Shar
-
Posts
327 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Shar
-
-
2 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
I agree, and he entered into his Ministry at the bidding of his mother.
Yet there is no real proof he was a pharisee.
I am loving this, but I have to go for the night. I will pick up tomorrow. God bless and good night
-
2 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
I hope you don't feel like you are being ganged up on. I'm just genuinely puzzled where the actual proof for this is. I see assumptions but not proof.
I don't feel ganged up on. I love the discussion. It is, just look at what He practiced and believed and you can conclude that He was of that sect because He even stated to "learn the traditions of the Pharisees". You know the old saying "you know them by their fruits", well that is in connection to what they say and do. Jesus said and practiced what was unique to the beliefs and practices of the Pharisees.
-
4 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
He learned obedience by the things he suffered.,
-
Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
but he was given wisdom and understanding from above and as a child was teaching the teachers.
-
And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
True, but he was still raised in human childhood. His parents were chosen for a reason. To raise Him, teach Him, guide Him. He even entered His ministry at the age of 30, to coincide with the age the Jewish male entered into priesthood.
-
-
1 minute ago, Joline said:
They rejected John Shar. The Pharisees authority were to judge cases under the authority of the highpriest (Sadducee)
They were given no authority in Moses law in anything concerning the heavenly kingdom. NONE, but they gained popularity by doing so making sure that the judges in the highcourt would be of them.
In fact they were afraid to speak against John because he was very popular with the people.
Joline, that is the point. The use of the word Pharisee does not mean the entire sects of Pharisees were wrong or even bad. Some Pharisees were, but that does not negate their beliefs because a few went haywire on John or others.
The kangaroo court that convicted Jesus at night was primarily Sadducee, not Pharisee. I cannot see Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea letting that happen. The Pharisees would have demanded a defense lawyer for Jesus. This group denied Him that, along with other rights that the Pharisees would have absolutely required.
-
3 minutes ago, Joline said:
This should be it's own thread. When you consider what the sect of the Pharisees taught, vs their seat in the Sanhedrin as Judges under the Chief Justice (the high priest) Nothing that came from the seat of Moses was sectarian as the Sadducees and Pharisees had to agree to pronounce judgement. However, as sectarians they taught many things concerning the prophets, and the heavenly kingdom etc.
These were things that Moses law gave them no such authority in. The judges were to decide cases of law between their brethren. The Sadducees merely said such things are not sources of law. They were correct about that. The resurrection and the heavenly kingdom had no place in a Jewish court of law, any more than a judge presiding in our courts applies prophesy in deciding a case.
I agree this should be it own thread, if interest continues.
-
7 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
Are you suggesting that these things he held in common with the Pharisees means the Pharisees taught him these things rather than that He is God and was affirming those things the pharisees got right?
Saying, as His human nature, he was raised and learn these things He was taught. The Bible says He even had to learn obedience. Remember, He was Human in every way, besides being the Son of God. He was raised from infancy to the Jewish adulthood by His parents and learn in the Temple.
-
14 minutes ago, Spock said:
I found this one paragraph from a blog of Greg Mamula (Baptist) you "ladies" might enjoy reading and reflecting upon:
Was Jesus a Pharisee? This argument has been made several times over. It is probably the group he had the most in common with. Since Judaism was a faith of the written word it is easy to see how Jesus would study the scriptures, see himself in it, and interpret those laws and narrative for himself and teach others to follow his ways. This is what each sect did. The Pharisees sought to apply law to everyday life for the common Jew. They rooted their interpretations to past Halakhah. Jesus, however, reinterpreted the law in light of himself alone as being the fulfillment, something the Pharisees would have taken offense at since they looked for a logical train of thought from any rabbi back to Moses. Jesus knew and understood the law, he studied it, and his first “profession” was likely carpentry. He summoned followers who were day laborers and taught them the law. In many respects this is the way of a Pharisee.
I cannot go into the all the practices of the Pharisees that distinguished them from all the other sects. But one really interesting one that was distinctively their personal practice, at that time, was to give a blessing before the meal. Jesus definitely practiced that one, along with others. God specifically commanded for the blessing to be after the meal. They gave a blessing then, as well.
-
9 minutes ago, Joline said:
Do they not believe his work was ETERNAL. It power spanned back to Noah.
1 Pet 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
Please Joline, get this. He does not have to enter the Holy of Holies again. He did not enter the Holy of Holies again for you when you believed on Him. When you made your personal decision for Christ, you did it in one day. You received the atoning sacrifice when you believed, even though He died over 2000 years ago. So it will be on the day Israel believes and the atoning sacrifice is pour on the nation. That can happen on Yom Kippur. This will be a significance God's appointed time for the Fall Feasts to have their significance to His second coming and to the nation of Israel.
-
4 minutes ago, Joline said:
Jesus was not a Pharisee? Whatever gave you that notion?
John the Baptist prepared HIS WAY. John was no Pharisee. Christs disciples were from Johns baptism. They were distinct sect. The gospel was to be preached beginning with John's baptism. They continued to administer John's baptism as Christs disciples. They would neither be baptized of John, nor would they listen to him.
I say the same to you as I just replied to LittleFlower, please read it. If I go to Mass and keep the Catholic feasts and holidays and I support the Catholic church, you would probably accurately conclude that I am Catholic. Well, Jesus practiced the Pharisee Sect of Judaism. Everything He practiced, believed and taught was from that sect of belief. He never preached against resurrection, Hell, angels, God as Father, as would a Sadducee. Besides, He stated for them to "learn the traditions of the Pharisees". He was raised a Jew, by Jewish parents, a Jewish father to teach Him the Torah, and to keep the Jewish faith. There wasn't anything Jesus did that was not fully Jewish.
-
2 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
I would like to see that proven. This seems to be conjecture.
Read what they believed. The other sects did not practice or believe as the Pharisees did. The Pharisees believed in Hell, angels, life after death, resurrection, grooming disciples, prayer before meals, etc. The other sects did not. Why would Jesus ever say "learn the traditions of the Pharisees, if he were of some other Sect? Remember, He was not born, raised, died or resurrected as a Gentile. He was a Jew and he learned Judaism and practiced it completely.
-
22 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said:
And there is nothing to tie their repentance to this particular day on the calendar. Some are mistakenly using a belief that Yom Kippur has yet to be fulfilled to tie their repentance to that date.
But since Yom Kippur has been fulfilled as we see Paul telling us in Hebrews 9, then this idea that National Israel will repent all at once on this particular day because it is claimed by some it is yet unfulfilled is an erroneous claim. The primary assumption is Yom Kippur has not been fulfilled. If it is fulfilled, the rest of the argument falls to pieces.
Yom Kippur has clearly been fulfilled already. So without this foundational claim that it is yet to be fulfilled being true, the rest of the argument fails and then the claim National Israel will turn to Jesus on Yom Kippur fails.
And Willa, if they repent, it necessarily includes repentance from sin. So I'm sorry but, I see no scriptural support for your claim that their repentance has nothing to do with sin.
It was Israel's great sin to crucify their God.
Zec explains their sins and the impurities God will remove from them and their land.....ON THAT DAY
-
1 hour ago, Joline said:
In first century Judaism you had various Jewish "understandings". since 70 ad the only Jewish understanding that survived is of one sect which is the sect of the Pharisees. John the Baptist had gained many disciples, and these disciples were those which followed Christ. None were of the sect of the Pharisees. not only that, but God had to open their minds to understand scripture. Paul was given direct revelation concerning what he taught concerning Gentiles. So I would definitely disagree with you on this one.
Jesus was from the Pharisee Sect of Judaism. The Pharisees had certain beliefs that were contrary to the Sadducees, Zealots, Essenes, etc. This was why there was a lot of division on the Sanhedrin, particularly between the Pharisees and the Sadducees.
The Pharisees believed in resurrection, life after death, angels, Hell, grooming disciples to eat, believe and act like their Master, etc. Pharisees had the tradition of giving the blessing before a meal. In addition, they gave a blessing after the meal as God commanded. This is what Jesus believed and even stated to "keep the traditions of the Pharisees" Mt. 23:2, but he warned for them not to be hypocritical in their keeping of them, as some of the Pharisees did.
We have believed that the Pharisees were bad and Christ abhorred them, but whenever He rebuked them if was because He was speaking "in the family" language. He had a right to rebuke them in order to turn them back to doing and thinking right. There were several sects of Pharisees and they were not all needing rebuking.
I don't know how accurate your history is, and I don't see evidence that all of John's disciples were not of the Pharisees, but maybe there was a reason the Pharisee Sect survived.
-
1 hour ago, thereselittleflower said:
That's not what Yom Kippur is about.
Yom Kippur is about the atoning sacrifice, and the High Priest taking its blood into the Holy of Holies.
God already poured out His Spirit on Pentacost - on the Jewish believers - The Apostles, and from that point is given to ALL believers - first to the Jews then to the Gentiles.
Saying that this will happen to the Jewish people on Yom Kippur is only that - saying it.
Paul tells us Yom Kippur has already been fulfilled by Jesus.
-
Hebrews 9 6Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship,7but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 8The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation.
11But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Yom Kippur requires the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies.
Paul has just told us Jesus ALREADY entered the Holy of Holies ONCE AND FOR ALL, into the more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, having obtained an enternal redemption.
The Greek word for "once for all" Paul used means:
Thayer's Greek lexicon states it's use in this verse is the same as OUR "once for all"
-
Thayer's Greek LexiconSTRONGS NT 2178: ἐφάπαξ
ἐφάπαξ (Treg. in Heb. ἐφ' ἅπαξ; cf. Lipsius, gram. Unters., p. 127), adverb (from ἐπί and ἅπαξ (cf. Winers Grammar, 422 (393);Buttmann, 321 (275))), once; at once i. e.a. our all at once: 1 Corinthians 15:6.
b. our once for all: Romans 6:10; Hebrews 7:27; Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 10:10. (Lucian, Dio Cassius, others.)
What is "our once for all" ?
-
-
once and for all (or once for all)phrase of once
-
1.now and for the last time; finally.
-
-
Paul has clearly stated that Jesus ONCE AND FOR ALL, for the LAST TIME, FINALLY entered the HOLY OF HOLIES as High Priest, through the greater and more perfect Tabernacle, not made with hands, through His OWN BLOOD.
He did this ONCE AND FOR ALL, for the LAST TIME, FINALLY.
Since He entered the Holy of Holies as High Priest already, ONCE AND FOR ALL, FOR THE LAST TIME, FINALLY, He is not going to enter the Holy of Holies again, and certainly not an inferior, earthly one to the one He has already entered.
He already fulfilled Yom Kippur ONCE AND FOR ALL, for the LAST TIME, FINALLY.
Our Savior has entered the Holy of Holies and He is our Great High Priest. These verses do not take away from Yom Kippur. This has yet to happen for the nation of Israel. They have not received the atoning sacrifice yet. They will when they believe on their Messiah when they see Him. Read Zec. 12 and 13. ON THAT DAY, is repeated throughout. Including taking away their sins in ONE DAY.
Just like you and I accepted Christ, it happened to us at the time we accepted Him, on that particular day, even though He died and paid the penalty over 2000 years ago. We did not personally receive the atoning sacrifice until we believed in the Messiah.
He entered the Holy of Holies once for all and for all time. He does not have to enter again. He is the Great High Priest that makes intercession for us in the Heavenly Temple. These Hebrews references do not affect Yom Kippur, in the future for Israel, when Christ returns.
-
-
8 minutes ago, mevosper said:
Q - The following information was taken from a website (http://biblelight.net/sukkoth.htm), in which the author goes into detail in determining the time of Christ's birth. As we know from Luke, Christ began his ministry at about the age of 30.
It is such a shame that there are those, even when the evidence is presented plain as day, that would believe Christ's first visit did not accomplish all that God proclaimed it would. I would have you to believe that there is nothing else that Christ needs to fulfill.
Actually, there is much that Christ still has to fulfill that will occur with his second coming. He has yet to fulfill all His Davidic promises to the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. He has yet to take His reign for a thousand years on the Davidic throne in Jerusalem. He has yet to take away the sins from the nation of Israel and cleanse the land. He has yet to rule the nations. Etc., etc., etc. The Fall Feasts point to His second coming.
-
13 hours ago, Qnts2 said:
I specified Messianic Jews, as I am aware that other people who call themselves Messianic do claim to keep the Mosaic law. I have disagreed with many as even the way they claim to keep the food laws are often seriously flawed as they do not deal with the blood which is in supermarket meat. Supermarket meat has not had the blood entirely removed and is too old to remove the remaining blood. If I kept the food laws as I used to prior to believing on Jesus, I would not eat in their homes.
For those who claim to keep the dietary laws, but do not really keep them, I am at a quandry as to whether I would eat in their homes. Since I know they are not keeping the dietary laws, do I eat with them and accept the false statement, or do I ignore their false statement and go ahead and eat. I have not been invited over to eat, and if that ever happens, I'm not sure what I would do.
Q, I agree that there are certain Messianics that claim they keep the Mosaic Law. However, like there are many types of Baptists (Free-Will, Independent, Southern, Primitive, etc.), there are many types of Messianics. Some believe that they should actually go through all 613 commandments and pick out what should and should not be upheld, even to an extreme orthodox manner. Some definitely don't even try to go there.
Some believe the Messianic Jew has a different set of requirements regarding the Mosaic Law than does the Gentile Messianic. It goes on and on to certain congregations and their differences. So, when someone ask if I am Messianic, I ask them what do you mean? I need to know what they have come to fully or erroneously understand before I answer.
I believe the biggest confusion comes with the word "law". Our English translations are so inadequate because they use the word "law" for the law from which we have been freed. YEA! However, they use the word "law" for what is actually referred to as teachings. We then erroneously conclude that because the word "law" is used, it is always negative, even when it refers to God teachings.
Those teachings are our guidelines and to keep us on the straight and narrow. I may even use some of the Mosaic Law as a guideline. For instance, stealing. Suppose my child stole from someone while spending the night with her friend. I may want to look at Ex.22:7 as a guideline. "...if the thief is caught, he should pay double." Even though this verse does not specifically address the exact act, as I described, it may be a good lesson to my child for stealing. Or, maybe I will use Pro.6:31 and make her pay back sevenfold.
-
52 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:
The meat from a regular market has not been drained of all of the blood. After slaughter, some of the blood will leave the vessels and veins and go into the meat. After 3 days, the blood is fixed in the meat and can not be removed by salting. Regular grocery store meat is usually over 3 days after slaughter, plus with the excess blood in the meat. So with regular grocery store meat, most of the time, salting does not work to remove the blood. For hamburger, at a regular grocery store, the ground meat with the blood in it is frozen to make it easier to grind. The blood adds to the weight and is more profitable for them.
There was a time when the meat at Kosher butchers was very fresh, less the 72 hours from slaughter and the salting process was done at home. Today, most Kosher butchers salt the meat themselves.
Thanks Q. Sticking to my vegetarian and fish diet. LOL
-
3 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:
Shar how can Yom Kippur be fulfilled without an atoning sacrifice? Christ is already the atoning sacrifice. This has already happened.
True, Jesus is the only atoning sacrifice. When He returns, they recognize Him as the Messiah and believe on Him. In that one day, they are saved. Yom Kippur is also a time for afflicting your soul, confessing and repenting from one's sin.
This day will be the time of Israel's repentance. When Jesus comes to establish His throne, Israel will look on Him whom they have pierced and MOURN for Him as one mourns for their only child. Ze. 12-13. The nation of Israel's sin will be dealt with in that one day. He will cleanse the people and the nation from all their sins and impurities. God promises will remember their sins no more. On that day, God will pour out a spirit of grace and supplication upon His people. God pours His atoning sacrifice on them.
They will know and have the true salvation, as we know and have, through their Messiah. Theirs is coming in one day.
-
11 hours ago, Qnts2 said:
I specified Messianic Jews, as I am aware that other people who call themselves Messianic do claim to keep the Mosaic law. I have disagreed with many as even the way they claim to keep the food laws are often seriously flawed as they do not deal with the blood which is in supermarket meat. Supermarket meat has not had the blood entirely removed and is too old to remove the remaining blood. If I kept the food laws as I used to prior to believing on Jesus, I would not eat in their homes.
For those who claim to keep the dietary laws, but do not really keep them, I am at a quandry as to whether I would eat in their homes. Since I know they are not keeping the dietary laws, do I eat with them and accept the false statement, or do I ignore their false statement and go ahead and eat. I have not been invited over to eat, and if that ever happens, I'm not sure what I would do.
I agree that the supermarket place does not kill the meat in a truly Kosher manner and whenever I have bought Kosher meats it has been at a Kosher butcher for over twice the price. Very good reason why I am mostly vegetation with an emphasis on eating fish or veggie substitutions for meats.
However, I do have some Jewish friends that have bought meat from a regular market and soak the meat in salt to remove all the blood. Is this an acceptable consideration if you want to make sure all the blood is removed?
-
21 hours ago, WilliamL said:
Using the NIV can get you very confused. "Who, being in the very nature God..." The word is morphe/form; nature is a whole different thing than form.
The Greek is also used figuratively here for nature. This verse helps substantiate other verses in the Bible, such as He.1:3 That the Son (Jesus) is the radiance of God, and the EXACT representation of his being.
The Word came "in a [there is no "the" in the Greek] form of God..."
In the Greek Interlinear this actually reads, "For think among you, which also was in Christ Jesus, who in THE form of God subsisting not robbery thought it to be equal with God....."
There is no biblical evidence that the Word was called by the name Jesus before the Word incarnated.
This is true, but there is indication in the Psalm 2:7 that at some point, the WORD became the Son and God became His father. We simply don't know when that occurred because the plan of salvation was from the beginning and we don't know when this distinction in the Godhead occurred.
But these posts have gotten way too far from the topic, which is about the beast that goes into perdition. So no more on this sideline from me, unless someone wants to start a separate string.
I agree and this is the last I will post on this subject here. A separate thread should occur.
-
Just now, Joline said:
This what I meant when I said you had a rabbinic view. The feasts are all about the priesthood. they cannot be kept without it. As well as the fact they make atonement for sin. Rabbinic Judaism always diminishes the priesthood.
You definitely do not have an understanding of the Feasts. The Feasts are all about the Messiah, His First and Second Comings. It does not diminish the priesthood, because Jesus, the Messiah, is the Priest! Also, your constant comment about me having a Rabbinic view, shows me you don't understand what Rabbinic is either.
-
12 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:
And we are off on saying Messianic Judaism has a Rabbinic view of scripture again. (It was a constant criticism of Messianic Judaism having a Rabbinic view from the other forum). Most people here know I object to misrepresentations among Christians.
Messianic Judaism has a Jewish view of scripture. Messianic Judaism with Messianic Jews is familiar with the view of Judaism as many were raised in Judaism. Sometimes the Rabbi's had it right and sometimes the Rabbis had it wrong. Clearly Messianic Jews reject the view of Judaism concerning Jesus and reject other views of Judaism seen as contrary to scripture, both Old and New. Messianic Jews do keep some Rabbinic traditions which do not conflict with scripture, but that is due to ethnicity/having grown up with those traditions and having Jewish family, many who are not saved. Coming from a different culture, and reading the NT before attending a church, I know that Christianity has it's own language, culture and traditions which are not in scripture. (For example on language, Christianese says we fellowship, but not just visit. And some say we do 'pot blessings' and not pot lucks. There are many many more which are unique in Christian churches which are not used elsewhere. I know because I had to figure out what Christians were saying with their unique Christianese words. )
AMEN Q.
-
7 minutes ago, Joline said:
Read it again
Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
Heb 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
The power of the resurrection is the power of his heavenly priesthood. His work as our high priest is not without effect.
9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
What is your point? This has nothing to do with the Feasts that are a topic of discussion. We know He is the Great High Priest in the Heavenly Temple.
-
9 minutes ago, Joline said:
I disagree with you concerning the "Jewish view" of scripture. I believe you have a "Rabbinic view" of scripture. There is a big difference there.
Also you are bringing things up which span several covenants, which sit distinct from the Sinai covenant. Also, nobody said they do not speak of Israels future too. Israels faithlessness in the rulers of the first century, in no way nullifies the promises made to Abraham by God. Nor does it make the fulfillment of them without effect. As Paul explains here
Ro 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Hebrews also teaches us that Christ atoned for our sin as high priest.Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;His heavenly ministry and the reality of it, is what the power of the resurrection is about. For again Hebrews teaches us
Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
If Christ is not raised, he is not a priest at all. He does not need to die on the day of atonement to fulfill that ministry in his heavenly priesthood.
And Hebrews also shows us Abraham is looking for a heavenly city, not an earthly one.
Heb 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;
Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Heb 11:16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
Heb 12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,I don't get the point of all your scripture quotes. I never quote anything Rabbinic. My understanding of scripture comes right out of the Word of God. No one doubts the final and complete atoning sacrifice of Christ for ALL who believe. Your position stems more out of not fully understanding the purpose and meaning of the Feasts of God, which He calls His appointed times. That very significant events around His plans and purposes center around His Appointed Times. The Jews did not make up these Feasts. God appointed and mandated them. I would seek my best to get to know them.
If you really want to understand Messianic Judaism and why they place a significance on these Feasts, I recommend the same book to you that I recommended to LittleFlower; "The Feasts of the Lord", by Kevin Howard and Marvin Rosenthal. It will open up a clear understanding of God's Feasts and their purposes.
-
Not really. If one has an understanding of all of God's Festivals, which he states are everlasting, you can see their fulfillment. Christ has two comings. In His first coming, The Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread, First Fruits were fulfilled, and Shavuot at Pentecost. In His second coming, and most specific to His return, His promise to Israel and His Davidic reign, the Feast of Trumpets, Yom Kippur and Succoth will be fully realized. I would deeply encourage you to read about these Feasts and a very good book to start with is, "The Feasts of the Lord" by Kevin Howard and Marvin Rosenthal. This gives a very clear understanding of them in Old and New Testaments, their purpose, their meaning and their times of fulfillment. There is no conjecture, but a full understanding to God's Feasts. God calls them His appointed times and they carry great significance to the times He has designated for His eternal plan and purposes.
fulfilled feasts
in Theology
Posted
Mt.23:2 From the Greek Interlinear ..."The scribes and the Pharisees sat down on Moses' seat. Then all things, whatever they tell you to keep, keep and do. But not according to their works, for they say and do not do." In other words, truly keep them. Don't be like some who are hypocrites and say to keep them, but do not.
The Scribes and Pharisees were the keepers of the law, both written and oral. They made sure it was protected and accurately transcribed. That was another distinction of the Pharisees from the other sects of Judaism, besides believing in the physical return of the Messiah.
I agree someone should start another thread if we wish to continue this discussion. There is plenty to say and discuss that can be quite interesting. This forum is about fulfilled feasts and I don't want to take from that discussion.