A vesture dipped in blood

[Retrobyter]

On 4/24/2017 at 10:54 AM, inchrist said:

Far from closed, I do not accept your answer simply based on an English version you prefer. Ive been fascinated how you have attempted to sweep understandings of scriptures under the carpet.

The orginal text reads as follows:

כבוְעָשָׂה הַנָּשִׂיא בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד כָּל עַם הָאָרֶץ פַּר[bull] חַטָּאת:(sin offering)

45:22 w'äsäh haNäsiyBaYôm hahû Baádô ûv'ad Käl-am hääretz Par chatta'ah

asah nasiy yowm huw beh-ad kol-am erets par (bull) chatta'ah (Sin offering)

45:22 And upon that x1931 day 3117 shall the prince 5387 prepare 6213 z8804 for x1157himself and for x1157 all x3605 the people 5971of the land 776 a bullock 6499 [for] a sin offering. 2403

What you also seem to be well unaware of, is Ezekiel 40 - 46 is well noted as being Controversial in the Talmud, there are a number of debates within the Talmud to try and harmonize Ezekiels contradictions with the Torah.

For example Menahot45a

Talmud mentions that the bull which Ezekiel prescribes for the first of Nisan is identical with one of the bulls that the Torah ordains for   Rosh Hodesh (the first of Nisan being Rosh Hodesh), The Talmud then asks the question why Ezekiel calls the bull a sin offering if the bull of the Torah is a burnt offering.

Rav Ashi tries to harmonize this contradiction by stating that the bull prescribed by Ezekiel is not the bull of Rosh Hodesh but rather a special inaugural sin offering.

Radak (Kimhi) notes (on Ezek. 45:18) that the redemption will occur in such a way that the Temple will be rebuilt and fully operational on the first of Nisan, so that the inauguration will begin on that day. 

Radak (45:22, 25) comments the extra bull that Ezekiel prescribes as a sin offering on the fourteenth of Nisan is one example of these innovative changes in the order of sacrifices. 

Your bible version may ignore the words "sin offering" but it does not mean the words dont exist in the orignal hebrew script.

Just like the jews have a contradiction with the OT, you have a contradiction with the NT.

Bulls DO NOT atone for sin ANYWHERE in the NEW TESTAMENT.

I appreciate from the Rabbi's attempting to harmonize Ezekiel, than attempting denialism instead....some even recognize that Ezekiels Law is to supersedes the Mosaic law.....What I do not accept is your denialism of Ezekiel 45:22 all due to you favouring an English translation. Come on now....

You have a contradiction, the origanl text tells you bulls are being used as a sin offering and I have conversations of Rabbi's who understand their own language which all english translations copy from, bulls being used as a sin offering in Ezekiel.

 

Now please answer my question, laws either harmonize or they supersede existing laws.....How do you Harmonize Ezekials bull for sin offering to make atonement to that of Christ's sin atonement.

 

 

 

Romans12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship.

Hebrews 13:15 Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that openly profess his name.

 

Can you not read what the rest of Hebrews states?

But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises.
 

Well no, some will be priests others will be kings....thats why it says Priests and Kings.
 

So proof of virginity is disgusting? So 
Deuteronomy 22:13-21 is disgusting?

complete western ignorance

Gn 29:23; Tb 8:1), and the stained linen would be retained as evidence of the bride’s virginity." (Tyndale Bible dictionary, Marriage customs) which you call disgusting

 

"To clarify for his disciples what he meant, therefore, the Baptizer used a typical Jewish type of parable, drawn from Jewish marriage customs. At that time the bridegroom normally selected one or two close friends to escort the bride to the bridegroom’s marriage chamber and to wait outside the room or tent for the bridegroom’s shout and often for receipt of tokens that the marriage had been consummated with his virgin bride. Such friends of the bridegroom were thus able to certify to the wedding guests that the consummation of the marriage had taken place and the joyous festivities could continue (cf. 3:29). John gladly accepted his role as a friend of the bridegroom. Just as he had earlier willingly turned over his disciples to Jesus in a self-giving act (1:35–37), here he expressed his genuine joy that Jesus was being accepted by the people. This brief parable, therefore, serves as a powerful illustration." (New American Commentary, John 3:29)

 

Which you call disgusting.

Tell me something......, do you see blood on the armies feet in Rev 19?

Shalom, inchrist.

Sorry, but you've made some weird conclusions that must be corrected, but I only have time for one tonight.

First, a "sin offering" is NOT for forgiving sin! (Isn't that interesting?) Here's an excerpt from Judaism 101:

Quote

Chatat: Sin Offering

A sin offering is an offering to atone for and purge a sin. It is an expression of sorrow for the error and a desire to be reconciled with G-d. The Hebrew term for this type of offering is chatat, from the word chayt, meaning "missing the mark." A chatat could only be offered for unintentional sins committed through carelessness, not for intentional, malicious sins. The size of the offering varied according to the nature of the sin and the financial means of the sinner. Some chatatot are individual and some are communal. Communal offerings represent the interdependence of the community, and the fact that we are all responsible for each others' sins. A few special chatatot could not be eaten, but for the most part, for the average person's personal sin, the chatat was eaten by the kohanim (the priests).

Therefore, the chatat, or sin offering, was ONLY for ACCIDENTAL sins! 

The BURNT Offering was for the forgiveness of sins:

Quote

 

Olah: Burnt Offering

Perhaps the best-known class of offerings is the burnt offering. It was the oldest and commonest sacrifice, and represented submission to G-d's will. The Hebrew word for burnt offering is olah, from the root Ayin-Lamed-Hei, meaning ascension. It is the same root as the word aliyah, which is used to describe moving to Israel or ascending to the podium to say a blessing over the Torah. An olah is completely burnt on the outer altar; no part of it is eaten by anyone. Because the offering represents complete submission to G-d's will, the entire offering is given to G-d (i.e., it cannot be used after it is burnt). It expresses a desire to commune with G-d, and expiates sins incidentally in the process (because how can you commune with G-d if you are tainted with sins?). An olah could be made from cattle, sheep, goats, or even birds, depending on the offerer's means.

 

So, don't be too set in your beliefs regarding Qorbanot (Offerings).

Regarding the offerings in Ezekiel, most of these were for the Levites and priests to eat. As I've said before, G-d loves a good barbeque, particularly the sweet fat and oils burning.

Also, I'll just mention that the Ro'sh Chodesh (or "Rosh Hodesh") is the First of EVERY month, not just that of the month of Nisan; it's the New Moon. It was as much a holy day as was the Shabbat. Remember that on the Hebrew calendar, the months are TRUE "moonths," following the phases of the moon.

Just learning and accepting this much should encourage one to go back and re-think what has been written so far.