to lend credence to the concept.

What is the breaking of bread that the Bible talks about?
In the Bible, the expression "breaking of bread" is a way of describing a shared meal. If a person eats alone, he does not need to break the bread, because there is nobody to share it with. However, if you are eating with another person, the bread loaf must be broken into pieces so that everyone can have some. The early church was described as having everything in common (Acts 2:44), and they studied doctrine together, prayed together, and ate together (Acts 2:42-47). This passage calls their common meals "the breaking of bread."
What is the breaking of bread that the Bible talks about?

So, Richard this is not an attempt to prove right and wrong but more of there are evidences that must take a critical eye to make sure that we are not simply swayed by the winds of popular thought. I have much respect for those things you have already written on as you know from my likes and I will have respect on your view here even if I may come to a firm disagree on anything we have discussed. To me some things must simply be on the shelf / fence for me until I find further evidence to tip it one way or another.
If you could and would for me your neighbor, I ask that you make a copy of anything that I may not have answered and reintroduce it as we pass a subject. I want the discussion or I would not be here and assert anything.
I appear to be on a limited time budget for a few weeks so i'll be in and out of the posting as time permits ok?
 
Last edited:

KBCid

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2011
764
292
63
Atlanta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'm not familiar with Revelation, except for very few verses.
But as to the Tree of Life in the Garden...yes, there was one.
Are you saying there wasn't??

Here is my simplicity.... can you reference any scripture that asserts that the tree was in the garden? and when you get a moment do a word search for the tree of life in revelation and read the verses concerning it. I would prefer to not try to sway your thinking if possible and just let you come to a conclusion before I make any points about it.
 

KBCid

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2011
764
292
63
Atlanta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
OK.
Understanding about the leaven is easy.
What about what I underlined?
We were discussing WHAT is to be remembered.
Then you speak of the first month.
Are you saying we should remember Jesus' death only one time per year at the appointed time? (which I'm not sure what it is)
I always understood this verse to mean that WHENEVER we join in communion, even if every day, we are remembering the sacrifice Christ made for us, that he gave His body and blood for us.

The remembrance of Christ's sacrifice once for all was done at an appointed time and place. The time was the yearly Passover which God made a Holy time of year for that celebration. The Jews always honored the Holy day at its appointed time and not every week or day right?
Now you and I both know that Christ said;
19...unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

So if Christ mimics the Father in all things then why would he make the Fathers dedicated Holy day of Passover to be celebrated whenever people felt like it?
Now let me ask this; Why should we not celebrate this most important act of Christ once a year on the very day that he did it? We celebrate the pagan day called Christmas once a year no? we celebrate the pagan day of easter once a year right? why is it they only occur at that rate? why not have easter every day and Christmas every week?
 

KBCid

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2011
764
292
63
Atlanta
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Trinity does not define God.
God cannot be defined.

To be more correct God cannot be defined by man.... BUT, God has every right to define themselves to man right? Which is exactly what happened in the beginning;

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness
Gen 5:2 In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Mark 10:8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

According to God male and female are the earthly representation of their image that they caused to be formed for that very purpose. God is two beings that are one in purpose.

John 17:22And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Notice that there is no mention of any other by Christ when he states who is involved in being one right? Notice also that he asserts what type of oneness the Father and himself have and it can be the same for man in that they can be different beings and yet still one.
 

jimd

Active Member
Oct 14, 2017
144
73
28
84
catawissa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It seems to me that common sense would indicate if anyone has a fleshly body they would have a fleshly nature, especially since it is not a sin. This fleshly nature was Spiritually done away with when Christ died and was resurrected the same as ours will be when we are resurrected but for now through faith in Him our sins are imputed to Christ. He bore our sins in His body on the cross. In the physical sense we still sin until we die. We will literally be free from the fleshly nature and sin when the corruptible is raised incorruptible or at death if you prefer to think of it that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen and pia
B

Butterfly

Guest
Really interesting thread to read-
A question : did Jesus have free will ?
You see I have always presumed that the choices we make when we are tempted is a choice we make, part of out free will.
Also what would have been the point of Jesus being tempted, as preparation for his ministry to begin - right after the spirit descending on him , if he did not have the same ability within him to make a choice that was not Gods will for his life.
I have always looked at his wilderness time as preparation for the spiritual battle that would take place as he started his ministry. I am not so sure that would have been needed if he did not have the ability to give into to temptation. Unless of course that whole experience was in fact for satans benefit - which I have never considered before !
Butterfly
 

Richard_oti

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2008
1,170
739
113
Sry for long time to respond.

No problem. We both have a life outside of CB and responsibilities to attend unto.


I too see the breaking bread point you make and for awhile I too was thinking that way but, as you pointed out before the last supper it was never used except in relation to multiple people eating together....

Before the "Last Supper", it was not used in the NT that I can recall other than when used by Jesus with the masses.


however, it was after the last supper that people were being brought into the church / community and the new thing was to live communally which if you think about it would elicit a more oft reference to bread breaking right?.

Yet, there are not that many such references. It is the timing as to when the phrase was used that always struck me. Why not simply say they "ate" or had "supped". Such as in Acts 20:11, they had broken bread and eaten. Seems almost redundant.


I know you mention this in part below, however in:
Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.

It is part of a "list" of things they were steadfast in doing.


Just a curiosity: In your opinion, would the bread of the Last Supper have been "artos" or "azumos"?


The thing that gives it away for me is why they would reference breaking bread and not drinking the cup or for that matter why not simply refer to it as the Lords supper? if that was indeed what was happening?

The cup was after "supper". Like I said, I used to read 1 Cor 11 as you do. No matter how I read it anymore, I can not see a yearly observance there, nor being spoken of.

Or, simplify it completely and directly state that this is done once a year before Passover. Not as or instead of Passover, for it is not at the appointed time of Passover, but rather the night before.


so let's look at the following accounts as bread breaking references;

I'm game. Who knows, maybe you shall show me something that I missed or misunderstood. However, may I eat my crow in private, or must I publicly admit my error? <chuckle>


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, 47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

If one celebrates the lords supper via bread breaking then why mention the bread and the meat and not the cup?

Is "meat" in v46 really "meat"?

Act 27:33 And while the day was coming on, Paul besought them all to take some food / meat, saying, This day is the fourteenth day that ye wait and continue fasting, having taken nothing. 34 Wherefore I beseech you to take some food / meat: for this is for your safety: for there shall not a hair perish from the head of any of you. 35 And when he had said this, and had taken bread, he gave thanks to God in the presence of all; and he brake it, and began to eat.

I find it interesting that both of us refer to the same verses in different ways.


Matt 14:19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. 20 And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.

braking is mentioned for multiple people right? and this before the last supper so, such terminology was not foreign to the tongue. right? Now my point is that prior to the last supper the whole communal thing was not really a thing in play since the apostles were following Christ around and not attending to the development of a church community. But after that point it became a focal point so the whole communal thing would have grown and elicited more references to that way of living right?

Prior to the "Last / Lord's Supper", within the NT I only recall it in such instances as you mention above, in which it speaks of Jesus breaking the bread as in Matthew 14 amoung a few other places.

However, even in a non-communal setting, at every meal in which bread was consumed, it was broken. Even within the walls of a SFD (single family dwelling) in which it was only a husband and wife, or even add a child or two.

Hmmm, doeth this mean that the inventor of the bread slicer was "anti-christ", attempting to do away with the "breaking of bread" altogether <grin>? Yes, I speak in jest. So while the answer to your questions is almost invariably "yes", an answer of "yes" is not restricted to be within the confines of your questions.


Acts 27:34 Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an hair fall from the head of any of you. 35 And when he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat.

Here again multiple people and thus breaking must occur. here is a reference from an outside source that seems to have some logic on the subject. Now this doesn't make it truth but it tends to lend credence to the concept.

Point taken and understood. However, that it specifically states "broken" it, is such a thing truly necessary to state when such would have been the norm. In Bere'shit 19, bake "unleavened bread, and they ate. No mention of "break / braking". Same in ch 31. When "breaking" bread was the norm for the times, to specifically state as much, is a redundancy unless there was a reason for it. And redundancies are always within the Scriptures for a reason. And again, I find it interesting, that we should both bring forth some of the same verses from different perspectives.

<snip>

So, Richard this is not an attempt to prove right and wrong but more of there are evidences that must take a critical eye to make sure that we are not simply swayed by the winds of popular thought.

I agree, it is not about proving "right" and "wrong", it is about the sharing of our perspective POV's, and learning one from another. As we share some common similarities, there is perhaps some to be gleaned by one or another or even both.

I enjoy the "critical eye" aspect. But as for "popular thought", if you only knew that which I have received from my "brethren" for my current perspective upon this. I do not accept anything due to "popular thought", for if it is popular, it is likely upon the "broad" path.


<small snip> as you know from my likes
Likewise. <small snip>


I may come to a firm disagree on anything we have discussed. To me some things must simply be on the shelf / fence for me until I find further evidence to tip it one way or another.

Which is very possible. I have done as before with others. Some things we shall disagree upon, and some must be shelved until such time as it is right.


If you could and would for me your neighbor, I ask that you make a copy of anything that I may not have answered and reintroduce it as we pass a subject. I want the discussion or I would not be here and assert anything.

No problem. I won't hesitate. Likewise, the discussion is the enjoyment.


I appear to be on a limited time budget for a few weeks so i'll be in and out of the posting as time permits ok?

Not a problem. My time also can become very limited.

Post when you may, I shall do likewise.
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Here is my simplicity.... can you reference any scripture that asserts that the tree was in the garden? and when you get a moment do a word search for the tree of life in revelation and read the verses concerning it. I would prefer to not try to sway your thinking if possible and just let you come to a conclusion before I make any points about it.
You won't sway my thinking.
I have a really strong base.
The tree of life is in rev 22, if I remember...maybe not.
I don't care for revelation.
I will reference scripture from Genesis:

Genesis 2:9
Genesis 3:22,24

I also read Revelation 22:1
I have no comment other than to say that Jesus gives eternal life so He is the tree of life.
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I must admit, when I first read your post, I had to do a double take and ask the question, did I just understand you correctly. After reading your subsequent posts, I have to conclude that I indeed did read you correctly.

As much as I don't really want to, I must challenge you with regard to this. Please note, it is done in love as for a brother. You are free to do with it as you will. Perhaps it has merit, perhaps it does not. I shall try to keep this short and to the point, yet enough for most to perhaps understand.

Question: Can Jesus both have eaten the Passover and been the Passover in the same month of the same year?
There is nothing in scripture that says Jesus ate the consecrated Bread and Wine.

Question: How long would it take from the time the lamb is slain, which could only be done in the place where YHVH chose to place haShem (Cf Deut 16:2, 6). Then taken back to the place in which whoever was staying, and was roasted whole, until it was time to eat of it?

IMO, this must be considered, for in the realization of this, it further helps us to understand the timing.

The Passover is a sacrifice, it is not a "day". It is a sacrifice in a prescribed month, on a prescribed day, at a prescribed time(frame). Yes, there is also a "second" Passover in the second month for those away on a journey or "unclean" on account of a dead body (Gee, I wonder why), cf BeMidbar 9 ; 19:11.

The Passover (sacrifice) is given to be upon the 14th between the evenings. "Unleavened Bread" does not begin until the 15th. The Passover is to be eaten with unleavened bread, the feast of
unleaven is for seven days only. The Passover seder is the meal that (pardon my expression) *kicks off* the feast so to speak. (cf Exodus 12:8)

Otherwise, it would require 8 days of unleavened bread.

Let's look a little closer:

Exodus 12:6 Take care of them until the fourteenth day of the month, when all the people of the community of Israel must slaughter them "at twilight" (bein ha-`arebim).

Leviticus 23:5 The LORD'S Passover begins "at twilight" (bein ha-`arebim) on the fourteenth day of the first month. 6 On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD'S Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread made without yeast. 7 On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work.

Numbers 9:3 Celebrate it at the appointed time, "at twilight" (bein ha-`arebim) on the fourteenth day of this month, in accordance with all its rules and regulations."

This fairly well establishes the month and day. It is upon the 14th day of the first month. However we have also encountered the first problem as well:

"At twilight", or bein ha-`arebim; When is this? IMO, we need to establish this for the sake of clarity and in order to achieve a proper understanding of this.

Bein ha-`arebim is "between the-evenings". Does this help us at all? Not really. So let's see if perhaps there is something within the Scriptures that will give us the needed clarification.

Deuteronomy 16:6b there you must sacrifice the Passover "in the evening, when the sun goes down" [ba-`arev ke-vo' ha-shemesh], on the anniversary of your departure from Egypt.

ba-`arev ke-vo' ha-shemesh: In the-evening, as-to_go the-sun.

IMO: This clarifies the meaning or timing of bein ha-arebim.

The Exodus itself will further clarify this as well as help set the timeline;

Exodus 12:29 At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead. 31 During the night Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, "Up! Leave my people, you and the Israelites! Go, worship the LORD as you have requested.

Numbers helps further solidify this: 33:3 The Israelites set out from Rameses on the fifteenth day of the first month, the day after the Passover.

From the Exodus account, we can see that they slew the Passover and applied the blood. Midway through the night, the firstborn were slain. During the night (that very night) Pharaoh summoned Moses and commanded them to leave. According to Numbers, they set out on the 15th, the day after the Passover.

To sum up to this point: The Passover lamb was to be slaughtered on the 14th of Aviv (Nisan), as the sun was to go down (prior to sunset).

According to Josephus, the "sacrifice(s)" were slain between 2 and 5:

Wars of the Jews 6.9.3 (Book 6, Chapter 9, Verse 3) we find; ...upon the coming of that feast which is called the Passover, when they slay their sacrifices, from the ninth hour till the eleventh, but so that a company not less than ten belong to every sacrifice...

I think that perhaps a brief look at the Feast of Unleavened Bread is perhaps warranted here:

Numbers 28:17 On the fifteenth day of this month there is to be a festival; for seven days eat bread made without yeast. 18 On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work.

Leviticus 23:6 On the fifteenth day of that month the LORD'S Feast of Unleavened Bread begins; for seven days you must eat bread made without yeast. 7 On the first day hold a sacred assembly and do no regular work.

Note: The 15th of Aviv is a shabat shabaton and mele'ket `avodah lo'.

Exodus 12:18 In the first month you are to eat bread made without yeast, "from the evening" (ba-`erev) of the fourteenth day "until the evening" (ba-`arev) of the twenty-first day. 19 For seven days no yeast is to be found in your houses. And whoever eats anything with yeast in it must be cut off from the community of Israel, whether he is an alien or native-born. 20 Eat
nothing made with yeast. Wherever you live, you must eat unleavened bread."

Exodus 12:18 says we are to eat unleavened bread from the evening of the 14th, to the evening of the 21st. Is there a contradiction? Not at all. Is this eight days instead of seven? Not at all. From sunset ending the 14th / beginning the 15th, until sunset *ending* the 21st are the seven
'days'.

In Exodus 12:18, we have ba-`erev' and 'ba-`arev. Why the slight difference with regard to the 'nikud' (vowel points) here? If we go through the Scriptures and do a comparison of these, it becomes very clear. Ba-erev is used of 'evening' following / after that day (after sunset). Ba-`arev is used of 'evening' which ends that day (prior to sunset). That is not as clear as I would like for it to be, hopefully you will understand it as intended.

Take a look at Yom Kippurim for clarity as well.

There are some peculiarities of things as recorded in the New Testament, which seem to cause a great deal of confusion:

1) The Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread are used as almost interchangable terms.

2) The "day of preparation" spoken of *is* the 14th of Aviv.

3) The day following the preparation day, is referred to as a shabat, which is the shabat shabaton that is the 15th of Aviv, the first day of "Unleavened Bread".

Luk 22:7 And the day of unleavened bread came, on which the passover must be sacrificed.

Again, the Passover is sacrificed upon the 14th, "Unleavened Bread" does not begin until the 15th.

John 13:2a The evening meal was being served...
Interesting choice of words.

The bread broken, was artos.

In John 18:28 they wanted to be able to eat the Passover

<time gap, skipping ahead>

Joseph requests body as the evening approaches (Matthew 27:57, Mark 15:42, John 19:38) and the "shabat" (first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread) was about to begin (Luke 23:50-54, cf John 19:31).

How long did it take for Joseph of Arimathaea to go to Pilate, get permission, buy new linen, return, remove the body from the cross, transport the body, wrap the body, and *then* place the body in the tomb? (cf Matthew 27:57-60, Mark 15:42-46, John 19:38)

Sundown, Feast of Unleavened Bread begins, the 15th of Aviv (a Thursday). A day
of no regular work.

<snip>
What are you trying to prove? The Last Supper (seder/Passover) was on a Thursday, He died on Friday, so what is the problem?

Luke 23:4,14; John 18:38; 19:4,6 – under the Old Covenant, the lambs were examined on Nisan 14 to ensure that they had no blemish. The Gospel writers also emphasize that Jesus the Lamb was examined on Nisan 14 and no fault was found in him. He is the true Passover Lamb which must be eaten.

Heb. 9:14 – Jesus offering Himself “without blemish” refers to the unblemished lamb in Exodus 12:5 which had to be consumed.

Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25 – Jesus is celebrating the Passover seder meal with the apostles which requires them to drink four cups of wine. But Jesus only presents the first three cups. He stops at the Third Cup (called “Cup of Blessing” – that is why Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 uses the phrase “Cup of Blessing” to refer to the Eucharist – he ties the seder meal to the Eucharistic sacrifice). But Jesus conspicuously tells his apostles that He is omitting the Fourth Cup called the “Cup of Consummation.” The Gospel writers point this critical omission of the seder meal out to us to demonstrate that the Eucharistic sacrifice and the sacrifice on the cross are one and the same sacrifice, and the sacrifice would not be completed until Jesus drank the Fourth Cup on the cross.

Do you deny the seder/Passover required 4 cups of wine? You look like a Modernist trying to disprove the Bible with the Bible. It doesn't work.

As for the rest of your assertions, I'm not going to sit at my computer for 5 hours addressing your post line by line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Richard_oti

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2008
1,170
739
113
There is nothing in scripture that says Jesus ate the consecrated Bread and Wine.

Nor have I implied nor stated that he did. Thus, the premise upon which your reply is built, is in error.

<snip>

What are you trying to prove? The Last Supper (seder/Passover) was on a Thursday, He died on Friday, so what is the problem?

Did Jesus eat the Passover, or was he the Passover? It can not have been both within the same month of the same year.

<snip>

Do you deny the seder/Passover required 4 cups of wine? You look like a Modernist trying to disprove the Bible with the Bible. It doesn't work.

If the premise is flawed, so also is the conclusion.

When was the Passover to be slain?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KBCid

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
The remembrance of Christ's sacrifice once for all was done at an appointed time and place. The time was the yearly Passover which God made a Holy time of year for that celebration. The Jews always honored the Holy day at its appointed time and not every week or day right?
Now you and I both know that Christ said;
19...unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

So if Christ mimics the Father in all things then why would he make the Fathers dedicated Holy day of Passover to be celebrated whenever people felt like it?
Now let me ask this; Why should we not celebrate this most important act of Christ once a year on the very day that he did it? We celebrate the pagan day called Christmas once a year no? we celebrate the pagan day of easter once a year right? why is it they only occur at that rate? why not have easter every day and Christmas every week?
I'm not debating with you whether the above is right or not...
It seems to me that celebrating Passover is a ceremonial activity and Jesus did abolish ceremonial law.

At the last Passover He said that His blood is the New Covenant.
The NC does not abolish the OC, but adds to it or changes it somehow.
Paul said:

1 Corinthians 11:26New King James Version (NKJV)

26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes

Because Jesus said:

24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat , this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

This would lead me to believe that one should participate in communion more than once per year.

Jesus said He is the bread that gives life. Why should we wait all year to eat that bread?

Also, I do believe Emmaus is the first Communion. Jesus did not wait to celebrate it. He broke the bread just after His resurrection.

If we are to follow the Jewish law, it means we have to become Jewish before we could become Christian. Both Paul and Peter agreed this was wrong.
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
10,727
5,716
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Really interesting thread to read-
A question : did Jesus have free will ?
You see I have always presumed that the choices we make when we are tempted is a choice we make, part of out free will.
Also what would have been the point of Jesus being tempted, as preparation for his ministry to begin - right after the spirit descending on him , if he did not have the same ability within him to make a choice that was not Gods will for his life.
I have always looked at his wilderness time as preparation for the spiritual battle that would take place as he started his ministry. I am not so sure that would have been needed if he did not have the ability to give into to temptation. Unless of course that whole experience was in fact for satans benefit - which I have never considered before !
Butterfly
So are you saying Jesus was born with the sin nature?
 

Helen

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2011
15,476
21,155
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
VictoryinJesus said:-

The thread title: calling all law keepers

Everyday I sin: whether it be coveting, anger, doubt, fear, complaining, smoking; the list is endless. Even though I don't want to, I sin. Thankfully, my relationship with God is not based on what I do but what He did. Therefore; I am a law keeper. I walk perfect and blameless and upright with hope and faith in what was prepared by God. Jesus Christ is the only way. The more I focus on TRYing to be perfect through the flesh, the less I focus on His gift and praising Him for what He has already done and loving others. There is great freedom in the removal of the yoke of bondage. It is true: His burden is light.


We are 33 pages in...yet she answered for the Opening Post on page 1. She..."Got it!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Butterfly

jimd

Active Member
Oct 14, 2017
144
73
28
84
catawissa
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So are you saying Jesus was born with the sin nature?
Heb 2:14 Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil,

The problem is, thinking of sin nature as a sin, it is not.
 
Last edited: