fulfilled feasts

[WilliamL]

18 hours ago, Joline said:

19 hours ago, thereselittleflower said:

He already fulfilled Yom Kippur ONCE AND FOR ALL, for the LAST TIME, FINALLY.

I agree. It is the plain and clear teaching of Scripture.

And I disagree. Yom Kippur is not fulfilled until he comes back out of the sanctuary, and fulfills all the appointed tasks. Including putting the sins upon the head of Azazel, and banishing him. Only then is the ceremony completed.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, WilliamL said:

And I disagree. Yom Kippur is not fulfilled until he comes back out of the sanctuary, and fulfills all the appointed tasks. Including putting the sins upon the head of Azazel, and banishing him. Only then is the ceremony completed.

The book of Hebrews teaches otherwise William. He is our Azazel.

[Qnts2]

11 hours ago, Joline said:

First of all I do believe those scriptures do speak of "judaizers". And I never said the Sadducees killed Jesus, a Messianic on here did. And you speak as though no Jews are non Messianic. More Jews are in the Church, than in Messianic synagogues. I think you are the one that wants to label someone who does not agree with you is all. There is no need for that.

I also believe first century Jewish worship looked more like the liturgical churches. After all the historical Churches do look much closer to the temple ministry of the first century.

You and someone else were discussing about who killed Jesus. I gave the verses which answer that question. 

In the original post I objected to, you said the following about the Pharisees, in response to the post I made which quoted scripture which said there were people who were Pharisees who believed on Jesus.

Your response, applying these verses to the believing Pharisees:

Jude 1:3 4  For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord

1:12  These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

16  These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
17  But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18  How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
19  These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

Those at the council were made manifest, at the council.
1 Jo 2:19  They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Jude 1 is talking about unbelievers, but the verses I quoted said these Pharisees were believers. Jude 1 does not say that it is talking about any Pharisees, but you make and assumption, and want to say it is talking about Pharisees who pretended to be believers, without any scriptural support. 

Those at the council were believers, and there is no proof that 1 John 2:19 is speaking about them as you want to claim. Applying these verses those Pharisees which in scripture are called believers, is a prejudicial statement without any scriptural proof. That you said the only Pharisee who believed on Jesus was Paul, who was handled specially to get to believe, is false. Your assumption that all Pharisees were Judaizers is also false as scripture differentiates between the believing Pharisees who wanted to have Gentiles circumcised, and believing Pharisees. And finally, Jude 1 and 1 John 2 are not applied to judaizers in scripture.  

[WilliamL]

10 minutes ago, Joline said:

The book of Hebrews teaches otherwise William. He is our Azazel.

It seems you do not know who Azazel was/is, or you would not say that.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Reinitin said:

Yes, sin is breaking the law of God he is the one for all men for all time atonement for our sin. The wages of sin is death. There would be no death if there was no sin and no law. The Lord had no sin so death could not hold Him in the grave. We however still Sin and our flesh still dies so sin and the law is still at work in this world and in us. Jesus said in Mathew 5:18 "For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished." The complete destruction of every thing that exalts itself above God comes before all things are accomplished. The Lord will still judge this world and remove death from us by fulfilling the fall feasts, the days of awe (great tribulation). (trumpets) the Lord coming back to earth and blood staining his robes to destroy all the enemies of God and give us a new beginning in our incorruptible bodies and white robes.   (tabernacle or booths) To hand this world completed a new creation back to God and dwell with us eternally. The frustrations this world was subjected to in hope will be removed and our Heavenly Father will have a harvest of many sons planted from the heavenly seed of His begotten Son our Lord, Priest and King. Death Hell and The grave will all be destroyed When he comes back to fulfill the prophecy rehearsed by man till the destruction as a witness to the work he is going to do. When Jesus hung on the Cross He said "it was finished" so if I under stand you correctly all was fulfilled their? If that is correct then why then 50 days after passover and 10 days after his ascension were the "now apostles"  assembled in the upper room observing the feast of Pentecost (shimchath torah, or Joy of the Law) waiting for Christ to send the Spirit of Grace in it's fullness the heavenly seed and seal for Gods planting of His kingdom? Has he now told us his seed planted to wait in hope as the full number of the gentiles come in till the harvest and the Spirit of Grace finishes it's work? It is as good as done because the Lord has spoke all these things. But, for now he has told us to wait till the harvest and all things the Lord has promised to be accomplished. I'm going to edit and ad to this because I fear your defence against those who deceive by making salvation our work instead of the Lords kicks In. Salvation and receiving the eternal kingdom is fully completed by the righteousness of our Lord not by us making ourself righteous by the law. His blood has been accepted as the once for all atonement for our sin and his righteousness is credited to us unto salvation. Yet, at the same time as knowing this is true I also know this world will not be made holy or pure and the wickedness, evil, death, hell and the grave will not be over come by man or the keeping od the law. It will also be overcome by the hand of the Lord when He and the angels return to gather, separate, collect and destroy at harvest.

I believe he has finished all the law with regards to sin. Because he never dies he remains a priest continually, therefore any sin we commit he is faithful to forgive in repentance. In short he does not need to do anything more with regards to sin. The law of Moses was added because of sin. It was a distinct covenant. I also believe the law, is also the entire 5 books of Moses. I agree with you on Gods righteousness not our own. As it is all about God being faithful to keep his promises to Abraham. When he completes the covenant promises made to ABRAHAM, we will enter the kingdom of the next world and the next life. We all have been born again as part and parcel of his promises made in Genesis 17 to be made a father of many nations. We all have been born of promise in Christ Jesus. As for law, there is the law of faith, which the book of Hebrews speaks. We walk in the steps of faith as our father Abraham. We are foreigners and strangers in this world, and in this life. Our citizenship is in the heavenly kingdom promised to Abraham. The things I speak of are all the law, not just the law of Moses. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not party to that covenant.

[Qnts2]

12 hours ago, Joline said:

I also believe first century Jewish worship looked more like the liturgical churches. After all the historical Churches do look much closer to the temple ministry of the first century.

First century Jewish worship occurred in 2 places. The synagogue and the Temple. Non-liturgical churches follow a pattern closer to 1st century synagogues.

As far as liturgical churches, I have visited 2 to see what happened in them. The RCC and a Lutheran church. While both claim to follow the Temple pattern, in my view they were more like an anti-Temple pattern, which so thoroughly distort what occurred in the Temple and violated the law. The Lutheran church was a more liberal group and not LCMS or WELS.

At the time, visiting differing churches was an assignment given to me to become more familiar with the differing kinds of services in churches. I also visited a Congregational church, and a Unitarian Universalist church. The Unitarian Universalist church, I would not call a Christian church at all. 

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:

,You and someone else were discussing about who killed Jesus. I gave the verses which answer that question. 

In the original post I objected to, you said the following about the Pharisees, in response to the post I made which quoted scripture which said there were people who were Pharisees who believed on Jesus.

Your response, applying these verses to the believing Pharisees:

Jude 1:3 4  For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord

1:12  These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

16  These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
17  But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18  How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
19  These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

Those at the council were made manifest, at the council.
1 Jo 2:19  They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Jude 1 is talking about unbelievers, but the verses I quoted said these Pharisees were believers. Jude 1 does not say that it is talking about any Pharisees, but you make and assumption, and want to say it is talking about Pharisees who pretended to be believers, without any scriptural support. 

Those at the council were believers, and there is no proof that 1 John 2:19 is speaking about them as you want to claim. Applying these verses those Pharisees which in scripture are called believers, is a prejudicial statement without any scriptural proof. That you said the only Pharisee who believed on Jesus was Paul, who was handled specially to get to believe, is false. Your assumption that all Pharisees were Judaizers is also false as scripture differentiates between the believing Pharisees who wanted to have Gentiles circumcised, and believing Pharisees. And finally, Jude 1 and 1 John 2 are not applied to judaizers in scripture.  

You desire to look for prejudice (anti-Semitism). Alsi engage in name calling etc. You know full well there are Christian Jews which agree with me concerning the sect, no Christian Jew's are not prejudice, they merely disagree with you and your views. No not all Pharisees were Judaizers, but those which were were from that sect. I believe they were exposed at that council as other scripture records of those which FEASTED AMONG THEM. They were still among the believers at that time. But you are more interested in name calling than discussing the issues.

Mt 16:6  Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
Mt 16:11  How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
Mr 8:15  And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.
Lu 12:1  In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.

Tit 1:10  For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:

Edited February 9, 2016 by Joline

[Qnts2]

Just now, Joline said:

You desire to look for prejudice (anti-Semitism). Name calling etc. You know full well there are Christian Jews which agree with me concerning the sect. No not all Pharisees were Judaizers, but those which were were from that sect. I believe they were exposed at that council as other scripture records of those which FEASTED AMONG THEM. They were still among the believers at that time. But you are more interested in name cqalling than discussing the issues.

Ok, I said prejudice against the Pharisees, but I never said anti-semitism. So, you are wrong. 

When a person makes generalized negative statements, against a group of people, which are all so negative and without any substantiation, as I've said before, they are making prejudicial statements.

Now, you are making a few statements which are a little more accurate concerning the Pharisees who were believers.. Yes, some Pharisees were believers. Among the Pharisees who were believers, some wanted the Gentile believers to be circumcised and become Jews, obligated to the Mosaic law, and others did not think Gentile believers needed to be circumcised, not obligating themselves to the Mosaic law. Unfortunately, you statement that they were still among the believers at that time, implying once again that they either were not believers (against what Acts says), or they left being believers which scripture never says.  

I am not name calling. I have been discussing the issues and I have been quoting scripture. Do you believe that all Pharisees who were believers (except Paul), were faking it or later left and were no longer believers?

[Willa]

Historicly I believe that John the Baptist was a 

 

 

On 2/9/2016 at 4:04 PM, 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 thought that John the Baptist was a Zealot, and historicly Jesus was also considered to be a Zealot.  This is why the people thought He was going to set up His kingdom at the triumphal entry into Jeruselem.  They expected Him to lead the revolt against the Roman oppression.  So instead He was crucified and mockingly called the King of the Jews.   He has yet to come again to fulfill those prophesies.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:

First century Jewish worship occurred in 2 places. The synagogue and the Temple. Non-liturgical churches follow a pattern closer to 1st century synagogues.

As far as liturgical churches, I have visited 2 to see what happened in them. The RCC and a Lutheran church. While both claim to follow the Temple pattern, in my view they were more like an anti-Temple pattern, which so thoroughly distort what occurred in the Temple and violated the law. The Lutheran church was a more liberal group and not LCMS or WELS.

At the time, visiting differing churches was an assignment given to me to become more familiar with the differing kinds of services in churches. I also visited a Congregational church, and a Unitarian Universalist church. The Unitarian Universalist church, I would not call a Christian church at all. 

20  Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
21  Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Synagogue in the first century was not for worship but places of study and learning. They did not become places of worship until after the temple was destroyed and the new Sanhedrin was established at Yavneh. Beside all that, it has nothing to do with worship according to the law. The destruction of the temple was a major concern because of its importance.