Determining the Dates for Easter and Passover

[Esther4:14]

On 4/1/2016 at 1:19 PM, Qnts2 said:

I think you are reading a lot of stuff into what I wrote and making a lot of false assumptions and accusations.

 

No I understood what you said.  You basically said that to become Christian is the same as renouncing your privilege and status as a Jew.  Therefore, it is possible to say that there is pride and an incentive to not convert to Christianity that has nothing to do with the behavior of the church and that the church does not have to take responsibility for whether or not the Jewish community converts to Christianity.  

There would also be pride in being able to return to Israel because you are a Jew and have not accepted Christ.    

This is the same philosophy that was used to say that people who had ancestors who were black or Indian did not deserve the same privileges as white people in America; therefore, it is a racist determination of who may or may not consider themselves or their heritage within the history of Judaism as valid.  Only a purebred Jew gets this privilege is what you are saying, which is interesting when the genealogical records were destroyed with the temple so there is no way to really know whether someone who says they are 100% Jewish really is 100%.   

Instead, you promote that there are some in the church who promote the false two house theology and point out all the times that there have been false claims of Jewish ancestry like the claim that there were lost tribes in Britain, which is clearly false because anyone who knows history would know that Jew and gentile lived very separate lives in England according to The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich in 1173.  

It is interesting to note that the accusation made in this historical writing concerns an event where there is actual evidence of a young boy who it is was murdered by the Jews in England, which would eventually lead to their expulsion.  Unlike in other instances like the Salem witch trials where there is no evidence that these women were witches; or, like when black men were accused of not being whole people.  There is no evidence to support this.  

However, in regard to the accusations towards the Jews, there is always a body involved.  

Therefore, I imagine that it is possible, demonstrated by the degree of separation within the communities from many of these accounts to suggest, that the rejection of the notion that there are people who descend from Israel who are not identified as a Jew comes from the desire of the Jewish community to separate itself in an elite way.  

And, I find that you have avoided what I actually said in regard to the subject of the thread in much the same way you initially questioned my source in a thread I started about what the Talmud had to say about the Sabbath.  As it turned out, you later admitted that you knew exactly the portions that I had cited in my original post because you have your own personal copy in your possession.  So basically, you were just wanting to give the impression that there was nothing valid to be gained from what I had to say from your credentials as a Jew.  http://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/193963-where-did-the-sabbath-go/

Further, the two house theology and any of the "false" claims of the lost tribes of Israel has nothing to do with the actual evidence of the many Jews who were never "lost" because of being taken into captivity.  They became "lost" because they became Christian and thereby renounced their status as Jews.  Scripture clearly says they converted in the first century.  Where are they and why would it not be possible that if the Lord were going to gather a remnant that he would not call one who because lost because his family had been cut off from his people for accepting the Messiah?  Would He not show favor to the descendants of the early church in this way?  

But, like I said, I believe that the dates for the Passover and Easter are different because it was a way to separate, or cut off the church from a Jewish identity.  Why, again, do you think the dates are different?

 " Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:4).  

[Paradigm]

55 minutes ago, Esther4:14 said:

No I understood what you said.  You basically said that to become Christian is the same as renouncing your privilege and status as a Jew.  Therefore, it is possible to say that there is pride and an incentive to not convert to Christianity that has nothing to do with the behavior of the church and that the church does not have to take responsibility for whether or not the Jewish community converts to Christianity.  

There would also be pride in being able to return to Israel because you are a Jew and have not accepted Christ.    

This is the same philosophy that was used to say that people who had ancestors who were black or Indian did not deserve the same privileges as white people in America; therefore, it is a racist determination of who may or may not consider themselves or their heritage within the history of Judaism as valid.  Only a purebred Jew gets this privilege is what you are saying, which is interesting when the genealogical records were destroyed with the temple so there is no way to really know whether someone who says they are 100% Jewish really is 100%.   

Instead, you promote that there are some in the church who promote the false two house theology and point out all the times that there have been false claims of Jewish ancestry like the claim that there were lost tribes in Britain, which is clearly false because anyone who knows history would know that Jew and gentile lived very separate lives in England according to The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich in 1173.  

It is interesting to note that the accusation made in this historical writing concerns an event where there is actual evidence of a young boy who it is was murdered by the Jews in England, which would eventually lead to their expulsion.  Unlike in other instances like the Salem witch trials where there is no evidence that these women were witches; or, like when black men were accused of not being whole people.  There is no evidence to support this.  

However, in regard to the accusations towards the Jews, there is always a body involved.  

Therefore, I imagine that it is possible, demonstrated by the degree of separation within the communities from many of these accounts to suggest, that the rejection of the notion that there are people who descend from Israel who are not identified as a Jew comes from the desire of the Jewish community to separate itself in an elite way.  

And, I find that you have avoided what I actually said in regard to the subject of the thread in much the same way you initially questioned my source in a thread I started about what the Talmud had to say about the Sabbath.  As it turned out, you later admitted that you knew exactly the portions that I had cited in my original post because you have your own personal copy in your possession.  So basically, you were just wanting to give the impression that there was nothing valid to be gained from what I had to say from your credentials as a Jew.  http://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/193963-where-did-the-sabbath-go/

Further, the two house theology and any of the "false" claims of the lost tribes of Israel has nothing to do with the actual evidence of the many Jews who were never "lost" because of being taken into captivity.  They became "lost" because they became Christian and thereby renounced their status as Jews.  Scripture clearly says they converted in the first century.  Where are they and why would it not be possible that if the Lord were going to gather a remnant that he would not call one who because lost because his family had been cut off from his people for accepting the Messiah?  Would He not show favor to the descendants of the early church in this way?  

But, like I said, I believe that the dates for the Passover and Easter are different because it was a way to separate, or cut off the church from a Jewish identity.  Why, again, do you think the dates are different?

 " Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:4).  

Esther:

Thanks for your honest, sincere and well thought out posts. I found it pointless to try to carry on a legitimate discussion with her. Rather than simply quoting a statement made by me, she consistently chose to create  labels and mischaracterizations of my position to shoot arrows at. In addition she kept trying to make the discussion personal about me rather than deal with the substance of my actual statements. 

I am normally more than willing to have an honest and civil discussion with people even if we disagree. However, if they consistently persist in Saul Alinsky types of tactics and constantly use ad hominem I find it too taxing to deal with.

Thanks again Esther.

 

[Qnts2]

3 hours ago, Esther4:14 said:

No I understood what you said.  You basically said that to become Christian is the same as renouncing your privilege and status as a Jew.  Therefore, it is possible to say that there is pride and an incentive to not convert to Christianity that has nothing to do with the behavior of the church and that the church does not have to take responsibility for whether or not the Jewish community converts to Christianity.  

There would also be pride in being able to return to Israel because you are a Jew and have not accepted Christ.    

This is the same philosophy that was used to say that people who had ancestors who were black or Indian did not deserve the same privileges as white people in America; therefore, it is a racist determination of who may or may not consider themselves or their heritage within the history of Judaism as valid.  Only a purebred Jew gets this privilege is what you are saying, which is interesting when the genealogical records were destroyed with the temple so there is no way to really know whether someone who says they are 100% Jewish really is 100%.   

Instead, you promote that there are some in the church who promote the false two house theology and point out all the times that there have been false claims of Jewish ancestry like the claim that there were lost tribes in Britain, which is clearly false because anyone who knows history would know that Jew and gentile lived very separate lives in England according to The Life and Miracles of St. William of Norwich in 1173.  

It is interesting to note that the accusation made in this historical writing concerns an event where there is actual evidence of a young boy who it is was murdered by the Jews in England, which would eventually lead to their expulsion.  Unlike in other instances like the Salem witch trials where there is no evidence that these women were witches; or, like when black men were accused of not being whole people.  There is no evidence to support this.  

However, in regard to the accusations towards the Jews, there is always a body involved.  

Therefore, I imagine that it is possible, demonstrated by the degree of separation within the communities from many of these accounts to suggest, that the rejection of the notion that there are people who descend from Israel who are not identified as a Jew comes from the desire of the Jewish community to separate itself in an elite way.  

And, I find that you have avoided what I actually said in regard to the subject of the thread in much the same way you initially questioned my source in a thread I started about what the Talmud had to say about the Sabbath.  As it turned out, you later admitted that you knew exactly the portions that I had cited in my original post because you have your own personal copy in your possession.  So basically, you were just wanting to give the impression that there was nothing valid to be gained from what I had to say from your credentials as a Jew.  http://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/193963-where-did-the-sabbath-go/

Further, the two house theology and any of the "false" claims of the lost tribes of Israel has nothing to do with the actual evidence of the many Jews who were never "lost" because of being taken into captivity.  They became "lost" because they became Christian and thereby renounced their status as Jews.  Scripture clearly says they converted in the first century.  Where are they and why would it not be possible that if the Lord were going to gather a remnant that he would not call one who because lost because his family had been cut off from his people for accepting the Messiah?  Would He not show favor to the descendants of the early church in this way?  

But, like I said, I believe that the dates for the Passover and Easter are different because it was a way to separate, or cut off the church from a Jewish identity.  Why, again, do you think the dates are different?

 " Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:4).  

That is not what I said. You obviously are making false accusations.

[Qnts2]

2 hours ago, Paradigm said:

Esther:

Thanks for your honest, sincere and well thought out posts. I found it pointless to try to carry on a legitimate discussion with her. Rather than simply quoting a statement made by me, she consistently chose to create  labels and mischaracterizations of my position to shoot arrows at. In addition she kept trying to make the discussion personal about me rather than deal with the substance of my actual statements. 

I am normally more than willing to have an honest and civil discussion with people even if we disagree. However, if they consistently persist in Saul Alinsky types of tactics and constantly use ad hominem I find it too taxing to deal with.

Thanks again Esther.

 

I have repeatedly asked you to state your position. Are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel?

You have yet to answer these question to clarify your position. If you had I would not be basing my thoughts on what you are writing which hasn't been terribly clear.

So, are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel? Do you subscribe to Oneness theology? Please answer the question rather then agreeing with someone who made false accusation against me and who made accusations against the Jewish people that they deserved to be expelled from countries because Jewish people murder people. So, do you agree that the Jewish people are kicked out of countries because they are murderers?

[Esther4:14]

4 hours ago, Qnts2 said:

I have repeatedly asked you to state your position. Are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel?

You have yet to answer these question to clarify your position. If you had I would not be basing my thoughts on what you are writing which hasn't been terribly clear.

So, are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel? Do you subscribe to Oneness theology? Please answer the question rather then agreeing with someone who made false accusation against me and who made accusations against the Jewish people that they deserved to be expelled from countries because Jewish people murder people. So, do you agree that the Jewish people are kicked out of countries because they are murderers?

One day I may decide to write a brief testimony of my background.  Right now, it is too painful for me still but I had no idea what two house theology was before coming here so no I do not think along these lines, and I have a fairly  simple testimony of a girl with a Bible from a fairly small town.   In other ways, it is very complex how His word has preserved my life.  

I also clearly stated my position in the post I have already made.  I also had no idea what oneness theology was before now either, and judging by your response and avoidance of the clear question I bolded relating to the thread, I will proceed to ignore further conversation with you again.  It is difficult to have a conversation with someone who manipulates what you say to such a degree according to her file cabinet of false teachings.  It is truly as though you have spent more time studying all the little nuances of false teachings that ever existed than a basic study and dependence on scripture.  I have never meet someone who could do such things and just be ready and raring to accuse someone whenever possible.    

In my church I went when I got saved, one of the ladies would only tell me things like get your heart right with Jesus and stay in the word.  It just was never necessary to train to go to the church Jeopardy.   "I'll take false teaching for five hundred". 

"Alright, name the false teaching originating in England about the lost tribes of Israel.". (Sound of buzzer). 

(side note: I realized now that I have gotten the responses confused and this wasn't originally addressed to me, but I would still like to say it anyway.)

[Paradigm]

14 hours ago, Qnts2 said:

I have repeatedly asked you to state your position. Are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel?

You have yet to answer these question to clarify your position. If you had I would not be basing my thoughts on what you are writing which hasn't been terribly clear.

So, are you Two House? Do you believe you are a child of Israel? Do you subscribe to Oneness theology? Please answer the question rather then agreeing with someone who made false accusation against me and who made accusations against the Jewish people that they deserved to be expelled from countries because Jewish people murder people. So, do you agree that the Jewish people are kicked out of countries because they are murderers?

In the grand scheme of things, I think it matters very little which opinions, positions or labels that I do identify with or do not.  I consider myself an individual and do not go shopping in the market of theology looking for packages to accept or reject based upon their labels or the critiques of others. Not only that, I have tried to detach from labels and categories that other's have created, defined, redefined, mischaracterized, etc.  

I therefore do my best in most cases to not inflict my opinions, labels, etc upon others. I do my best to keep myself out of discussions and let the scriptures speak for themselves as much as possible. I believe that all scripture is God breathed, so the more we can let it be what it is and refrain from adding, subtracting or changing, the better. I strive to focus upon "It is written" rather than "I think" "I believe" "I feel" "the way that I see it", etc. That is why I normally  just mainly post scriptures on a topic and perhaps show what Hebrew or Greek words were used in a passage. I may also show what passage a NT writer is referencing. 

Though it may not be possible to eliminate all subjectivity, I strive to detach myself from personal agenda as much as I am able and be as objective as I can regardless of my personal inherited belief systems and influences. The truth does not need to conform to my narrow views of what is or is not, what is possible and what is not, what is to my personal taste and what is not. For as it is written:

Proverbs 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

If we sincerely want truth, we have to swallow the scroll whether it is sweet or bitter. That scroll is objective truth, yet it is worked out subjectively and often expressed subjectively. 

Those who are sincere seekers of truth are likely much more concerned with hearing  God's opinion, labels, positions, etc than mine. Most people on forums are not brazen enough to out and out deny a list of scriptures, so many times they will seek to make a discussion personal. This is not only unfruitful, but merely brings confusion and strife and other works of the flesh to issues and the actual substance is often lost. I have no control ultimately what others choose to do. They can choose to get personal, contentious and behave disingenuously if they want. I trust that the Righteous Judge will judge as He chooses and that He will reveal as He chooses to whom He chooses.  

Therefore, you can choose to label me however you want, mischaracterize my positions or discuss what you think my assumptions are. You can continue seeking to make me the subject of a discussion. I will likely continue my practice of not doing likewise, but staying focused upon "it is written." I hope that this is clear because I do not intend to continuously try to clarify. For it is God who creates the seeing eye and the hearing ear. That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit. 

[Qnts2]

52 minutes ago, Paradigm said:

In the grand scheme of things, I think it matters very little which opinions, positions or labels that I do identify with or do not.  I consider myself an individual and do not go shopping in the market of theology looking for packages to accept or reject based upon their labels or the critiques of others. Not only that, I have tried to detach from labels and categories that other's have created, defined, redefined, mischaracterized, etc.  

I therefore do my best in most cases to not inflict my opinions, labels, etc upon others. I do my best to keep myself out of discussions and let the scriptures speak for themselves as much as possible. I believe that all scripture is God breathed, so the more we can let it be what it is and refrain from adding, subtracting or changing, the better. I strive to focus upon "It is written" rather than "I think" "I believe" "I feel" "the way that I see it", etc. That is why I normally  just mainly post scriptures on a topic and perhaps show what Hebrew or Greek words were used in a passage. I may also show what passage a NT writer is referencing. 

Though it may not be possible to eliminate all subjectivity, I strive to detach myself from personal agenda as much as I am able and be as objective as I can regardless of my personal inherited belief systems and influences. The truth does not need to conform to my narrow views of what is or is not, what is possible and what is not, what is to my personal taste and what is not. For as it is written:

Proverbs 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

If we sincerely want truth, we have to swallow the scroll whether it is sweet or bitter. That scroll is objective truth, yet it is worked out subjectively and often expressed subjectively. 

Those who are sincere seekers of truth are likely much more concerned with hearing  God's opinion, labels, positions, etc than mine. Most people on forums are not brazen enough to out and out deny a list of scriptures, so many times they will seek to make a discussion personal. This is not only unfruitful, but merely brings confusion and strife and other works of the flesh to issues and the actual substance is often lost. I have no control ultimately what others choose to do. They can choose to get personal, contentious and behave disingenuously if they want. I trust that the Righteous Judge will judge as He chooses and that He will reveal as He chooses to whom He chooses.  

Therefore, you can choose to label me however you want, mischaracterize my positions or discuss what you think my assumptions are. You can continue seeking to make me the subject of a discussion. I will likely continue my practice of not doing likewise, but staying focused upon "it is written." I hope that this is clear because I do not intend to continuously try to clarify. For it is God who creates the seeing eye and the hearing ear. That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit. 

Your position appears to be partially similar to Two House. It seems you might believe you are Israel. Some of the verses you quoted are also often used in One Law theology but you do not appear to be purely  One Law.

I view labels as good as it is a short hand to understand what you are saying without all of the guessing. You have been as clear as mud as far as I am concerned. I recognize a bit of various theologies so even though I asked for clarification many times, you ignored my request and then blame me because you think I got it wrong.  

I am disappointed that you did not comment on your agreement with a post which accused the Jewish people of being murderers and countries are right to kick Jewish people out. Another question ignored, as I asked hoping for the best, but with no answer, am I to assume the worst? You see no problem calling Jewish people murderers and kicking them out of countries?

 

[Qnts2]

13 hours ago, Esther4:14 said:

One day I may decide to write a brief testimony of my background.  Right now, it is too painful for me still but I had no idea what two house theology was before coming here so no I do not think along these lines, and I have a fairly  simple testimony of a girl with a Bible from a fairly small town.   In other ways, it is very complex how His word has preserved my life.  

I also clearly stated my position in the post I have already made.  I also had no idea what oneness theology was before now either, and judging by your response and avoidance of the clear question I bolded relating to the thread, I will proceed to ignore further conversation with you again.  It is difficult to have a conversation with someone who manipulates what you say to such a degree according to her file cabinet of false teachings.  It is truly as though you have spent more time studying all the little nuances of false teachings that ever existed than a basic study and dependence on scripture.  I have never meet someone who could do such things and just be ready and raring to accuse someone whenever possible.    

In my church I went when I got saved, one of the ladies would only tell me things like get your heart right with Jesus and stay in the word.  It just was never necessary to train to go to the church Jeopardy.   "I'll take false teaching for five hundred". 

"Alright, name the false teaching originating in England about the lost tribes of Israel.". (Sound of buzzer). 

(side note: I realized now that I have gotten the responses confused and this wasn't originally addressed to me, but I would still like to say it anyway.)

I was asking questions to Paradigm to try to get a better understanding of their position. The teachings you call false are teachings I have run into very often and have had to learn what they teach to understand and counter as Two House, and One law teachers try to recruit believers into their teachings. Since both try to use Hebrew but actually misuse Hebrew because they do not understand Hebrew grammar, for most Christians who do not know Hebrew, they are more easily deceived. 

As far as your points, I have said, you are misrepresenting what I am saying. I realize that you do not understand but are using your lack of understanding to make some accusations which are false. Being 100% Jewish is not pride as it has nothing to do with DNA. It would be like saying a person is 50% Christian. Is a person who is 50% Christian a Christian? The answer to that is no. A person who says they are 50% Christian is not Christian at all.  While a person who is a Christian would explain further as it is a matter of faith in Jesus which is either 100% or not at all, being Jewish is not something you try to convince someone else into becoming, so a person who says they are 50% Jewish, is not Jewish, but it doesn't matter in terms of eternal salvation whether a person is Jewish or not Jewish. 

[Guest]

On ‎3‎/‎29‎/‎2016 at 4:27 AM, OldSchool2 said:

Many Orthodox Christians, including the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches, celebrate Easter Sunday by the Julian calendar.

Yes! and these Catholic Churches do not call it Easter either. They call it Pascha.

[Guest]

On ‎3‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 4:37 PM, Paradigm said:

That's what I would like to know as well. That is why I posted so much of it. I don't recall you posting any scriptures.

Where does scripture say that we should call the first day of the week "the Lord's Day?" I already quoted the only verse where that phrase appears.

Yes, at times they did meet on the first day of the week. They also continued to keep the Sabbath. In Scripture the day begins in the evening and ends in the evening. If you notice it was on the first day of the week and Paul spoke until late and a guy fell. The Sabbath begins on what what is now called Friday at sundown. It ends Saturday evening. So in modern vernacular Sabbath ends on Saturday after sundown which begins the first day of the week. They were gathered on the first day of the week (Saturday evening) to close out the Sabbath at the Havdolah service. They were not changing anything or doing some new practice. You will see multiple passages of Paul preaching at the local synagogues on Sabbath. 

Hebrews 4:7-11

⁷ Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. ⁸ For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. ⁹ There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. ¹⁰ For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. ¹¹ Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

They still "are" a shadow of things to come.

Colossians 2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

 

Modern day Christianity is the hybrid. A mixture of paganism and traditions of men mostly. That's why the beliefs and practices cannot be substantiated using the scriptures. 

I have already quoted scripture where Paul tells us to keep Passover and that YHVH says that it is to be done forever. We cannot lean into our own understanding but must to what is written as the authority of what is true. 

 

We are told Christ our passover has been sacrificed, therefore let us keep the feast. The feast spoken of here is unleavened bread. We who are in Christ are not to keep the feast according to the old leaven (teaching). We are to keep the feast of unleavened bread Void of the old malice. What does that mean to you?

Firstly, in cultural context, it probably includes the sectarian divisions over when the first wave sheaf was to begin the count to Pentecost. As this day was in dispute among the Sadducees, Pharisees, and Essesnes. Therefor you could say, the day of Christ's resurrection was in dispute, long before Jesus came to fulfill it. I believe Paul here warns concerning this malice in keeping the feast of his resurrection. He does not want these divisions to be taken hold of in the Church.