!HALLELUJAH!
!HALLELUJAH!
Posted on 06/14/2011 5:05:57 PM PDT by TaraP
It's been 1500 years since there has been a rabbinically approved sacrifice to take place in Israel and the rabbis did approve a Gentile who trained under the leadership of selected rabbis to perform the sacrifice of two turtledoves recently in Israel. The ceremony took place in the Jordan Valley near Jericho as a number of rabbis watched to make certain all Levitical laws were kept in the offering of these two doves.
There are a number of religious Jews that have been preparing for the building of the temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem who believe that Jews need to become accustomed once again to the offering of animals for the sacrifices called for when the temple is once again standing in Jerusalem.
A rabbinically approved sacrifice being performed in Israel is tangible evidence that Bible prophecy will be fulfilled. Since the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70AD there has not been an opportunity for Jews to offer any of the required sacrifices called for under Levitical law.
Over the last 2000 years there have been several occasions in different parts of the world where rabbis would approve the offering of animals in sacrifice but nothing compared to the days when the temple was standing in Jerusalem.
Recently a Gentile, one trained by a number of rabbis, performed a sacrifice of two turtledoves in the Jordan Valley near the Dead Sea, the first rabbinically approved sacrifice in 1500 years.
This is a part of a program to prepare the Jewish people for the restoration of the sacrificial system that is called for in the first 7 chapters in the book of Leviticus. Daniel 9:27 reveals that the sacrificial system will be restored when there is a temple in Jerusalem. Even the Messiah's temple described in Ezekiel 40-46 calls for sacrifices to be restored as a part of daily Jewish life.
There will be two temples in the future for the Jewish people, one in the Tribulation period and then another in the time of the Millennial Kingdom of the future. In both of these temples, sacrifices will be made. In fact for the next temple all preparations have been made and its ready to be built in Jerusalem even right now.
A sacrifice made in Israel recently is indeed evidence that Bible prophecy will be fulfilled.
I am doing something useful and I don't have a troll friend.
I want to talk to Peter to find out if he really was the first Pope. After all, John 6:58 says that he will live for ever after taking part in Communion, so where is he?
St. Peter is alive in heaven.
So in other words, his soul is alive but his body is dead? Am I reading you right?
Odd, I don't see anything about a soul in John 6:58.
Furthermore, are you stating that since Peter is alive in heaven due to partaking of communion, with Christ Himself no less, that those who did not partake of communion are not alive in Hell, being punished for their sins? I'm sure that Judas would love to hear your explanation of how that happens.
Jesus never told anyone that they would not know the times of the end...Quite the contrary, the entire chapter you reference is a road map to that very event...Jesus lists the signs to look for...
Jesus said we wouldn't know the day or hour that He returns...You know what that means??? It means we won't know the day or hour that Jesus will return...
Your wisdom is noted...
His soul is alive in Heaven.
Odd, I don't see anything about a soul in John 6:58.
I can't help it that you only see "body" in John 6:58.
Furthermore, are you stating that since Peter is alive in heaven due to partaking of communion, with Christ Himself no less, that those who did not partake of communion are not alive in Hell, being punished for their sins?
No I'm not stating that.
I'm sure that Judas would love to hear your explanation of how that happens.
How what happens - something I never said?
Thanks for the ping!
It may be hypocritical, I'm not denying that, but I'm also human and want to see these two tied in metaphysical and theological knots when they try to defend their stances.
Please note though that I'm NOT saying that Peter or Judas either one are not still alive. I completely agree that both are alive, but what I disagree with is the fact that you and bronx2 are taking one portion of John 6 literally but just one short verse later you interpret things spiritually. There's a disconnect there, but I'm not sure that you see it.
Where did I say that?
There's a disconnect there, but I'm not sure that you see it.
Correct. I don't see a disconnect.
In the early church the prevailing thought was that the second coming was imminent and coupled with the roman persecution of Christians, some of the early church fathers wrote in reference to the persecution and to the expected imminent coming.
Adam, by Jewish and early Christian beliefs, was appointed a week (corresponding to Creation week) - or seven thousand years, the last of which is Christ's thousand year reign on earth, the Lord's Sabbath (Revelation.) The Sabbath is also prophecy:
The Epistle of Barnabas dates back to the first few centuries after Christ’s resurrection. It is quoted by Clement of Alexandria and also mentioned by Origen. It was part of the Codex Sinaiticus but is not part of the Catholic canon today. Nevertheless, it reveals the discernment of these early Christians.
But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This [is] the first resurrection. Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. – Revelation 20:4-6
But I say unto you, That in this place is [one] greater than the temple. But if ye had known what [this] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. – Matt 12:5-8
At the top of Genesis 4, after Adam is banished to mortality, the perspective changes to Adamic man, to our space/time coordinates. Adam's clock starts ticking. The first indication of the change in observer perspective is in the curse itself (emphasis mine)
And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. – Genesis 5:5
PRAISE GOD! PRAISE GOD!
AMEN!
It blessed me, too.
By stating that Peter is alive in heaven, you imply that is due to his partaking of communion. After all, the very same verses which you use to defend the Catholic tradition of Transubstantiation are the ones which also state that eternal life is granted by partaking of communion. Here, let me show you.
[53] Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. [55] For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. [56] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. [57] As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. [58] This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. - Jhn 6:53-58 KJV
So if Peter, who we both know took communion from Christ's own hand, is alive in heaven and the verses above are to be taken literally, as the Catholic tradition of Transubstantiation states that they are, then his status as being alive in heaven are a direct result of his taking communion.
Conversely, because Judas did not take communion (remember, he left before Christ held the first Communion), by these very same verses we can deduce that Judas is not alive.
However, because we know that Christ told us that the rich man lifted up his eyes in hell and was able to see the beggar being comforted, the rich man was alive in hell and being tormented. The problem is, though, that the rich man never took communion so how is he still alive even after dying?
I didn't imply anything.
After all, the very same verses which you use to defend the Catholic tradition of Transubstantiation
I didn't do a defense of Transubstantiation.
The problem is, though, that the rich man never took communion so how is he still alive even after dying?
Catholics, when talking about being alive, are referring to being alive in Christ. Anyone in hell is not alive in Christ.
Send out the raven ahead of the dove...
I’ve talked to Holly on the phone.
They are absolutely solid, congruent, honorable, Bible Believing and walking the talk Christians.
That’s even obvious from their website.
The “UNRELIABLE” post from that old thread was a farce to begin with.
However, investigate away. I’m confident they’ll fair better than their detractors in terms of their efforts for the Kingdom of God as well as in terms of their character.
Some folks’ brains seem to already be tied in knots.
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.