Posted on 09/29/2006 8:27:34 AM PDT by Buggman
In my first article on the Fall High Holy Days, we saw that the Feast of Trumpets is intimately linked by both Yeshua and Sha’ul with Yeshua’s Second Coming on the clouds of heaven, and saw that this corresponded with the expectations of the rabbis. Now we come to the second of the Fall Feastdays, and the holiest day of the Jewish—which is to say, Biblical—calendar: Yom Kippur takes place on the tenth of Tishri, nine days after Rosh Hashanah.
On that day, the high priest would put on a special coat of white linen and carry out a very unusual sacrifice.
And he shall take the two goats, and present them before YHVH at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for YHVH, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which YHVH's lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before YHVH, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness. . . .Today, the sacrifices which were the centerpiece of the Levitical ceremony cannot be held of course, but this does not make it impossible to observe the day. Like Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur is not a pilgrimage Feast: No one was required to be in Jerusalem (other than the cohenim, or priests) for its service. However, those outside of Jerusalem still bore the responsibility for not doing any work, gathering in a holy convocation (i.e., in their home synagogues), and for denying themselves (Lev. 23:27ff). Out of these three commands, modern Judaism has built its customs.And when he hath made an end of reconciling the holy place, and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat: And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness. (Lev. 16:7-10, 20-22)
After a final, festive meal in the afternoon before Yom Kippur, Jews the world over dress in white in remembrance of the High Priest’s white linen robe that he would wear within the Holy of Holies, and at sundown go to what is known as the Kol Nidre (“All Vows”) service. The Kol Nidre is a prayer sung to a haunting cadence, which asks God to release one from any wrongful oaths taken that year. It dates to the Middle Ages, when Jews were forcibly converted to Christianity; they would ask God to release them of the vows taken at the point of a sword. Another traditional song is Avinu Malkeynu (“Our Father, Our King”), which translates as follows:
Our Father and Our King
Our Father and Our King
Our Father and King
Be merciful to us
Be merciful unto us.For we have done no deeds
Commending us unto You
For we have no deeds commending us to You
Be merciful, save us, we pray.
Synagogue services typically run all day, with observant Jews petitioning God to forgive their sins. Fasting, denying one’s self, is mandated by Torah, and observant Jews will usually refrain from any comforts at all during the day, including bathing, wearing leather shoes, etc. It should be noted that Isa. 58 and Mat. 6:16-18 both speak against fasting to be seen and fasting in lieu of true repentance:
“Wherefore have we fasted,” say they, “and Thou seest not? wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge?” Behold, in the day of your fast ye find pleasure, and exact all your labours. Behold, ye fast for strife and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness: ye shall not fast as ye do this day, to make your voice to be heard on high.True self-denial is not the mere restraint from food, though it may include fasting from food (Mat. 6:16-18, 1 Co. 7:5).Is it such a fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to YHVH? Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh? (Isa. 58:3-7)
Yom Kippur ends with the Neilah (“The Closing of the Gates”) service and a final blast from the shofar. It is said by the rabbis that the gates of Heaven through which our prayers of repentance can rise close at this time, sealing one’s fate for the year. Of course, in the Messiah Yeshua, we may always “come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:16). However, there is still an eschatological truth to the rabbinical belief, discussed in the previous article on Rosh Hashanah.
Of course, it may rightly be asked in what sense can one be atoned for on this day without blood, “for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul” (Lev. 17:11). One who believes in the Messiah Yeshua, of course, looks to Him and His perfect sacrifice for their atonement. Non-Messianic Jews follow the belief established by Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai that acts of righteousness provide atonement (Avot de Rabbi Nathan 4:18). However, even in the Jewish community, the need for blood redemption still runs deep. In the ceremony called Kaparot, practiced only in very Orthodox circles, a chicken is waived over the head three times as the man says,
“This is my substitute, my vicarious offering, my atonement. This fowl shall meet death, but I shall enjoy a long, happy life.” After reading several selections from Job and the Psalms, the person lays his hand on the head of the bird as a symbol of identification, it is killed as his substitute, and given to the poor for their final meal before the fast. (Howard and Rosenthal, The Feasts of the Lord, p. 126)Why is a chicken used instead of a goat, for example? Because goats, bulls, oxen, rams, and lambs could only be offered for sacrifice in the Temple, so the rabbis forbade the use of any animal which might make it appear that one was continuing the sacrificial system. (Turkey or chicken is substituted for lamb for the Passover dinner in most Ashkenazi homes for the same reason.)
In Biblical times, of course, a bull and two goats were the sacrifices made. The bull was offered for the sins of the High Priest and the other priests, so that he could be purified before entering into God’s presence. The goats, one for Yhvh and one for the scapegoat would then atone for Israel. The word “scapegoat” is a translation of Azazel. Keil and Delitzsch explain the significance of the word:
Azazel, which only occurs in this chapter, signifies neither “a remote solitude,” nor any locality in the desert whatever (as Jonathan, Rashi, etc., suppose); nor the “he-goat” . . . The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being, in opposition to Jehovah. . . We have not to think, however, of [just] any demon whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in the Jewish writings . . . but of the devil himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. The desert and desolate places are mentioned elsewhere as the abode of evil spirits (Isa. 13:21 and 34:14; Mat. 12:43; Luk. 11:24; Rev. 18:2). (Keil, Johann and Franz Delitzsch, Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament, [e-Sword version 7.0.0, ed. Rick Meyers, 2000-2003])And yet, while the “scapegoat” was, in effect, given over to Azazel, to the very Enemy himself, the “two goats . . . must be altogether alike in look, size, and value; indeed, so earnestly was it sought to carry out the idea that these two formed parts of one and the same sacrifice, that it was arranged that they should, if possible, even be purchased at the same time” (Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services, p. 248). So all speculations that the scapegoat might represent Satan or the Antichrist or some other evil entity fall short. What could these two goats signify other than the dual-natured Messiah Yeshua? He carried away all our sin, just as the scapegoat would be sent into the wilderness with the sins of Israel: “As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us” (Psa. 103:12). Unlike the lambs, goats, and bulls that died on the altar, our Messiah rose again. Thus, like the two goats, He was both sacrificed and yet lives.
A red ribbon was tied in the horns of the scapegoat. When the goat was led out before the people, if God accepted the sacrifice, the ribbon would miraculously turn white as a reminder of the promise that “though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool” (Isa. 1:18). It is most interesting that for the forty years between the sacrifice of Yeshua and the destruction of the Temple, the scarlet ribbon did not turn white!
Forty years before the Temple was destroyed the chosen lot was not picked with the right hand, nor did the crimson stripe turn white, nor did the westernmost light burn; and the doors of the Temple’s Holy Place swung open by themselves, until Rabbi Yochanon ben Zakkai spoke saying: “O most Holy Place, why have you become disturbed? I know full well that your destiny will be destruction, for the prophet Zechariah ben Iddo has already spoken regarding you saying: 'Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour the cedars'” (Zech. 11:1). (Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 39b)Hebrews 8 -10 explains that when Messiah completed His sacrifice on the cross, He entered the heavenly Holy of Holies, of which that of the Tabernacle and the Temple were merely copies, to complete the Yom Kippur ritual of atonement. The sacrifice was not accepted because it was being offered by the wrong High Priest:
For Messiah is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: nor yet that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others . . . But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool. (Heb. 9:24-25, 10:12-13)But if this is the sole and sufficient fulfillment of the feastday of Yom Kippur, then we have a problem. In every other feastday that we have seen fulfilled in history, the fulfillment took place on that day. Yeshua was offered up on Passover as the Lamb of God, thus taking away our sin just as leaven was removed from the Hebrews’ houses during the seven days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. He rose as the firstfruits of the dead (cf. 1 Co. 15:20-23) on Sfirat HaOmer or HaBikkurim, the Feast of Firstfruits. The Church was given the Ruach HaKodesh (the Holy Spirit) in power on Shavuot, or Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks. And we have seen that His Second Coming seems likely to occur on a Rosh Hashanah in order to fulfill that feastday. Why then would the Day of Atonement be out of sequence?
The Exodus
The Feastdays of the Torah are divided into three groups—the spring feasts, Shavuot (Pentecost), and then the fall feasts—each of which is linked to a distinct stage of the Exodus and Israel’s instruction at Sinai. In addition, there are at least three minor feasts (that is, those which were not ordained at Sinai) which are also prophetically significant. The key to understanding the Feasts’ prophetic significance is to understand their historical significance.
When YHVH reorganized Israel’s calendar by proclaiming the month of the Pesach (Passover) to be the “beginning of months” (Exo. 12:2), He was establishing that His plan of salvation begins with the Passover. However, to truly understand God’s plan, we begin our brief study not with the Passover, but with the six “silent” months which separate the Passover from the previous Sinai-ordained Feastday, Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles. Within this “silent period” lie two minor Feasts: Hanukkah, which celebrates the victory of Israel over the forces of Antiochus Epiphanes, and Purim, which celebrates her victory over the forces of Haman some three centuries earlier as is described in the book of Esther. Hanukkah has an eschatological significance which will be explored in another article, but for now it is enough to note the element these two feasts share in common: Both celebrate YHVH’s “hidden” protection of and provision for His people. Though He did not act with any obvious miracles like fire from the sky or supernatural plagues, nevertheless He brought His people to victory against overwhelming odds: In Purim by the placement of a Jewish queen, and in Hanukkah by giving the Jews might in battle.
These “silent” months between Sukkot and Pesach correspond to the 430 “silent years” which lead up both to the Passover of the Exodus (Gal. 3:17) and the Passover of the Messiah. Both periods were characterized by the lack of a true prophet to lead the people, “a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of YHVH" (Amos 8:11). God had not forgotten His people, but it probably felt to them like He had.
When the Lord fulfilled His promise to redeem His people from bondage, it was through the Passover and the death of a Lamb. God’s people were set free from Egypt via the blood of the lamb painted on their doorposts, so that they would not die in God’s wrath. Likewise, God’s people were set free from sin by the blood of the Lamb painted on their hearts, so that they would not die in God’s wrath. The seven days of the Feast of Matzah, in which all the leaven had to be removed from Israel’s houses and no leaven could be eaten, represents the quick removal of Israel from Egypt (in which there was no time to make leavened bread) and the complete removal of all sin in our lives by the sacrifice of Yeshua as we flee the ways of the world.
In the third month after Israel’s departure from Egypt, they arrived at Mt. Sinai (Ex. 19:1). There God descended on the mountain in fire, with the sound of a shofar (vv. 16ff), and called Moses up the mountain to begin giving him the Torah. According to Jewish tradition, the day that this happened was the day of Shavuot, the Feast of Weeks, a date consistent with the Biblical record. Like HaBikkurim, the Feast of Firstfruits for the barley harvest, on which Messiah was raised as the Firstfruits of the dead (cf. 1 Co. 15:20), Shavuot is a firstfruits festival for the wheat harvest. On the first Shavuot, the firstfruits of the nation of Israel began receiving the Torah. On Shavuot after the death and resurrection of the Messiah, the firstfruits of the Church began receiving the Torah written on their hearts by the giving of the Spirit of God in the form of fire and with a great sound (Jer. 31:33, Ezk. 36:26-27, Acts 2:3ff).
After giving Moses the first commandments, the Lord called him back up the mountain to receive further instruction, and Moses remained with Him for forty days (Exo. 24:18). It was during this period that Aaron led the people in the sin of making and worshiping the golden calf. When Moses descended again from the mountain and saw this, he smashed the stone tablets on which God had written His commandments, signifying that Israel had broken the covenant they had made to follow all of God’s commands, and many in Israel died, both at the hands of the Levites whom Moses commanded to take arms against their kinsmen, and by a plague sent by God. Moreover, Moses removed the Tent of Meeting (not the Tabernacle, which had not yet been built, but a different tent in which Moses lived and met with YHVH; Exo. 33:7ff) to outside the camp, signifying that the people’s sin was great enough that God had removed the visible place which was the focal point of Israel’s worship and His Presence.
The parallel is not difficult to understand: Forty years after Yeshua ascended into Heaven, Israel still had not repented as a body from her “golden calf.” Just as Israel in the Exodus fell into the sin of worshipping God in the manner of their tradition (in this case, image-based worship), which they learned while in Egypt, instead of worshipping God in the manner in which He had commanded them, Israel in the first century fell into the sin of worshipping God in the manner of their traditions rather than doing so through the Messiah as He had commanded them. While the details differed, the essential core of the sin was the same.
So was the punishment. As Israel in the Exodus was punished by the sword and plague, so Israel in 70 AD was punished by the sword and plague. And as Israel in the Exodus had the Tent of Meeting removed by their prophet, Moses, so Israel in the first century had the Temple removed by the prophet after Moses, Yeshua HaMashiach. The destruction of both Temples took place on Tishbi b’Av, or the 9th of the month of Av. While it cannot be proven, the timing of the Golden Calf incident makes it quite possible that Tishbi b’Av is the day on which Moses removed the Tent of Meeting as well.
In the Exodus sin, God’s fury was so great that He said to Moses, “Now therefore let Me alone, that My wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation” (Exo. 32:10). YHVH-Tzva’ot, the Lord of Hosts, was actually planning to destroy the whole nation and start over with Moses and his children! This is, in fact, what Replacement Theology claims that God did to Israel in the first century: destroyed them, and replaced them with the Messiah’s “children,” the Church.
Those who believe that God has cast away His chosen nation need to take another look at Exodus. Moses, who had not joined in the sin of the people, interceded for Israel so that God would not utterly destroy them, though He did punish them, even (temporarily) taking away their place of worship. Are we to think that Yeshua did any less, or that His intercession for Israel would be any less heard? And notice the basis on which Moses interceded for Israel: Not on the basis of their obedience or repentance, but on the basis of YHVH’s Name—that is, His reputation—and His promises (ibid., vv. 12-13). It is on this same basis that the Lord has already begun returning Israel to her land: “Thus saith the Lord YHVH; ‘I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for Mine holy Name's sake . . .’” (Ezk. 36:22).
The Future Fulfillment
“Okay,” the amillennialist answers, “clearly not all of the Jews were destroyed, but the Temple was, and since we are now the Temple of God, there will be no other.” Again, keep reading. After seeing to the punishment of Israel and removing the Tent of Meeting, Moses was told by God, “And I will send an angel before thee . . . for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou art a stiffnecked people: lest I consume thee in the way” (Exo. 33:2, 3). But Moses, not content that a lesser angel go with Israel, returned up the mountain, and interceded with God for another forty days, going without food or water, until YHVH relented and agreed to send His Presence with Israel. The form in which His Presence went with Israel was in the pillar of fire and cloud which was intimately connected with the Tabernacle:
The Tabernacle of Israel was known by several names. . . The name dwelling from Heb. mishkan, from shakan, to “lie down,” a “dwelling,” connected itself with the Jewish, though not scriptural, word Shekinah, as describing the dwelling place of the divine glory. (Unger, F., The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary, R.K. Harrison, ed. [Moody, 1988] “Tabernacle of Israel,” p. 1238)According to the Talmud, the day on which Moses returned with the second set of stone tablets, showing that YHVH had forgiven Israel and restored fellowship with them, was the day of Yom Kippur (Tractate Taanit 30b), and the forty days that he fasted before God correspond with the forty days of T’shuva (Repentence) that are traditionally observed leading up to the Day of Atonement. (This forty-day period of fasting may be the same forty-day period that Yeshua spent fasting and being tested in the wilderness after His baptism.)
Likewise, the day on which Yeshua will return to restore His fellowship with Israel, and direct them in building a Temple greater than that which they built on their own, just as Moses directed Israel in building a Tabernacle greater than the former Tent of Meeting which was taken away from the camp, will be on Yom Kippur. Like the Levitial High Priest emerging from the Holy of Holies to show that God had accepted the sacrifice of the goat on the people’s behalf, Yeshua will emerge from the Holy of Holies in Heaven to show Israel that God has accepted His sacrifice on their behalf.
Yom Kippur is not yet complete. Our High Priest is hidden from our eyes, beyond the veil, making intercession for us day and night, but He has not yet emerged to show all Israel that His blood-stained garments have been turned as white as snow, proving that the Father has accepted the High Priest’s sacrifice on behalf of all Israel, not just the remnant that now believe. When He does, carrying the sign of a covenant restored before Israel even as Moses did, then the Temple promised by Ezekiel will be built, just as the Tabernacle was.
When will the High Priest come forth? On the last day of Daniel’s Seventieth Week when Israel and Jerusalem will “make reconciliation for iniquity” (Dan. 9:24). The word for reconciliation, kaphar, is most often translated “atonement.”
With Israel’s sins atoned for, the way will be made for the final stage of the Messiah’s reconciliation of all things to Himself. Next we will study Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles, when Yeshua will be officially crowned King over all the nations . . . on His birthday.
Shalom, and God bless.
Try reading it again.
I merely pointed out that the phrase "nearly the whole city" does not mean "the church", so whatever Luke was descrining is not a church worship service, but rather an evangelistic service of sorts. Some gentiles came to Christ and were baptized after this all happened. See verse 48.
TCYet another sign of last day sabbatarian desperation.
No, it's not. That guy said some really mean stuff about a whole lot of people. He straight up called for a curse on the houses of Jews and Christians alike. In contrast, the SDA church claims to be THE end times Church and their doctrine states that the first resurrection is it - no second chance. But they do not teach that only SDA members are in that resurrection. I remember Pastor Ross specifically saying that the SDA doesn't condemn or presume to judge anyone. The SDA does not know who is called and to what measure. Mullah Calvin apparently does.
Thanks for playing.
Psssst! Who is Ellen White????
Ellen White was born Ellen Topcat on a farm in the Northeast in the early 1800's.....
The essentials are not there.
1. There is no mention of the wine, the cup of communion. Without the wine, it's not the Lord's Supper.
2. There is no mention of any type of ceremony. No mention of any reverence associated with it. No blessings asked. No mention of taking it "unworthily".
3. It's not even called the "Lord's Supper". Clearly the term "kuriakos deipnon", the Lord's Supper, is known to be extant since it's mentioned in 1 Corinthians 11. But it IS not used in Acts 20.
This was an unremarkable meal. Something that happened, and happens, all the time. That's not even the point. The only reason it's mentioned at all is that it was a testament to God's healing powers, through Paul, because on that night God used Paul to bring a dead boy back to life.
What is really conspicuously missing is any mention of a synagogue or worshiping on the last day sabbath of the Jews in Acts 20.
Who cares? The point was to relate the story of the miraculous healing during a fellowship meal following the sabbbath.
On 54 acres??????
Otherwise your comments have little impact on those of us who follow the practices of the apostles.
That is a key phrase; when you should be following the Holy Word of G-d not the Traditions of man !
b'shem Y'shua
Matthew 23:15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees,
you hypocrites!
You travel over land and sea to win a single convert,
and when he becomes one,
you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
That is a key phrase; when you should be following the Holy Word of G-d not the Traditions of man !
Let us just be clear, are you denying that the apostles spoke authoritatively for God Himself, or that their practice as given in the NT is not to be considered normative for the church of God?
Well that just about sum up this conversation.
Well.....she wasn't my precursor and prophetess, because I can find no record of her celebrating Passover....or for that matter...any other of God's Holy days.
Sorry Topcat....wrong time....wrong station! I'm sorry...I cannot even say "Nice Try" because it was pathetic.
"God's annual Festivals are listed in Leviticus 23 and in Deuteronomy 16. These God-given holy days were commanded to be observed "forever" (Leviticus 23:14, 21, 31, 41). The Apostolic Church observed the annual Sabbaths (Acts 2; 12:3-4; 18:21; 20:6, 16; 27:9; 1 Corinthians 16:8). These Sabbaths will continue to be observed during Christ's millennial rule (Zechariah 14:1, 9, 16-19)."
What is the deal with your Ellen White fetish? You're apparently the only one on the board interested in her.
First, I note that Mr. Maoz engages in the age-old fallacy of trying to use the New Testament to unfavorably contrast Judaism and Christianity. For example, he quotes from Luke 18, claiming that the words of the Pharisee universally represent Judaism in the 1st century and beyond. He conveniently misses this obvious point: Both the publican and the Pharisee were Jewish followers of the faith of YHVH known as Judaism! Nowhere does Yeshua state or even hint that the publican was what we now call a Christian. One can only read such a conclusion back into the text by a careless bit of eisegesis.
Yeshua’s point was in contrasting the conditions of two hearts, the religiously proud versus the humble and repentant. One could tell the exact same parable as “The Reverend and the IRS Agent” and it wouldn’t change its meaning one iota.
So right off the bat, Maoz engages in very, very poor interpretation of the text. Fortunately, his speech improves as he goes on, but he so nearly sinks it at the beginning that it simply must be pointed out.
Now to his credit, Maoz is far more fair to Messianism than many. And he is not wrong that some Messianics make the error of falling into Rabbinic Judaism; there’s at least one example on this forum. However, this may no more be legitimately used as an argument against Messianism than the existence of Hyper-Calvinism may legitimately be taken as an argument against the whole system of Calvinism:
History teaches us that hyper-Calvinism is as much a threat to true Calvinism as Arminianism is. Virtually every revival of true Calvinism since the Puritan era has been hijacked, crippled, or ultimately killed by hyper-Calvinist influences. Modern Calvinists would do well to be on guard against the influence of these deadly trends.No system should be judged by its abuses, nor should the baby be thrown out with the bathwater.
--Phil Johnson
Now, it is true that Judaism tends to emphasize works over faith, and in fact does not preach faith in line with the Gospel. This is due to two causes: First, a direct reaction to a “dead faith” Christianity which puts creeds above works. As I and others have observed before, for most of two millennia, Christianity and Judaism have both been guilty of defining themselves mostly in opposition to each other.
Second, it is due to the loss of the sacrifice and the Temple. Since there could be no more blood of the sacrifice to atone for sins, as required in Lev. 17:11, the rabbis sought out other means of atonement:
As Rabban Yohana ben Zakkai was coming froth from Jerusalem, Rabbi Joshua followed after him and beheld the Temple in ruins. "Woe unto us!" Rabbi Joshua cried, "that this, the place where the iniquities of Israel were atoned for is laid waste!" "My son," Yohanan said to him, "be not grieved; we have another atonement as effective as this. And what is it? It is ACTS OF LOVING KINDNESS, as it is said, 'For I desire mercy and not sacrifice (Hos. 6:6)" (Avot de Rabbi Nathan 4:18)As noted in my original article, the need for blood atonement is still recognized in the “ultra-Orthodox” practice of killing a chicken on Yom Kippur, so while of necessity the emphasis in Judaism was transferred to works, the need for blood atonement has not vanished. Too, the idea that one is saved by God’s grace alone, not by “the works of the law” are deeply imbedded in Judaism, as reflected in the Avinu Malkeynu, quoted in my opening article:
The rest of Maoz’s sermon isn’t all that objectionable other than the standard arrogant “only a Calvinist would understand” crack that all Calvinists seem obliged to make. But his main point, that we cannot in the least depend on our own works for salvation, nor can we sanctify ourselves, but must continually rest in the Messiah is spot on. This is 100% true. However, it also sidesteps the practical question which arises once one is already saved: “How now shall we walk?”Our Father and Our King
Our Father and Our King
Our Father and King
Be merciful to us
Be merciful unto us.For we have done no deeds
Commending us unto You
For we have no deeds commending us to You
Be merciful, save us, we pray.
Theological platitudes like “walk by faith,” “walk in the Spirit,” “live in Christ” do not answer that question in any concrete form; indeed, without a foundation on the Rock of God’s Word, they are meaningless:
Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of Mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings of Mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it. (Mat. 7:24-27)There are four types of people:
1) Those who try to keep the commands of God in the Bible, but who do not really trust Him to forgive their sins. This sort becomes legalistic in deed and/or creed, judging everyone around them for not doing the right works or voicing the right creeds. Outwardly, they can seem smug, or even serene, but inside they are never at peace, because they know that they don’t measure up to God’s standards either, but hope by getting “close enough” that He’ll overlook the rest.I don’t think Maoz would disagree with the above; in fact, he himself, though he’s primarily concerned with Type #1, acknowledges the necessity of being a Type 4 when he points out that those who truly love God naturally seek to do His will.2) Those who “have faith,” but insufficient faith to change their lives. To this person, “faith” is “believing in” something contrary to fact, or in the absence of evidence. They think that by saying the right words, the sinner’s prayer or whatever, they get a free ticket into heaven. What they miss is trusting God enough to not only be able to rest assured of one’s salvation, but enough to want to do things God’s way. These are those who build their house on sand.
3) Those with neither faith nor works. ‘Nuff said.
4) Those who rest assured of their salvation in the Messiah, and trust Him enough to obey His words. Obedience is not done out of fear, as in the first type of person, but out of love. Again, I do not seek to keep the Torah in order to be saved, but because I am saved, and I want to be like my Savior in every way.
TC, you’ve several times made the accusation that those of us who observe the Sabbath and the other Feastdays are being legalistic. I deny the charge—not that Messianics and Sabbatarians are never legalistic, because some plainly are, but because not all of us are, nor is legalism a condition unique to our fellowships.
Legalism is a condition of the heart which reveals itself in the outward actions and attitudes, not a simple matter of keeping God’s Torah out of faith and love—or else the Apostles were all legalists of the first order. Because legalists are convinced in their hearts—whether they’ve thought it out in their heads or not—that if you don’t do or say such-and-such in just the right way, you’re not really saved, or a Christian. To quote Max Lucado, “Legalism turns my opinion into your boundary.”
Now with that in mind, TC, which of us is the legalist? I, who has only pointed out that the Bible never did away with the Feasts or Sabbath, and who started these threads simply to show what the Feast mean and why they still have value, since in the Apostle Sha’ul’s words, they “are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of the Messiah” (Col. 2:17). Or you who barge into this thread to condemn the rest of us for keeping practices which you aver are “not authorized” by the NT, even though you cannot show where the NT changes or forbids the keeping of the Feasts either? I who love and accept both Messianics and those who worship the Lord on Sunday as my brethren in the Lord? Or you who state without a hint of grace, “Christians do not keep the Sabbath.”
It was a good speech, TC. But you’ve evidentially missed Moaz’s real point in your joy at finding some criticism against Judaism and some (not all) Messianics in his words.
Since I've not made any particular comments about what Maoz said, I'm not sure your conclusion is warranted. I was especially interested in your take on the issue of justification as he outlined it.
I'll have to go back and listen again with your comments in mind.
Not a fetish, just trying to establish pedigree.
Besides, with all the beatings that the church fathers have taken either explicitly or implicitly (chants of "paganism" come to mind), surely a reference from Wikipedia to Ellen White's unique -isms can't be too objectionable.
Closer....but yet, "No Cigar"!
To what end? Why not argue scripture for scripture?
Besides, with all the beatings that the church fathers have taken either explicitly or implicitly (chants of "paganism" come to mind), surely a reference from Wikipedia to Ellen White's unique -isms can't be too objectionable.
I don't object, actually, I couldn't care less. But I have to wonder why you seem to want to take the debate away from scripture and on to extra-biblical sources.
I tried earlier in the thread or the last thread to get you to step back or move forward and tell us how you come to your beliefs. What is the end game of your theology? Mine is pretty simple - God does not change the rules, belief in Him changes men to follow them.
Since you want to make this about anything but scripture, and you refuse to post the scripture that repeals the 4th Commandment, I will go off on the tangential bait.
RE: ECF bashing:
Once I discovered all the errors that I had been taught, I set out to find out how did this happen? Even the Apostles had disagreements that made it into scripture. The ECF's had a huge challenge spreading the Gospel to the Nations. IMO, the early Church's purity was eroded the further they got away from Jerusalem. I think that in order to win converts, the first one's started compromising. Baptizing people en masse is risky business, no? This is clear in the Epistles as well as the rebukes the churches get in Revelation. Then as Paul's converts started converting others, and so on, the lines between paganism and Christianity started to become really blurred. Keep in mind, these guys couldn't possibly have the access to the scriptures that we enjoy.
It looks like it all came to a head at the Nicean Council, where purity was compromised for unity.
Anti-Semitism looks like a source of the apostasy. Hellenists and Gnostics weren't big on being judged. Another was Plato-ism and Neo-Plato-ism. These folks saw "truth" in every religion. This was re-inforced as civil Rome conquered land after land and kept running into gods that looked just like the one's back home. So these little nuances creep in, innocently, over time and become the norm. In broad terms, I do not subscribe to a notion that these things were part of a "vast Hellenist-wing conspiracy". I think it was all an accident.
The part that absolutely blows my mind is that here we are with our electronic Bibles and specials on the Discovery or History channels explaining the pagan origins of a whole lot of Christianity. With PhD level theologians who know full well the origins of the errors they teach, and yet they keep teaching them. But, then I remember it is all prophesied:
Dan 12:4 "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase."
Isa 35:5 Then the eyes of the blind will be opened And the ears of the deaf will be unstopped.
Why not just ask?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.