Passover & Christianity

[phkrause]

I'm in agreement Richard! The sacrificing of the animals is no longer necessary, because all the ceremony's  pointed to Jesus!! I also agree that Jesus instituted the foot washing and the eating the bread, drinking the grape juice to replace the Passover for the new Christians. I do believe that the Jews can keep on with the Passover, because that still points to coming out of Egypt for them!!

[Ron Amnsn]

On 4/1/2018 at 5:58 AM, RichardRuhling said:

Christ said, "Not one jot or tittle shall pass from the law till all be fulfilled." Matt 5:18.  Don't His words allow for animal sacrifices to pass away because He fulfilled them.

If we presume that we know and understand all of the reasons and purposes that God himself had in mind when he instituted the animal sacrifices, then we might conclude that Jesus fulfilled all those reasons and purposes. 

Is there a passage of Scripture that actually states that Jesus fulfilled all the reasons and purposes for animal sacrifices?  Some people might point to the "once for all" verses like Hebrews 7:27 where the translators inserted the words "for all" to try to render into English a sense of emphatic singularity of an event that the Greek word ephapax carries.  Those inserted English words "for all" imply an element of meaning that is not present in the Greek.  There is no Greek word or words in those verses that can be translated as "for all".  The English phrase "once for all" does somewhat approximate the emphatic "only once" meaning of the Greek if we could just leave it as is.  However, the inserted words "for all" usually leave the English reader feeling the need to supply an additional idea as the object of the preposition "for" -- as an answer to the question "for all what?".  You hear this happen almost every time the "once for all" verses are explained.  People will say it means "for all time", "for all sacrifices", "for all people", or "for all everything", which sounds theologically grand but is not the meaning of the passage in Greek.   People have a strong tendency to insert or assume an idea that agrees with their own theological presuppositions -- "for all [whatever we want the verse to say]".  The Greek word ephapax simply refers to an event that happens just once and never again.

Also, there are given to us in Scripture a few purposes and reasons for animal sacrifices that Jesus did not fulfill.  The most obvious was the daily provision of sustenance for the Levitical priests (Numbers 18), who were given portions of the animal sacrifices by God as a perpetual inheritance in lieu of tribal lands.  What did the death of Jesus do to provide or fulfill that promised inheritance to the families of righteous priests like the parents of John (the baptist), Zachariah and Elizabeth, who had no children to provide for them in old age and no fields to sell?  At the time God gave that inheritance to the Levitical priests, was God already planning to revoke that inheritance when Messiah died?

[8thdaypriest]

On 5/26/2017 at 10:51 PM, Ron Amnsn said:

If circumcision of 8-day-old male babies as God instructed was considered in the NT to be some sort of mutilation, then Jesus because he was circumcised would have been [supposedly] "mutilated" and would not have been "without blemish".

Never thought of that.  Good one!

[Ron Amnsn]

On 4/1/2018 at 5:58 AM, RichardRuhling said:

The veil of the temple was rent when He died, meaning there is nothing sacred in it now. 

Do you mean that after the veil was torn the Israelites were not supposed to bring their tithes and grain offerings to the temple any more?  If that is the case, then the coming of Messiah would revoke from the priests and Levites all of the daily sustenance that God had promised to them as their inheritance -- not just loss of the priestly portions of the animal sacrifices that had been promised perpetually to the priests.

If God had intended all along to revoke the inheritance he gave to the priests and Levites, how do we know that God is not already planning to revoke the promises he has given regarding the New Earth and our place in it?  Does the good news of the Gospel really include the teaching that God's Word and his promises are not reliable?  No.

Which Scripture passages reveal that the tearing of the temple veil meant that there was thereafter nothing sacred at the temple?  As far as I can find the only Bible passage that offers any explanation for the significance of the tearing of the veil is Hebrews 10:20 where it says the veil represents the body or flesh of Jesus.  Everything else we've been taught about the meaning of the tearing of the veil is non-Scriptural.

[8thdaypriest]

2 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

so, there are given to us in Scripture a few purposes and reasons for animal sacrifices that Jesus did not fulfill.  The most obvious was the daily provision of sustenance for the Levitical priests (Numbers 18), who were given portions of the animal sacrifices by God as a perpetual inheritance in lieu of tribal lands.  What did the death of Jesus do to provide or fulfill that promised inheritance to the families of righteous priests like the parents of John (the baptist), Zachariah and Elizabeth, who had no children to provide for them in old age and no fields to sell?  At the time God gave that inheritance to the Levitical priests, was God already planning to revoke that inheritance when Messiah died?

We are to EAT the "body of Christ" - the true sacrifice, because we ARE "priests of God and of Christ".  We also DRINK His blood - symbolically of course.   So He did "fulfill" the provision for the priests - for all of them, not just for the Levite priests.  The "priesthood" has been "changed" to include ALL Israelites, not just Levites. 

The Apostolic believers shared their wealth, so Elizabeth and Zechariah would be taken care of. 

[Ron Amnsn]

2 hours ago, RichardRuhling said:

...  has the New Moon coming before the spring equinox and is disqualified

Which Scripture says the new moon of the first month cannot come before equinox?  Modern astronomers tell us that equinox marks the beginning of "Spring", but it could be somewhat anachronistic to assume that "Spring" was defined that way when God first instituted Passover.

[Ron Amnsn]

10 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

We are to EAT the "body of Christ" - the true sacrifice, because we ARE "priests of God and of Christ".  We also DRINK His blood - symbolically of course.   So He did "fulfill" the provision for the priests - for all of them, not just for the Levite priests.  The "priesthood" has been "changed" to include ALL Israelites, not just Levites.

So your telling us that God intended to replace the promise of daily sustenance for the Levitical priests with a once-per-year meal where they (and the rest of the Israelites) symbolically eat and drink the "flesh" and "blood" of Jesus?  Is that how much we can count on the literal fulfillment of the promises and inheritance given in God's Word?

[8thdaypriest]

4 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Do you mean that after the veil was torn the Israelites were not supposed to bring their tithes and grain offerings to the temple any more?  If that is the case, then the coming of Messiah would revoke from the priests and Levites all of the daily sustenance that God had promised to them as their inheritance -- not just loss of the priestly portions of the animal sacrifices that had been promised perpetually to the priests.

If God had intended all along to revoke the inheritance he gave to the priests and Levites, how do we know that God is not already planning to revoke the promises he has given regarding the New Earth and our place in it?  Does the good news of the Gospel really include the teaching that God's Word and his promises are not reliable?  No.

Which Scripture passages reveal that the tearing of the temple veil meant that there was thereafter nothing sacred at the temple?  As far as I can find the only Bible passage that offers any explanation for the significance of the tearing of the veil is Hebrews 10:20 where it says the veil represents the body or flesh of Jesus.  Everything else we've been taught about the meaning of the tearing of the veil is non-Scriptural.

God did not say that His Temple would be gone forever.  In fact, He said it would be restored - in Messiah's kingdom. 

Ezekiel 37:15-27  The LORD will gather the children of Israel.  Judah and Israel will be joined into one kingdom - never to be separated again, with one King - from the line of David (v.24). The Lord will then make an everlasting covenant of peace with those He has gathered (v.26).  “My Tabernacle also shall be with them; . . . The nations also will know that I, the LORD, sanctify Israel, WHEN My sanctuary is in their midst forevermore.”

It is "the priesthood" that is "changed".   I've heard at least two descriptions of that "change".  I don't agree with either. 

I believe "the priesthood" has been changed BACK to "the firstborn", with Christ (THE firstborn of God) as high priest.    God said, "Israel is my firstborn" which to me means that all Israelites of faith, are "priests of God and of Christ".   Believing Gentiles (by DNA) are "grafted in" to Israel, and unbelieving DNA descendants of Jacob are "cut off" from Israel. 

Isaiah 61:4-9 describes priests with land enough to grow vineyards and they have fields to plow.  These cannot be Levite priests.  Those priests had no land inheritance.

Isaiah 61:4-9  “And they shall rebuild the old ruins.  They shall raise up the former desolations. And they shall repair the ruined cities, the desolations of many generations.      Strangers [non-Israelites] shall stand and feed your flocks, and the sons of the foreigner [non-Israelite] shall be your plowmen and your vine dressers.  But you shall be named the Priests of the LORD.      
        Men shall call you the Servants of our God.  You shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory you shall boast.  Instead of your shame you shall have double honor, and instead of confusion they shall rejoice in their portion.  Therefore in their land they shall possess double [the inheritance of the firstborn].”  
        “Everlasting joy shall be theirs.  For I, the LORD, love justice; I hate robbery for burnt offering; I will direct their work in truth, and will make with them an everlasting covenant.  Their descendants shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people.  All who see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the posterity whom the LORD has blessed.”

[8thdaypriest]

11 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

So your telling us that God intended to replace the promise of daily sustenance for the Levitical priests with a once-per-year meal where they (and the rest of the Israelites) symbolically eat and drink the "flesh" and "blood" of Jesus?  Is that how much we can count on the literal fulfillment of the promises and inheritance given in God's Word?

Israel would very shortly have NO LAND, and nothing to bring to a Temple.   God allowed that to happen.  Are you going to blame Him and say that He was breaking His promise of "daily sustenance for the Levitical priests".  There has been no such sustenance for almost 2000 years.  

But there has been sustenance for the priests of God and of Christ, in the body of believers - who care for one another. 

[Ron Amnsn]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Israel would very shortly have NO LAND, and nothing to bring to a Temple.   God allowed that to happen.  Are you going to blame Him and say that He was breaking His promise of "daily sustenance for the Levitical priests".  There has been no such sustenance for almost 2000 years. 

I think there is a difference of about 40 years between the death of Christ and the destruction of the Temple.  God allowed both events to happen because both events were part of the teachings that God placed in the Old Testament through Moses and the prophets. 

To say that
  (a) God revoked the inheritance of sustenance to the priests and Levites because Messiah died as planned from the beginning
is quite difference than saying that
  (b) the priests and Levites would not be able to access their inheritance because all of the Israelites were unable to access their inheritance due to the disobedience of the Israelite nation and the expected discipline from God.
Statement (a) contradicts God's Word because it teaches that God's covenants and promises to the descendants of Levi and Aaron were untrustworthy and intentionally misleading.
Statement (b) affirms God's Word by recognizing that God will deal with the Israelites as He promised and covenanted with them.  God is faithful and God's Word can be trusted.

As you know, the throne of David has been vacant far longer than the Temple has been inactive, yet we still expect Jesus to sit on that throne as prophesied in Luke 1:32.  Does the passage of 2000 years prove that the God of eternity has permanently abandoned his covenants and promises with the descendants of Aaron? If so, what do those same 2000 years say about God's covenant and promises to Abraham?

 

[Ron Amnsn]

2 hours ago, RichardRuhling said:

Ron,  You have an unusual mind that seems to require more proof of various points when, if a person is willing, "he shall know the doctrine, whether if be of God," John 7:17. Your not knowing is a source of concern on your need for proof of this and that and the other. I think I'm wasting time and I'm doubtful that you are a willing Christian as suggested by the text.

When teachings and doctrines are put forward that contradict God's Word found in Scripture, what do you expect from "a willing Christian"? 

The book of Acts commends the Jews in the synagogue at Berea for searching the Old Testament scrolls to see whether the teachings of the apostle (and Bible author) Paul were true.  Shouldn't we demand that same sort of proof from other human teachers?  If we don't demand Scriptural proof, we are asking to be deceived by the false doctrines of men.  Even EGW herself and SDA Fundamental Belief #18 say that all teachings (even [or especially] those of EGW) must be tested by Scripture.  If you aren't demanding Scriptural proof to support the teachings handed down from those who went before you, are you really following the teachings Scripture, of EGW,  or of the SDA church?

[Ron Amnsn]

3 hours ago, RichardRuhling said:

... otherwise the month is beginning in winter.

Richard, you are falling back on the definition provided by modern astronomers regarding when "Winter" and "Spring" happen, even though you (rightly) disagree with those same modern astronomers on the definition of when "New Moon" happens.

How did God define "Spring" when he told Moses which month would be the first month of the year?  That is the definition that counts.

[8thdaypriest]

I thought the month of Abib started when the priests at Jerusalem saw that the Barley was ripe. 

There are no more priests at a Temple in Jerusalem., - no priests to declare the Barley ripe. 

Judaism went to a standardized "calender" to retain some semblance of their traditions in keeping with the Law of Moses, and the Oral Torah.  

Ron, are you saying there are folks at Jerusalem, ready to tell us when the barley is ripe? 

[8thdaypriest]

53 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I think there is a difference of about 40 years between the death of Christ and the destruction of the Temple.  God allowed both events to happen because both events were part of the teachings that God placed in the Old Testament through Moses and the prophets. 

To say that
  (a) God revoked the inheritance of sustenance to the priests and Levites because Messiah died as planned from the beginning
is quite difference than saying that
  (b) the priests and Levites would not be able to access their inheritance because all of the Israelites were unable to access their inheritance due to the disobedience of the Israelite nation and the expected discipline from God.
Statement (a) contradicts God's Word because it teaches that God's covenants and promises to the descendants of Levi and Aaron were untrustworthy and intentionally misleading.
Statement (b) affirms God's Word by recognizing that God will deal with the Israelites as He promised and covenanted with them.  God is faithful and God's Word can be trusted.

As you know, the throne of David has been vacant far longer than the Temple has been inactive, yet we still expect Jesus to sit on that throne as prophesied in Luke 1:32.  Does the passage of 2000 years prove that the God of eternity has permanently abandoned his covenants and promises with the descendants of Aaron? If so, what do those same 2000 years say about God's covenant and promises to Abraham?

 

I am saying that the LORD planned to include ALL of Israel redeemed as priests one day - not just the Levites.   He planned to EXPAND the priesthood.   The Levites still have their inheritance, but so do all the rest of faithful redeemed Israel.  

It parallels the inclusion of believing Gentiles - by grafting - into Israel, and their inheritance of the proises WITH faithful DNA decendants of Jacob. 

Israel has been EXPANDED. Why should not "the priesthood" also be EXPANDED.   

Jesus was not a Levite, and He is now high priest.   And don't give me that "not on the earth" line.  

Melchizedek was a KING and a PRIEST on the earth.  Christ was made a priest of His order - the FIRSTBORN. 

[Ron Amnsn]

15 minutes ago, RichardRuhling said:

Abib is the first spring month and it means "green ears" 
I live in Arizona and I don't see any green ears where I live. 
Talk to the people on the east coast who are having winter now. 
I don't wish to quibble with you any more.

Was Moses in Arizona or on the east coast of the US when he received the instruction regarding the chodesh of "green ears"?

In which location did God say he would place his name forever?  To which location were the Israelites to go to celebrate the feasts that occurred in the first month?  I seems it would be appropriate to look in that area for "green ears" at the beginning of the first month.

[B/W Photodude]

16 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I thought the month of Abib started when the priests at Jerusalem saw that the Barley was ripe. 

Months in the Hebrew calendar start with the new moon. It is known as "Rosh Chodesh."

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/rosh-chodesh-101/

[8thdaypriest]

8 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

Months in the Hebrew calendar start with the new moon. It is known as "Rosh Chodesh."

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/rosh-chodesh-101/

Yes I know it begins with the new moon. 

The priests would check the barley, and if it was not going to be ripe by the 16th, they would add an extra month to the year. 

I believe that a near earth object passed close the earth, on the outside of the earth relative to the sun.  This was about 800BC, around the time of Hezekiah.  It pulled the earth into a longer orbit, adding 5 and a quarter days to the year.  Cultures around the world all added these days to their calendars at this same time.  The Mayans called them "The unwanted days".  To compensate for the extra days, the priests of Israel added an extra month, approximately every 4 years. 

[Ron Amnsn]

16 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I thought the month of Abib started when the priests at Jerusalem saw that the Barley was ripe. 

There are no more priests at a Temple in Jerusalem., - no priests to declare the Barley ripe. 

Judaism went to a standardized "calender" to retain some semblance of their traditions in keeping with the Law of Moses, and the Oral Torah.  

Ron, are you saying there are folks at Jerusalem, ready to tell us when the barley is ripe? 

When the Roman empire made it impossible to continue using the calendar that had been used in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus, Judaism did switch to a calculated calendar -- the calendar of Hillel (the second).  Now that the Jews are back in the Land and the Sanhedrin is being reborn there is a move beginning to return to the calendar that was formerly used.  The nascent Sanhedrin has a calendar article on their website and members of the Sanhedrin do go out to watch for the new moons, but they feel that the orthodox Jews are not yet ready to follow the lead of a Sanhedrin whose authority is not widely recognized.

There are people in Israel that have been examining the barley crops each Spring and watching for the first sighting of the new moon in Israel each month.  The observations I trust the most are done by Karaite Jews -- devout Jews who reject the man-made traditions of Orthodox Jews and aim to model their lives according to what is written in Scripture.  You can find the reports and photos of barley observations and new moons at https://www.facebook.com/datetree/ . There is a historic Adventist connection to the Karaite calendar -- it is reported that in the early days of the Advent movement William Miller and his followers determined the date (October 22) for the Day of Atonement in 1844 using the calendar of the Karaite Jews (at least that was their intent). 

There are also groups of Orthodox Jews observing the new moons and barley crops to get ready for the day the Orthodox will return to the calendar explained in the Talmud.  According to the Talmud it was the Sanhedrin rather than the priests that determined the calendar during Second Temple times.

[B/W Photodude]

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The priests would check the barley, and if it was not going to be ripe by the 16th, they would add an extra month to the year. 

Get a few years of bad weather (it does come in cycles at times) and the Hebrew calendar would be way off. There was more to adding a month than the barley.

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

This was about 800BC, around the time of Hezekiah.  It pulled the earth into a longer orbit, adding 5 and a quarter days to the year.  Cultures around the world all added these days to their calendars at this same time. 

Spinning up my "Twilight Zone" music!

[Ron Amnsn]

8 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Get a few years of bad weather (it does come in cycles at times) and the Hebrew calendar would be way off.

Way off from what?  Really.  How do you know that the calendar you use now isn't "way off" from something more in line with the calendar God set up at creation?

If you use Pope Gregory's calendar as most of the western world does, your months and years are "way off" from the calendar Moses, King David, and Jesus used.

8 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

There was more to adding a month than the barley.

The Sanhedrin did check other factors, like the conditions of the roads and bridges that people would need to travel on to come to Jerusalem for Passover.  The roads and bridges are no longer a factor most years because they don't get washed out each winter.  Are any of the other factors still relevant?

[B/W Photodude]

39 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Way off from what?  Really.  How do you know that the calendar you use now isn't "way off" from something more in line with the calendar God set up at creation?

All calendars are arbitrary. In the Jewish calendar, months were added to keep the months approx in the same part of the solar cycle, given that there are 365 days a year and 360 in the Jewish calendar. 

As far as being way off from the Jewish calendar, what difference does it really make? It is funny watching people invent all of these different calendars and the heavenly bodies just do their thing regardless of what we do. It helps to have studied astronomy to understand this.

[JoeMo]

We could have this same discussion about Christmas in December if we wanted to.  The season in which Christians observe Resurrection Day, pagans observe as the spring equinox and Jews celebrate as Passover.  The season Christians celebrate as Christmas, pagans celebrate the winter solstice, Jews celebrate as Hanukkah.

I'm approaching my 68th birthday. I'm not all that concerned if we choose to celebrate that day on the exact date of my birthday or not.  In the current dispensation - since we don't really "know" the exact date of some feasts - is God more concerned about the exact dates on which we keep the feasts, or the fact that we recognize and celebrate them in the proper season?  Using Passover as an example, Israelites who were unclean or otherwise unable to celebrate Passover in the 14th of the first month could celebrate it in the 14th day of the second month.  I believe God wanted them to "remember" more than make sure they did it on the exact day of the anniversary of their flight.

I'm not including the weekly Sabbath in this proposition.  To my knowledge, the weekly cycle of 7 days has never been altered.  When they switched from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar, they only changed the date - not the day of the week. It's the same with almost all calendars of the world.  We may not agree on the Month, date, and year; but we all agree on whether it's Monday or Tuesday (taking into account the international dateline, of course).

[8thdaypriest]

1.  God commanded Israel, "You shall keep it as a Feast by an EVERLASTING ordinance."  He did not say to keep it until Messiah comes. 

2.  If the priesthood has been changed, then so has the sacrificial system - because the law said that every sacrifice must be offered by an Aaronic priest.  Passover would then be kept in a different way - with bread and wine and bitter herbs, instead of with a sacrificed lamb.  It's still Passover.  The only thing I see "changed" in the Law - is "the priesthood". 

3.  Jesus said,  "I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer" (Luk 22:15 NET).  Tells me that Jesus regarded the last supper with His disciples AS a Passover. 

4.  Luke 22:16 continued:  "For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God."   Says to me, that Jesus plans to celebrate Passover - with us - WHEN it is finally completely fulfilled. 

He was holding the Passover cup - the 4th cup - the "Cup of Joy", the cup at the very end of the service, when He said, "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." (Mat 26:29).  He wasn't just talking about drinking grape juice.  He was talking about the wine that is part of the Passover celebration. 

5.  Paul said, "Let us therefore keep the Feast" - not with leaven.  The ONLY Feast that involved avoidance of leaven - was Passover.  Put Paul's instruction in context. 

 

[8thdaypriest]

So far as being "pagan" - it IS if you do Easter Egg Hunts.   Eggs and bunny rabbits were part of fertility rites.  And the name Isthar - that was the goddess of fertility. 

Much better to call it Firstfruits, or Resurrection Day. 

[Ron Amnsn]

On 4/3/2018 at 8:25 AM, B/W Photodude said:

All calendars are arbitrary.

If all calendars are arbitrary, why should Christians plan our lives around Pope Gregory's calendar that we know for sure is different than the one implemented by God in Genesis and used by Jesus in the Bible? Do we have a passage of Scripture that tells us that following Jesus doesn't include following the calendar he followed?