A Building , an habitation for God not made with hands

[Enoch111]

Sorry, but those two events do not blend together...

That's what I meant by making a mishmash of the Scriptures. It is extremely dangerous not to rightly divide (interpret) the Word of God.

 

[Robert Gwin]

It is hard to discern how it applies to make Jesus’ point there. Similar to purge out the old leaven of malice and wickedness that you may be a new lump (refers to, a “whole”, body yeah?) whose body? I’m not sure but to me the wine skins or “bottles” here also speak of not all flesh is the same in reference to that which is Spiritual and that which is carnal. is all “earth” evil when considering “a new earth” or is there a distinction between carnality (animal or beast) and the New man. Point is I’m not suggesting “earth” is wickedness but to me it says “carnality” is what destroys “earth” which He speaks of creating heaven and earth Anew.

You asked “Do you know why the bottles break when new wine is installed? (related to the patch pulling away also) Why did Jesus say that to them?”

Maybe for the same reason he warned them that the house having been swept seven more evil spirits return finding “it empty” and the last state is worse than the first. Or all the times Jesus said one of the most debated things “go and sin no more unless something worse come upon you.” …”Do you know why the bottles break when new wine is installed?

To me why do the bottles break when the new wine is installed? The patch pulling away? …is because of you don’t throw a rag (Peter 2:16) (1 Thessalonians 2:5) on an old cloak; for the fullness and filing up, pulls away from the outer cloak and the division comes into being and is made worse. Or do people cast young wine into a leather bottle which breaks apart and the wines pours out and the bottles are destroyed? Strange though this is said to be the future of coming Armageddon where the bottles…earthen vessels are to be taken and destroyed. To me though the division is made worse , the patch pulling away, and both are destroyed is maybe Jesus’ point to the religious leaders of that time. And for our observance today that fresh wine is put into bottles (Job 33:25) and “both” are “preserved”(kept close) (Luke 17:33). How does what Jesus’ said to them concerning the bottle burst relate to the verses on perseverance of Life?

Question: does all the theology and religion make the division worse? Does all the theological differences and debates and squabbling make the tear worse? Who said it would? Maybe that was Jesus’ point to them? To Look long and hard at the fruits? Made worse or better?

yes, to me the bottles parable and the patch which pulls away and the division is made worse speaks of “agreement” and “disagreement”; also “made better” or “made worse”
1 Corinthians 11:17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse.

the bottles parable and the patch which pulls away and the division is made worse speaks of “agreement” and “disagreement”; also “made better” or “made worse”
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

John 17: 20-23 where Jesus Christ prayed the body built up for the Habitation of God to be made One.

That may not help but confuses more. I’m reading through myself confused. If there is one thing I took away from consideration of the bottles and the patch that pulls away where the tear or division is made worse is this…Jesus Christ warned them (and also us)that it would happen. It is very evident today that Jesus wasn’t lying nor deceiving.

To me why do the bottles break when the new wine is installed? The patch pulling away? …is because of you don’t throw a rag (Peter 2:16) (1 Thessalonians 2:5) on an old cloak; for the fullness and filing up, pulls away from the outer cloak and the division comes into being and is made worse. Or do people cast young wine into a leather bottle which breaks apart and the wines pours out and the bottles are destroyed? Strange though this is said to be the future of coming Armageddon where the bottles…earthen vessels are to be taken and destroyed. To me though the division is made worse , the patch pulling away, and both are destroyed is maybe Jesus’ point to the religious leaders of that time. And for our observance today that fresh wine is put into bottles (Job 33:25) and “both” are “preserved”(kept close) (Luke 17:33). How does what Jesus’ said to them concerning the bottle burst relate to the verses on perseverance of Life?

You nailed it Vicky, I always wondered about that, but they were talking about wineskins, not bottles. Clearly bottles would not break, but the skins expand with the fermenting wine, so if they are reused, they will eventually expand so much they will tear.

It is hard to discern how it applies to make Jesus’ point there. Similar to purge out the old leaven of malice and wickedness that you may be a new lump (refers to, a “whole”, body yeah?) whose body? I’m not sure but to me the wine skins or “bottles” here also speak of not all flesh is the same in reference to that which is Spiritual and that which is carnal. is all “earth” evil when considering “a new earth” or is there a distinction between carnality (animal or beast) and the New man. Point is I’m not suggesting “earth” is wickedness but to me it says “carnality” is what destroys “earth” which He speaks of creating heaven and earth Anew.

Here is our understanding on it maam, it might make sense to you:
Jesus is helping the disciples of John the Baptist to appreciate that no one should expect Jesus’ followers to conform to the old practices of Judaism, such as ritual fasting. He did not come to patch up and prolong an old, worn-out way of worship, a whole system of worship that was ready to be discarded. The worship that Jesus is encouraging is not one that conforms to the Judaism of the day with its traditions of men.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Well firstly, the veil of the temple being torn in two at Christ's crucifixion was a 'literal' event, and it represented the end of the 'old covenant' separation between God and His people through a fleshy priesthood (Levitical), making Lord Jesus our only Mediator.

I never said it wasn’t literal. Only considering the figure with what the figure (the veil torn in the temple) is of. The circumcision of Christ? As also where he pointed out to the Pharisees how David entered in to the house of God when hungry to eat the shew bread and to give to those with David. But so much better is Christs’ entering in to, not the temple made with hands, but the temple of God made without hands. David was a figure of that house of God made with hands where David entered to eat…Christ entering in to that which is the true House of God not made with hands… “by the circumcision of Christ”. How can you say that the veil torn in the house of God has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and should be condemned for being included in the OP concerning the topic of “a building, the habitation of God not made with hands.” Again “by the circumcision of Christ”? To you, it’s place there with other verses connected to the habitation of God …with consideration of “if this house is dissolved” what Hope is there?…to you should be condemned for it has nothing to do with the veil was rent, torn from top to bottom? Also how can you say the veil torn has absolutely nothing to do with if this body is destroyed there is the House of God built on the foundation that is Christ which is not divided?

I’ll say it again ..to me…the veil torn from top to bottom has to do with the circumcision made without hands and also; the circumcision made without hands has to do with the Habitation, the House of God not made with hands. Because all is of God and not man.

That event has NOTHING to do with what Paul was declaring in 2 Cor.5 that if our flesh house were dissolved we still have another body not made with hands, but one from God, eternal in the Heavens.

That event
The tear of the veil from top to bottom
You say …do I understand you correctly…has absolutely nothing at all to do with the circumcision made without hands of God (the circumcision of Christ) (the removal of what?) (as you said the removal of separation from God), which has nothing to do with the Habitation made without hands? Nor has anything to do with if this house is dissolved?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

Here is our understanding on it maam, it might make sense to you:
Jesus is helping the disciples of John the Baptist to appreciate that no one should expect Jesus’ followers to conform to the old practices of Judaism, such as ritual fasting. He did not come to patch up and prolong an old, worn-out way of worship, a whole system of worship that was ready to be discarded. The worship that Jesus is encouraging is not one that conforms to the Judaism of the day with its traditions of men.

It does help. Thank you. Love “the worship that Jesus is encouraging is not one that conforms to the Judaism of the day with its traditions of men.” Makes me think of be not conformed to the world but transformed by the renewing of the mind.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

People hate and dislike and are subjective. Meh. @Enoch111.

@VictoryinJesus do you believe God was a monster even though he rain downed hell fire upon people in scripture; like sodom and gomrrah; even though he had also created a place for them to go when they had died? Sheol is where everyone went to which is considered hell - with two place one being Abraham’s bosom or paradise and the prison part which was separated.

Was God fair and just in his decision and do you think since he has sent his Word that sense the days now of Jesus having the victory is what once was old now made Better by the new covenant; in which Jesus takes care of sin, the devil, death, and Sheol?

Don’t misunderstand when I said I’m conflicted. I’m not conflicted over whether God is a monster but instead …someone close to me seems convinced the God of the Old Testament is men giving their commands of what to do. Again because of the contractions. This person feels pretty strongly all the commands and traditions was man’s’ way given of men and not Gods way given of God. That makes it hard because of valuing what someone says, then struggling with how you see it also and the differences. Like do they have a valid point? That is my conflict. You asked is God a monster for raining down fire? I don’t think so because of Proverbs 25:21-22 If your enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: [22] For you shall heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord shall reward thee.

And NT Romans 12:19-21 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. [20] Therefore if your enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shall heap coals of fire on his head. [21] Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

But unless I misunderstood “the heaping of hot coals on their head” is by feeding them when they’re hungry and giving them water when they are thirsty? Which does seems contradictory to where they asked the Lord “they follow us not…do you want us to call down fire and destroy them”?

 

[Keturah]

Contradictions may seem to be so in the Bible but are not.
Every scripture must be in harmony with the rest for it to be our guideline.
What is lacking is our own spiritual vision to see the weights and balances God has implemented in his word.
Look through the Spirits eyes when studying, he has been and seen where we seek to go!

 

[Davy]

I never said it wasn’t literal. Only considering the figure with what the figure (the veil torn in the temple) is of. The circumcision of Christ? As also where he pointed out to the Pharisees how David entered in to the house of God when hungry to eat the shew bread and to give to those with David. But so much better is Christs’ entering in to, not the temple made with hands, but the temple of God made without hands. David was a figure of that house of God made with hands where David entered to eat…Christ entering in to that which is the true House of God not made with hands… “by the circumcision of Christ”. How can you say that the veil torn in the house of God has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and should be condemned for being included in the OP concerning the topic of “a building, the habitation of God not made with hands.” Again “by the circumcision of Christ”? To you, it’s place there with other verses connected to the habitation of God …with consideration of “if this house is dissolved” what Hope is there?…to you should be condemned for it has nothing to do with the veil was rent, torn from top to bottom? Also how can you say the veil torn has absolutely nothing to do with if this body is destroyed there is the House of God built on the foundation that is Christ which is not divided?

I’ll say it again ..to me…the veil torn from top to bottom has to do with the circumcision made without hands and also; the circumcision made without hands has to do with the Habitation, the House of God not made with hands. Because all is of God and not man.

That event
The tear of the veil from top to bottom
You say …do I understand you correctly…has absolutely nothing at all to do with the circumcision made without hands of God (the circumcision of Christ) (the removal of what?) (as you said the removal of separation from God), which has nothing to do with the Habitation made without hands? Nor has anything to do with if this house is dissolved?

I've already said my peace. Take it or leave it.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

I've already said my peace. Take it or leave it.

Which I take to mean you would prefer not to talk about the circumcision made without hands or the House of God made without hands. nor do you want to talk about how they connect (or as you suggest how they don’t connect)to the veil in the temple made with hands being torn from top to bottom. We started with you condemning a mismatch of verses as over spiritualized and said they are meant to be taken and burned. Condemned. I asked which ones don’t have to do with “if this is dissolved” there is hope “in a habitation not made with hands.” You said the veil being torn. I gave you the best reasons i could for why it deserves a place in a mismatch of verses on the topic of Thread. We don’t agree there either; on what doctrines burn in the fire.

 

[Davy]

Which I take to mean you would prefer not to talk about the circumcision made without hands or the House of God made without hands. nor do you want to talk about how they connect (or as you suggest how they don’t connect)to the veil in the temple made with hands being torn from top to bottom. We started with you condemning a mismatch of verses as over spiritualized and said they are meant to be taken and burned. Condemned. I asked which ones don’t have to do with “if this is dissolved” there is hope “in a habitation not made with hands.” You said the veil being torn. I gave you the best reasons i could for why it deserves a place in a mismatch of verses on the topic of Thread. We don’t agree there either; on what doctrines burn in the fire.

I'm not going to listen to your false blending of your philosophy with Bible Scripture. The Church has had plenty of that false working for centuries by the crept in unawares.

 

[Mr E]

The idea Paul is covering in 2 Cor.5:1-5 is about our flesh body vs. our heavenly body. If our flesh body were suddenly destroyed, we still have a body from God not made with hands. That means non-flesh. Now since one is supposed... to understand 1 Cor.15 before they got to this point, Paul is pointing to the "spiritual body" he taught being that body from God, not made with hands. So that is NOT to be turned in a SPIRITUALIZATION nor man's philosophy. Paul is speaking in LITERAL terms, REALITY, GOD'S SCIENCE of how He made us, even if one wanted to call it that.

So what does it mean when some who does NOT... understand those literal things Paul is talking about while He was using simple metaphor? It means they tend to want to 'spiritualize' it, or turn it into some philosophical message away from the actual context of the Scripture.

And then when you continue that 'spiritualization' trying to bring in support of other Scripture for 'your idea', you leave the actual Bible context again, and again.

Now just because you may have learned how to do that 'spiritualizing' of Scripture from some preacher, because there are many that do that very thing because God did not give His Word to them, that does not mean it's OK for us to do it.

You are making the exact same point that @VictoryinJesus was making.

ummm... maybe you didn't even read through it?

 

[Mr E]

You said “The idea Paul is covering in 2 Cor.5:1-5 is about our flesh body vs. our heavenly body.”
And also how “If our flesh body is torn” we still have “our heavenly body”

Never disagreed but agree. I don’t understand how the below “if torn” “if the tent be torn” …or rent in two? Or torn in two? Or to burst open? or to break apart? That there is a dwelling place given from above and of God which is not torn apart, not rent but made Whole in Christ “our heavenly body” built up with Christ as the foundation and cornerstone; with also the prophets in agreement; which house grows up in all things where He said “I will build My House” and nothing can overthrow it.
The below was not meant to contradict what Paul was speaking of in regards to what remains where even “the gates of hell” can not overthrow it. Same as if this work be of men it will come to nothing but if it be of God then nothing can fight or stand against it. Again I fail to see your condemnation of all the below has no use and is worthy of all condemnation? Which part do you disagree so strongly with? The habitation no man can tear apart? Or is it that the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom? Or is it the part where God makes of two One new man, tearing down the middle wall of partition? Is it a habitation that grows where all the parts join and fit together for the habitation of God. Is it the groaning to not be poorly clothed but to found in him not having our own righteousness but the righteousness that comes from God? Or is it that…that which was subject to death through a lifetime of fear be swallowed up of Life? What part you see is to be condemned?

For we have seen if the tent which is our dwelling is torn; destroyed or overthrown
Matthew 16:17-18 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (The habitation of God no man is able to tear, destroy or overthrow that which is built without hands of God) (Acts 5-38-39) leave these men along because if this work be of God then nothing can overthrow it.

IF the tent be torn
Mark 15:34-38 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why have you entangled me? And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calls Elias. And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Leave him alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down. And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the Spirit. And the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom.

IF the tent “building” be torn
we have a building from God, a dwelling from God where two …that which was torn is made One. Go read it where God makes of two One new man in Christ. Significant (Imo) because of what is read at funerals of seasons and times for everything …even a time to tear and a time to sew.

IF this tent be torn
We have a building Ephesians 2:21-22 In whom allll the building fitly framed together grows unto an holy temple(habitation) in the Lord: [22] In whom you also are builded (sewn, fitly framed, jointed) together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

We have a building from God, a dwelling not made with hands, age long in heavens. Which heavens sing a joyful song.

For indeed in this [house] we groan.
Longing to be clothed —to put on a habitation from heaven.

If indeed seeing unless we having put it on, to not be found naked. (Poorly clothed).
Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Not that we be cast off
Or not that we be cast away age-long
But take off the old way of strife, debates, murder, hatred and put on the New which is created in His likeness: mercy, forgiveness, patience, peace and joy. Indeed seeing that unless we having put it on, to not be found naked (poorly clothed) but instead clothed with the New Man given of God unto Life.

Indeed while we are in this tent…torn in two
We do groan being weighed down because we do not wish to be put off or to be cast off.

but put on Christ.
In order, so that
What was subject to death..Hebrews 2:15-18
[And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
What was subject to death
Will be swallowed up by Life.
1 Corinthians 15:53-54 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. [54] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Life is in the New man?
Logos having life in itself and communicating it to others. The Word of Life which we have gazed upon and the hands of us have handled (deceitfully or with care?)

Indeed while we are in this tent…torn in two
We do groan being weighed down because we do not wish to be put off or to be casted off.
but to put on Christ.
In order, so that
What was subject to death
Will be swallowed up by Life.
Isaiah 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it. (That He will take away or remove …as in He takes away tears…not as in robbery is His “to take away from” or “to remove from” as to rob but to give …consider OT of that which was removed from the fire, an iron plucked out from the fire(as is said torment)…to “remove” or “take away” and I will clothe”
Zechariah 3:2-4 And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? [3] Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. [4] And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.

In scripture, throughout scripture- there is the apparent, evident, in your face- physical meaning and physical understanding. These need little explanation. 'He's talking about farming' - a seed is planted in the soil and if the soil is good(receptive), the plant grows. All true.

But he applies a certain principle to these physical things and by understanding that principle a follower can discern the deeper, higher, greater meaning-- a spiritual context he employs to convey Truth beyond the physical 'image' presented.

His disciples came and asked why he speaks in code (dual meaning- 'parables') -He said-- “You have been given the opportunity to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but they have not. For whoever has will be given more, and will have an abundance. But whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him For this reason I speak to them in parables: Although they see they do not see, and although they hear they do not hear nor do they understand.

Secondly-- it wasn't even 'his' principle. He was quoting Isaiah and employing that same manner of speaking that God told Isaiah to use when the word of God came to him. It's God's way of conveying truth, so don't let anyone discourage you from 'spiritualizing' scripture. You're on a pretty solid foundation and with good company in doing so.

So then.... You (your physical body) are the house. The temple. The clay jar, the soil, the wine skin.... and so on.

Those garments spoken of are physical outer coverings and nothing more. It's the same idea, spoken a different way. And the idea is that though broken, or unclean, bent or spent.... it's of no consequence in the spiritual sense because these are all 'outer' things and temporary in nature, while the real 'you' is spiritual in nature and it is that spirit (His spirit) that dwells "in" that outer you.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Revisiting 2 Corinthians 5:1-5

For we have seen if the tent which is our dwelling is torn; destroyed or overthrown
Matthew 16:17-18 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but my Father which is in heaven. [18] And I say also unto you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (The habitation of God no man is able to tear, destroy or overthrow that which is built without hands of God) (Acts 5-38-39) leave these men along because if this work be of God then nothing can overthrow it.

IF the tent be torn
Mark 15:34-38 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why have you entangled me? And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calls Elias. And one ran and filled a spunge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Leave him alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down. And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the Spirit. And the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom.

IF the tent “building” be torn
we have a building from God, a dwelling from God where two …that which was torn is made One. Go read it where God makes of two One new man in Christ. Significant (Imo) because of what is read at funerals of seasons and times for everything …even a time to tear and a time to sew.

IF this tent be torn
We have a building Ephesians 2:21-22 In whom allll the building fitly framed together grows unto an holy temple(habitation) in the Lord: [22] In whom you also are builded (sewn, fitly framed, jointed) together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

We have a building from God, a dwelling not made with hands, age long in heavens. Which heavens sing a joyful song.

For indeed in this [house] we groan.
Longing to be clothed —to put on a habitation from heaven.

If indeed seeing unless we having put it on, to not be found naked. (Poorly clothed).
Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Not that we be cast off
Or not that we be cast away age-long
But take off the old way of strife, debates, murder, hatred and put on the New which is created in His likeness: mercy, forgiveness, patience, peace and joy. Indeed seeing that unless we having put it on, to not be found naked (poorly clothed) but instead clothed with the New Man given of God unto Life.

Indeed while we are in this tent…torn in two
We do groan being weighed down because we do not wish to be put off or to be cast off.

but put on Christ.
In order, so that
What was subject to death..Hebrews 2:15-18
[And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
What was subject to death
Will be swallowed up by Life.
1 Corinthians 15:53-54 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. [54] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

Life is in the New man?
Logos having life in itself and communicating it to others. The Word of Life which we have gazed upon and the hands of us have handled (deceitfully or with care?)

Indeed while we are in this tent…torn in two
We do groan being weighed down because we do not wish to be put off or to be casted off.
but to put on Christ.
In order, so that
What was subject to death
Will be swallowed up by Life.
Isaiah 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it. (That He will take away or remove …as in He takes away tears…not as in robbery is His “to take away from” or “to remove from” as to rob but to give …consider OT of that which was removed from the fire, an iron plucked out from the fire(as is said torment)…to “remove” or “take away” and I will clothe”
Zechariah 3:2-4 And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? [3] Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. [4] And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.

Stupendous. Thank you for sharing what He gave you there.

 

[Mr E]

Hello;

Was reading what victory had to say in what she had been reading recently.

When it comes to the wine; I believe this was a contrast between the old covenant and the new covenant - you can’t mix old ways with new ways. You have have a new start - which is in Christ, which frees from the old ways. If you mix them both in you only have confusion, and conflict. Like when Paul wrote to the Galatians warning them not to go back the Law. And focuses a lot of the spirit va the flesh. Which the Law was created to let the people of Israel known they were sinful, and Satan in that day he the power of death, until it (the Law) had been nailed to the cross of Christ and the defeat of the devil would shortly come to pass.

That is my thoughts on the wine bottles.

You can’t mix old religious law - with the new Royal Law of Christ who fulfilled the Torah, which is defined as loving your neighbor as yourself which David showed when he went in and got food for him and his friends.

Yes-- and we don't have to wonder or surmise or decipher this understanding. We don't have to guess about things he clearly explained. This is the benefit we have today, having his words preserved in scripture- because he explained concerning the wine...

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

He uses the familiar to illustrate the point. The wine he offered he said was his blood- the blood of a new contract that he had written on their hearts after three years of teaching. By drinking from this cup they were 'buying in' to that new covenant, in agreement, signing on.

Jesus was referencing an idea first presented in Genesis- a blood covenant made between God and Abraham-- we still talk in these terms today about 'agreements written in blood' as a way of importing the strength and importance of such agreements. Ex 24 describes the idea best, and of course that's the idea that Jesus was pointing at with the wine in saying 'this is my blood of the new testament' -- in essence he was presenting his last will and living testament--- leaving to each of them those things he taught and testified to concerning the Father.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Thought a lot too about the Old Testament and the New Testament. Didn’t bring it up because I’m conflicted…does the Old Testament and New Testament contradict one another (as in disagree) or support one another (as in agree)?

The old is the…picture of heavenly matters and things. We can see the picture of heavenly matters with our eyes. We start to at first just get inklings of all the word being Spirit with some small clues we pick up on and by a little here and a little there, we start to gain strength in a different “set of eyes.” The law and OT is not done away with but instead springs into life and no more remains just pictures of and shadows of and a valley of shadows but instead goes into our very center.

 

[Mr E]

NO, really we cannot be justified in trying to mix unrelated Scripture together, for that is to present chaos, which is of the devil. It goes against the simplicity of His Word. Just because a verse topic can often be found repeated in another Book of The Bible, that doesn't mean its topic changed. Trying to link verses that are about separate topics is to create chaos in His Word, and is away from understanding. That kind of working is destined to be destroyed by fire (SEE 1 Corinthians 3:11-15).

So why WASTE time doing the devil's work of creating chaos in His Word, when you could instead get into the actual Bible understanding that our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ want you to have? And then... He would be able to use... you in HIS SERVICE.

Scripture is full of folks doing exactly what you call "the devil's work" --- mixing unrelated scriptures together, creating associations that didn't exist. New Testament writers do this consistently -even the likes of Peter, Paul and Mary have included in the stories references to old testament writings that they insert to hearken back to past events in the retelling.

You need to calm down.

 

[Mr E]

That's what I meant by making a mishmash of the Scriptures. It is extremely dangerous not to rightly divide (interpret) the Word of God.

pfffft. How do you eat an elephant?

Then he took bread, and after giving thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you.

 

[Mr E]

The old is the…picture of heavenly matters and things. We can see the picture of heavenly matters with our eyes. We start to at first just get inklings of all the word being Spirit with some small clues we pick up on and by a little here and a little there, we start to gain strength in a different “set of eyes.” The law and OT is not done away with but instead springs into life and no more remains just pictures of and shadows of and a valley of shadows but instead goes into our very center.

I like that stunnedbygrace-- the new is the revealing of the old. An 'unveiling' you might say.... like tearing the veil in two from top to bottom. ;)

 

[stunnedbygrace]

You nailed it Vicky, I always wondered about that, but they were talking about wineskins, not bottles. Clearly bottles would not break, but the skins expand with the fermenting wine, so if they are reused, they will eventually expand so much they will tear.

Here is our understanding on it maam, it might make sense to you:
Jesus is helping the disciples of John the Baptist to appreciate that no one should expect Jesus’ followers to conform to the old practices of Judaism, such as ritual fasting. He did not come to patch up and prolong an old, worn-out way of worship, a whole system of worship that was ready to be discarded. The worship that Jesus is encouraging is not one that conforms to the Judaism of the day with its traditions of men.

I got a flash of something, some sort of connection. Between a leaky cistern that cannot hold water, old wineskins, and the jar/bottle the woman broke to tend to our Lord. Can’t speak about it yet but it’s there.

 

[Mr E]

I got a flash of something, some sort of connection. Between a leaky cistern that cannot hold water, old wineskins, and the jar/bottle the woman broke to tend to our Lord. Can’t speak about it yet but it’s there.

Like a flash of light? It's the same principle. It's that the true, deeper, spiritual understanding is hidden until the vessel is broken. Until what is veiled is unveiled.

But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing, among whom the god of this age has blinded the minds of those who do not believe so they would not see the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not proclaim ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your slaves for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said “Let light shine out of darkness,” is the one who shined in our hearts to give us the light of the glorious knowledge of God in the face of Christ.


The concept comes from the story of Gideon.... a physical example of a spiritual concept. (Judges 7) He gave them all trumpets and empty jars with torches inside them.

At the sound of the trumpet....

They blew their trumpets and broke the jars they were carrying. All three units blew their trumpets and broke their jars. They held the torches in their left hand and the trumpets in their right. Then they yelled, “A sword for the LORD and for Gideon!”

 

[stunnedbygrace]

That’s interesting. I just posted something about Gideon this morning and here he comes up again. Gideon isn’t talked about that much so to think about and hear about him twice in a day is rare. I think I’ll go read all about him in the Bible…:)