Posted on 04/24/2006 6:48:22 PM PDT by Iam1ru1-2
"It's not a question of 'maybe' or 'if'," says the Temple Institute's Rabbi Yisrael Ariel. "Bringing the Paschal sacrifice is a Torah obligation incumbent upon the People of Israel these very days."
Speaking with Yoel Yaakobi of the weekly B'Sheva newspaper, Rabbi Ariel said that though there are some grave Halakhic [Jewish legal] problems associated with bringing the Paschal sacrifice, "we have found the solutions, and the obligation is as strong as ever. This is one of the only two positive Biblical commandments that those who forsake it are liable to receive the ultimate karet [cutting off] punishment. From the moment that a Jew stands on the Temple Mount and the site of the Holy Temple is under our control, the Jewish People are immediately obligated to bring this sacrifice."
Sixteen of the 613 Biblical commandments relate to the Paschal sacrifice, which must be brought on the 14th day of the month of Nissan - Passover eve - and eaten on the night of the 15th. Today, this sacrifice is remembered only in the form of the Afikoman, the piece of matzah snatched and hidden by children during the Pesach seder meal, by the small roasted shank-bone on the Seder plate, and by prayers and study.
Rabbi Ariel said, "After the destruction of the First Temple, when the Jews began returning from Babylonia to the Holy Land, they brought the Paschal sacrifice during the course of 22 years even though there was no Holy Temple. They also were considered ritually impure - because there was no Red Heifer by which to become pure - yet they still brought it... There is currently no genuine impediment to bringing the Paschal sacrifice."
There have been other attempts to renew this sacrifice over the years, or at least to solve the Halakhic problems involved. Speaking about the rabbis who came to the Holy Land 700 years ago and sought to pave the way to offer the Pesach lamb, Rabbi Ariel said,"It is simply disgraceful when we compare our actions with theirs. They were here after the Crusaders, when there were perhaps 1,000 Jews in the whole land, which was totally desolate, and tried to renew this commandment. And yet we have 5-6 million Jews, and we have an army with tanks and planes, and what are we doing? ... Over 2,000 years ago, the Jews were afraid to live in Jerusalem, yet they made it obligatory for one out of every ten men to work towards building the Holy Temple, and they started the sacrifice services amidst the ruins of the First Temple. And where are we? Should we not be ashamed?"
Among the problems that Rabbi Ariel says have been solved by the Temple Institute he heads in Jerusalem are the following: Ritual impurity (which applies only to individuals, not to the entire nation), the precise location of the altar, and the sacred priestly garments, which the Institute has recently completed fashioning according to Biblical requirements. He emphasizes, of course, that the exact details of these and other issues are complex and must be reviewed with rabbinical experts. "I don't say that there aren't problems, but as the Maharatz Chayut has written, there is no Halakhic problem in the Temple that cannot be solved."
"Why then do you not go and sacrifice the Pesach sacrifice yourself?" Rabbi Ariel was asked.
"Have you just now returned from the moon?" he answered with pain. "The government has established a special police unit just for the Temple Mount. A Jew is forbidden even to move his lips there - and you want me to go there with my sheep and building tools to build an altar?!...
"The problem, which has received the silent backing of the rabbinical world, is that we have allowed the Arabs to be in charge of the Mount, and so they play soccer there. That's what happened when Moshe Dayan gave the Temple Mount keys to the Arabs after the Six Day War. First they give them the keys, then they say, 'It's impossible to regain control,' and then they say, 'We don't know [all the details of the Temple Mount and the altar, etc.].' The 200 commandments that are connected with the Temple cry out every day, 'Jews, where are you?!'"
Proverbs 2:1-5
1 My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;
2 So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding;
3 Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;
4 If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;
5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.
You mean 'a lot of people believe in things that some man told them to believe'! That's called being led astray. When people believe in something that they can't back up with scripture for themselves, they put themselves in jeopardy. That's the example I find in the Bible.
Not my definition; the Bible's.
God is spirit, not flesh. To believe that Jesus is/was/could be God is to deny that he is flesh.
If you call Jesus God, or God in the Flesh you are espousing antichistian beliefs.
And I don't have any problem at all saying that the Jews espouse antichristian beliefs in that they deny that Jesus is the Christ.
Sin is the cause of God's wrath. Only a sinless man could be a propitiation for the sins of the world. No man was ever nor can ever be sinless, because he will always have human nature that comes from Adam. Jesus was the new Adam, the new Man, The Son of Man--perfect and sinless. Only God is perfect and sinless. Only a man with a divine nature could me sinless.
Says you.
Jesus was born without the sin nature we are born with, just as Adam had a perfect nature. Adam was not God. Jesus was the second Adam. Jesus is not God, either.
Born of a virgin? Jesus did not come from the seed of man. Jesus did have a human nature, and just as Adam began, Jesus began sinless. But not like Adam, Jesus continued perfect, and without sin his entire life.
You misquoted. Your attention to detail stinks. It didn't say a virgin would give birth, but a virgin would conceive. There is a difference.
Could God Almighty create a perfect human seen inside Mary contingent upon her believing faith and acceptance? Sure, why not?
Thus you have a human being without the fallen nature conceived by a virgin. Human. Not God.
Pretty simple really. And it fits with sripture.
You seem to have a difficult time understanding English, maybe if I wrote it ancient Hebrew. The point of the poster, to whom I responded, was that people are fools for believing in something they don't completely understand. The Trinity is backed up in scripture, and so are many other things, such as the eternality of God, that cannot be fully comprehended. Since you know so much, go ahead and explain how God can be eternal without sounding like an idiot.
Then what is your definition, smart Aleck.
God is spirit, not flesh. To believe that Jesus is/was/could be God is to deny that he is flesh.
God is a spirit, but He can be both a spirit and a man, especially a triune God. You have a soul, don't you? Well, you are a spirit and a human. How is a spirit disqualified from the possession of a body? And, conversely, how is a body disqualified from possession of a spirit? I don't see that concept in the Bible at all.
What you can't seem to get past is the fact that a human nature cannot be the same as a divine nature. True, it cannot. This goes on to another point about the nature of Jesus that you seemed to misunderstand. No, a human does not have to be God to start out sinless. God created Adam without sin, but Adam was not able to meet God's standard, because Adam, we would all agree, was never God. God is too high of a standard for anyone. But in order for a man to remain sinless, he had to have had a divine nature. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, so He he had a divine nature and was able to live the life only God himself could have lived.
Could God Almighty create a perfect human seen inside Mary contingent upon her believing faith and acceptance? Sure, why not?
Why not? Because God's purpose to save humanity was not contingent on Mary's faith. God wanted to save people from hell irregardless of Mary's faith. God could have created a sinless human in Mary. Yes, but that sinless human would not have remained sinless if he was not God.
Classic.
>>>You seem to have a difficult time understanding English, maybe if I wrote it ancient Hebrew. The point of the poster, to whom I responded, was that people are fools for believing in something they don't completely understand.
Well aren't you just full of Christian love?? I must not be able to understand english because I never posted to you in the first place, and only responded to your post to me. Any point you may have is totally lost with your hostility.
>>>The point of the poster, to whom I responded, was that people are fools for believing in something they don't completely understand.
Now if I can assume that you even know who you are posting to, and also assume that that poster was me, then I think that you are the one who can't understand English. MY point was NOT "that people are fools for believing in something they don't completely understand". My point was that people were fools for believing in something that is NOT in the Bible.
>>>Since you know so much, go ahead and explain how God can be eternal without sounding like an idiot.
I don't have to explain it if it's written plainly in the Bible. The Bible says it, I believe it: that's faith.
Deut 33:27
27 The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.
1 Tim 1:17
17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
See how easy that is? Now show me the Trinity in the Bible in the same way. Don't explain it to me, just show me some easy to understand passages or verses.
Actually, the notion of trampling the blood of Jesus underfoot, treating it with contempt, by doing the slaughtered livestock stunt again, is the real abomination, the thing that God will never permit.
Certainly that too!
You are just supposed to have faith in a doctrine of men that contradicts the plain words of Torah, because the apologists can very creatively "explain" how one is really three. Cling to the true and reject those deceptions, and you'll make people mad. What they do from there is a function of the spirit under which they are operating.
This discussion wih you is rather pointless since you reject the Bible and twist scripture for your own purposes.
God is spirit and NOT a man. Jesus Christ is a man who came in the flesh (as opposed to being 'in the spirit' or as a spirit)
Num 23:19 God [is] not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do [it]? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
You've got a real problem here trying to say that Jesus is God Almighty...no, he's really just God...oops, wait, he's a god....no, no....he's got a divine nature as part of a triune (three part) god...
When the Bible CLEARLY stated that God is spirit and not a man; that Jesus is a man and totally in the realm of flesh; that there is One God and one mediator between God and man...and that God is one, not three.
Simply stated, the trinity is an unholy doctrine derived from Baal worship and those that truly believe in the trinity are worshipping a false god which is the epitome of idolotry.
And trinity worship is antichrist doctrine.
|
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
|
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
|||
After reading most of these posts all that I can say is “My Word”.
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.
