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 most your post is off topic, I did find that this one part isn't. and should be answered.
You said. """""When does the first month of the Bible Year called ABIB begin?? Many Bible scholars believe that it always begins of the first day of SPRING or sundown March 20th to sundown March 21st for ABIB is the Hebrew word for SPRING!!! And so the 14th {*7+7*} Day of ABIB can also be translated the 14th {*7+7*} day of SPRING!!"""""
Bionically speaking, ABIB begins on the first day of ABIB. It is really clear from your post that you know little about how the Hebrew calendar works. Though it is true that the first month may move a round a bit, it is always rest as it should be to keep the feast in there appropriate season. As Passover is to always be in Spring, Abib, (Now called Nishan) Does start in spring, just not always on the first day of spring.
Next """"""""""""So we can assume that the month of ABIB is different from the Babylonian moon month of Nisan and therefore has nothing to do with the moon.""""""
Also as the Hebrew calendar is a Luni-solar calendar, and that is way off topic right now, do a little work and you will find just how it works. When we come that as the main topic, I will cover it from all sides, at that point if you are still following, you will learn a lot.
You are learning how to read what I say, good on you. I asked Mondo today how he would discribe my teaching, here is what he said.
"It reminds me of the way lawyers talk. You pull out of the other person where they stand, so they can't wiggle out of it latter, Then present your case in a way that lets the class decide for themselves."
So if you read my post in this manner, keeping in mind that you are the jury. It does make a person look at what is said, As well as how it truly lines up with the Word.
You are learning how to read what I say, good on you.
End quote
*Huge smiles*
Quote:
So if you read my post in this manner, keeping in mind that you are the jury. It does make a person look at what is said, As well as how it truly lines up with the Word.
End quote
I find that when a teacher makes it enjoyable, I learn the best. I used to get D's in high school psychology but in Mr. Ammon's class in college, it was straight A's both semesters. If a teacher was boring , I tuned out and used my vivid imagination or slept. I hate boredom!
I find myself taking notes on our lessons Rain. Thank you for making these interesting and a joy. Looking forward to more from you.
I really no intention of going down this road, yet as one talks of Passover, easter becomes a part of that discussion. Some will always point that easter is named in the Word, and that makes it Biblical. They fall to make to make clear that the word easter only shows up once, and only in one translation.
Truth is, if read in it's full context, this is how it gets handled almost every time. they will read,
Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
Now as we can see, easter was a part of life even back then. So the idea that it isn't Biblical is just not true.
Now the other side will answer with, If you read that in context with the whole of the Word, you find how wrong the idea of easter being truly Biblical really is. Then they add,
Act 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
For some that are just starting to look at Biblical Truth, this can be a mind boggling. I mean really. From one verse to the next the holiday changes. It is also clear that the bit about unleavened bread was an add on, or at lest it looks that way.
So how do we find the truth? Well we all know that Pilot, on Passover would let the Jews pick one person to set free. This we know due to this being a part of the story we all know and love.
Mat 27:15 Now at the feast the governor was accustomed to releasing to the multitude one prisoner whom they wished.
Now being as He was accustomed to this, it becomes clear this was a yearly thing. We also find through this story that it had to the feast of Passover. As it goes on to tell of Yeshua's suffering, and crucifixion. That really should be the end of it,. yet it seldom is.
It never falls that side 2 has to try make things better by going into where easter came from, and so. If we are to true to this study we must as well.
Though we can't rerally nail down when easter became a thing in the church, all we can do is look at it's history. So I will do my best to make this as short as I can.
Easter became a thing with Nimrod, though it is not stated in the Word in plain words. Nimrod was called a mighty hunter before Adonai.
Gen 10:9 He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; therefore it is said, “Like Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD.”
The easter is good crowd tells us this was due to his prowess in battle. That is a true statement to some extent.
Yet when we look at what is said by the other side, they agree to a point. They simply add this. Nimrod ensared men with his words, and incited them to rebel against HaShem.
If you wish to look at what is said about this topic please go to the link below.
http://www.babylonforsaken.com/easter.html
Now hold on their partner, you can't show a dricket link from Nimrod to easter. Way to much times has passel, and history never recorded the rites passed down by Nimrod.
Not so true. Read the page you find with that link.
I know this can become a full book of it's own. How? I wrote one on this topic. Funny the things we do at times.
I now await any questions, or comments. If none, then I will more on with Paul Harvy, and let him give the rest of the story. LOL
"Semiramis became the mediator between man and this "god", you had to pray through her to reach him. "
End quote
Sadly my Catholic mother in law never believed me when I told her "Mary" was not the Mary of the bible but the babylonian Queen of Heaven- the same goddess that the women made cakes to. The Catholic "Mary" is a mediatrix and that is not biblical.
The conclusion of your link states:
The Catholic Chruch tries to mix pagan worship with the worship of God, christianity with babylonism, the Truth with a lie; But God will not mix with evil. What are we doing when we attempt to "Worship Jesus" with the traditions of Babylon?[ Mark 7:7-9]
So this data is more deductive than inductive reasoning then as it can be proven by looking at the outcomes?
I think from what I can gather that you are saying is how awfully obfuscated the truth is throughout history.
Not only though Constantine but further back in time to the Babylonian moon worship. Did these people become the Talmudic jews - the pharisees that Y'shua addressed as a den of vipers and said they were of their father , the devil?
The same jews who said Y'shua cast out satan by the power of satan. From my research years ago , the talmudic jews were the ones that said that Y'shua was a product of mary's union with a roman soldier. That explains the mishna and their various oral laws/traditions of men if they are the same ones addressing Y'shua.
""""""""Not only though Constantine but further back in time to the Babylonian moon worship. Did these people become the Talmudic jews - the pharisees that Y'shua addressed as a den of vipers and said they were of their father , the devil? """""""""""
Good question, though the answer is no. When we look at the Pharisees and Sadusees, we are seeing the 2 house that came up out of the Levi. The house of Hillel later became what we know from the Word as the Pharisees. This is the house that Paul grow up learning in. The Sadusees, came from the house Shammia.
Both had a hand in the work that became the Mishnah, and the Talmud. Now if I haven't lost my mind, (and that may have been what I seen roll under the desk) the Babylonian was written to persevere the Oral laws.
I will drag you back on topic tomorrow, even if it is kicking and screaming. LOL
No what you brought up does fit losely with the topic, it would just fit better down the road a bit.
Today there will be no post on the second feast, I simply can't sit here long enough right now. Remingtin got under foot, and I landed on my hinny, so the pain is a bit much right now sorry.
Give him a rub for me. Take care!