It has been my experience that the answer is no. We all know and understand that HaShem is order, and that all things that truly show His Light and Love are as well. I ask that if you can't follow the simple request placed before you, please don't post on this thread.
Any debate on the Laws of HaShem, goes off the deep end, with passage after passage being posted. In just one post we may find as many as 15 if not more. This is an unproductive way to handle this, or any topic. As it can leave any one wishing to reply, with little option, Leave a post that is pages long, or leave a vague post filled with even more passages and little substance. This is what leads to endless debate with no answers, as well talking in circles.
For this reason, it is always best to look at ONLY ONE PASSAGE at a time. Now once that passage is called up, Both sides must look at it from both sides. i.e. Be ready and willing to argue the points you don't follow.
If the only thing we do is push one side of a topic, we fail to really look at the other side, and in most cases, fail to even hear the other side. So here is my propose, it is open to every one that truly wishes to open their hearts and minds to TRUTH. Not my truth, not your truth, and not your churches truth. Rather BIBLICAL TRUTH.
As almost all study of OT vs NT is centered around the Law of HaShem, (Know here after as TORAH) the first thing that must be found is, "How valid is Torah today?" Not an easy answer for many.
So here we go.
When it comes to Torah, the one passage that comes up more than other is Mat. 5:17. So lets look closely at this passage.
(NLT) Mat 5:17 “Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.
(KJ same passage) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
One must always take note of the passage opening. Here we are told not to think that something is Yeshua's reason for coming. From that we are safe to say that anything that follows, (until a change of topic) is what we shouldn't see as coming topass. After all He just THINK NOT, or in my words, (Don't put words in my mouth, or forget the important words I use.)
So let's do a full brake down of this passage. Looking at from both sides.
First we have THINK NOT, or Don't misunderstand. Both give the same thought behind the words. Just tell us not to entertain the idea that Yeshua came to do any of the following. So what is it he didn't come to do?
(KJ ) I am come to destroy the laws or the prophets:
(NLT) I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets.
If we read this passage for what it tells us, rather than what we wish it to say, we find that the Torah, and the Prophets are placed together. From this one should conclude that they work together, and we can not remove one from this passage with any hope of keeping the whole context of the passage.
Also, if we remove any part of this, then apply the new contextual meaning to the full passage, as well as any that may follow, do we not teach a lie, based on what we hope is true? SO any teaching on this passage must hold true to both Torah and prophets. With this understanding, one must walk carefully. If we say Yeshua removed the Law, nailed it to the cross, and so on, We also say that He has removed the prophecies that have not been fulfilled. Like His second coming, Judgment of all man kind, and many others.
(KJ) I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
(NLT) No, I came to accomplish their purpose
Now the most common word to be pushed by them that stand in opposition to Torah is the word FULFILL. So lets take a look at that word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fulfill Has this to say.
a : to put into effect : execute He fulfilled his pledge to cut taxes.
b : to meet the requirements of (a business order) Their order for more TVs was promptly fulfilled.
c : to measure up to : satisfy She hasn't yet fulfilled the requirements needed to graduate.
d : to bring to an end she came to install herself and fulfill her time at the house— Willa Cather
2a : to develop the full potentialities of He has a lot of talent, but he hasn't really fulfilled his potential.
b : to convert into reality a sense of the failure of life to fulfill its ultimate expectations— Leslie Rees
3 archaic : to make full : fill her subtle, warm, and golden breath … fulfills him with beatitude— Alfred Tennyson
Now in this we find both sides, we find that it can mean to being to an end, yet we must ask, has it all been brought to an end? Are we wrong to say Yeshua will be coming back? After all He has brought to an end the Prophets, then that would also mean all prophecy has been fulfilled, or removed as they no longer hold meaning. i.e. there is no need for them.
Yet if we now look at this from a more contextual view, we know He must return for the WORD to hold truth. After all if any part of what the WORD tells us is not true, then we place our salvation in the hands of sin. Just saying.
We also know from the fact that Yeshua must come again, we must understand that He is still working to FULFILL scripture.
On the flip side.
At best I can here, so I leave something our please let me know.
This passage is clear that Jesus FULFILLED the Law, nailed it the cross, and removed it. He know that man kind can not live up to it's standards, and that to be held to that standard would leave us all devoid of hope. The passage is clear in that it tells us Jesus removed law. As is clear in your own use of Webster.
As we move into the first day of Unleavened bread, We can find some really strange things said from 2 groups. Of them a lot of people find they fit at lest one. First Take a good look at the Word truly tells us.
Lev 23:6
On the next day, the fifteenth day of the month, you must begin celebrating the Festival of Unleavened Bread. This festival to the LORD continues for seven days, and during that time the bread you eat must be made without yeast.
Lev 23:7
On the first day of the festival, all the people must stop their ordinary work and observe an official day for holy assembly.
Now a look at an event from the Word. If you can't recall the story please read it full, as to be sure that all sides of this fit at lest some context.
Luk 22:1
The Festival of Unleavened Bread, which is also called Passover, was approaching.
Luk 23:23
But the mob shouted louder and louder, demanding that Jesus be crucified, and their voices prevailed.
Luk 23:53
Then he took the body down from the cross and wrapped it in a long sheet of linen cloth and laid it in a new tomb that had been carved out of rock
Luk 23:54
This was done late on Friday afternoon, the day of preparation, as the Sabbath was about to begin.
Highlighted to shorten the post. I would ask that you please read all 4 accounts of this story, if you never have.
You see I picked this book as it leads to the back bone of this strange story told by many churches. And here is how it goes.
Jesus was put on the cross on Friday as our sacrifice for sin, and raised on Sunday. We are told in the Bible that Sabbath was coming, that's why they put him in a tomb that was close by. When he left that tomb he made Sunday the holiest day of the week.
Side 2
If Yeshua had placed in the tomb on Friday as the wording in the above translation tells us, we are faced the idea that Yeshua at best was only in the tomb for 48 hours at best 60. Not the full 3 days and nigh mandated by the Word.
Mat 12:40
For as Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights.
So how do we rectify this? By placing the Word back into historical, and cultural context.
As we seen the Torah tells us that the first day of Unleavened Bread is a Sabbath. No matter what day of the week it falls on. Keep in mind the day starts at sun set. Please see Gen. chapter 1.
So If Passover was on a Wednesday, then the next day, Thursday, would a Sabbath. Place Yeshua in the Tomb on Wednesday just as the sun was starting to set, and you now have 3 days and 3 nights.
For some this seem a bit off topic. It really isn't, when you think back you find the feast got started with an accounting of easter. This is more of that same trail.
Do we need to look more at the understandings of the 3 days?
I do remember reading once that his death was on a Wednesday.
Wednesday evening he was laid to rest after Pilate released His body to Joseph, then thursday evening, Friday evening and rose before Saturday sunrise.
Are you saying also that some translations are wrong as to the preparation day ? One verse mentions Friday . So some vatican versions of the bible make that distinction so his resurrection falls on Sunday?
Not surprised as the Vatican has translated and revised most modern bibles when they teamed up with United bible society.. Another topic I have covered before. Just touching on it here .Proven fact....see Nestle-Alland 27th edition, page 45.
First night/day. Thursday. Keep in mind that the day by Biblical standers begins at sun set.
second night/ day Friday
Last night/day Saturday.
If we read the Bible from what we understand as a new day (midnight) then we do our selves an injustices. Though many people will say that he was raised on Sunday morning, that places Yeshua in the tomb for 3 days and 4 nights does it not.
"""""Are you saying also that some translations are wrong as to the preparation day ? One verse mentions Friday . So some vatican versions of the bible make that distinction so his resurrection falls on Sunday?"""""
The only translation I know of is the NLT that uses the word Friday. As with any translation out there, there will mistranslated words, and thoughts. Some are obviously blatant, others it is clearly a misunderstanding.
Does this mean that some Bibles are not be trusted? Not at all, if we disregard every translation with a ministration, or misunderstood thought, we wouldn't have any left. Other than the Tanakh.
Does this mean that some Bibles are not be trusted?
End quote
I don't disregard all translations. Some just have a different way of reaching people's understanding. IF they agree with the verses I am seeking I have no problem but I don't use modern translations as a whole for study in my home. Hope that makes sense.
Does this mean that some Bibles are not be trusted?
End quote
I don't disregard all translations. Some just have a different way of reaching people's understanding. IF they agree with the verses I am seeking I have no problem but I don't use modern translations as a whole for study in my home. Hope that makes sense.
