atonement [Archive] - Tzaddikim Discussion Forums

hyssop

03-23-2002, 02:12 PM

Hi, Matt:

Yes, the sacrifices appear to be substitutional: Israel used them in that fashion, and the prophets were sent to set things straight. "Christianity" uses Yahshua's death in a substitutional manner, too.

The popular belief is: Yahshua came along and kept the law perfectly, which pleased the Father immensely. Since we could not and can not keep Yahweh's Law (obey the Father), we needed Yahshua to die in our stead (as our substitute). Now, when Yahweh looks at us who believe that the Messiah has died in our place, He no longer views us as the miserable sinners (disobedient children) that we are but, rather, gives to us a substitutional righteousness because of our faith and treats us as commandment-keepers even though we aren't. In fact, most "believers" in a substitute teach that one no longer need worry about keeping Yahweh's commandments (they were nailed to the cross and done away).

However, before jumping to any of the above conclusions, one may want to consider the next two verses of the scripture you quoted: <BLOCKQUOTE>1 John 2 NRSV<HR>[3] Now by this we may be sure that we know him, if we obey his commandments. [4] Whoever says, "I have come to know him," but does not obey his commandments, is a liar, and in such a person the truth does not exist;<HR></blockquote>Now, don't get me wrong; Yahshua's death on the cross accomplished a great deal toward bringing about our chances for eternal life in Yahweh's kingdom--we can get into that on a separate thread. Yahweh just does not accept substitutes. Look what Yahweh told Moses when Moses offered himself as a substitute for the children of Israel in the golden calf affair:<BLOCKQUOTE>Exo 32 KJV<HR>[31] And Moses returned unto the L-rd, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them g-ds of gold. [32] Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. [33] And the L-rd said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.<HR></blockquote>Hope this helps . . .

Searching

03-25-2002, 11:02 PM

Peace Matthew 23,

I am glad to see that you have read a little of what we profess here. We by every means are a bit different (except for me, all think I am a pretty normal guy:D ).

I see that you have met Mr. Hyssop. He is a preacher at my assembly, and is not bad I might add. Besides, he let's me eat his 'Viena Fingers' (cookies) on Sabbath.

I hope that we can continue with the discussion of 'Mercy, not Sacifice'. Peace.

Sincerely,
Searching

Matthew23

03-26-2002, 06:02 AM

Hyssop,
Wasn't a sacrifice required in order for one's sin to be forgiven?

If I have sinned, but then afterward I was very sorry and repented/asked forgiveness, wouldn't I still be required by the law to make a sin offering, if it weren't for the death of Christ?

Matt

hyssop

03-26-2002, 03:09 PM

Matt,

To be sure, sacrifice is a requirement for the sinner. However, do you think that the following verses indicate that sacrifice is a prerequisite for forgiveness?<BLOCKQUOTE>Mat 12 KJV<HR>[31] Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. [32] And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.<HR></blockquote>Yahshua did not say the all of these sins (with the exception of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost) would only be forgiven after a sacrifice of some sort . . . He simply said that they would be forgiven: period.<BLOCKQUOTE>Ezek 33 KJV<HR>[14] Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right; [15] If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die. [16] None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live. [17] Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal: but as for them, their way is not equal. [18] When the righteous turneth from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, he shall even die thereby. [19] But if the wicked turn from his wickedness, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby.<HR></blockquote>Our Heavenly Father just wants us to love him and have the same moral values as He has -- not unlike an earthly father wants of his children. I wouldn't HAVE to see some type of punishment carried out in order to forgive my disobedient children; I just want to see them doing what they are supposed to do. Ezekiel tells us that Yahweh is the same. We, by nature, usually know what is fair and just.

Why then the sacrificial system? That, my friend, is quite an interesting Bible study . . . that I'd be happy to get into :)

Matthew23

03-26-2002, 07:51 PM

about Ezekiel 33...

The key word here is righteousness. Let's say I have been a wicked man (which I have, I was born that way), and I have decided to become a righteous man. Now, in order for me to be a righteous man, I need to keep, um... How many miscellaneous laws are there, three hundred and what? As soon as I break one, I am then unrighteous in the sight of God, correct? Is it really possible to be a righteous man? Here's what I'm getting at...

Ecclesiastes 7:20 (niv) There is not a righteous man on earth
who does what is right and never sins.

Romans 3:21-26 (niv) But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-- 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

I apologize if I have turned this into a sort of circular reasoning.

Sincerely,
Matt

Searching

03-27-2002, 01:40 AM

Peace Matthew,

Beating Hyssop to the Punch here I am, He he he.

No circular reasoning here at all. Only questions.

Please consider this: You would let your innocent son be punished for the fact that your sinful son is sinful? This would be a miscarrige of justice, do you agree? NO ONE, does that!...Okay Hitler, butt we bombed him.

Do you remember how the Isrealites had to FIRST be taken out of Egypt (sin) for thier sacrifice(sacrifice) to be acceptable to the Father?
Also think about what the Father Wants. Does he want you to show him Messiah as your sacrifice? Or does he want you to DO his commandments?

What is the Reason that Messiah is nailed to the stake?
Can you continue in sin just because you have faith in Messiah? (sacrifice?)Proverbs 21:27 The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination: how much more, when he bringeth it with a wicked mind?
Sincerely,
Searching

Matthew23

03-27-2002, 06:51 PM

think about what the Father Wants. Does he want you to show him Messiah as your sacrifice? Or does he want you to DO his commandments?

both...

1 John 3:
1 How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him.
2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.
3 Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure.
4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.
5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.
6 No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him.

Matthew23

03-27-2002, 07:13 PM

Hebrews 9:
19 When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people.
20 He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep."
21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies.
22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

It just seems so plain to me. Christ died, shed his blood so that my sins could be forgiven. His death however, does me no good if I do not have a "broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart" (psalm 51:17).

Anyways, what is the writer of Hebrews saying in 9:22? (Man, I love the book of Hebrews. It ties the Gospel together with the OT so well. Beautiful stuff.)

Matt

hyssop

03-27-2002, 10:49 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Matt<HR>Anyways, what is the writer of Hebrews saying in 9:22?<HR></blockquote>Matt, that's a good question. Please consider the King James translation of the verse.<BLOCKQUOTE>Heb 9:22 KJV<HR>And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.<HR></blockquote>What happens when a disease goes into remission? It is no longer active. That is what the writer of Hebrews is saying to me. When sin has a consequence (e.g. an innocent animal dies because of the sin), the perpetrator is more likely to avoid sinning in the future. And, then, what happens when a sinner stops actively sinning? Yahweh is happy with that individual and no longer remembers his sin. Is this forgiveness? Sure; in a sense. But, it is not like Yahweh wants to kill something (or have us kill something) in order to forgive us. He just wants us to do what is right.

Please consider a couple of other verses in Hebrews:<BLOCKQUOTE>Heb 10 KJV<HR>[16] This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the L-rd, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; [17] And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. [18] Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.<HR></blockquote>What's the writer saying? Isn't he saying, "if a sinner quits sinning (has Yahweh's laws written on his heart and mind), he is no longer sacrificing"?

And that, my friend, is the purpose of sacrifice: to turn a sinner from sin. The children of Israel, however, did not use the sacrifices in this manner. They used the sacrifices as a means of forgiveness -- much like the Chr-stian world uses the sacrifice of J-sus. The Jews would commit their sin, bring their sacrifice, and go home thinking that Yahweh was happy with them. What do many do today? They commit their sin, participate in communion (the sacrifice of Yahshua), and go home thinking that G-d has now been satisfied and is happy with them.

That's what Micah was getting onto the Jews about in the verses below. Yahweh is no bloodthirsty being just waiting for His sacrifice. He wants the sinner to see the result of their sin (the death of a totally innocent animal) and then turn from their sin.<BLOCKQUOTE>Micah 6 KJV<HR>[7] Will the L-rd be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? [8] He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the L-rd require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy G-d?<HR></blockquote>Well, it's getting late so I'll post this now, and we can talk some more about sacrifice . . . thanks for the discussion.

Searching

03-27-2002, 11:39 PM

Peace Matthew,

I just wished to comment on one thing that you mentioned. You said that you will not be justified without a broken spirit. This is true. If you have a broken spirit, you will be following the commandments. Consider this...sacrifice is merely the doing of the commandments? It is not a separate thing correct?

Sincerely,
Searching

Searching

03-29-2002, 02:51 AM

Peace Again Matthew,

I know you have not responded yet, but I thought that I would explain something that Hyssop and I have passed up being the bone-heads we are.

You are probably wondering, 'what's these guys point? if Messiah didn't die in our Place, then why did he if all you have to do is quit sinning?'

Remember back on LDS talk we talked a bit about Adam and How we are guilty just as he is? I was acctually very surprised to hear you say this. Most believe that everything is completely Adam's fault because he is perfect yadda yadda. We believe that Messiah died because Adam sinned. Or more so that we sin. We believe that When we sin, we murder Messiah. As a sin offering dies not because someone does not sin, but because they do sin.

Basically we believe we have done the most abominable thing:

Murder of an Innocent Victim!

I hope this helps fit some pieces of our puzzle together for you. Peace.

Sincerely,
Searching

Matthew23

03-29-2002, 07:10 AM

Hello again, Hyssop. I would also like to thank you and Searching for the conversation. It is always a learning experience for me to discuss these things with others.

about remission...

The Greek word used here is aphesis which is a form of the Greek word aphiemi. This word, aphiemi, was used by our Messiah in John 20:23 (kjv)"Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." In the context here, a person is to remit the sins of others, then his own will be remitted. In other words, one cannot remit his own sins. The remission comes from whoever you have sinned against. In the case of Heb. 9:22 then, the one who remits is God, not man. I cannot remit my own sins. Only someone that I have sinned against can do that. "And without the shedding of blood there is no remission."

about Micah 6...
Here is the comment for verse 6 in my NIV study bible:
"Micah does not deny the desirability of sacrifices but shows that it does no good to offer them without obedience." Makes sense to me.

Searching, I'll get back with you later today.

Matt

Matthew23

03-29-2002, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Searching
I just wished to comment on one thing that you mentioned. You said that you will not be justified without a broken spirit. This is true. If you have a broken spirit, you will be following the commandments. Consider this...sacrifice is merely the doing of the commandments? It is not a separate thing correct?

Good point, Searching. But I believe that it would be useless to only follow one of these commandments. They work together.

Matt

Matthew23

03-29-2002, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Searching
Murder of an Innocent Victim!

About your last post, Searching. I agree very much with what you have said about why He died. What amazes me is, He didn't have to die for us, but He did it anyway. This leads me to the most popular verse in the bible...

John 3:16 (niv)For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

rivkah

03-29-2002, 05:50 PM

G-d does his part. We do ours.

Without G-d's unmerited favor, there would have been no passover lamb. Without the people accepting that provision, taking the blood and putting it on the doorpost, even though he provided the means, it would have been for naught.

Searching

03-30-2002, 12:14 AM

Peace Rivah,

Happy Passover! I am not sure when yours begins, but ours is soon. Saturday Sunset to be exact. It has been cloudy here in Missouri, so our sighting of the New Moon has been a bit delayed perhaps compared to others.

What you say is very true. The Father did not have to give us the ability to sacrifice. Fortunatly for us he did. What do you feel Messiah's Role is in all of this? In a way this will tie in to our disscussion that I will shortly pick up with you about the Red Hiefer in the Tzaddikim Forum. Peace.

Sincerely,
Searching

hyssop

04-01-2002, 06:33 PM

Hello, Mattew23:<BLOCKQUOTE>Matt<HR>about Micah 6...
Here is the comment for verse 6 in my NIV study bible:
"Micah does not deny the desirability of sacrifices but shows that it does no good to offer them without obedience." Makes sense to me.<HR></blockquote>It sounds like your NIV study bible is saying that Yahweh desires sacrifice . . . David seems to disagree:<BLOCKQUOTE>Psalm 51<HR>[16] For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [17] The sacrifices of G-d are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O G-d, thou wilt not despise.<HR></blockquote>I think that I'll listen to David.

Now, I want to get your interpretation of Hebrews 9:22 straight. Do you interpret "And without the shedding of blood there is no remission" to mean that Yahweh will not forgive a sinner without some sort of blood sacrifice?

Matthew23

04-01-2002, 07:36 PM

Originally posted by hyssop
Now, I want to get your interpretation of Hebrews 9:22 straight. Do you interpret "And without the shedding of blood there is no remission" to mean that Yahweh will not forgive a sinner without some sort of blood sacrifice?

Yep.

Matt

Matthew23

04-01-2002, 08:03 PM

Hebrews 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

1 Timothy 2:5-6 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men--the testimony given in its proper time.

1 Peter 2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.

He said it Himself:
Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

Matthew 20:28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

Just like the sacrificial lamb of the OT, the innocent died for the sins of the guilty.

I hope I'm not coming across as being arrogant. This is just something I believe in with all my heart.

Sincerely,
Matt
What do you believe He died for?

hyssop

04-01-2002, 08:42 PM

Matt,

You have a good spirit; I am not offended by your comments at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE>Matt's Response<HR>Originally posted by hyssop
Now, I want to get your interpretation of Hebrews 9:22 straight. Do you interpret "And without the shedding of blood there is no remission" to mean that Yahweh will not forgive a sinner without some sort of blood sacrifice?
Yep.

Matt<HR></blockquote>Matt, please consider the following:<BLOCKQUOTE>Leviticus 5 KJV<HR>[11] But if he be not able to bring two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, then he that sinned shall bring for his offering the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering; he shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon: for it is a sin offering. [12] Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, even a memorial thereof, and burn it on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the L-rd: it is a sin offering. [13] And the priest shall make an atonement for him as touching his sin that he hath sinned in one of these, and it shall be forgiven him: and the remnant shall be the priest's, as a meat offering.<HR></blockquote>Hmmm . . . if (as you say) Yahweh requires a blood sacrifice to forgive the sinner, either this scripture is wrong or one can extract blood from fine flour . . .

Matt, I hope you do not take offense as we discuss this issue. I once believed as you do, and it is not easy to let go of the "in my stead" philosophy. But, trust me, there is another way of looking at the sacrifices, and it does not require a bloodthirsty G-d who can only be appeased by seeing the shed blood of His only obedient son.

Why Yahshua's death? Well, several reasons: 1) If I truly understand that He is my sacrifice, then I admit to taking part (through my sin) in His death. I killed Him; me and everyone else who has sinned. Once I realized that, I turned from my sin (by His stripes I was healed); 2) My participation in the death of Yahshua through my sin means that I have brought my Passover lamb, my sin offerings, and all of the sacrifices required by Yahweh. I can lay claim to having performed righteousness (the keeping of Yah's commandments) while I was yet a sinner; 3) When He died, I, the sinner, died with Him. So, I then buried my dead body in baptism and was resurrected a new creature (in the Messiah) who now wants to perform righteousness with all my heart (I have His laws written on my heart).

Matthew23

04-02-2002, 03:43 PM

Hyssop,

I knew you were setting me up for something:-). I'll get back with you on this one. I'm scratching my head a bit.

I am enjoying this conversation very much. I was glad to see you use a little sarcasm (in your remark about extracting blood from flour). I am a pretty sarcastic guy, so I appreciate good sarcasm from others:-).

Matt

Matthew23

04-04-2002, 05:11 PM

Check out the NIV translation of verse 12:
He is to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar on top of the offerings made to the LORD by fire. It is a sin offering.

I have to ask you before going any further... Why do you think the priest was instructed to "take a handful of it...burn it...on top of the offerings made to the LORD by fire?"

I think this is a legitimate question. Since the poorest person could only afford such an offering of flour, maybe the offering was then "cleansed with blood" upon being placed on top of the offerings?

Matt

hyssop

04-07-2002, 07:17 PM

Matt,

I'm not ignoring you; I've just been studying, praying, and thinking about your last point.

I will get back to you soon.

Matthew23

04-07-2002, 07:33 PM

Take your time, Hyssop. This subject has had me up late some nights. I'm still thinking a lot about those verses in Lev. 5. Sometimes I'm tempted to "lean on my own understanding" and I forget to pray about this stuff.

Matt

hyssop

04-11-2002, 06:05 PM

Matt,

I checked out the Hebrew, and I believe that you are correct: the fine flour was offered on top of the burnt offerings on the altar. I have to say that I considered your comment about the flour being "cleansed with blood" a legitimate question worth investigating. I have given the subject a lot of thought, and I don't think one can consider the sin offering of fine flour a blood offering.

The first point that came to mind was the fact that the one who offers the sacrifice is in need of cleansing -- not the offering itself. So, the fine flour has no need to be "cleansed with blood."

Further, if Yahweh cannot forgive a sinner without some sort of blood offering, why confuse the issue by commanding a fine flour offering as a sin offering in the first place? If someone was too poor to bring an animal for a blood sacrifice, Yahweh could have had him bring a bucket or a cup full of blood as a sin offering. That shouldn't have been too difficult and probably would have been less expensive than an ephah of fine flour.

Although these points made sense to me early on, there is another point that occurred to me yesterday morning while pondering the issue: The meat offering upon which the fine flour was sprinkled had no blood; as far as I can tell, the blood of the offerings was poured out when the animal was killed.

You know, I've been thinking about how one can cleanse something (or someone) with blood. Can you picture the sprinkling of blood on everything? It really doesn't bring clean visions to my mind; it seems that everything would just be more "dirty" after being sprinkled with blood.

However, I do believe that we have a plausible explanation of the mechanics behind the cleansing with blood that we can explore if you'd like.

Matthew23

04-11-2002, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by hyssop
Matt,

I checked out the Hebrew, and I believe that you are correct: the fine flour was offered on top of the burnt offerings on the altar. I have to say that I considered your comment about the flour being "cleansed with blood" a legitimate question worth investigating. I have given the subject a lot of thought, and I don't think one can consider the sin offering of fine flour a blood offering.

The first point that came to mind was the fact that the one who offers the sacrifice is in need of cleansing -- not the offering itself. So, the fine flour has no need to be "cleansed with blood."
I don't think that the purpose of the flour being offered on top of the offerings was intended to cleanse it, but just that it would be included with the other offerings that were made.

Further, if Yahweh cannot forgive a sinner without some sort of blood offering, why confuse the issue by commanding a fine flour offering as a sin offering in the first place? If someone was too poor to bring an animal for a blood sacrifice, Yahweh could have had him bring a bucket or a cup full of blood as a sin offering. That shouldn't have been too difficult and probably would have been less expensive than an ephah of fine flour.
Well, where is he going to get a cup full of blood? If he just say, wounds his own animal just enough to get some blood from it, but not enough to kill it, then it's not really a sacrifice. If he kills his neighbor's animal to get some blood for his own offering, he has just committed another sin.

Although these points made sense to me early on, there is another point that occurred to me yesterday morning while pondering the issue: The meat offering upon which the fine flour was sprinkled had no blood; as far as I can tell, the blood of the offerings was poured out when the animal was killed.
You're right. The flour, though, has been included with the other offerings which had been shed of blood. Hebrews 9:22 "without the shedding of blood there is no remission." It doesn't say "without the cleansing of blood." And another thing I find very interesting in this verse. "the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood."

You know, I've been thinking about how one can cleanse something (or someone) with blood. Can you picture the sprinkling of blood on everything? It really doesn't bring clean visions to my mind; it seems that everything would just be more "dirty" after being sprinkled with blood.
It is a very gross way of cleansing things. But it doesn't matter what I think is gross or not. What matters is what God says.

However, I do believe that we have a plausible explanation of the mechanics behind the cleansing with blood that we can explore if you'd like.
Sure, I'd like to.
Matt

hyssop

04-12-2002, 09:18 PM

Matt,

Just to get an idea of where you stand . . . do you feel that the sacrifices are the forerunner to Yashua's crucifixion? In other words, were the sacrifices a shadow or type of Yashua's suffering and death that was to come?

I believe that this principle is at the heart of the gospel. Look at what Paul says in I Corinthians -
<BLOCKQUOTE>I Cor 15 NIV<HR>[1] Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. [2] By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. [3] For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that [Messiah] died for our sins according to the Scriptures, [4] that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, <HR></blockquote>Now, these scriptures were Old Testament scriptures (obviously, since the New Testament had not yet been written).

Following is Luke's description of one of Yashua's greatest Bible studies with His disciples. He opened their minds so they could finally understand what He had been telling them all along:<BLOCKQUOTE>Luke 24 KJV<HR>[44] And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. [45] Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, [46] And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved [Messiah] to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:<HR></blockquote>Yashua was talking with His Jewish brethren. It wasn't like they hadn't heard these scriptures many times before; however, it was the first time they had applied these scriptures to the death, burial, and resurrection of the Messiah.

Comments? Do you understand and agree with these premises?

Matthew23

04-13-2002, 08:33 PM

I, Matt, hereby agree to the above said.

Matt:D

hyssop

04-14-2002, 10:20 AM

Great. Then, with fulfillment of scripture in mind, let's take a look at Numbers 19. Here is what Judaism has to say about these laws:<BLOCKQUOTE>Pentateuch & Haftorahs - comments on Numbers 19<HR>    This ordinance is the most mysterious rite in the Scripture, the strange features of which are duly enumerated by the Rabbis. Thus, its aim was to purify the defiled, and yet it defiled all those who were in any way connected with the preparation of the ashes and water of purification. 'It purifies the impure, and at the same time renders impure the pure!' So inscrutable was its nature--they said--that even King Solomon in his wisdom dispaired of learning the secret meaning of the Red Heifer regulations.   . . .   In brief, the attitude of Judaism as to the meaning of this law is not merely a confession of ignorance, but the realization that we shall never know why such defilement should be removed in that specified manner ('ignorabimus').<HR></blockquote>Whenever I read these comments, I can't help but remember these words of Paul:<BLOCKQUOTE>2 Cor 3 KJV<HR>[14] But [the children of Israel's] minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in [Messiah]. [15] But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. [16] Nevertheless when it shall turn to the L-rd, the veil shall be taken away.<HR></blockquote>Paul says that Yashua Messiah is the key to understanding the Hebrew scriptures. Please take a moment (okay, a little more that a moment) to read Numbers 19, and remember to look at these scriptures with Messiah's fulfillment in mind.

All done? Okay, let's look at the first couple of verses:<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[1] And the L-RD spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, [2] This is the ordinance of the law which the L-RD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot, wherein is no blemish, and upon which never came yoke:<HR></blockquote>Red Heifer - Now, our stated premise is that all the sacrifices pointed toward Yashua's crucifixion. If that is so, then we claim that He fulfilled the conditions of this sacrifice. One might ask, "How can Yashua, a man, fulfill the conditions of a female (Red Heifer) sacrifice?" Well, Gal 3:28 states: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in [Messiah Yashua]." We are not looking for a woman to come as a "second Messiah" to fulfill the female laws of sacrifice; Yashua, in His death, fulfilled all of the sacrifices.
Without spot or blemish - (Heb 4:15 KJV) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
upon which never came yoke - A yoke forces the animal wearing it to submit to the will of its master. We believe that this reference to never being yoked is also a reference to a sinless state. (Mat 11:28-29 KJV) Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. Mankind labors and is heavy laden with sin.<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[3] And ye shall give her unto Eleazar the priest, that he may bring her forth without the camp, and one shall slay her before his face: [4] And Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood directly before the tabernacle of the congregation seven times:<HR></blockquote>Any thoughts of how these verses would apply to Yashua?

Matthew23

04-14-2002, 12:36 PM

Tell me more. I'm not quite getting your point here. And I'm not so sure that this points toward Jesus. The red heifer was to be slaughtered outside the camp, not at the altar, unlike the "normal" sacrifices. The focus seems to be on the ashes which would be used in the water for cleansing. Interesting.

Matt

hyssop

04-14-2002, 03:20 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Matthew23<HR>And I'm not so sure that this points toward Jesus. The red heifer was to be slaughtered outside the camp, not at the altar, unlike the "normal" sacrifices.<HR></blockquote>Matt, don't forget our premise: "The sacrifices were a shadow or type of Yashua's suffering and death that was to come." This does not mean "most of the sacrifices were a shadow;" they all were. Now, let's examine verses 3 & 4:
ye shall give her unto Eleazar the priest - Eleazar was not the high priest, Aaron was. To whom was Yashua taken first? (John 18:12-13 KJV) Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took [Yashua], and bound him, And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year. Just as the Red Heifer was not taken to Aaron, the High Priest, Yashua was not first taken to Caiaphas, the high priest that year.
he may bring her forth without the camp - Yashua was crucified outside of Jerusalem. (Heb 13:12-13 KJV) Wherefore [Yashua] also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.
one shall slay her before his face - The priests witnessed Yashua's suffering by the hands of the Jews and His crucifixion by the Romans.
Eleazar the priest shall take of her blood with his finger, and sprinkle of her blood directly before the tabernacle of the congregation seven times - I do not know for sure the fulfillment of this scripture (although I am sure that Yashua fulfilled it, somehow, in His suffering and death). I have been told that Yashua's blood was spilled seven times from the time of His arrest through the time of His death on the cross. This makes sense to me, but I'm just not sure. It is interesting to note that the Pentateuch states that the seven sprinklings were common in the case of all sin-offerings (see Lev 4: 6 & 17).

Matt, think about Yashua going over these scriptures with His disciples after He was raised from the dead. He showed them His death, burial, and resurrection that was written, but veiled, in the law of Moses. This is the message that Paul took into the synagogues: Yashua's death, burial, and resurrection according to the scriptures. We are still looking at the death and burning of the Red Heifer: Yashua's suffering and death.<BLOCKQUOTE>Number 19 KJV<HR>[5] And one shall burn the heifer in his sight; her skin, and her flesh, and her blood, with her dung, shall he burn: [6] And the priest shall take cedar wood, and hyssop, and scarlet, and cast it into the midst of the burning of the heifer.<HR></blockquote>The burning of the heifer was a shadow of Yashua's suffering and ultimate death.

Nearly fifteen hundred years before Yashua's suffering and death, the law commanded that three ingredients be present! Can you find them?

Matthew23

04-14-2002, 05:09 PM

keep going.

hyssop

04-14-2002, 06:14 PM

According to Moses' law, three ingredients must be present at Yashua's suffering: cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet.

Work with me a little bit :) . . . can you guess what those ingredients might be?

Look around for them . . .

HINT 1: I believe that the some say that the cross was made of dogwood. What do you think?

HINT 2: (John 19:28 KJV) After this, [Messiah] knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst.

HINT 3: Matthew 27

Happy hunting!

Matthew23

04-15-2002, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by hyssop
According to Moses' law, three ingredients must be present at Yashua's suffering: cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet.

Before I get into looking for the three things, where do you get this from Moses' law?

Searching

04-15-2002, 04:58 PM

Peace Matthew,

Numbers 19 gives a list of many things, those three are in there.

Searching

(ps...Blues are in...:) I'll be nice again...)

hyssop

04-15-2002, 07:01 PM

Matt,

All of the sacrifices point to Yashua's death.

The Law states that the Passover must be sacrificed on the 14th day of the first month in the afternoon (Ex 12:6). Yashua was crucified on the 14th day of the first month in the afternoon (John 19:31). The passover could not have a broken bone (Ex 12:46); so, we can be sure that Yashua, our passover (I Cor 5:7), would not have any of His bones broken (John 19:33). How can we be sure? Because, if His legs would have been broken, Law would not have been fulfilled.

Now, if Yashua is the fulfillment of all of the sacrifices, then He is also the fulfillment of the regulations of the red heifer in Numbers 19. One of the regulations of the red heifer sacrifice is that cedar wood, hyssop, and scarlet must be cast into the burning of the heifer. Assuming that Yashua, in His suffering and death, fulfilled these commandments, we can be confident that all of these ingredients were there. Why? Because the Law commands it, and there is no one or no thing that can prevent Yashua from performing Yahweh's Law.

I hope you are following me here . . .

So, I have given you three hints to point you in the direction of determining those ingredients that were present at Yashua's suffering and death which, in a spiritual sense, was the once-and-for-all fulfillment of the burning of the red heifer. Moses' Law in Numbers 19:6 requires that those ingredients be present.

Please know that my only intention of asking you to look for these ingredients is to get you in tune with Yashua's spiritual fulfillment of Yahweh's physical laws that were given to Moses.

May Yahweh's spirit be with you,

Matthew23

04-16-2002, 02:12 PM

Ah, yes. The scarlet robe. The hyssop and the sour wine.

Are we left to assume though, that the tree was of cedar wood? Or does the bible actually testify to it?

Interesting suff. Like I said, these conversations are always of value to me. I love to learn more about the word of G-d.

Oh yeah, I was thinking on my way home from work the other day: from now on, I'll post "G-d" and "J-sus" as such when posting at this board so as not to offend anyone. I must ask the question, though: Why do most of the people here substitute the title "Christ" with "Messiah?" I thought that they both meant the same thing, "Anointed One," "Christ" being a Greek term and "Messiah" being a Hebrew term.

Matt

G-d bless you too, Hyssop, Searching.

hyssop

04-16-2002, 06:32 PM

Yes! Way to go! The Greek scriptures explicitly state the presence of the scarlet and the hyssop; the evidence of those ingredients would be difficult to find without the writers' help. And, yes, as far as I know, it is up to us to determine the location of the cedar wood. It would stand to reason that the Romans used cedar for their crosses, since it is far more weatherproof than other woods. However, there is no written proof in the scriptures that the cedar ingredient was the cross. There could have been a cedar ladder, a cedar closet ;), who knows? BUT, we do know that it had to be there; the Law commands it.

Before we continue with Numbers 19, I will attempt to answer your question about the name issue as best I can: Yes, Chr-st and Messiah mean the same thing. G-d and El, Elohim, etc. mean the same thing. L-rd and Yah, Yahweh, etc. mean the same thing. I consider Yashua, Yeshua, Yahshua, etc. to mean the same thing as J-sus. I can only speculate that those who insist upon using the "Sacred Names" have an aversion for the secular names. I do not wish to offend anyone, and I love the Hebrew language; so I am only too happy to use the English transliteration of the Hebrew words when I can.

And here we go . . . more fulfillment of scripture:<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[7] Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even. [8] And he that burneth her shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even.<HR></blockquote>As you can see, those involved with the burning of the heifer became unclean. I believe that those unclean people participating in the burning of the heifer represent all who sin. The fulfillment of these scriptures is performed by the sinner (one who kills the sacrifice) who turns from his sin and is baptized (washes his clothes and his flesh in water).<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[9] And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin.<HR></blockquote>You know, before Yahweh led me to see the power behind these scriptures, I would have fallen asleep reading Numbers 19 by now. More than twenty years after seeing this for the first time, I still get goosebumps when I read it.

Question: If the burning of the red heifer represents Yashua's suffering and death, what do the ashes that remain when it is over represent?     I hope that you said, "Yashua's dead body."

Now the Law requires that a clean man deposit the ashes in a clean place which had to be outside the camp.<BLOCKQUOTE>Luke 23 KJV<HR>[50] And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just: [51] (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them; ) he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of G-d. {a clean man} <HR></blockquote><BLOCKQUOTE>John 19 KJV<HR>[41] Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid. {a clean place} [42] There laid they J-sus therefore because of the Jews' preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand. {outside the camp} <HR></blockquote>More to come . . . this puts a whole new perspective on "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Mat 5:17 KJV)," doesn't it?

Searching

04-17-2002, 02:24 AM

Peace Matthew,

I will just tell you that I use the name 'Messiah' because in reality I haven't done any but a small bit of research about the sacred names. It does seem in the OT that the Father (<---there's my other one) did care a bit about his NAME. Once I get around to checking it all out I will change probably. I have so much other stuff to look at for the moment as well. I'm Beating my head against my pillow at night saying 'what does THAT mean gosh dangit' as it is. As well on most boards I find that those who use the name 'J-sus' and 'G-d' have almost immediatly disclosed thier religion to me...I usually know where they are coming from and what they are going to say. 'Christianity' no matter what denominations seems almost the same to me. I am sure you have noticed, but we are an 'odd' group (some more than others ;)) but there are others as well who believe in the Law who are often easily identified by what name they refer to Messiah as.

Do I think he really cares? Well, he gave us a really long Law...why the seventh day? Many things...many things...

I don't know if we talked about what the name Yashua means...but it is 'Yah is Salvation' which is neeter than what 'J-sus' translates to...I think that is.

By the way...Is Ldstalk down? I haven't been able to get on the board the past week.

And by the way again...Blues beat Detriot TWICE this weekend :p...he he he. And I have a new favorite team to hate for the next 7 games. Hmm, this is a religious board...can you play hockey and be religious? I guess that's a hard one...Peace.

Searching

Matthew23

04-17-2002, 02:03 PM

Searching,

I have read that the Hebrew language is considered a pure language. Taking the L-rd's name in vain is "harder" to do when using it. Let me know if you have more information on this.

The title J-sus is just an Hebrew to English translation of Yeshua. So I don't know what the big deal is really. His name was originally a Greek name (Iesous) in the first place anyhow, wasn't it?

About hockey...
Remember Bob Bassen? He could be a pretty mean dude at times. Well, Bob is a Christian. Go figure.

Matthew23

04-17-2002, 02:15 PM

Hyssop,

Ahh, I get it now! The ashes/water used for purification represents the blood of J-sus! Yeah, you're dealing with a narrow sighted Christian:)

I have done some reading on this subject since you have brought it to my attention. I learned that the price paid (thirty pieces of silver) to Judas for the handing over of the Messiah was the same then as the price that would have been paid for a FEMALE slave. Interesting, eh?

You said more to come. I'll be quiet 'till then.

hyssop

04-17-2002, 10:29 PM

Matt,

I sincerely doubt that Yashua's name given Him at birth was a Greek name. He was born of Jewish parents, circumcised the eight day . . . I would be astounded to know that they did not give Him a Hebrew name.

As far as what the ashes mixed with water represents (v17), we'll get there. I might not get more written on Numbers 19 before Friday night; I may have to work late on Thursday night.

Talk to you soon,

Matthew23

04-18-2002, 02:12 PM

About Iesous...

The Jews of that time and place spoke Greek. The New Testament was written in Greek. So how do we know that His parents gave him the Hebrew name?

hyssop

04-18-2002, 06:57 PM

We don't know what name He was given. We do know that He was the "seed" promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham was a Hebrew, as were Isaac, Jacob, etc. The one common language to all "observant" Jews is Hebrew; they all use it when worshipping the Creator. Moses was raised an Egyptian and spoke the Egyptian's language (whatever that was), but I certainly would not expect Yah to have written the 10 commandments on those tablets of stone in hieroglyphics--my money is on Hebrew.

Mary and Joseph were Jewish. According to the scriptures, they did not really give Yashua His name: the angel(s) who appeared to each of them told them the name to use. Since the angel told Mary that Yah would give to Yashua "the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever" etc, I would really be surprised if Yah's angel gave her a Greek name to use.

However, for lack of some definite "proof" one way or the other (I do not know of the existance of such a proof): unless Yashua's given name is pivotal to supporting key theological beliefs/understanding, how much do we really need to argue our opinions? ;)

Back to Numbers (if you so desire) soon,

Matthew23

04-19-2002, 07:20 AM

Yes, let's get back to Numbers.

rivkah

04-19-2002, 02:46 PM

Ieasous (or however you spell it) literally means "son of Zeus." No, I'm quite certain his parents did not name him that.

But aha -- if you know his name in Hebrew, it means sooo much. Yehoshua -- G-d is salvation. That is a name above all other names, wouldn't you say? It gives life to the scripture, when you read about "the name."

hyssop

04-19-2002, 07:26 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[10] And he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: and it shall be unto the children of Israel, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among them, for a statute for ever.<HR></blockquote>Again, this is another reference to someone who is involved with the creation of the ashes of purification becoming defiled themselves in the process. It is difficult for the Jew (or anyone, for that matter) to understand how something that defiles can be used to purify those who are defiled.

Numbers 19:11-13 discusses the defilement from contact with death. Death is the ultimate of defilements in the Jewish mind. The process to be purified from the defilement of death involved being sprinkled with ashes & water and then being washed, or baptized, as we will see later. I was raised a Lutheran and thought that John the Baptist came along with a "new" Chr-stian practice of baptism; he didn't. The practice of baptizing comes from the Law.<BLOCKQUOTE>John 3 KJV<HR>[25] Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. [26] And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.<HR></blockquote>Purfication from the defilement of death involves baptism. As an aside, let's take a look at a statement that Paul made in Corinthians:<BLOCKQUOTE>1 Cor 15:29 KJV<HR> Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?<HR></blockquote>Paul is arguing his point that there exists a resurrection from the dead; many did not believe in a resurrection.

Paul's logic was: "Yahweh instituted in the Law a purification from the defilement of death. This ritual is a picture of the resurrection, for resurrection from the dead (life) is the ultimate purification from the defilement of death." In other words, Paul was saying, "Otherwise, why did Yahweh give us a physical means by which one can be purified from the defilement of death, if there is no resurrection?"

Wow! Think about this a little bit. The LDS have built an entire religion around an erroneous interpretation of this verse. They are being baptized as a "substitute" for their dead friends and relatives for naught.

To be continued . . .

rivkah

04-19-2002, 09:03 PM

Hyssop ~

I just never know what is going to "strike a chord" with me, but the following quote from your last post, without really understanding the why, how, what, etc, gave me chills. There are soooo many things that I don't understand -- but even the glimmers are soooo exciting !

Otherwise, why did Yahweh give us a physical means by which one can be purified from the defilement of death, if there is no resurrection?"

Thank you and best regards,
Rivkah

Matthew23

04-20-2002, 08:34 AM

Sounds good, Hyssop. Keep going.

hyssop

04-20-2002, 02:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[14] This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days. [15] And every open vessel, which hath no covering bound upon it, is unclean. [16] And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.<HR></blockquote>I believe that the vessel to which Numbers 19 refers is Yashua's tomb.<BLOCKQUOTE>Mark 15:46 KJV<HR> And [Joseph of Arimathaea] bought fine linen, and took [Yashua] down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre.<HR></blockquote>The tomb was hewn out of solid rock. In order to be a clean repository for Yashua's body, this vessel (tomb) had to be covered. Thus, the Law commanded that Joseph roll the stone over the entrance of the tomb. Was the covering bound on the vessel?<BLOCKQUOTE>Matt 27:66 KJV<HR> So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.<HR></blockquote>Yes, the covering was bound upon the vessel.

Now, I'd like to focus for a moment on that eventful Sunday morning upon which the disciples found out about Yashua's resurrection.<BLOCKQUOTE>John 20 KJV<HR>[2] Then [Mary Magdalene] runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple [John], whom J-sus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the L-rd out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him. [3] Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. [4] So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. [5] And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in. [6] Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, [7] And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. [8] Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.<HR></blockquote>John is writing about what it took for him and Peter to believe that Yashua's body had not been stolen but, rather, that Yashua had been raised from the dead. Try to put yourself in their shoes (I mean, sandals ;)) as they walked into the tomb and looked at the linen clothes. The linen clothes that were wrapped around Yashua's body were empty and collapsed. When the disciples saw how the linen clothes were lying there still wrapped around themselves, they knew that someone could not have taken Yashua's body out; He had to have just sat up out of them. They then knew and believed that Yahshua had been resurrected.

Now, please pay attention to the following verse. John is writing about the events of Yashua's resurrection long after it happened. And, after he writes the account of his and Peter's race to the tomb, he thinks about something:<BLOCKQUOTE>John 20 KJV<HR>[8] Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed. [9] For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. <HR></blockquote>Can you understand what John is saying? He is recalling all of the events of that day and then thinks, "You know, if Peter and I had known this one particular scripture that demands Yashua's resurrection, we wouldn't have had to run all the way to the tomb and look in to believe."

I believe that scripture is Number 19:17. Can you look at the verse with spiritual eyes (keeping Yashua's fulfillment of scripture in mind) and see why?

Matthew23

04-21-2002, 07:28 PM

Hyssop,

I'm not sure about this, but here goes...

Put ashes in jar.
Add water.
Ashes will then RISE.

That's the best I can do. This simple minded man's brain is tired. Have a good Monday

Matthew23

04-24-2002, 03:11 PM

hey y'all, check out my www. Now you'll see what a dork I am. I wanted to show off my family though.

hyssop

04-29-2002, 02:58 PM

Well, I must apologize for the delay in continuing this thread; the past week was very hectic. Matthew, you've got the right idea: you're looking at the physical shadow, the Law, and attempting to see Yashua's once-and-for-all fulfillment of the spiritual.<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19:17 KJV<HR> And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel:<HR></blockquote>Let's carefully examine the spiritual behind this physical commandment:

the ashes of the burnt heifer - If the burning of the heifer is a shadow of Yashua's suffering and death, then what remains when the burning (suffering and death) is over? The ashes represent Yashua's remains, His dead body. It is very interesting to note that the Hebrew word used for "ashes" in verses 9 & 10 is Strong's Concordance Hebrew word #665, the word most used to mean the powdery substance left after a fire: ashes. However, the word used in verse 17 that is translated "ashes" is really the Hebrew word for "dust." Does this ring any bells? Gen 3:19 "for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." The commandment in Numbers requires that "running water" be given to the dust (dead body) in the vessel.

and running water shall be put thereto . . . - The literal translation of this "running water" is "living water." Does this ring any bells?<BLOCKQUOTE>John 4 KJV<HR>[10] J-sus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of G-d, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
. . .
[13] J-sus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: [14] But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.<HR></blockquote>. . . shall be put thereto in a vessel - We've already discussed how the vessel spoken of in Numbers 19 represents the tomb. Remember, thanks to Mark, we are told that the tomb was carved out of a piece of solid rock.

So, Numbers 19:17 basically says, "Eternal life must be given to Yashua's dead body in the tomb!"

Wow! So, John is thinking to himself in John 20:9, "If I had really known Numbers 19:17 that Sunday morning, I wouldn't have had to run to the tomb and go inside in order to believe that Yashua was raised from the dead."

And, that's not all. There is more information to be gleaned from Numbers 19. And that, my friend, will have to wait for another day.

Matthew23

05-09-2002, 06:20 PM

I'm still here. Go on, dear Hyssop:)

hyssop

05-13-2002, 07:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[18] And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave: [19] And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even. [20] But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the LORD: the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean.<HR></blockquote>Is there a spiritual meaning behind these verses? Paul says, "The law is spiritual." Sure, there's a meaning. What could the sprinkling of the water of separation from sin (Num 19:9) represent? Well, remember: the water of separation is made up of the ashes (suffering and death of the Messiah) and the added running/living water (resurrection to eternal life). The water of separation = Yashua's death, burial, and resurrection. How can one sprinkle Yashua's death, burial, and resurrection?<BLOCKQUOTE>Isaiah 52 KJV<HR>[13] Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. [14] As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: [15] So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.<HR></blockquote>Sprinkling the water of separation = preaching Yashua's death, burial, and resurrection

And who is this servant of Yah who sprinkles many nations? Why, Yashua, of course. He is the only truly "clean man" who will sprinkle the unclean. His first order of business, following His resurrection, was to begin sprinkling:<BLOCKQUOTE>Luke 24 KJV<HR>[25] Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: [26] Ought not [Messiah] to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? [27] And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
. . .
[32] And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?<HR>[44] And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. [45] Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, [46] And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:[47] And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.<HR></blockquote>The disciples were also baptized into the body of Messiah. They, too, were on a mission to sprinkle the unclean. Yashua told them: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" They sprinkled and baptized.

I wish to leave all readers of this post something to consider -<BLOCKQUOTE>The traditional view of Yashua's baptism is that He was giving us an example to follow. The scriptural account, however, does not really indicate that this was the case:<BLOCKQUOTE>Yashua came to John the Baptist to be baptized, and John refused (can you blame him?)</blockquote><BLOCKQUOTE>Matthew 3 KJV<HR>[13] Then cometh [Yashua] from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. [14] But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?<HR></blockquote>Now, consider all that we've discussed in this thread and carefully examine Yashua's response:<BLOCKQUOTE>Matthew 3 KJV<HR>[15] And [Yashua] answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.<HR></blockquote>What did Yashua mean by this statement? In your opinion, what was the purpose of His baptism?</blockquote>

Matthew23

05-23-2002, 06:10 PM

It was necessary for Him to be consecrated as the Great High Priest. He Himself needed no repentance or cleansing from sin, but He identified Himself with man, becoming our substitute. This was also an event that identified Him as our Messiah, the Son of G-d (see John 1:32-34).

hyssop

05-23-2002, 07:28 PM

Matt: "It was necessary for Him to be consecrated as the Great High Priest."

Yes, Yashua needed to be consecrated the Great High Priest. However, was it baptism that accomplished this? I think not. <BLOCKQUOTE>Hebrews 5 KJV<HR>[5]So also [Messiah] glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. [6] As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.<HR></blockquote>When did Yashua become the Father's only begotten son? When was He made a high priest after the order of Melchisedec?<BLOCKQUOTE>Acts 13:33 KJV<HR>[5][Yahweh] hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up [Yashua] again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.<HR></blockquote>Yashua was consecrated the Great High Priest when the Father raised Him from the dead unto eternal life. Yashua then became the "high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec" -- "after the power of an endless life. (Heb 7:16)" In my opinion, you're going to be hard-pressed to scripturally prove that Yashua was consecrated the High Priest at His baptism and not His resurrection.

Matt: "He Himself needed no repentance or cleansing from sin . . ."

I absolutely agree.

Matt: ". . . but He identified Himself with man, becoming our substitute."

I'm sorry, Matt, but I just can't agree with you here. Yes, He is the lamb that taketh away the sin of the world. But, as far as I can see, the notion that He was our "substitute" just doesn't fit with the majority of biblical references to that topic.

Matt: "This was also an event that identified Him as our Messiah, the Son of G-d"

I can agree with you here.

But . . .<HR>
Yashua did not convince John to baptize Him by saying, "It is necessary for me to be consecrated the Great High Priest; baptize me." He did not say, "It is necessary for me to become man's substitute; baptize me." And, He did not say, "It is necessary for me to be identified as the Messiah; baptize me."

He said: ". . . for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness."

What did He mean by that statement? Why did John immediately change his mind and baptize Yashua?

I think that, if we comprehend what He meant, we'll have a much better chance at understanding why He chose to be baptized.

Matthew23

05-24-2002, 02:46 PM

Hyssop,

You haven't proven that He bacame the Great High Priest on the day of His resurrection. I guess you are assuming that that Psalm 2:7 talks about the day of the ressurection. So you are hard pressed also to prove when he was made a priest forever in the order of Melchisedek. Having neither end of days nor beginning of days, wouldn't He actually have ALWAYS been a priest in the order of Melchisedek? I guess that could be the topic of another thread.

You asked me what I thought he meant (about him saying "to fulfill all righteousness"). I told you what I thought. Are you going to make me guess again what it is that He "really" meant?

hyssop

05-24-2002, 04:46 PM

Please accept my apologies, Matt. I thought that you gave me reasons why Yashua was baptized, but I didn't realize that you had actually addressed the question of fulfilling righteousness.

You see, Yashua told John that it was necessary that they fulfil righteousness. What is righteousness? Is it not the performance of Yahweh's will, His commandments?<BLOCKQUOTE>Psalms 119:172 KJV<HR>My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness.<HR></blockquote>Yahweh's commandments are righteousness. Yashua told John that He needed to be baptized because Yahweh commanded it. We've been talking about Yashua's fulfillment of scripture--His carrying out, at a spiritual level, Yahweh's commandments. Yashua used the law as a checklist, if you will, to determine and guide His actions. Can you see Yashua fulfilling Yahweh's commandments in His death, burial, and resurrection? If so, then I hope that you can see that Yashua had scripture in mind when He went to John to be baptized. And, just as the disciple John said, "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead," perhaps, you do not yet know the scripture that necessitated His baptism. Can you apply the principles that I have attempted to explain in this thread and find that scripture? I believe it to be in Numbers 19.

Searching

05-25-2002, 12:37 AM

spp...matt, I have been rooting for the Ave's. Is that wrong?

Matthew23

05-25-2002, 06:30 AM

Searching,

My brother hates the Avalanche, so he's rooting for Detroit, and a lot of people I work with are pulling for the Wings. It would be great to have a little help rooting the Avs on to victory.

Matthew23

05-25-2002, 06:40 AM

Hysssop,

Is this it?
Numbers 19:7 After that, the priest must wash his clothes and bathe himself with water.

I'm sorry, Hyssop, for getting an attitude with you in my last post.

hyssop

05-25-2002, 08:04 PM

Matt,

You are on the right track. We have studied into the origin of baptism: Numbers 19. We know that Yashua is The High Priest; so, I can see how you have selected Number 19:7 as the commandment that required His baptism. However, let's take a closer look at all of the verses that reference baptism in Numbers 19: <BLOCKQUOTE>Numbers 19 KJV<HR>[7]Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even.[8] And he that burneth her shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even. 
. . .
[10] And he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: and it shall be unto the children of Israel, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among them, for a statute for ever. 
. . .
[19] And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even. 
. . .
[21] And it shall be a perpetual statute unto them, that he that sprinkleth the water of separation shall wash his clothes; and he that toucheth the water of separation shall be unclean until even. <HR></blockquote>Of all those who are to be baptized, there is only one who is never unclean: the sprinkler. And, when we discussed verses 18-20, we saw how Yashua was the sprinkler. Also, please notice that the sprinkler only had to wash his clothes; he did not have to wash his flesh. Yashua was baptized to wash His clothes; He was without sin and had no need to wash (purify) His flesh. He was baptized because He understood that Numbers 19:21 commanded Him to do so. He and John were fulfilling righteousness.

Can you see and agree that Yashua and those involved in His death, burial, and resurrection were fulfilling commandments given the children of Israel almost 1,400 years before?

Matthew23

06-04-2002, 03:09 PM

okay, makes sense. Go on Hyssop.

hyssop

06-04-2002, 03:15 PM

If one looks at the "big picture," who is ultimately responsible for the death of Yashua?

The Jews?
The Romans?
The sinner?
Yashua?
Yaweh?

Hint: 1 Peter 2:24 & many others

Matthew23

06-06-2002, 01:51 PM

Uh, the sinner. That's my final answer.:)

hyssop

06-06-2002, 05:37 PM

:D You know, Matt, I like your sense of humor . . . and, I was short a smile today. Thanks

Yep, that's my final answer, too.

So . . . did you, in your sin as those men in Acts 2:23, kill Yashua?

Matthew23

06-06-2002, 08:02 PM

If the wages of sin is death, then I deserve to die. However, He bore my sins and died in my place. Now because He chose to lay down His life for me, I may live.

I thank Him for willingly taking my punishment. He knew the hairs on my head and the sins I would commit when He took the nails.

Well then I guess I did kill Him, because of my sins.

John 10:14-18...
14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me-- 15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

hyssop

06-09-2002, 10:10 AM

Yes, Matt. If we claim that Yashua died for our sins, we have to admit that we participated in His death; we killed Him.

But, as we've seen previously, Yashua is the spiritual fulfillment of the sacrifices. So, if we claim that Yashua is our Passover lamb, then we sacrificed Him in exact accordance with Yahweh's commandments (on the 14th of the first month in the afternoon, no bone was broken, etc.). In our sin, we killed the Red Heifer in exact accordance with Yahweh's commandments (killed it outside the gate, before the priest, etc.). We have performed ALL of the sacrifices in exact accordance with Yahweh's commandments.

So, we, in our sin, have accomplished the sacrificial requirements commanded by Yahweh in His law. This is grace (a free gift of righteousness), as Paul discusses in Romans 5. This righteousness (killing Yashua) is as filthy rags, but we did it. What then should we do, once we realize that our sin killed the Holy One of Israel? Turn from sin; do what Yahweh commands. Because, if we don't, we continue to participate in Yashua's sacrifice and prove ourselves to be performing willful sin against Yahweh's spirit, for which there will be no forgiveness.

Matthew23

06-09-2002, 11:04 AM

So, what you're saying then, is that by receiving the gift of grace, we still fall short in that the righteousness we would then have is but filthy rags. And the only way to obtain true righteousness is to keep the law.

Do I have the right idea of what you've been trying to tell me? I just want to make sure I understand this.

hyssop

06-09-2002, 07:53 PM

What I am trying to say is:

righteous = Yahweh's commandments

physical unrighteousness = sin = breaking Yahweh's physical commandments = killing Yashua = keeping Yahweh's spiritual sacrificial commandments = righteousness which comes by faith in Yashua Messiah

This is not a partial righteousness; it is 100% righteousness. I, though faith in the Messiah, can stand before my Creator and say, "I have kept all of your commandments; I am righteous (given to me by my participation in Yashua's death)." You see, when I stole, coveted, bore false witness, et cetera, I killed Yashua and brought my sacrifice. Had Yashua not laid down His life as my Passover lamb, I would still be in my sin with no hope. However, once I realize that my physical sin killed Yashua, I should flee from sin and want to conform to Yahweh's will, His law.<BLOCKQUOTE>Romans 7:22 KJV<HR>For I delight in the law of G-d after the inward man:<HR></blockquote>Are we justified by the works of the law? No. The work of the law is the physical keeping of Yahweh's commandments. We cannot be justified by the works of the law, because we are flesh and unable to conform perfectly to Yaweh's law. However, bearing in mind the following, which of Yaweh's commandments do you think that we should teach that one no longer observe?<BLOCKQUOTE>Matthew 5:19 KJV<HR>Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.<HR></blockquote>

Matthew23

06-10-2002, 05:32 PM

to my pal Hyssop,

I'm sorry. Maybe it's because this "doctrine" is new to me, but it seems very twisted. I'm still not clear if you believe that the sinner is made righteous by observing the law, or if you believe that the sinner is made righteous by grace through faith in J-sus.

You know what I believe. I am what you would call a "so-called-Christian." I believe in observing ALL of the commandments of G-d that are required of me. I have much to study about such things as:

When to observe the Sabbath?
Am I still required to observe the Sabbath?
Pork- to eat or not to eat?

My wife could have a pork chop and not think twice about it. I've asked her in the past, "If it's okay for you to eat a pig, then is it okay for you to commit adultery, worship a golden idol, or maybe tell your mom and dad to buzz off?" This is my delema. I'm not sure where to draw the line. I know about Peter's vision, how all the animals were made clean. But if G-d didn't want the ancient Hebrews to eat a ham sandwish, why would He change his mind later on? I'm just a modern day Gentile, but I know I need to honor G-d to the best of my ability. Does that mean that I need to follow all the laws of the Jews? Am I rambling or what?

This Numbers 19 stuff that you're sharing with me, it's going to take a while to sink in. I sometimes have to read your posts 2 or 3 times to understand it. This has been a great conversation. I appreciate you sharing with me. I realize that you feel that it is your duty as a "disciple" to share with me what you believe is the true gospel. That's part of the reason why I am here also, to be a lighthouse (yeah, another Christian cliche). This is also a great learning process for me.

I will have to share with you, sometime later, how 9-11 changed MY life. (you know, they say 9-11 changed every American in one way or another. Don't ask me the "they" are:).) It has to do with a message board similar to this one, and a Muslim I befriended name Imran.

okay, okay, I'll shut up now

hyssop

06-10-2002, 09:00 PM

Matt,

First of all, thanks for hanging in here with me. You say that I know what you believe; that is not entirely so. I think, however, that I do know what you've been taught. Believe it or not, I feel that this puts you at a disadvantage (Please refer to Romans 3:1-2). You have mixed emotions about Yahweh's law: "Should I do what He says or has it all been done away, and I can now ignore it? Well, not all of it. Just selected parts of it. Hmmm. Which parts?" I know how you feel. I've been there; I was raised a Lutheran and attended a Baptist church as a young father. Now, don't get the impression that I think that I've got it all figured out, because I have only discovered how little I really know.

I don't want to belabor this righteousness point, but you are right: there is no righteousness apart from keeping Yahweh's law. Now, before your pastor/minister brands me as a heretic (he probably would anyway), let me explain:

David states in Ps. 119:172 that all of Yahweh's commandments are righteousness. Fundamentally, if you want to be righteous, keep all of Yahweh's commandments. That's great. Except for one little problem: there aren't very many who have managed to keep all of Yahweh's commandments. I believe that the scriptures only mention two: Abraham (Gen 26:5) and Yashua (Heb 4:15).

So, that leaves all of the billions of the rest of us out in the cold. We have no righteousness (we have physically broken one or more of Yahweh's commandments); we are doomed. Thanks be to Yahweh that He sent Yashua to change all of that. When Yashua died as our sacrifice, He gave us the opportunity to keep ALL of Yahweh's law. When I did not covet, I had righteousness through the works (physical observance) of the law; when I coveted, I was bringing Yashua, my sacrifice (according to Yahweh's law in a spiritual sense) through faith.

Now that I realize that my sin was responsible for Yashua's death, I want to change. I no longer delight in coveting (because I know that, when I covet, I am participating in Yashua's death); I am delivered from Egypt (slavery to sin) with a mighty hand, and I leave in haste. I no longer wonder if I HAVE to avoid using Yahweh's name in vain; I WANT to avoid it. I no longer wonder if I HAVE to observe the Sabbath; I WANT to observe the Sabbath.

Actually, you may find it amusing to hear the logic behind my keeping the Sabbath for the first time. I had been looking into the issue of a Saturday Sabbath, went to the library and studied the Julian and Gregorian calendars (checking to see if days might have gotten lost), and finally determined that Saturday should still be Saturday (I didn't think to consider that the Jews have been counting six and resting one for millennia). I asked my Baptist minister about the Sabbath and wanted to know why we, as Baptists, observed Sunday instead of Saturday. His bottom line was to quote to me his New Testament support for how we can observe ANY day and that the Baptists just happen to pick Sunday. I thought to myself, "Well, if it doesn't really matter to the Baptists what day we observe as the Sabbath, I can choose to observe Saturday JUST IN CASE it does matter to Yahweh. So, I've got all of my bases covered!" I observed my first Sabbath over twenty years ago and never looked back. :)

You mentioned Peter's vision and how it seems to indicate that all meats (including pork) are now okay to eat. What do you think of a new thread on the topic under General Theology/Biblical Study?

Matthew23

12-17-2002, 06:46 PM

2 Corinthians 5:21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Sounds like a serious form of substitution to me:)

Matt

hyssop

12-18-2002, 03:44 AM

The scripture that you quoted states that Yashua became "sin for us" so that "we might become the righteousness of G-d."

What, exactly, is the righteousness of G-d? And, how is that accomplished by having someone punished in your place?

Matthew23

12-20-2002, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by hyssop
What, exactly, is the righteousness of G-d?The righteousness of God is that which is acceptable to Him; that which is in good standing with Him.

And, how is that accomplished by having someone punished in your place? [/B]
Haven't we been through that already?:)

Go ahead...

hyssop

12-21-2002, 06:49 AM

Matt,

Your first definition, "that which is acceptable to Him," is very close; your second, "that which is in good standing with Him," is not . . . and that's why you can read 2 Cor 5:21 and misunderstand it to mean that "Yashua died in my stead."

Please let me explain: Your second definition is the definition of righteous, not righteousness. The righteous are in good standing with our Heavenly Father. And, why are they in good standing with Him? Because they have performed righteousness: "that which is acceptable to Him." Do you see the difference? It's a fine line but, nevertheless, very important to understand before one can accurately interpret what is being said.

Righteousness = that which is acceptable to Him. Fundamentally, Yahweh's commandments define what is acceptable to Him.<BLOCKQUOTE>Psalms 119:172 KJV<HR>My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness.<HR></blockquote>This is at least the third time that I've quoted this scripture in this thread (although, the last time was 6 months ago ;) ).

Matt, I just went back and read some of this thread over again, and one of your comments really stood out:<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Matthew23<HR>I'm sorry. Maybe it's because this "doctrine" is new to me, but it seems very twisted. I'm still not clear if you believe that the sinner is made righteous by observing the law, or if you believe that the sinner is made righteous by grace through faith in J-sus.<HR></blockquote>"the sinner is made righteous by observing the law" -

Yes, this is true. One who performs Yahweh's law has righteousness.<BLOCKQUOTE>Ezek 18 KJV<HR>[21] But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. [22] All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.<HR></blockquote>When one physically performs the law, they have a "physical" righteousness.

"the sinner is made righteous by grace through faith in J-sus" -

Yes, this is true. This righteousness, however, is not a "physical" righteousness. It is a "spiritual" righteousness: the righteousness of G-d. Now, REMEMBER: righteousness is Yahweh's commandments. So, how do we have a free gift (grace) of righteousness (keeping Yahweh's commandments) through faith in J-sus?<BLOCKQUOTE>1 Cor 5:7 KJV<HR>Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Chr-st our passover is sacrificed for us:<HR></blockquote>Yashua was your sacrifice, my sacrifice. And, that is something we accept through faith. What did we have to do to bring this sacrifice? NOTHING! It was a free gift (grace) of Yahweh. All we had to do was be ourselves: sinners. When we sinned, we were participating in the death of Yashua--we were accomplishing our "spiritual" sacrifice. If you accept this through faith, you have the righteouness of G-d: a keeping of His commandments at the "next level."

Enough said for now . . .

Matthew23

12-21-2002, 08:05 AM

Let's say that I broke one of YHWH's commandments today. Now I am unrighteous. In order for me to become the righteousness of God, what do I need to do? I sinned and now I am unrighteous. Do I remain unrighteous forever?:confused:

hyssop

12-21-2002, 11:58 AM

I don't believe that this is a hypothetical issue. You have already admitted that you practice unrighteousness (the breaking of Yahweh's commandments) without thinking twice about it.

When you perform this sin, you are participating in Yashua's death (he died because of your sin). You are as responsible for his death as those who nailed him to the cross; there is no difference. His spilled blood is on your hands.

When/if you finally realize that your unrighteousness killed Yashua, then you are at the threshold of the "Righteousness of G-d." It was Yashua's purpose to die for you; not in your stead but, rather, to give you the opportunity to bring a sacrifice for your sins. This sacrifice is Yashua. You sacrificed Yashua in exact accordance with the scriptures. You brought the Passover Lamb on the 14th day of the first month [Ex 12:6 - John 19:14]; you washed his inwards and his legs in water [Lev 1:9 - John 19:34]. YOU DID IT!

Now, if you brought this sacrifice, what does that mean?

It means that you have performed Yahweh's command to bring a sacrifice for your sin. You have performed righteousness (and you didn't even know it). It is grace, a totally free gift. It is the gift of G-d.

Thummim

12-22-2002, 08:34 AM

Matthew23 writes;

Let's say that I broke one of YHWH's commandments today. Now I am unrighteous. In order for me to become the righteousness of God, what do I need to do? I sinned and now I am unrighteous. Do I remain unrighteous forever?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Can I assume that this hypothetical sin of yours, is deliberate? An unintended sin can be handled by the priests. But deliberate sin is YHWH's sole domain. He is the offended party and he alone can forgive the transgression.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

29 Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.

30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth YHWH; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

31 Because he hath despised the word of YHWH, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him. Nu. 15: 29 - 31

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...So a deliberate sin will require the participation of YHWH, as in the following text.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

22 I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and, as a cloud, thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee. Isa. 44: 22

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...As to a pascel lamb being used for a sin offering, all sin offerings are required with the slaughter of the lamb. It covers no sin.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16 And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of YHWH.

17 And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

18 In the first day shall be an holy convocation; ye shall do no manner of servile work therein:

19 But ye shall offer a sacrifice made by fire for a burnt offering unto YHWH; two young bullocks, and one ram, and seven lambs of the first year: they shall be unto you without blemish:

20 And their meat offering shall be of flour mingled with oil: three tenth deals shall ye offer for a bullock, and two tenth deals for a ram;

21 A several tenth deal shalt thou offer for every lamb, throughout the seven lambs:

22 And one goat for a sin offering, to make an atonement for you.

23 Ye shall offer these beside the burnt offering in the morning, which is for a continual burnt offering.

24 After this manner ye shall offer daily, throughout the seven days, the meat of the sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto YHWH: it shall be offered beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.

25 And on the seventh day ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work. Nu. 28: 16 - 25

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...The pascel lamb is not for sin. Unintentional sin is addressed separately. Intentional sin again requires YHWH's personal attention. If "Jesus" is a pascel lamb, it would still yeild no absolution from intentional sin. All sin offerings would still be required since they are not for individual indiscretions. The sin offerings are for Israel's cleansing, and not for your sin personally. Your asked to have a contrite heart.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

15 O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise.

16 For thou desirest not sacrifice {for intentional sin?}; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.

17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Ps. 51: 15 - 17

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...The solution then must be repentance for intentional sin. If you also defile Israel {the people and the land} through your transgressions, the priests can deal with them through the Levitical code. But your own sin is yours and YHWH's to deal with. YHWH does not stay angry forever.

22 Thus saith thy Lord YHWH, and thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people, Behold, I have taken out of thine hand the cup of trembling, even the dregs of the cup of my fury; thou shalt no more drink it again:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...This sentiment would go with YHWH never again being angry with his people {Isa. 54: 9}, him being convinced that they are righteous by his own act. {in this time}

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Isa. 43: 25

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Being JEWish and being forgiven by YHWH, or being forgiven by the new faith of christianity {in its many forms} are very different things. YHWH is a savior to the JEWish people, but christianity and the name of "Jesus" hasn't ended in the JEWish people being declared righteous, though YHWH does make this declaration himself. Christianities declaration is one of oppression for the JEWish people.

6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

...This is what christianity declares for the end of those who are JEWish and do not worship "Jesus". And this is what became of this righteous people in the hands of christianity. Accused of killing the messiah, the son of GD and "GD manifested in the flesh", {can a people be accused of greater evil?} the JEWish people couldn't escape their fate. But you will no doubt find YHWH a more just Eloheem in dealing with your own sin. {sacrifice not required!} Paul could be completely wrong in his assessment of "Jesus". He could be guilty of fashioning "Jesus" into an idol of flesh that the world worships in the place of YHWH.

....Michael

Thummim

12-22-2002, 10:03 AM

...Matthew 23, the question of a mans righteousness is a deeper question that it at first seems. What is righteousness anyway? Can we personally achieve righteousness without it being a grant given to us by YHWH? Can a man be righteous for his own sake? I can be known of my peers, to be a righteous man for my dealings with them. But would this add to my righteousness that YHWH decrees to me for meeting his will?

...We have to ask, "whose standard of righteousness are we talking about?" You could be righteous to me, and at the same time be unrighteous to YHWH. {or it could be reversed} Why do I {or you} need to be righteous at all? I assume that I want something in return for my righteousness. What do I want for the walls that I fence in my life with? Righteousness will require something of me. At first, I assume that I want to please YHWH. But why. What is it that I want of him? {everlasting life, inclusion in his peoples, honor?} Righteousness then must infer some kind of a contract. {I will, so I can ...}

...Matthew23, what is righteousness to bring to you? What do you want? Is it to be a part of the JEWish people? Maybe to be a good christian? Maybe it is soly pleasing YHWH that you want. If YHWH asked of you to distroy his enemies, man, woman and child, would this now be righteousness to you? Saul was given such a view of righteousness. He did the killing, but insisted on plundering. For killing, he was righteous, but for plundering, he gave away his own righteousness with YHWH. I assume that we must all have our own righteousness within us. It seems that "Jesus" said something like "blessed is the man who does not hold himself guilty in the thing that he allows". I cannot remember exactly what was said, or where. But it seems very valid. Perhaps we at first must find righteousness within our own hearts. But then aren't we really judging YHWH's righteousness, to do so?

...So asking whether you are unrighteous {or righteous} forever, must concern who is the judge of that righteousness. I may not be totally at peace with YHWH judging my righteousness for me. Killing children is my chief revulsion to war. But killing Moslem children can save the lives of JEWish children {or American children}, if there is really are weapons of mass destruction in the hands of ...(xxx). What is righteousness is not always easy to determine. It could be the domain of the gods {if we allow it to be}. But we ourselves along with our children, have to live with the consequences of allowing the gods to determine our righteousness.

...I'll bet that you are a very righteous man of great conscience. You probably are very good at determining righteousness. So are you a righteous man in your own judgement? There is a curse that lays upon the righteous. Because they care, they sometimes cannot forgive themselves of their past transgressions. The unrighteous, have no problem here.

....Michael

hyssop

12-22-2002, 07:32 PM

Yahweh's commandments are righteousness.

If one does what Yahweh commands, he is righteous; if one does not, then he is unrighteous.

Very simple.

Matthew23

12-22-2002, 09:00 PM

Hyssop,

If I do what YHWH commands, I am righteous; and if I sin, I am made righteous through Yeshua's sacrifice. Is this what you believe?

I can dig that! :)

I don't get how that explains the whole substitution issue though. I mean, yes, through my sin, I did kill Yeshua. I believe that. But how can you say that he didn't die in my place. I deserved to die for my sins, right? Am I missing something?

Matthew23

12-22-2002, 09:03 PM

Thummim, I'm not ignoring you...
It's late and I need to hit the sack. I just wanted to get a quick reply in to Hyssop. I'll check into your replies soon.:)

Thummim

12-23-2002, 08:38 AM

Hyssop writes;

Yahweh's commandments are righteousness.

If one does what Yahweh commands, he is righteous; if one does not, then he is unrighteous.

Very simple.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...But is it? The text of the tanakh teaches us that there are those prophets that do not say what YHWH says to say. YHWH himself claims that there are prophets that do not speak his words. If these false prophets write down their words, do we know that they are always underscoring YHWH's will? When a prophet speaks, don't we have to test him in some way? How do we know that a prophets words, are YHWH's words? We are told that if a prophet speaks, but his words do not come true, he is not the prophet of YHWH. I can bring this test to two separate prophets of the tanakh and void their words by this test. Both Isaiah and Haggai appear to be in breach of preaching the words of YHWH, by this test. Take away the words of Isaiah from christianity, and there is no christian faith. Isaiah cedes righteousness to the JEWish people that is rejected by the teachings of christianity. But the words of Isaiah are suitable for christians to build there own righteousness upon. What seems wrong with this? Could it be that Isaiah is a JEW who writes his words for his own people's blessing? If christianity takes their blessing from Isaiah's words, but denighs the blessing of Israel, does it become apparient who the thieves are?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

17 But Israel shall be saved in the with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end. Isa. 45: 17

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...This verse of text is in the same paragraph as Isa. 45: 1, where Cyrus is named messiah. He releases the people of YHWH from their captivity with an everlasting salvation according to the prophet's words. Was Israel's salvation an everlasting salvation? All JEWs are said to be righteous by YHWH's own words. {Isa. 44: 22} But neither christianity, nor "Jesus" teaches this. Is the teacher {"Jesus"} false, or is the prophet {Isaiah} false? Are both false and not speaking YHWH's words?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

18 Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of YHWH'S temple was laid, consider it.

19 Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, as yet the vine, and the fig tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive tree, hath not brought forth: from this day will I bless you. Hag. 2: 18, 19

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Yeah? A perpetual blessing for Israel. {dated!} This is the faith of both these prophets. Israel is forever pardoned and righteous, according to their teachings.

...So do we throw out the words of both these prophets? I could go through the NT and the tanakh, and throw out much of both works by this test. I would suggest that we all test righteousness by our own judgement. What YHWH seems to say, just might not be what YHWH really says.

...These things are important to think about. Dare I go any further? We may not have the permissions that we think we do. If righteousness is not in the texts of the sacred books, {by test} then we may just end up being tested ourselves, by what is in our own hearts. Do you cede to the JEWish people, the righteousness that their prophets give them through their words?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith YHWH thy Redeemer.

9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.

10 For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith YHWH that hath mercy on thee. Isa. 54: 8 - 10

....Michael

hyssop

01-01-2003, 05:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Matthew23<HR>If I do what YHWH commands, I am righteous; and if I sin, I am made righteous through Yeshua's sacrifice. Is this what you believe?

I can dig that! :)<HR></blockquote>Yes, Matt. That's what I believe. And that's what I think Paul meant when he said,<BLOCKQUOTE>Gal 2:17 KJV<HR>But if, while we seek to be justified by Chr_st, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Chr_st the minister of sin? G_d forbid.<HR></blockquote>When we are justified (declared righteous) through Y'shua, we have to admit that we killed him and brought him as our sacrifice when we sinned.

One could say, "Great! Then I can do whatever I want. I'll get spiritual righteousness by sinning." And what did Paul say to that logic? "Is Chr_st the minister of sin? Absolutely not." Because when we realize that our sin (breaking Hashem's commandments) crucified the Messiah, we should repent (change) and move away from sin. Look at what the writer of Romans said was being reported of the Apostles:<BLOCKQUOTE>Rom 3:8 KJV<HR>And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.<HR></blockquote>Do you see how the message of grace (Hashem's gift of righteousness through the death of Y'shua) fits this slanderous twisting of what was being said?

Now, what about the substitutional death of Y'shua? It's a false message! Think about it. What father would punish his good child as a substitute for his wicked children?

And . . . if you understand how Y'shua's death gives you righteousness and you turn from your sin, our Heavenly Father will forgive you. Your old self died with Y'shua. You now repent, are baptized, and live as a new creature in Him.

So . . . what does it mean when the scripture says, "Y'shua died for us"? Think of this in terms of warfare. When a soldier dies for his country, is he paying their penalty for sin? Of course not. He lays his life down so that his fellow countrymen may live. This is how Y'shua died for us. We know there is a spiritual war taking place between our Creator and those spirit beings that are His enemies--our enemies. Y'shua died in order to deliver us from our slavery to sin.

I know that our message is not always easy to follow, but I pray that you see Satan's lie. The Deceiver has convinced the world that it can continue in sin and still be right with Hashem. This is just not so.

Peace,

Matthew23

01-02-2003, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by hyssop
Now, what about the substitutional death of Y'shua? It's a false message! Think about it. What father would punish his good child as a substitute for his wicked children?

For G-d so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

And . . . if you understand how Y'shua's death gives you righteousness and you turn from your sin, our Heavenly Father will forgive you. Your old self died with Y'shua. You now repent, are baptized, and live as a new creature in Him.

agreed

So . . . what does it mean when the scripture says, "Y'shua died for us"? Think of this in terms of warfare. When a soldier dies for his country, is he paying their penalty for sin? Of course not. He lays his life down so that his fellow countrymen may live. This is how Y'shua died for us. We know there is a spiritual war taking place between our Creator and those spirit beings that are His enemies--our enemies. Y'shua died in order to deliver us from our slavery to sin.

I know that our message is not always easy to follow, but I pray that you see Satan's lie. The Deceiver has convinced the world that it can continue in sin and still be right with Hashem. This is just not so.

...the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and give his life as a ransom for many.

If you don't mind me asking, who taught you what you believe?

Thummim

01-02-2003, 11:13 AM

Who is righteous?

...When a sinners sin is remitted by YHWH, we do not get to say that the sin never happened. But when YHWH forgives the sin, he has covered unrighteousness, with righteousness. The righteous do not benefit from this act. But righteousness can bring into the same esteem the sinner, as it does the righteous person. The righteousness of YHWH's people, is a choice of YHWH's.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Isa. 43: 25

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Righteousness here is an act of YHWH's. For his own sake, he has made his people righteous. How many sinners are covered in this decree of YHWH's, and for how long? I'm trying to show you that righteousness can cover the unrighteous. Moses dies a sinner, unforgiven by his GD, and left on the wrong side of the Jordon river. But he is still a righteous man. A sinner can be righteous! This is a very hard lesson for people to learn. All Israel is righteous! That is the cover of a GD who himself makes his people righteous.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. {swear what?}

24 Surely, shall one say, in YHWH have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed.

25 In YHWH shall all the seed of Israel be "justified" {"tzadek in hebrew" = righteous, and shall glory. Isaiah further goes on to say that this righteousness means that YHWH will never again be angry with his people.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee. {as of Isa. 44: 22}

10 For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed --> {these mountains and hills underline forever!}; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith YHWH that hath mercy on thee. Isa. 54: 9, 10

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...So what is removed? Though peace leaves the people of Israel, it must not be by YHWH's will. It might be by a loss in the strength of YHWH's name, to cover his people. This name is Davids strength to defeat his enemies.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

10 All nations compassed me about: but in the name of YHWH will I destroy them.

11 They compassed me about; yea, they compassed me about: but in the name of YHWH I will destroy them.

12 They compassed me about like bees; they are quenched as the fire of thorns: for in the name of YHWH I will destroy them. Ps. 118: 10 - 12

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...It is so hard, to get people to see that this Eloheem is not as any other. He is worshipped through his name. He belongs to the people who live in the line of "Shem --> the Name", son of Noah. The authors of the tanakh made a Name for their Eloheem, and for themselves. He {YHWH} is no "Object or idol". His worship is unique in all the world. All other Eloheem are objects "things". But YHWH is a Name! It is also this peoples Name of righteousness. This is the blessing of Israel, "the linking of Names".

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

27 And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Nu. 6: 26

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...and without this link in "Names", there is no blessing given according to Malachi.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

1 And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you.

2 If ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith YHWH of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart.

3 Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of your solemn feasts; and one shall take you away with it. Mal. 2: 1 - 3

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...So a people trapped by forgetfulness can still be righteous. They need the blessing that is in the name of their Eloheem.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

7 Our soul is escaped as a bird out of the snare of the fowlers: the snare is broken, and we are escaped.

8 Our help is in the name of YHWH, who made heaven and earth. Ps. 124: 7, 8

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Escape from this trap is as easy as learning the Name of YHWH. It is not the "Lord" that is this peoples righteousness. It is YHWH! In YHWH, all of Israel have righteousness weither they sin or not. But I do not mean to say that it is OK to sin. It is not. The righteousness of this people does not come from themselves. It comes from their Eloheem. Studing talmud all day long will not make righteousness for this people. {but it might help} But the Name of YHWH {in the will of YHWH}, does make a righteous people.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Psalm 20

To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.

1 YHWH hear thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob defend thee;

2 Send thee help from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion;

3 Remember all thy offerings, and accept thy burnt sacrifice; Selah.

4 Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfil all thy counsel.

5 We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners: --> *the letters {YHWH} come from the Name of "YaHudaH", the root of "Jesse"* YHWH fulfil all thy petitions. {see Ps. 89: 24, Isa. 11: 10 and make the connection to the Name of YHWH}

6 Now know I that YHWH saveth his anointed; he will hear him from his holy heaven with {"his Name"} = >> the saving strength of his right hand.

7 Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of YHWH our God. {???}

8 They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright.

9 Save, YHWH: let the king hear us when we call. Ps. 20

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...GD and Hashem are different ideas and very different ways of worshipping an Eloheem. One can be attached to a Name, but not to an idol. YHWH can take his people to himself through his Name. He can be YHWH, their righteousness.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. {because of his name} This is the heritage {Name} of the servants of YHWH, and their righteousness is of me, saith YHWH.

....Michael

hyssop

01-10-2003, 03:51 AM

Matt,

Please accept my apology for the long-delayed response. I will post a detailed response this weekend. In the mean time, I'd like you to consider the following:

Your quote: "...the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and give his life as a ransom for many." is a very good point.

What I would like you to think about is:
"From what did Y'shua ransom us?"
"Who did we owe?" "For what?"
"Who did He pay?" "With what?"

And, lastly: Can you find Biblical support for your views? For example -- if you believe that Y'shua died in your place to pay the penalty for your sin, find a number of compelling examples in the Hebrew scriptures that support substitutional punishment.

I'll be back soon,

Matthew23

01-14-2003, 03:57 PM

YHWH accepts substitutes- He has even gone so far as to provide them for us...

Genesis 3:21
Genesis 22:13
Exodus 12:1-13
Exodus 28:38
Isaiah 53:5
Leviticus 1:4
Leviticus 16:21-22
Leviticus 17:11
Numbers 3:12
Numbers 3:41
Numbers 3:45
Numbers 8:18
I Kings 20:42

Matthew23

01-14-2003, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by hyssop

What I would like you to think about is:
"From what did Y'shua ransom us?"
"Who did we owe?" "For what?"
"Who did He pay?" "With what?"

from what? DEATH
who did we owe? YHWH
for what? UNRIGHTEOUSNESS
who did He pay? YHWH
with what? HIS LIFE

Thummim

01-15-2003, 09:41 AM

...Matt, these offerings are not substitutes. They are for unintentional sin.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

24 Then it shall be, if ought be committed by ignorance without the knowledge of the congregation, that all the congregation shall offer one young bullock for a burnt offering, for a sweet savour unto YHWH, with his meat offering, and his drink offering, according to the manner, and one kid of the goats for a sin offering.

25 And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them; for it is ignorance: and they shall bring their offering, a sacrifice made by fire unto YHWH, and their sin offering before YHWH, for their ignorance:

26 And it shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel, and the stranger that sojourneth among them; seeing all the people were in ignorance.

27 And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of the first year for a sin offering.

28 And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before YHWH, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.

29 Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.

30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth YHWH; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Nu. 15: 24 - 30

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.

17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Ps. 51: 16, 17

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. Ps. 40: 6

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

6 Wherewith shall I come before YHWH, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old?

7 Will YHWH be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?

8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth YHWH require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Mi. 6: 6 - 8

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. Hos. 6: 6

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Intention sin is another creature. When one sins intentionally, he needs to work it out with YHWH. Like with Moses and Aaron, all sins are not addressed by offerings and sacrifices. The accidental infraction needs to be dealt with. But intentional sin is not forgiven by the sheding of anothers blood. The people are asked to deal with their sin and not trust in a sacrifice.

...Many people misunderstand this point. There is no requirement for an offering to be given for intentional sin. But sincerity and a contrite heart help very much, if the sin is deliberate. No one can buy themselves out of their transgressions. Not even Moses or Aaron, who were not allowed to make any offering to get past their sin of making themselves the deliverers of YHWH's people, by refusing to santify the name of YHWH. {the sin of the NT and its writers} It is like the only book that is without the Name of YHWH in it. This book is the book of Esther, that details a plan to destroy all GD's people. Perhaps it is a warning of the "NT" which yeilds little to the JEWish people. If Moses and Aaron are not allowed to cross over into the promised land, you know that their sin must be very bad.

....Michael

Matthew23

01-15-2003, 09:59 AM

Where do we draw the line between an unintentional sin and sin that is intentional? Or better yet, where does YHWH draw the line?

And why does David also say: "Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean"? Ps.51:7

Thummim

01-15-2003, 11:38 AM

...Matt, the purge me with hyssup line has nothing to do with sin. It refers to Numbers chap. 19, where the rules of cleansing from death are found. Hyssup is one of the ingredients used. Davids son by Uriah's wife dies and David is defiled by death. This is seen in the heading of Ps. 51, when David fathers a child by Bathsheba which YHWH kills.

...The parallel story is II Sam. chapter 12. Nathan tells David of a rich man who steals a poor mans lamb. David becomes very angry and decides that this rich man should die. Then Nathan tells David that he is the rich man and the lamb is Uriahs wife. Later David fathers the child by Bathsheba, who is born sickly and dies in his presence. That requires cleansing from having touched death.

...Any offering given to YHWH may either be excepted by him, or he may refuse it. These offerings really are more for YHWH then his people. There is a connection between the people and their GD. This connection is addressed with these offerings. An unintentional sin is still a sin to an Eloheem whose name you are linked to. {See Nu. 6: 27, Mal. 2: 1, 2} The blessing of this people requires this "Linking" of names. Without GD's Name, a righteous offering cannot be made. It is Hashem that is being served and this Name that the temple is built for. It is always better to be connected to your Eloheem. This is the line of Shem {the Name} "of Noah's son" that leads to the name of GD. "the enterprise of Moses" (ie.) "what is your name?"

...Unintended sin is not contemplated by the sinner. It is not a sin of the soul. These sins are unavoidable, but still touch YHWH. Holiness is like the rings of an onion. These rings surround YHWH, requiring a priest to become holier and holier as he nears YHWH. One of the worst sins that YHWH hates is competition with other gods. Hashem is treated like a family name. The people are refered to as YHWH's wife or as children to their Eloheem. The offerings are not the center of this faith. The center is YHWH's Name.

...Then along came christianity and changed everything and put the Levitical offerings at the center. But those offerings do not yeild life. That requires the Name of YHWH.

....Michael

Matthew23

01-15-2003, 06:55 PM

Give me some examples of each kind of sin... unintentional vs. intentional.

...the Hyssop part has nothing to do with sin? I beg to differ. The whole 51st Psalm is all about SIN and MERCY. When David was with Bath-sheba, was it not a sin? Was it intetional or unintentional?

simchat_torah

01-15-2003, 10:52 PM

Shalom Matthew,

Thummim is correct that the line in Tehillim (psalms) 51 is in fact a purification from touching that of a dead body. Dovid obviously was defiled by the death of his son.

Yes, he did commit a sin with Bathsheba.
Yes he does repent from that sin in Tehillim 51.
Yet his cry to cleanse with hyssop is an obvious refrence to Torah's purification of being defiled by death.

"Where do we draw the line between an unintentional sin and sin that is intentional?"

Two sources can tell us the answer...

1) HaShem alone makes this distinction.

and others may prescribe to the idea that:

2) Halacha will tell us the difference.

Halachic interpretation on this matter is quite complicated, however, I lean towards the first theory.

The Torah does in fact make a point to discuss both types of sin. It gives two different types of cleansing, sacrafices, and atonement for each category of sin.

We can discuss this in a seperate thread however, because this topic alone would take pages upon pages to fully explain.

Shalom,
Yafet.

Valid Name

01-16-2003, 04:08 AM

Good Morning,

This comes to mind...

John 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

However I have to run...

Valid Name

Matthew23

01-17-2003, 08:03 PM

Nowhere in the account of David in IISamuel 11 & 12 is it stated that he came in contact with the dead body of his child. And notice that when David admits "I have sinned against YHWH" (12:13) it is before the child had even died (12:18).

Another thing... The heading of Psalm 51 states "When the prophet Nathan came to him after David had committed adultery with Bath-sheba." This was SEVEN DAYS before the child died (12:18)!

So in Psalm 51, David needed cleansing from his sin, not from touching a dead body. So if the hyssop spoken of in Ps.51:7 wasn't to be dipped in the "water of cleansing" (Num. 19), what was it supposed to be dipped in?

Thummim

01-19-2003, 09:57 AM

14 Deliver me from bloodguiltiness, O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Blood guiltiness is touching death to David. His child is dead because of him. If he had gone to war and slain his enemies, he would have been required to pass all of the things that would not burn, through the fire of cleansing. He himself, along with all his company would be required to undergo cleansing with hyssop and after seven days, to wash themselves and put on clean clothes.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

19 And do ye abide without the camp seven days: whosoever hath killed any person, and whosoever hath touched any slain, purify bothyourselves and your captives on the third day, and on the seventh day.

20 And purify all your raiment, and all that is made of skins, and all work of goats' hair, and all things made of wood.

21 And Eleazar the priest said unto the men of war which went to the battle, This is the ordinance of the law which YHWH commanded Moses;

22 Only the gold, and the silver, the brass, the iron, the tin, and the lead,

23 Every thing that may abide the fire, ye shall make it go through the fire, and it shall be clean: nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of separation: and all that abideth not the fire ye shall make go through the water.

24 And ye shall wash your clothes on the seventh day, and ye shall be clean, and afterward ye shall come into the camp. Num. 31: 19 - 24

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...David killed this child with his own sin. He allows seven days of mourning to pass and then washes himself according to the Levitical law. Hyssop is not enough. One must also "wash" himself on the seventh day, as the scripture says.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, --> and I shall be whiter than snow. Ps. 51: 7

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Both I, and sim_chat torah have told you rightly.

....Michael

Matthew23

01-19-2003, 01:19 PM

I don't see anything about waiting seven days...2 Samuel 12:19 David noticed that his servants were whispering among themselves and he realized the child was dead. "Is the child dead?" he asked.
"Yes," they replied, "he is dead."
20 Then David got up from the ground. After he had washed, put on lotions and changed his clothes, he went into the house of the LORD and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request they served him food, and he ate.

And you need to consider the context of the washing that David is talking about:Psalm 51:2 Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.

Is David full of sorrow because he has been defiled by touching death? No, he's sorry because of the sin he committed. He admitted his sin (2 Sam:13) even before he was told that the child would die (v.14).

So you both have told me your interpretation of the scripture in question, but are you sure that it is correct? :D

hyssop

01-19-2003, 01:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Previous Conversation:<HR>Hyssop: What father would punish his good child as a substitute for his wicked children?
Matthew23: For G-d so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Hyssop: We know there is a spiritual war taking place between our Creator and those spirit beings that are His enemies--our enemies. Y'shua died in order to deliver us from our slavery to sin.
Matthew23: ...the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and give his life as a ransom for many.<HR></blockquote>Matt, it is evident that you believe the "mainstream Christian" doctrine of a substitutional death of the Messiah "in your stead." You use Y'shua's death in the same manner as ancient Israel often used the sacrifices: as a payment to satisfy what seemed to be an obsession on the Creator's part to punish something (or someone) in order to forgive sin. <BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Matthew23<HR>YHWH accepts substitutes- He has even gone so far as to provide them for us...

Genesis 3:21
Genesis 22:13
Exodus 12:1-13
Exodus 28:38
Isaiah 53:5
Leviticus 1:4
Leviticus 16:21-22
Leviticus 17:11
Numbers 3:12
Numbers 3:41
Numbers 3:45
Numbers 8:18
I Kings 20:42<HR></blockquote>That's quite a long list of scriptures. Until one takes a look at them, it might seem that you've got a lot of evidence to support the substitutional death of the innocent in place of the guilty. However, upon inspection, I think that most would see that the majority of these scriptures have nothing to do with punishing the innocent for the sins of the guilty. In fact, Hashem is pretty clear about who He will punish:<BLOCKQUOTE>Exo 32 KJV<HR>[30] And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the L~RD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin. [31] And Moses returned unto the L~RD, and said, Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them gods of gold. [32] Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written. [33] And the L~RD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.<HR></blockquote><BLOCKQUOTE>Ezek 14 KJV<HR>[13] Son of man, when the land sinneth against me by trespassing grievously, then will I stretch out mine hand upon it, and will break the staff of the bread thereof, and will send famine upon it, and will cut off man and beast from it: [14] Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the L~rd G~D.<HR></blockquote><BLOCKQUOTE>Ezek 18 KJV<HR>[19] Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. [20] The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.<HR></blockquote>Hashem will not accept an innocent substitute "in the sinner's stead." The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

So, what did Y'shua accomplish in His death? Well, He redeemed us. Fine. How does redemption work? The place to look for those answers is the scriptures:<BLOCKQUOTE>Exo 6:6 KJV<HR> Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the L~RD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments:<HR></blockquote>Hashem told Moses that He was going to redeem Israel from out of Egypt. And, when He first mentioned the redemption of the firstborn to Moses, He said:<BLOCKQUOTE>Exo 13 KJV<HR>[13] And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem. [14] And it shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him, By strength of hand the L~RD brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage:<HR></blockquote>So, what is Egypt? What is this house of bondage from which Y'shua is redeeming us? Your redemption, Matt, is from a punishment, is it not?<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Matthew23<HR>from what {did Y'shua ransom us}? DEATH
who did we owe? YHWH
for what? UNRIGHTEOUSNESS
who did He pay? YHWH
with what? HIS LIFE<HR></blockquote>That's not what I consider the "shadow" given to us in Exodus. Hashem is in the process of bringing us out of sin, out of slavery to sin. The traditional view of Y'shua's redemption is that Hashem gave Y'shua to us so that we could pay Hashem the debt of punishment that we owed Him for our sin. In Y'shua, Hashem now has someone to punish. As long as He can "vent" His anger on someone, He's happy. Come on. Does this really make sense?

Thummim

01-19-2003, 04:06 PM

...Matt,

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Gen. 2: 17

...Did Adam touch death on the day that he ate of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil? Or did GD lie? I believe that when David confessed his bloodguiltiness, he also confessed that he had touched death as well. David himself declared that he was guilty of sin worthy of death. Didn't he also touch death when he declared, ...

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

4 And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.

5 And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As YHWH liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Does YHWH live {as David declares that he does} and did David execute himself by his own words? Who alone can anole his death warrent? He has touched death, for YHWH has already decreed that the child will die. David has already killed this child, though it is not yet in the grave. The child is still as dead as either Adam or Eve were when they ate of the forbidden fruit. They both died when YHWH declared them dead at their transgression. Their bodies still hadn't been put in the grave yet, but they were already dead. And though Adam, Eve, and David all touched death at their appointed times, they went to the grave some time later, David's own death sentence being commuted by YHWH. {II Sam. 12: 13} Hyssop belongs only to a narrow body of Levitical laws dealing with ritual cleansing. The offerings and sacrifices belong to unintentional sin, apart from the offerings given to YHWH as gifts.

...Likely, sim_chat torah could give you some talmudic backing for the above argument. The talmud however, is not my strength.

....Michael

hyssop

01-19-2003, 05:29 PM

Michael,

Hashem created the seven-day week to teach us about His plan for man. I believe that each day in the physical week represents a thousand-year "day" in Hashem's plan. For example, the seventh day (Shabbat) is the Day of the L~rd or L~rd's Day, a thousand-year period when Messiah will rule.

Hashem told Adam: "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (Gen 2:17 KJV)." When Adam ate of the tree, he was destined to die on the first day of the seven-thousand year plan. Adam did not see Day Two; he died at the age of nine hundred and thirty (Gen 5:5).

Thummim

01-20-2003, 10:09 AM

...Hyssop, we both have our own bridge to cross this river of confusion. {Adam dieing on the day of his sin} I believe that Adam, and his wife died when YHWH created death. {when death could first be touched} The world wasn't created in 6000 of our years. This is the danger of counting out creation in our own years. The knowledge that we gained from Adams sin, shows us that this is wrong. We know how to measure the heavens like YHWH. The count comes out wrong, when we do it right. Could you believe that the answer is counted in the billions of years?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Psalm of Moses

12 So teach us to number {count} our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.

13 Return, O YHWH, how long? and let it repent thee concerning thy servants. Ps. 90: 12, 13

....Michael

Matthew23

01-20-2003, 03:15 PM

You guys are gangin' up on me! :) Give me some time, I'll try to answer as much as I can. I'm not a bible whiz by any means, but I think I can get the needed (correct:D ) responses posted before too long...

Matthew23

01-20-2003, 04:00 PM

originally posted by Hyssop
That's quite a long list of scriptures. Until one takes a look at them, it might seem that you've got a lot of evidence to support the substitutional death of the innocent in place of the guilty. However, upon inspection, I think that most would see that the majority of these scriptures have nothing to do with punishing the innocent for the sins of the guilty.

Fair enough, but what about the “minority”?

Now, do you not believe that Yeshuah ransomed us from DEATH?… if not then explain this:
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

I believe that the sinner will be punished for his own sins. That is justice. Is YHWH a just God? Yes. He is the judge who decides if we are guilty or not. He is the judge who will sentence us. We are all guilty of sin, and our sentence is death (Romans 3:10, Psalm 14:3). How is it then, that we can be “saved” from this penalty that we deserve due to our unrighteousness?

Ephesians 2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast.

Romans 3:20-25 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for ALL have ainned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his BLOOD. He did this to demonstrate JUSTICE...

simchat_torah

01-20-2003, 07:09 PM

Shalom All,

I will try to bring some Rabbinical quotes later (possibly before the weekend?) concerning substitutional sacrafices. It most definately is a Jewish concept.

-Yafet.

Matthew23

01-21-2003, 06:37 PM

Thummim,

I would actually like to hear what the Talmud says about this topic. I have been reading a book called How Firm a Foundation by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein, which tells "what one should know about Jews and Judaism". So, I have just begun to learn about such things as "Talmud" and "mitzvah". I have a very shallow understanding of Judaism, but through reading the book and talking with you, I'm sure I'll get "schooled" more than I bargained for:). Judaism is very interesting to me now, after coming to the realization that Christianity has been, after all, a Jewish movement (hope you don't mind me saying so).

Thummim

01-22-2003, 09:49 AM

...Matt, let me leave the talmud to sim_chat torah. We can both learn from him, the thinking of the rabbis. Arguing from the talmud would leave my feet on quicksand. I do hear the talmud being quoted more and more often. Perhaps one day, we will learn it as we now learn from the three books of the tanakh. Who knows what YHWH has in store for us?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:

12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.

23 But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel.

24 They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine. Isa. 29: 11, 12; 23, 24

....Michael

Matthew23

01-22-2003, 06:43 PM

The Mormons claim those verses (Isaiah 29:11,12) to be a prophesy concerning the Book of Mormon. I'm blown away by Mormonism... Do you know any Mormons?

Thummim

01-23-2003, 10:26 AM

...Matt, I've conversed with Mormons, but but find little in the way of a blessing to the JEWish people in their faith. The thieves all have their day. But doesn't it have to be JEWish? The problem is that too few books of faith were written to satisfy all men. So those that exists have to do double duty. What gets me, is that the people who wrote the most revered book, get the shaft in most of these faiths. But if the letters of the Name of GD really come from the name of the tribe of Judah, {omiting the fourth letter} all theives will again have their day. I do possess a copy of the book of Mormon. But without faith in the author, one cannot have faith in what he writes.

....Michael

hyssop

01-27-2003, 03:29 AM

I sincerely doubt that the Jews originated the idea of substitutional sacrifice. It seems that sacrificing the innocent (virgins to the volcano god, for example) "in the stead of" the guilty has been around forever.

I will agree that substitutional sacrifice has certainly been observed by the Jewish people. The practice, however, was blasted by the prophets. Their message from Hashem was: "Your substitutional sacrifices are an abomination. Instead, do what I tell you to do."

Matthew23

01-27-2003, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by hyssop
I will agree that substitutional sacrifice has certainly been observed by the Jewish people. The practice, however, was blasted by the prophets. Their message from Hashem was: "Your substitutional sacrifices are an abomination. Instead, do what I tell you to do."

Hyssop, if you don't mind, give me some scripture references so I can check it out.

Matt

hyssop

01-27-2003, 05:34 PM

One example that is pretty much to the point:<BLOCKQUOTE>Micah 6 KJV<HR>[6] Wherewith shall I come before the L~RD, and bow myself before the high G~d? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? [7] Will the L~RD be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? [8] He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the L~RD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy G~d?<HR></blockquote>

Matthew23

01-28-2003, 05:38 PM

His desire is that we act justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with Him. If we don't, then we are required to make an offering. If we are constantly making offering after offering for the sins committed, then we haven't acted justly, loved mercy, and walked humbly with Him. Yes, YHWH is pleased with us when we act the way He wants us to...

It is not His desire that we make a sin offering- because that means we haven't acted according to His word.

Matt

Thummim

01-29-2003, 09:45 AM

...Matt, do you make an offering for your unintentional sins, or do the priests? What do you do about your intentional sins, since there is no offering for them?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

29 Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.

30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, {deliberately} whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth YHWH; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

31 Because he hath despised the word of YHWH, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him. Nu. 15: 29 - 31

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. Ps. 51: 16

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

....Michael

Matthew23

02-01-2003, 05:48 AM

Originally posted by Michael
...Matt, do you make an offering for your unintentional sins, or do the priests? What do you do about your intentional sins, since there is no offering for them?

If I sin intentionally, how sorry would I be afterwards? How sorry is someone who commits premeditated murder as opposed to the person who murders someone when he's in a moment of rage? I may be stretching it here, but I think that's the issue that Numbers 15:29-31 is dealing with. The sinner that isn't sorry cannot be forgiven, so a sacrifice wouldn't do him any good. That would be a sacrifice like those referred to in Micah 6:6-8. But the sinner that has a broken and a contrite heart- he will be forgiven, provided he offers a sacrifice as commanded by the Levitical law.

Once the sinner described in Num. 15:29-31 is cut off from his people, will he ever have a chance to come back? Is it possible for him to ever be forgiven?

Matt

hyssop

02-01-2003, 07:35 AM

Matt:

Hashem is not pleased with any sacrifice . . . it's the broken and contrite heart that he's looking for.<BLOCKQUOTE>Psalm 51 KJV<HR>[16] For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [17] The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
<HR></blockquote>So, if anyone tells you that you can sacrifice something "in your place" to make Him happy with you, you're being misled.

Matthew23

02-01-2003, 03:35 PM

Check these out when you get a few minutes...
Gen. 8:20-21
Exo. 29:18,25,41
Lev.1:9,13,17
Lev. 2:2,9,12

I can go on, there are more examples of how the offering made by fire is a "pleasing aroma" to YHWH.

originally posted by Hyssop
Hashem is not pleased with any sacrifice . . . it's the broken and contrite heart that he's looking for.
The offering and the broken and contrite heart are what he's looking for.

It is the unrepentent heart that displeases Him; makes the sacrifice useless...
Leviticus 26:14-31
14 " 'But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands, 15 and if you reject my decrees and abhor my laws and fail to carry out all my commands and so violate my covenant, 16 then I will do this to you: I will bring upon you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and drain away your life. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.
18 " 'If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over. 19 I will break down your stubborn pride and make the sky above you like iron and the ground beneath you like bronze. 20 Your strength will be spent in vain, because your soil will not yield its crops, nor will the trees of the land yield their fruit.
21 " 'If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22 I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted.
23 " 'If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me, 24 I myself will be hostile toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over. 25 And I will bring the sword upon you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands. 26 When I cut off your supply of bread, ten women will be able to bake your bread in one oven, and they will dole out the bread by weight. You will eat, but you will not be satisfied.
27 " 'If in spite of this you still do not listen to me but continue to be hostile toward me, 28 then in my anger I will be hostile toward you, and I myself will punish you for your sins seven times over. 29 You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters. 30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies on the lifeless forms of your idols, and I will abhor you. 31 I will turn your cities into ruins and lay waste your sanctuaries, and I will take no delight in the pleasing aroma of your offerings.

If YHWH does not desire sacrifice, then why did He command moses to do so in the first place?

Matt

hyssop

02-01-2003, 11:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>Matthew23<HR>If YHWH does not desire sacrifice, then why did He command moses to do so in the first place?<HR></blockquote>Your logic is ill founded. Just because Hashem commands that one do something doesn't necessarily mean that He enjoys it. Hashem commands the death of the wicked and, yet, He says:<BLOCKQUOTE>Ezek 33:11 KJV<HR> Say unto them, As I live, saith the L~rd G~D, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?<HR></blockquote>If Hashem is not pleased with the death of the wicked, why does He command it? He wants the wicked to see that there is a consequence to sin. For that same reason, He commanded sacrifice. He wanted the individual to see that, as a result of their sin, an innocent animal died. What should the sinner logically do, when they see what their sin has caused? The sinner should repent (change); they should move away from sin. Instead, many get the idea that Hashem is some bloodthirsty being who can be satisfied by the sacrifice itself. He commands sacrifice, but He does not want sacrifice. Rather, He desires that the sinner stop sinning.

Matthew23

02-02-2003, 10:49 AM

Hyssop,

I respect you because you have zeal for G-d. But I can not at this time agree with your views on this subject. I must say, I have learned a great deal about YHWH's word since I have been talking with you all here.
Maybe we ought to try discussing something that we agree upon (or something else that we don't :)). Do you have any favorite books of the bible? Maybe there is a certain subject therein that you would like to talk about...

Matt

hyssop

02-02-2003, 03:49 PM

Matt,

I respect you, too. I know how difficult it is to really see past substitutionalism; I've been there. I also think that it may be time to move on to other topics.

I'll think about a subject for another thread. If you come up with one, blast it on out there. :D

Peace.

Thummim

02-03-2003, 07:13 PM

...Matt, can you tell me what sacrifice "Jesus" is fulfilling, and to what consequence? How do we get any sort of a sacrifice for sin without using an altar and fire? Paul believes that their is no remission of sin without the shedding of blood. But YHWH rutinely forgives sin without bloodshed, given that there is no sacrifice for intentional sin to be found in the torah. To get substitutionalism down without pinpointing which sacrifice that we are talking about, can only cause confusion. Show me a parallel sacrifice in the tanakh that has anything to do with sin. I really think that believing that an offering can be "fulfilled", is misleading. "Jesus" does a poor job of fulfilling any sacrifice that exits in the torah. It seems to me, that reading from the torah that there is no sacrifice for intentional sin, {Nu. 15: 30} just slips by everybody. Any reading of the torah will show you that a passover lamb is not a sin offering, seeing that all sin offerings are always required with its slaughter. {Nu. 28: 16 - 25} This brings up this question, "If "Jesus" is to be taken for a passover lamb, where are the sin offerings that are required with the passover lambs use, to be seen at the crucifixion of {Jesus}"? Can you make a case that Israel was sinless when they left Egypt, heading for the promised land?

....Michael

Matthew23

02-03-2003, 07:59 PM

Michael, you always ask the best questions. Believe me, you've got me thinking; even had me up late some nights. I'll be thinking about these things that you've asked. I don't know all the answers, but I'm eager to know what they are... for the livelihood of my own faith...I'll be searching. I hope I never stop.

Obviously, you care about me enough to share with me what you believe to be the truth. I appreciate that.

Matt-

sometimes I have to ask myself: "What do i love more- my God...
or my religion?"

Matthew23

02-05-2003, 05:19 PM

Michael,

When you get some spare time, would you do me a favor...? Read the book of Hebrews and let me know what you think. It deals a lot with Yeshua's role in the levitical law.

Matt

Thummim

02-06-2003, 11:46 AM

...Matt, Paul rests most of his faith upon a single scripture of Psalms. He believes that "Jesus" is the priest in the "order of Melchizedek". That he places above the torah, the book of Psalms, is evident in his premise of a "fulfilled law". Take Psalms 110 from him, and his whole faith falls apart.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: Heb. 10: 11

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...To Paul, the Levitical priesthood of Aaron could not remove sin perpetually by any offering made, seeing that every offering was always renewed, and so they were only a shadow of what was to come. He believed that everlasting righteousness had to come to fulfill scripture. {though not ceeded to all the JEWish people in his own faith} So he needed a sacrifice to accomplish this. He believes that there can be no atonement for sin without the shedding of blood. Since the priesthood of Psalms 110 belongs to the tribe of Judah, and the Priesthood of Aaron does not remediate sin in any perminant way, this priest of the Psalms is to be a permanent answer to sin.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

...Here Paul concludes that the offerings of the Levitical priesthood are now {with the sacrifice of "Jesus"}, no longer valid as a way of reconciling our transgressions against YHWH. But we both know that these offerings were never for the intentional sins of the people. They were to keep the Name of YHWH clean. The Place were the Name of YHWH resides is always kept clean. Its holiness is maintained through the offerings of the Levitical priesthood. Intentional seen is always seen as the domain of YHWH, in its reconciling. YHWH may forgive a sin or he may hold the offenders accountable until the third or fourth generation passes. That is the law of the torah. Nowhere does it say in Psalms, that this priest like Melchizedek will be able to forgive sin, as YHWH already does. There is no such authority given to this priest. He is simply to await GD's overpowering of his enemies. Did Melchizedek ever forgive a sin? If Melchezidek cannot forgive a sin, {there is no evidence of him doing so} why should "Jesus" be able to? The Psalmist creates a throne for his Priest - King to sit in. This is what his words are all about. But "Jesus" sits in no such throne. The Psalmist is not talking about establishing a throne in the heavens. He's saying to David, sit at my right hand {in his power} until he reigns over his enemies {who dwell upon the earth}. But Paul loves to stretch things a bit. Paul gets very little support from the torah in establishing his faith. Thus he needs to circumvent its laws and teachings with his own. If YHWH can already forgive an intentional sin, why must he create a new method to do so? Why, when there has never been an offering for intentional sin, must YHWH create one? Why does Paul state that Abraham had faith that YHWH can raise Isaac up from the dead? {Heb. 11: 19} David didn't believe this of YHWH and his own son. {II Sam. 12: 23} I think that Abraham was only being obedient. He was willing to obey his Eloheem to this extent. {a burnt offering of his most precious possession} But YHWH was unwilling to except the sacrifice of Isaac. YHWH can suggest killing a promised people {the seed of Isaac} and replaceing them with another people. Then too, Moses did intercede for his people as there intercessor {unlike "Jesus" who didn't, as Isa. 53 required him to do} Wouldn't this shadow more closely what Abraham did? {Ex. 22: 10} The faith of the NT is gentile in nature, and is easily picked apart. Now what will YHWH need with the spilling of innocent blood? Does that really seem like something that YHWH would require? YHWH spills the blood of those who curse his Name or his people. And of his people, he curses those who seek another god or transgress his laws. {YHWH's own already existing forgiveness of the transgressors being reckoned in} Paul is easy to argue with. He is not so understanding in the knowledge of YHWH. He needs to walk away from the faith of his forefathers to embrace his new faith.

....Michael

Matthew23

02-08-2003, 08:17 AM

Why doesn't the Jewish community offer sacrifices any more? When did it stop? Why did it stop?

simchat_torah

02-09-2003, 04:38 AM

When the temple was destroyed they stopped.

They do not continue beause HaShem declared that they are only to be done in the place of his choosing. Unfortunately right now, there is a mosk on top of the temple grounds. Thus the place of his choosing is temporarily unavailable.

Matthew23

02-09-2003, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by simchat_torah
HaShem declared that they are only to be done in the place of his choosing.

Where in His word can I find that?

simchat_torah

02-09-2003, 05:40 PM

Ultimately, this can be answered by one simple verse:

Duet. 16:2
"2Your Passover sacrifice may be from either the flock or the herd, and it must be sacrificed to the L-RD your G-d at the place he chooses for his name to be honored."

Here he explicitly states that the sacrafice must be done in the place of he chooses. Adonai also commanded Israel to keep the feasts in one place only, the place of His choosing (Deuteronomy 12:5).

The tabernacle/temple was the appointed place where the atoning sacrifices were to be offered, and they were to be offered there and no where else. Israel was to have but one temple to reflect the fact that there is only one G-d (Deuteronomy 12:5,13,14; 16:5,6), and to avoid the corruption of their worship (1 Kings 12:26-33). The tabernacle’s portable nature was suited to the nomadic period of Israel’s forty years of wilderness wandering, and the early, unsettled years in the promised land. Later, when the nation was fully settled in the land, the L-rd Himself chose Jerusalem as the location for the permanent temple (1 Kings 8:44,48; 11:13,32,36; 14:21; Psalm 78:68-70).

Jerusalem is the place that HaShem chose to place his name upon, and to forever stamp his reputation among men with his promises concerning its destiny. ( I Kings 11:36 And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light always before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there. ) ( II Kings 2:7 reiterates this same idea and includes the comment that his name is connected to Jerusalem ) II Chronicles 6:6 But I ( G-d ) have chosen Jerusalem, that my name might be there; and have chosen David to be over my people Israel. Jerusalem was the city chosen by G-d for Israel to build his tabernacle.

Zechariah 1:14 reveals that HaShem is jealous for Jerusalem, and in chapter 2:12 indicates that when G-d brings his people back and plants them in their own land; that he will yet choose Jerusalem again.

Although G-d does not require a building or a dwelling place, for He is Spirit, He, nevertheless, graciously agrees to appear "before His holy people in the place of his choosing." For this reason, Adonai called the Holy Temple of King Solomon "The House of My Glory" (Isa. 60:7)

Matthew23

02-10-2003, 07:13 PM

Thank you for pointing that out. That kind of puts a kink in the point that I was ready to make, but what about the commandment to keep the feasts and continue to give offerings "by an ordinance for ever" (Exodus 12:14,17,24; Numbers 18:8)? It seems that the Jewish people are in a sort of predicament: They have been commanded to make offerings unto YHWH- forever, but they don't have a place of His choosing available to do so. What I'm wondering is...

Since the destruction of the temple, have the views of substitutional sacrifice and atonement changed- perhaps because there is no way to sacrifice?

simchat_torah

02-10-2003, 08:33 PM

I know I had promised to bring in some rabbinical quotes concerning substatutional sacrafices, yet I haven't done that yet... busy busy busy.

Seems ever since I started this night job I haven't been on the internet as much as I would like to be... but hopefully that will change soon.

Anyway, aside from substatution, there are other ways that the Jews have developed to atone for sin... and it can be traced back to at least Daniel if not further.

Tzaddakah ---> righteous acts.
Teshuvah ---> repentance.
T'philah ---> prayer.

Tzaddakah, Teshuvah, and T'philah...

These are seen as coverings for unintentional sin... however, there remains no sacrafice for intentional sin in Judaism.

Shalom Mishpochah.
-Yafet.

simchat_torah

02-10-2003, 08:38 PM

I suppose what I forgot to mention is that there were other times that the Jews were without a temple. The past 2k years are not unique in that aspect. Many christians turn to that and make very odd doctrines out of the lack of a temple, but it was even prophesied that there would be a third temple. Essentially, all of the rantings I have heard from christianity about the Jews lacking a temple (currently) only fuel replacement theology.

The temple has been destoyed before, this is not unique. The Jews did come up with replacements for the sacrafices...

In place of the 3 daily sacrafices, Daniel prayed prayed, facing the temple, and specifically during the three times a sacrafice was to be offered. As well, there are many verses that indicate HaShem desires righteousness over sacrafices none the less, and here is where Tzaddakah comes in.

Teshuvah is turning from our unrighteous acts, and then turning our hearts and minds towards performing Tzaddakah.

Shalom Mishpochah.
-Yafet.

Matthew23

04-12-2003, 04:06 PM

If the Jewish people no longer perform sacrifices because the Temple is gone, then why do they continue to observe the Feasts of YHWH?Deuteronomy 16...
1 Observe the month of Abib and celebrate the Passover of YHWH your G-d, because in the month of Abib he brought you out of Egypt by night. 2 Sacrifice as the Passover to YHWH your G-d an animal from your flock or herd at the place YHWH will choose as a dwelling for his Name...
5 You must not sacrifice the Passover in any town YHWH your G-d gives you 6 except in the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name. There you must sacrifice the Passover in the evening, when the sun goes down, on the anniversary of your departure from Egypt...

10 Then celebrate the Feast of Weeks to YHWH your G-d by giving a freewill offering in proportion to the blessings YHWH your G-d has given you. 11 And rejoice before YHWH your G-d at the place he will choose as a dwelling for his Name...

13 Celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles for seven days after you have gathered the produce of your threshing floor and your winepress... 15 For seven days celebrate the Feast to YHWH your G-d at the place YHWH will choose.

16 Three times a year all your men must appear before YHWH your G-d at the place he will choose: at the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabernacles. Wouldn't the same logic apply to the Feasts as it would to the offerings?

This is what I believe...

There is fulfillment of the sacrifices and the Feasts- in Yeshua and in His body, the church. There is a "spiritual" way in which believers in Messiah keep the Feasts of YHWH. Just as in the Levitical law there were "types and shadows" of what would come, so there are also "types and shadows" in the Feasts of YHWH. There's no way we can keep the Feasts literally as described in the Torah if we can't even offer the sacrifices we are commanded to offer to go along with the Feasts! I believe though, that the Feasts can be kept in spiritual ways.

There are many ways in which the Feasts have been fulfilled (and also some ways in which they are yet to be fulfilled). To discuss this in detail would require a new thread or threads. If anyone shows enough interest (for the activity here is very low), I'd love to discuss the ways in which the Feasts have been, and will be, fulfilled. I have much to learn in this area, so I'd love to discuss this with someone, in order for myself (and others) to come to a better understanding of YHWH's word.

sincerely,
matt (i just want to know Him better tomorrow than i do today)