The problem with sacraments

[Guest Teditis]

13 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:

That is not heretical.

Jesus did die for sins, once and for all. But, if you are talking about the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, that atonement is a national atonement for the nation of Israel. When the children of Israel, as a nation accept Jesus as the Messiah, then Yom Kippur will be fulfilled. 

There were also daily sacrifices for atonement. Those sacrifices were for the sins of individuals. All of those sacrifices have been completed once and for all, but are not applied to all individuals who will accept Jesus until they come to faith. There were also sacrifices for individual ritual uncleanness which Jesus died for, once and for all. But not all have yet been make clean until they come to faith in Jesus.

So of the many differing sacrifices for sin and uncleanness, Jesus accomplished all that was needed so that people might be saved, but not all who will be saved are saved yet. Yom Kippur is not yet fulfilled until the time when Israel will see Jesus return, and as scripture says: Matthew 23:37“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. ³⁸ Behold, your house is being left to you desolate! ³⁹ For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’”

Blessed is He Who come in the Name of the Lord, is the Messianic greeting that the priests were to use to recognize the Messiah, when He entered Jerusalem. When the priests greet the Messiah, all Jewish people will accept their Messiah. That will be the fulfillment of the national redemption, when all of Israel who are living will see Jesus and believe. 

One added comment: While Jesus died for sin, once and for all, that does not mean everyone is saved.  That would be Universalism, which is heretical. The fulfillment is when each person believes on Jesus and is saved.  

 

I appreciate the time you took to explain but we'll have to agree to disagree.

Jesus' atonement was for all people, the Jew first, then the Gentile. There is no need for a special

atonement for the nation of Israel... He is their Messiah first, after all.

Each Jew is on their own in these days and has to make Peace with Jesus as they are called to do.

They will be given no special exception to accessing this atonement that isn't already given to both

Jew and Gentile.

As for the dispensation of the nation of Israel, God may have special plans... but that has nothing to do with the

salvation of individual Jews.

Shiloh's statement of some sort of dual-atonement is nothing but buggery and foolishness.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Qnts2 said:

I do not believe Christianity has made strides forward since Jesus teachings. There is no such thing as an improvement on what Jesus taught. The believers back then are the same as the believers today.

Messianic Judaism holds to the authority of Scripture. As Jewish people, we do follow traditions we grew up with but those customs are not Holy.

Messianics do not consider oral torah, torah?

[Guest shiloh357]

1 hour ago, Joline said:

Well Shiloh your rabbinics, based on oral law called tradition in the scripture is wrong

Ac 13:27  For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

Why do you assign an office to men they did not hold from Moses?

Why do you believe the Sanhedrin were given the office to teach the prophets?

That was the ministry Given to the apostles of the Christ.

My rabbinics?  Based on oral law??   What are you talking about?

What office am I assigning to anyone?

What does this have to do with the Sanhedrin? 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

Yes he did.  and I have explained this three times already.   I am not talking about the atonement.  I am talking about the prophetic fulfillment of the festival  relative to the second  advent and the day of judgment where those rejected the atonement will be judged.

I have made that clear several times, now.  

So then you say Jesus did fulfill the day of atonement?

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, Joline said:

So then you say Jesus did fulfill the day of atonement?

That is all I have been saying. 

[Guest shiloh357]

2 minutes ago, Joline said:

Messianics do not consider oral torah, torah?

No, Messianic Jews do not consider the Oral law to be Torah.

[Guest]

Just now, shiloh357 said:

My rabbinics?  Based on oral law??   What are you talking about?

What office am I assigning to anyone?

What does this have to do with the Sanhedrin? 

I am talking about how the Rabbis read the prophets. Where do you give them this jurisdiction of duty?

The Judges in Israel were to decide between two litigants in the law. Just like you and I going before a judge in any courtroom today. The high priest was the supreme justice. He did carry the urim and thumim to decide the matters to difficult for the lower courts.

So where do you give the rabbins the authority to interpret and teach the prophets.

[Guest shiloh357]

3 minutes ago, Teditis said:

 

Shiloh's statement of some sort of dual-atonement is nothing but buggery and foolishness.

I didn't say anything about a dual atonement.   I said that there was  a dual prophetic fulfillment.  It was fulfilled in Jesus atoning work on the cross at his first advent.  Then I said it will be fulfilled again on the day of judgment against those who rejected Jesus' atonement.  You ought actually read what I said instead of just misrepresenting my words.  

[Guest Teditis]

10 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:

I do not believe Christianity has made strides forward since Jesus teachings. There is no such thing as an improvement on what Jesus taught. The believers back then are the same as the believers today.

Messianic Judaism holds to the authority of Scripture. As Jewish people, we do follow traditions we grew up with but those customs are not Holy.

Well of course they've made strides forward... that is the nature of the passage of time.

I never said that they improved on what Christ taught...merely that they have taken His

teachings and put them into practice. They have in essence improved on OT/Rabbinic teachings

just as Christ has encouraged us to do... to expand and go beyond.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

No, Messianic Jews do not consider the Oral law to be Torah.

So it is not really oral law then right?