PDA

View Full Version : Discussion The Shadows Still Teach



manichunter
Apr 25th 2009, 02:42 PM
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Col 2:16-17)

I see this Scripture repeated alot, but there has always been one thing that baffles me in all my years of conversing with believers. Most do not understand or comprehend the Shadows of things to come. Yes Jesus came and is coming back. But how can one understand the multiple things and aspects of Jesus without being made witness to the revelations the shadows reveal about the character and works of Jesus.

Relating to Jesus is no different than any other relationship. It is a relationship that takes time to learn and relate to a person. Jesus did not give us all the shadows for us to just throw away, but learn. What is a burnt offering and how is it applicable to Jesus and believers? What about the grades of the burnt offering? What does the bull, lamb, goat, and turtle dove teach me? Yahweh did not just give the grades without reason of purpose. I am to learn and know that the bull reveals my manner of work ethic on my mutual yoke with Yeshua.

For example-
Jesus is said to be our sin offering and yes He is. However, He is also our burnt, meat, peace, red heifer, and trepass offering as well. Each one of these offerings provided a different work in the Yahweh's satisfaction being met. They also set examples of what is expected of our conduct as we immitate Jesus in our service towards Yahweh and others.

It is not that we can be the shadows or accomplish anything with the ritual. It is the spiritual principles the shadows reveal that we have to come to know and immulate. We are told to deny ourselves, pick up our own cross, and follow Jesus. Learning the shadows is the only means forward.

Yes Jesus is the light, but a blinding light to those who have not yet learned their Lord.

How so much power has been lost from Christianity because the shadows have been stripped away. Now we have the light indeed, but do not comprehend it. What we are left with is religion without power.

Tomlane
Apr 25th 2009, 03:56 PM
manichunter (http://bibleforums.org/member.php?u=28381), good explanation. That gave me a thought. For those who advocate in substituting a wafer or bread and wine for the real deal that hung on the cross, why don't they want to use a burnt wafer or burnt bread for the body? I beleive that is a very ligimate question. Personally, I would rather continue to stick with the real Christ and His spiritual baptism that put me in his church and continue to have Him as my sabbath. In other words instead of having any of the shadows for my life why settle for the temperary when we can have the real thing that is lasting? Isn't communion done once a week, a very temprary situation and evidendly one that doesn't have lasting vaule as the real thing that casts the shadows in the first place. If it had lasting value it wouldn't need doing every week would it?

Thanks again Manichunter, Tomlane

-SEEKING-
Apr 25th 2009, 05:03 PM
The only thing that I learn from shadows is that sooner or later, the actual object casting that shadow will be upon me. So the object is what is "real" not the shadow it casts. Just my 2 cents.

manichunter
Apr 25th 2009, 05:14 PM
The only thing that I learn from shadows is that sooner or later, the actual object casting that shadow will be upon me. So the object is what is "real" not the shadow it casts. Just my 2 cents.

Everything starts with learning the basics, building from the foundation, and who starts learning the principles of algebra without basic math being learned first.

We still know in part and look through a glass dimly. Well these things help with our limited vision and understanding concerning things so much greater than our capabilities to reason

How can you learn Jesus. Either in person, by experience, or by His word. Well these shadows are integrated into His word.

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 26th 2009, 02:06 AM
I know what you're saying here, and I agree. This is a good post.

Paul describes both the law, and everything to do with it, as a shadow of things to come in the book of Hebrews, too:

Heb. 8:4,5 For if He were here on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer up gifts according to the law, who serve the copy and the shadow of the heavenly things as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle.......

Heb. 10:1 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they continually offer year by year, make those who approach perfect

I find the first verse particularly interesting -- the earthly priests served the shadow of heavenly things, while Jesus (our heavenly High Priest) served heavenly things themselves. We see that the shadow of heavenly things was the law.

Something I find really interesting -- the philosopher Plato used the analogy of shadows in his Republic. He gave an illustration about people who lived in caves, who spent their entire lives chained and watching shadows. This was the only reality they ever saw, so they mistook the shadows for reality, not knowing that they were merely figments of a greater reality. Plato makes this statement:

"To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images."

I think that anyone in Paul's Greek audience would have been familiar with Plato's allegory. Plato pretty much says that the one who comes out of the cave, after spending all of his life watching shadows, would naturally appreciate the truth more -- but with the Jews, that did not happen. They were more content to remain in the cave, watching the shadows, and convincing themselves that this was truth.

The shadow that Paul is talking about here is basically the law, and everything having to do with it -- Holy days, sacrifices, and priests. Everything in the Old Testament points to Christ. The Bible says that Christ is a fulfillment of the law -- of the shadow, because it was His image that was creating the shadows.

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 05:49 AM
I know what you're saying here, and I agree. This is a good post.

Paul describes both the law, and everything to do with it, as a shadow of things to come in the book of Hebrews, too:

The shadow that Paul is talking about here is basically the law, and everything having to do with it -- Holy days, sacrifices, and priests. Everything in the Old Testament points to Christ. The Bible says that Christ is a fulfillment of the law -- of the shadow, because it was His image that was creating the shadows.


So if people comprehend the LIGHT and have no more use for the shadows, then they would be able to answer these questions?

How was Jesus our drink offering? When was the drink offering fulfiilled by Jesus in the NC? When was the first prophetic shadow cast of the drink offering about Jesus in the OC? How did Paul follow the example of Jesus by being a drink offering? In what way is the drink offering applicable to believers today?

BroRog
Apr 26th 2009, 06:19 AM
Paul is not commending the shadow when he says the substance belongs to Christ. It's the substance, not the shadow that we need.

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 06:43 AM
Paul is not commending the shadow when he says the substance belongs to Christ. It's the substance, not the shadow that we need.


I agree whole heartily, but however, tell me what this particular shadow taught you about Jesus and what you need and gained from Him. Paul knew and understood what the shadows actually pointed to in Jesus. Each pointed to different things about Jesus and his continuous ministry. For example, Jesus as our sin offering is not the same thing as Jesus as our Burnt Offering. So, then how is Jesus our burnt offering.

David2
Apr 26th 2009, 08:17 AM
The sin offering was expiatory in nature while the burnt offering was consecratory. One should remember first that all offerings were for a "saved" people. Although the nation of Israel were not all saved people, the nation as such belonged to God and in a "saved" relationship to Him. The offering that brought salvation to the nation was of course the lamb that was slain in Egypt and commemorated once a year at passover. Al other offerings were not for "salvation" but rather the removal of sin, sanctification and consecration.

The burnt offering was to commit oneself to the Lord and to restore your relationship with Him. We know today that no sacrifice could actually perform this task. These burnt offerings were just a shadow of the real once and for all offering at calvary that would not only attone for our sins, but also reconcile us to God. I would say that reconcilliation as brought about on the cross, was the fulfillment of the burnt offering.

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 01:20 PM
The sin offering was expiatory in nature while the burnt offering was consecratory. One should remember first that all offerings were for a "saved" people. Although the nation of Israel were not all saved people, the nation as such belonged to God and in a "saved" relationship to Him. The offering that brought salvation to the nation was of course the lamb that was slain in Egypt and commemorated once a year at passover. Al other offerings were not for "salvation" but rather the removal of sin, sanctification and consecration.

The burnt offering was to commit oneself to the Lord and to restore your relationship with Him. We know today that no sacrifice could actually perform this task. These burnt offerings were just a shadow of the real once and for all offering at calvary that would not only attone for our sins, but also reconcile us to God. I would say that reconcilliation as brought about on the cross, was the fulfillment of the burnt offering.

The burnt offering, meat offering, and peace offering were called sweet offerings that actually pleased Yahweh. They were not done to atone for sin. Yahweh actually comsumed them in whole or part along with the offerer as a type of communion and fellowship along with the priest who administered the sacrifice.

They were made to symbolized three different things in regard to Yahweh, the people, and the individual. They were not done in offering for sin, but symbolic of service and love.


The sin and trespass offerings were non-sweet offerings. Each grade of these offerings symbolized specific emblems of Yeshau's ministry towards us and the future expections of the saints who would follow Him in ministry.

The sin offerings where not consumed by anyone. They were thrown away after the sacrifice was made outside of the camp.

The sin offering was made in order for a person to appraoch Yahweh in the first place. One could not offer any other offering of a sweet nature unless he gave a sin offering first. The trespass offering was done in regard to specific offensives a person committed against others and Yahweh.

Firstfruits
Apr 26th 2009, 02:22 PM
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Col 2:16-17)

I see this Scripture repeated a lot, but there has always been one thing that baffles me in all my years of conversing with believers. Most do not understand or comprehend the Shadows of things to come. Yes Jesus came and is coming back. But how can one understand the multiple things and aspects of Jesus without being made witness to the revelations the shadows reveal about the character and works of Jesus.

Relating to Jesus is no different than any other relationship. It is a relationship that takes time to learn and relate to a person. Jesus did not give us all the shadows for us to just throw away, but learn. What is a burnt offering and how is it applicable to Jesus and believers? What about the grades of the burnt offering? What does the bull, lamb, goat, and turtle dove teach me? Yahweh did not just give the grades without reason of purpose. I am to learn and know that the bull reveals my manner of work ethic on my mutual yoke with Yeshua.

For example-
Jesus is said to be our sin offering and yes He is. However, He is also our burnt, meat, peace, red heifer, and trespass offering as well. Each one of these offerings provided a different work in the Yahweh's satisfaction being met. They also set examples of what is expected of our conduct as we imitate Jesus in our service towards Yahweh and others.

It is not that we can be the shadows or accomplish anything with the ritual. It is the spiritual principles the shadows reveal that we have to come to know and emulate. We are told to deny ourselves, pick up our own cross, and follow Jesus. Learning the shadows is the only means forward.

Yes Jesus is the light, but a blinding light to those who have not yet learned their Lord.

How so much power has been lost from Christianity because the shadows have been stripped away. Now we have the light indeed, but do not comprehend it. What we are left with is religion without power.

Heb 10:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

What therefore is the better hope?

Heb 6:18 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
Heb 6:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

1 Tim 1:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;

What therefore are you expecting the shadow to teach you since Christ has come?

Through the life of Christ according to the gospel of Christ do you not know Christ?

What is your hope?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Kahtar
Apr 26th 2009, 02:57 PM
Those who see no value in studying the shadows and types seemingly see no value in this verse either:
All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Timothy 3:16-17
What scripture was Paul referring to here? Certainly not the new testament.
How many here can honestly say they have a complete understanding of Christ? If you believe that is the case, then you have stopped learning, and thus stopped growing.
The shadows and types are rich with instruction and understanding, relevent for THIS day, and even though we have the shadow caster, we still do not see Him perfectly, but rather through a glass, darkly.
Seriously, how many of the diciples who were with Christ when He was on the earth fully understood Him?
There is a lot of stuff that Paul wrote that we think we understand, but really don't, because we don't have an understanding of where he was coming from. And the same is especially true of John.

BroRog
Apr 26th 2009, 05:14 PM
I agree whole heartily, but however, tell me what this particular shadow taught you about Jesus and what you need and gained from Him. Paul knew and understood what the shadows actually pointed to in Jesus. Each pointed to different things about Jesus and his continuous ministry. For example, Jesus as our sin offering is not the same thing as Jesus as our Burnt Offering. So, then how is Jesus our burnt offering.

I'm not sure what you are asking me. We don't have shadows any more.

Tomlane
Apr 26th 2009, 08:03 PM
BroRog, you made a good point to Manichunter. One thing I'm curious about do you know of any differences between a burnt offering and a sin offering. I thought the burnt offering Christ made was to satisfy God's demand for justice and that offering paid for our sins. But I never knew there is such a thing a sin offering since we get to choose wither we want to accept it the free gift. We can't accept the burnt offering because that one was made to God just as the burnt offerings of bulls and goats temporarily turned justice aside for sin when it was offered to God. So since God's permanent offering for sin has been made how it possible to have a sin offering? I've never read that one in the scriptures have you? If you can't explain it to me perhaps manichunter can. Thanks or maybe both of you can. Duh! lol

Tomlane

HisLeast
Apr 26th 2009, 08:09 PM
If types and shadows don't teach then how do we prove Christ was the Messiah of prophecy?

BroRog
Apr 26th 2009, 08:44 PM
If types and shadows don't teach then how do we prove Christ was the Messiah of prophecy?

God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high . . .

If I understand the point being made here, the author of Hebrews suggests that while God spoke to the fathers through prophets "in many portions and in many ways" he has spoken to us in his son. He gave the prophets visions, cryptic messages, and portions of the overall picture. But now, through Jesus, we have the entire clear picture of God's intent for mankind, his salvation, and our hope for eternal life. Jesus and the apostles explain it all in clear language that we can understand. The shadows only hinted at the object being represented, but now that we have the actual object, we no longer need the shadow.

In the Corinthian passage, Paul is contrasting a shadow with substance. The contrast is between a flat, black, outline of the truth, against a 3-dimensional, colored, full bodied truth. His point is, if we can look at the actual item, which allows us to see things the way they really are, why would we prefer to look at a shadow of it instead?

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 09:02 PM
Heb 10:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.

What therefore is the better hope?

Heb 6:18 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
Heb 6:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

1 Tim 1:1 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=1) Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;

What therefore are you expecting the shadow to teach you since Christ has come?

Through the life of Christ according to the gospel of Christ do you not know Christ?

What is your hope?

God bless you!

Firstfruits
I am not trying to be perfect by the shadows. The shadows teach me about Jesus. They are used to prove that Jesus is Messiah. And most importantly, they reveal His future works. Prophecies and types have yet to be fulfilled.

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 09:07 PM
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high . . .

If I understand the point being made here, the author of Hebrews suggests that while God spoke to the fathers through prophets "in many portions and in many ways" he has spoken to us in his son. He gave the prophets visions, cryptic messages, and portions of the overall picture. But now, through Jesus, we have the entire clear picture of God's intent for mankind, his salvation, and our hope for eternal life. Jesus and the apostles explain it all in clear language that we can understand. The shadows only hinted at the object being represented, but now that we have the actual object, we no longer need the shadow.

In the Corinthian passage, Paul is contrasting a shadow with substance. The contrast is between a flat, black, outline of the truth, against a 3-dimensional, colored, full bodied truth. His point is, if we can look at the actual item, which allows us to see things the way they really are, why would we prefer to look at a shadow of it instead?
\
How do you reconcile that Paul was the same apostle who say we only know in part now and that we see through a glass dimly now. Paul is the same one who says we have to learn Christ.

I look at a car engine as a non mechanic, that tells me nothing as to how to fix it or cause it if function without learning.

Do you learn how to be married or did you just now how to be married after you exchanged vows. No, you had to learn this new experience. It is the same with Jesus. We have to learn how to relate to Jesus. The Shadows as taught by the Holy Spirit are a short cut and a means to avoid undue hardship.

Eben
Apr 26th 2009, 09:25 PM
Paul warns us to leave the shadows alone and go forward to become mature in the Word and in the knowledge of the Word. To keep yourself busy with the shadows after you have come to the full understanding does not make sense. The same chapter Paul speaks about the shadows he first says:
Col 2:2 I do this in order that they may be filled with courage and may be drawn together in love, and so have the full wealth of assurance which true understanding brings. In this way they will know God's secret, which is Christ himself.
Col 2:3 He is the key that opens all the hidden treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge.
Col 2:4 I tell you, then, do not let anyone deceive you with false arguments, no matter how good they seem to be.
Col 2:5 For even though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, and I am glad as I see the resolute firmness with which you stand together in your faith in Christ.
Col 2:6 Since you have accepted Christ Jesus as Lord, live in union with him.
Col 2:7 Keep your roots deep in him, build your lives on him, and become stronger in your faith, as you were taught. And be filled with thanksgiving.
Col 2:8 See to it, then, that no one enslaves you by means of the worthless deceit of human wisdom, which comes from the teachings handed down by human beings and from the ruling spirits of the universe, and not from Christ.
Col 2:9 For the full content of divine nature lives in Christ, in his humanity,
Col 2:10 and you have been given full life in union with him. He is supreme over every spiritual ruler and authority.
Col 2:11 In union with Christ you were circumcised, not with the circumcision that is made by human beings, but with the circumcision made by Christ, which consists of being freed from the power of this sinful self.
Col 2:12 For when you were baptized, you were buried with Christ, and in baptism you were also raised with Christ through your faith in the active power of God, who raised him from death.
Col 2:13 You were at one time spiritually dead because of your sins and because you were Gentiles without the Law. But God has now brought you to life with Christ. God forgave us all our sins;
Col 2:14 he canceled the unfavorable record of our debts with its binding rules and did away with it completely by nailing it to the cross.
Col 2:15 And on that cross Christ freed himself from the power of the spiritual rulers and authorities; he made a public spectacle of them by leading them as captives in his victory procession.
Col 2:16 So let no one make rules about what you eat or drink or about holy days or the New Moon Festival or the Sabbath.
Col 2:17 All such things are only a shadow of things in the future; the reality is Christ.

The thing to remember is that Christ has done it. Past tense. Not you nor can you do anything. There is nothing more that you can do. To consider the shadows can only show you what Christ has already done for you, so to keep yourself busy with the shadows is to keep yourselv busy with the flesh. Ans Christ is now in the Spirit where we are with Him.
With Love In Christ.

Tomlane
Apr 26th 2009, 09:54 PM
BroRog and Eben both have given some beautiful truths that I got a joy out of reading. Shows a lot of maturity.

manichunter, asked BroRog,


How do you reconcile that Paul was the same apostle who say we only know in part now and that we see through a glass dimly now. Paul is the same one who says we have to learn Christ.

I have he confidence that BroRog or Eben can answer the question. So I'll look forward to your answers. I'm sure the answers will be the same as mine if I were going to answer it.

Tomlane

Firstfruits
Apr 26th 2009, 10:00 PM
I am not trying to be perfect by the shadows. The shadows teach me about Jesus. They are used to prove that Jesus is Messiah. And most importantly, they reveal His future works. Prophecies and types have yet to be fulfilled.

With regards to what you have said, according to the words of Christ, is that not the purpose of the Holy Spirit?

Jn 14:16 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=16) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 15:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

Can we not depend on the Holy spirit to do as Jesus said he would do?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Kahtar
Apr 26th 2009, 10:33 PM
Guess we might as well just throw that old testament out the window, seeing that since we have Christ we no longer need it.
While we're at it, we might as well throw out Paul's writings too, since he clearly is a liar, telling us that ALL scripture is good for doctrine and instruction in righteousness.
This is rediculous.:rolleyes:

Tomlane
Apr 26th 2009, 10:34 PM
Fristfruits made a good point manichunter, and the more I think about it a shadow is a very poor picture of someone for there is no detail only an outline and inside of the shadow obscures what it is bouncing off of. Not only do we have the Holy Spirit to teach us but we also have the spirit of truth and error to guide us and since Paul was given the job of exposing Christ and the church through the inspired word that gives us everything we need to be mature in Christ and to be complete in Him why would you want to settle for less unless you want to practice some of the ordinances?

The word says the shadows point us to Christ. Evidently it was't that complete because with the many prophesies fulfilled by Christ, the majority of Jews still failed to recognized Him even when He raised the dead and fed thousand. Why worship in the physical and get left out when we worship in spirit?

Tomlane

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 26th 2009, 10:40 PM
So if people comprehend the LIGHT and have no more use for the shadows, then they would be able to answer these questions?

Well, I'm not completely sure, but I'll give it a shot:


How was Jesus our drink offering? When was the drink offering fulfiilled by Jesus in the NC?

God's wrath was poured out upon Jesus when He was on the cross. Also, Jesus said "Father, if it be Your will, let this cup pass from Me." The cup of God's wrath.

Is it possible that God's wrath was the drink offering that was poured out upon Jesus, the burnt offering, when He was being sacrificed for all of our sins?



When was the first prophetic shadow cast of the drink offering about Jesus in the OC?

Exodus 29:40 And with the one lamb a tenth deal of flour mingled with the fourth part of an hin of beaten oil; and the fourth part of an hin of wine for a drink offering?

Again, we see the wine of God's wrath poured out upon Jesus, the sin offering


How did Paul follow the example of Jesus by being a drink offering?

Phil. 2:17 But even if I am being poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I rejoice, and I rejoice together with you all.

2 Tim. 4:6 For I am already being poured out, and the time of my departure is at hand.

Tomlane
Apr 26th 2009, 10:42 PM
Kahtar;2055965]Guess we might as well just throw that old testament out the window, seeing that since we have Christ we no longer need it.
While we're at it, we might as well throw out Paul's writings too, since he clearly is a liar, telling us that ALL scripture is good for doctrine and instruction in righteousness.
This is rediculous.:rolleyes:

If you were to read the scriptures with understanding you would know not everything is for today, and I know you are not so ignorant you would build an ark. If yo let me know and I'll recommend a good lumber supplier to you.

Here is what the scriptures say if you were to take the time to read them.

Romans 15:4 *For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

There are a lot of good scriptures throughout the book of John, Romans, Ephesians about salvation that you may want to read.

Tomlane

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 26th 2009, 10:50 PM
Why does everyone have to be so brutally disagreeable?

Tomlane
Apr 26th 2009, 10:52 PM
Well, I'm not completely sure, but I'll give it a shot:



God's wrath was poured out upon Jesus when He was on the cross. Also, Jesus said "Father, if it be Your will, let this cup pass from Me." The cup of God's wrath.

Is it possible that God's wrath was the drink offering that was poured out upon Jesus, the burnt offering, when He was being sacrificed for all of our sins?

Welder, I have alternative for you. How does this one sound in regards to Christ being a drink offering for everyone.

Matthew 5:6 *Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

John 4:14 *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.

John 6:35 *And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Revelation 7:17 *For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 21:6 *And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

How would that work for you?

Tomlane

HisLeast
Apr 26th 2009, 11:03 PM
Why does everyone have to be so brutally disagreeable?

I'm right, therefore I need not consider others.
Its the human condition. :mad:

-SEEKING-
Apr 26th 2009, 11:11 PM
http://www.time-less-image.com/images/ebaycomics/shadowpart1.jpg

The shadows, the shadows.

manichunter
Apr 26th 2009, 11:57 PM
Paul warns us to leave the shadows alone and go forward to become mature in the Word and in the knowledge of the Word. To keep yourself busy with the shadows after you have come to the full understanding does not make sense. The same chapter Paul speaks about the shadows he first says:
Col 2:2 I do this in order that they may be filled with courage and may be drawn together in love, and so have the full wealth of assurance which true understanding brings. In this way they will know God's secret, which is Christ himself.
Col 2:3 He is the key that opens all the hidden treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge.
Col 2:4 I tell you, then, do not let anyone deceive you with false arguments, no matter how good they seem to be.
Col 2:5 For even though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, and I am glad as I see the resolute firmness with which you stand together in your faith in Christ.
Col 2:6 Since you have accepted Christ Jesus as Lord, live in union with him.
Col 2:7 Keep your roots deep in him, build your lives on him, and become stronger in your faith, as you were taught. And be filled with thanksgiving.
Col 2:8 See to it, then, that no one enslaves you by means of the worthless deceit of human wisdom, which comes from the teachings handed down by human beings and from the ruling spirits of the universe, and not from Christ.
Col 2:9 For the full content of divine nature lives in Christ, in his humanity,
Col 2:10 and you have been given full life in union with him. He is supreme over every spiritual ruler and authority.
Col 2:11 In union with Christ you were circumcised, not with the circumcision that is made by human beings, but with the circumcision made by Christ, which consists of being freed from the power of this sinful self.
Col 2:12 For when you were baptized, you were buried with Christ, and in baptism you were also raised with Christ through your faith in the active power of God, who raised him from death.
Col 2:13 You were at one time spiritually dead because of your sins and because you were Gentiles without the Law. But God has now brought you to life with Christ. God forgave us all our sins;
Col 2:14 he canceled the unfavorable record of our debts with its binding rules and did away with it completely by nailing it to the cross.
Col 2:15 And on that cross Christ freed himself from the power of the spiritual rulers and authorities; he made a public spectacle of them by leading them as captives in his victory procession.
Col 2:16 So let no one make rules about what you eat or drink or about holy days or the New Moon Festival or the Sabbath.
Col 2:17 All such things are only a shadow of things in the future; the reality is Christ.

The thing to remember is that Christ has done it. Past tense. Not you nor can you do anything. There is nothing more that you can do. To consider the shadows can only show you what Christ has already done for you, so to keep yourself busy with the shadows is to keep yourselv busy with the flesh. Ans Christ is now in the Spirit where we are with Him.
With Love In Christ.

Paul does not say we should not study the shadows, he said not to ritually practice shadows as means to be justified for salvation and righteousness.

As far as Colosians, you have it wrong. You have not realized the context of the subject matter. Paul literally said let no one judge you if you do such things. How do you get a negative out of a postive command.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 12:07 AM
With regards to what you have said, according to the words of Christ, is that not the purpose of the Holy Spirit?

Jn 14:16 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=16) And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 15:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

Can we not depend on the Holy spirit to do as Jesus said he would do?

God bless you!

FirstfruitsJn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.


What does the Holy Spirit have us recall. At the time of Jesus, He only quoted the Old Covenant to His disciples. In His rebuke of satan coming out of the wilderness, you have Jesus responding with Torah. In reference to how the Temple should be treated, He quoted Torah. What did Jesus teach His disciples.

Ac 8:35 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+8:35&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.
Phillip taught and preached from the shadows. It was good enough for the Ethiopian to say where is the water that I might be baptized.


Let me change the word to one of positive in nature. I will try to share my interpretation of the word commonly applied as shadows and say that they are types and emblem in the like that we are made in his image and likeness. These shadows are in the image and likeness of Jesus in regards to his works and character towards us.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 12:11 AM
Fristfruits made a good point manichunter, and the more I think about it a shadow is a very poor picture of someone for there is no detail only an outline and inside of the shadow obscures what it is bouncing off of. Not only do we have the Holy Spirit to teach us but we also have the spirit of truth and error to guide us and since Paul was given the job of exposing Christ and the church through the inspired word that gives us everything we need to be mature in Christ and to be complete in Him why would you want to settle for less unless you want to practice some of the ordinances?

The word says the shadows point us to Christ. Evidently it was't that complete because with the many prophesies fulfilled by Christ, the majority of Jews still failed to recognized Him even when He raised the dead and fed thousand. Why worship in the physical and get left out when we worship in spirit?

Tomlane

Are you willing to confess that Paul taught and preached from the inspired word? What was the inspired proof that he used to convey the person and works of Jesus? How and what did the Bereans do and use to verify to their credit to prove that the gospel was good and true. The Berean Jews used the Shadows, and they were commended for doing so.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 12:34 AM
Something that escapes me is that people do not use critical thinking in their own lives and practices.


Has anyone who said that we should not observe OT rituals not questioned or examine the rituals that they observe today. It is not like the rituals most observe weekly at their churches can be found in Scripture. They are not, but most do them without questioning their origin. Most would be scared to discover, that some of today's Christian rituals have pagan roots. Simply saying bless you to someone after they sneeze is a pagan ritual. It comes from a German myth that a person was expelling a deamon, and the saying was to help a person keep the deamon out.

That is right, I called what we do every week from when the choir sings, altar call, and sermon is all established ritual we believe aid and facilitate worship and teach us about Jesus. It is not different in theory or fact than the Old ritual by definition. With the exception that man created the rituals we observe today. For instant, the Lord Supper. It became a ritual, not that it should not be done, but how often became to be done according to various rituals according to interpretation and assumptions.

We all have ritual in our walk through Jesus. We often see significance in our rituals and legitimize them as well even without Scriptural endorsement. Then we discount, rebuke, and reject the principles taught about Jesus from the OT rituals.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 01:15 AM
\
How do you reconcile that Paul was the same apostle who say we only know in part now and that we see through a glass dimly now.

When Paul said we see through a glass darkly, he wasn't talking about himself personally. He was talking about those of us who seek after tongues and prophesies but don't have love. Once we add love to tongues and prophecies, we see ourselves as others see us.

In his Corinthians letter, he contrasts the Jewish rituals and feast days, which he calls shadows, with his teaching about Christ, which he calls the "substance."

If you have the teaching about Christ, you can do away with all the Jewish rituals and feast days, etc. You got what all these things pointed at.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 01:18 AM
We all have ritual in our walk through Jesus. We often see significance in our rituals and legitimize them as well even without Scriptural endorsement. Then we discount, rebuke, and reject the principles taught about Jesus from the OT rituals.

Christians today practice rituals that mean something to them; but it's not as if we could practice first century rituals because these rituals are lost to us. No body knows what people actually did back then.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 01:26 AM
When Paul said we see through a glass darkly, he wasn't talking about himself personally. He was talking about those of us who seek after tongues and prophesies but don't have love. Once we add love to tongues and prophecies, we see ourselves as others see us.

In his Corinthians letter, he contrasts the Jewish rituals and feast days, which he calls shadows, with his teaching about Christ, which he calls the "substance."

If you have the teaching about Christ, you can do away with all the Jewish rituals and feast days, etc. You got what all these things pointed at.

1Co 13:12 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13:12&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - [ In Context (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13:12&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&sc=1&l=en) | Read Chapter (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en) | Discuss this Verse (http://www.studylight.org/forums/posting.php?mode=newtopic&f=12&subject=1 Corinthians+13:12) ]
http://www.studylight.org/images/clear.gif[ Original: Greek (http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=1co+13:12&it=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&sr=1&l=en) | Multi-Translation (javascript:PopUp('multi.cgi?bk=1co&ch=13&vs=12&t=kjv','multi',500,450,0,1,1,450,20)) | Make Poster (http://www.studylight.org/cgi-bin/poster.cgi?verse=1co+13:12&t=kjv) ] For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
No, he included himself in the same manner of sight.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 01:35 AM
Christians today practice rituals that mean something to them; but it's not as if we could practice first century rituals because these rituals are lost to us. No body knows what people actually did back then.

Well this is not true. In the gospels and the books of Acts it alludes to worship and service in the home churches and syna. {lus there are secular records avaliable to reference this material.

Are you okay with this "Christians today practice rituals that mean something to them". If you are then there is nothing wrong with what I do by observing the Feast and New Moons. If I find significance and principles in them, then you should be okay with my worship.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 01:42 AM
I humbly submit brief answers to the thread without putting all the details:

1. How was Jesus our drink offering?
The drink offering was a part of the meal (meat/grain) offering that was offered at the same time. It is first mentioned in Gen with Jacob being the first recorded to commission one at an altar. It consist of a hin of wine and sometimes olive oil.

The meal offering symbolizes mankind's duty towards other men by first paying lifting it towards Yahweh for approval. Then it was given to the priest for consumption who stood as a symbolic mediator. It was a sweet offering. A sweet offering is an offering that does not have anything to do with sin, but God's pleasure with faithful and loving service. It symbolized a person physically representing what their heart meant towards God, much like how we do offerings today. No blood or meat could actually be used in the meat offering. (Side note: the word meat is properly translate meal)

Jesus the man, not His divine side, satisfied man's portion. He provided everything we would ever need in regards to ministry and provision. Then he asked us to mimic His literal act in principle.

How is the drink offering is connected to this. The wine symbolized blood. No literal blood could be used like it could be with the other sweet offerings such as the burnt or peace offerings. Mankind was never meant to consume blood, however, as a result of the fall mankind begin to consume blood which symbolized life. God had originally laid claim to all blood to include the animals. Hence mankind was to be satisfied by the fruit of the vine for his consumption.



2. When was the drink offering fulfilled by Jesus in the NC?
When His side was pierced and the blood spilled onto the ground. This was not just an observation, but a prophetic fulfillment of the offering system. Then it had to be sprinkled on the altar before the Father.
Jesus the man, not Jesus as God, satisfied the Father's request that mankind have their needs met as well.


3. When was the first prophetic shadow cast about the drink offering in reference to Jesus in the OC?
In Yahweh's exchange with Eve in regards to her seed (the Messiah of man) one day being bruise in the side. The same place she came from in regards to her being taken out of Adam's side. The side represents something that would take to much typing right now.


4.How did Paul follow the example of Jesus by being a drink offering?
Paul gave his total life and effort to meeting mankind's need of salvation and deliverance. He exhausted his life to the point of literal death to minister to others. He recalls the stories of his stoning and beatings. All symbolic of how the various grades of the meat offering are treated before they are placed upon the altar. In the first two grades the grains are bruised and beaten to a certain fine point before they acceptable to be placed on the altar.


5. In what way is the drink offering applicable to believers today?
A believer is required to immulate the manner of the meat offering, not by ritual, but love and commitment towards others. We are to give mankind's their portion for sastifaction in regards to ministry and deliverance.

The various grades reveal our level of understanding of our ministry, attitude, and commitment towards our brother. With the first being unrefined whole grains and ears being placed on the altar to the fine refined flour being placed on the altar to symbolized our service towards others. It first had to be directed towards God who then disseminated the blessings.

AND so much more..........

It takes me literally three months to teach this course properly so forgive me if I did not answer every question. I will answer follow ups..........


Not I do literally have an altar to commit sacrifices and would not do them if I had one. My point is not the ritual, but the works, attitude, and love it points to.

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 27th 2009, 02:00 AM
Welder, I have alternative for you. How does this one sound in regards to Christ being a drink offering for everyone.

Matthew 5:6 *Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

John 4:14 *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.

John 6:35 *And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

Revelation 7:17 *For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 21:6 *And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

How would that work for you?

Tomlane

I don't know.

It sounds good, but honestly, I'm confused by this thread....not really clarifying anything.

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 27th 2009, 02:09 AM
Are you willing to confess that Paul taught and preached from the inspired word? What was the inspired proof that he used to convey the person and works of Jesus? How and what did the Bereans do and use to verify to their credit to prove that the gospel was good and true. The Berean Jews used the Shadows, and they were commended for doing so.

So, then, in a nutshell, and with clarity, please explain why it is so important to study the shadows.

Yes, the Berean Jews used the shadows, but they had also used the shadows to prove that Jesus was the true Jewish Messiah. The shadows were used to prove the authenticity of Christ's messiahship. Fast forward 2,000 yrs......what about someone who gets saved in a church service, and is fully convinced that Jesus Christ is God and that He is the saviour of the world. Is it still imperative that they look at the shadows, or is their conversion using the light Himself enough?!

How would knowing the shadows benefit that person in his/her Christian walk? Yes, I believe that it would give that person a better understanding, but really, are you actually insinuating that for a person's faith to be legitimate, he must understand the shadows?

I'm sorry, but I'm really beginning to misunderstand your purpose behind this thread. You make some good points, but I really don't understand what the motive for this thread is. Would you mind clearly explaining what you are trying to get across?

The shadows were meant to point to Christ, so if a person is already sees Christ, what is the purpose of the shadows?

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 27th 2009, 02:24 AM
Something that escapes me is that people do not use critical thinking in their own lives and practices.


Has anyone who said that we should not observe OT rituals not questioned or examine the rituals that they observe today. It is not like the rituals most observe weekly at their churches can be found in Scripture. They are not, but most do them without questioning their origin. Most would be scared to discover, that some of today's Christian rituals have pagan roots. Simply saying bless you to someone after they sneeze is a pagan ritual. It comes from a German myth that a person was expelling a deamon, and the saying was to help a person keep the deamon out.

That is right, I called what we do every week from when the choir sings, altar call, and sermon is all established ritual we believe aid and facilitate worship and teach us about Jesus. It is not different in theory or fact than the Old ritual by definition. With the exception that man created the rituals we observe today. For instant, the Lord Supper. It became a ritual, not that it should not be done, but how often became to be done according to various rituals according to interpretation and assumptions.

We all have ritual in our walk through Jesus. We often see significance in our rituals and legitimize them as well even without Scriptural endorsement. Then we discount, rebuke, and reject the principles taught about Jesus from the OT rituals.

I don't think it's that we should not observe Old Testament rituals -- It's that we no longer have to. If someone wants to observe Passover, or the Feast of Firstfruits, by all means, be my guest, but that doesn't mean that I have to.

It isn't the ritual -- It's the spirit behind it. After all, didn't God say at one point that the sacrifices and feasts and new moon celebrations, all of which He instituted, were an abomination to Him?

Vhayes
Apr 27th 2009, 02:30 AM
The shadows were meant to point to Christ, so if a person is already sees Christ, what is the purpose of the shadows?
Hi Welder - I'm not Manichunter but to me, this is the perfect eaxmple of what the shadows should lead us to study and understand.


The meal offering symbolizes mankind's duty towards other men by first paying lifting it towards Yahweh for approval.
When you look at that and compare it to:
Matthew 5
22 - "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
23 - "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
24 - leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.



The priesthood was a shadow of what we would all be individually as believers.

I learned an axiom years ago that is so very true:
The New (Testament) is in the Old (Testament) contained -
The Old is by the New explained.

i believe this is what Manichunter is saying.

Hope this helps -
V

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 02:34 AM
I'm sorry, but I'm really beginning to misunderstand your purpose behind this thread. You make some good points, but I really don't understand what the motive for this thread is. Would you mind clearly explaining what you are trying to get across?

The shadows were meant to point to Christ, so if a person is already sees Christ, what is the purpose of the shadows?

Good points. Nah, its new to you and you are unfamiliar with it. I have spelled it out as plainly as possible. The problem is, there is so much that falls through the gaps because there are other subjects that need to be taught before this one can be properly understood. I teach this particular subject to third year college students.

I know I am introducing something new and untraditional to most, but bear with me. I am explaining as simple as I can. It took me years to learn and know these things. I do not think anyone can learn these things by a few post. I would hope they would spur others to look into and investigate as Scripture say you are free and encouraged to do.

This is one of the things God is critical about, we always questions a persons motives and do not critically look at the message.

I have stressed this point before I think numerous times. I can see something and witness it, but this does not mean that I know it without experiencing and communing with it.

I have met a great many of famous people, but I cannot say I know them because I have not fellowshipped and communed with them other than in a crowd, in public, or in passing. It takes a friendship, imitate discourse, and familiarity to know a person.

Are you saying what the Bereans used was not good enough and could not do the same today. What advantage does the renewed covenant have over the original covenant. Jesus was the same in either whether or not we beheld him in the flesh. By the way, Abraham, Adam, and a few others knew Jesus in the flesh prior to the birth of Jesus.

I believe we do ourselves a disservice by cutting off the first half of the Bible for instruction, training, and the setting of principles.


I guess I will have to wait....................... I will live this topic of the patterns, emblems, and types along to alot of people's relief.

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 27th 2009, 02:37 AM
Hi Welder - I'm not Manichunter but to me, this is the perfect eaxmple of what the shadows should lead us to study and understand.

Huh?! :confused







The priesthood was a shadow of what we would all be individually as believers.

Hope this helps -
V

Yes, it did. Thank you.

Because we are all priests, understanding how the shadows point to Christ (or how Christ fulfilled the law) helps us to better fulfill our "priesthood."

Thank you!!!

Vhayes
Apr 27th 2009, 02:43 AM
Sorry Welder - I'll try again.


Quote:
The meal offering symbolizes mankind's duty towards other men by first paying lifting it towards Yahweh for approval.
When you look at that and compare it to:Matthew 5
22 - "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
23 - "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
24 - leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

Manichunter explained the purpose of a drink offering - and I used New Testament scripture to elaborate. We need to be "right" with our fellow man before we can have a meaningful conversation with God.

Does that make sense/
V

Equipped_4_Love
Apr 27th 2009, 02:51 AM
Good points. Nah, its new to you and you are unfamiliar with it. I have spelled it out as plainly as possible. The problem is, there is so much that falls through the gaps because there are other subjects that need to be taught before this one can be properly understood. I teach this particular subject to third year college students.

I know I am introducing something new and untraditional to most, but bear with me. I am explaining as simple as I can. It took me years to learn and know these things. I do not think anyone can learn these things by a few post. I would hope they would spur others to look into and investigate as Scripture say you are free and encouraged to do.

Thank you. That really does explain what the intent of this thread is -- to encourage us to think critically about our faith. I see, now...It's about understanding how Christ fulfilled the entirety of the law.


Are you saying what the Bereans used was not good enough and could not do the same today. What advantage does the renewed covenant have over the original covenant. Jesus was the same in either whether or not we beheld him in the flesh. By the way, Abraham, Adam, and a few others knew Jesus in the flesh prior to the birth of Jesus.

I believe we do ourselves a disservice by cutting off the first half of the Bible for instruction, training, and the setting of principles.

I guess what I'm saying is that they were looking for a Messiah to fulfill prophecy and the law. People outside of Judaism would not be looking for a Messiah based on this criteria....most people who accept salvation today probably aren't even aware that there were shadows that pointed to Christ -- all they know is that they are in sin, and need a saviour.

More than likely, they won't even hear about the shadows until they accept Christ, but by that point, they already have the light. They know little to nothing about Judaism.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:13 AM
I don't think it's that we should not observe Old Testament rituals -- It's that we no longer have to. If someone wants to observe Passover, or the Feast of Firstfruits, by all means, be my guest, but that doesn't mean that I have to.

It isn't the ritual -- It's the spirit behind it. After all, didn't God say at one point that the sacrifices and feasts and new moon celebrations, all of which He instituted, were an abomination to Him?

Yahweh actually said He hates their Feast and New Moons because they had defiled them with paganism and legalism. He was not saying that His Feast or the manner in which He set them up was an abomination. It is what they were doing with them after He gave them to Israel.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:20 AM
Hi Welder - I'm not Manichunter but to me, this is the perfect eaxmple of what the shadows should lead us to study and understand.


When you look at that and compare it to:
Matthew 5
22 - "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
23 - "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
24 - leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.



The priesthood was a shadow of what we would all be individually as believers.

I learned an axiom years ago that is so very true:
The New (Testament) is in the Old (Testament) contained -
The Old is by the New explained.

i believe this is what Manichunter is saying.

Hope this helps -
V

You are correct, and I have said this countless times that the Initial

Covenant cannot be fully comprehended without the Renewed Covenant being added to it, and the Renewed Covenant cannot be fully unvealed without the Initial Covenant being understood.

If the Initial is to be understood, then the types, emblems, and patterns will have to be matched to Jesus and His people. Jesus was called a prophet as well, because He prophisied about things to come. Hence, not all has been fulfilled. Therefore both Covenants have to be married.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:24 AM
Sorry Welder - I'll try again.


When you look at that and compare it to:Matthew 5
22 - "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
23 - "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,
24 - leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.

Manichunter explained the purpose of a drink offering - and I used New Testament scripture to elaborate. We need to be "right" with our fellow man before we can have a meaningful conversation with God.

Does that make sense/
V







You have got a glimspe of what I am sharing. I am talking about the focusing of actions towards God and His people. The how to love by the understanding of the principles that marry both covenants together.

It is easy to see torah in the New when it is matched it Old equivalent principle.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 04:35 AM
1Co 13:12 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13:12&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - [ In Context (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13:12&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&sc=1&l=en) | Read Chapter (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=1co+13&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en) | Discuss this Verse (http://www.studylight.org/forums/posting.php?mode=newtopic&f=12&subject=1%20Corinthians+13:12) ]
http://www.studylight.org/images/clear.gif[ Original: Greek (http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=1co+13:12&it=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&sr=1&l=en) | Multi-Translation (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:PopUp%28%27multi.cgi?bk=1co&ch=13&vs=12&t=kjv%27,%27multi%27,500,450,0,1,1,450,20%29) | Make Poster (http://www.studylight.org/cgi-bin/poster.cgi?verse=1co+13:12&t=kjv) ] For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
No, he included himself in the same manner of sight.

I understand Mani. I read the text. I know he said "we". :)

Give me a little credit.

Christians have been robbed of the true meaning of this passage because for so long they have been told that Paul is speaking eschatologically. It is taught that Paul is speaking about the second coming of Christ as if all of us will continue to see in a dim mirror until he returns.

Notice, though, that Paul speaks about himself in various stages of his maturity. He says that when he was a child, (past tense) he thought and spoke as a child. But when he grew up (present tense) he put away childish things. He reminds his readers that as we grow in the Lord, we start out with immature ways of looking at the faith, which change over time.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

Immature Christians tend to make prophecy and tongues into the important goal, thinking that being a prophet, a minister, a preacher, a teacher makes one important, significant, and cool. But Paul wants Christians to realize that these things aren't the goal; love is the goal. Prophecy and tongues are simply a means to an end.

Prophecies come to pass. People stop speaking eventually. But love will always endure. After all is said and done -- after all is prophesied and spoken, at the end of the day, if it wasn't about becoming a loving person, then it was all a waist of time.

Mature Christians will put the gifts of the spirit into proper perspective. The gifts aren't things we do for God. The gifts are the things God does for us. And if we don't learn how to love each other, the gifts are worthless.

That's his point. The Corinthians were thinking like children. And they need to start thinking like mature Christians and get an adult perspective on the gifts. In their immaturity, they had a foggy self-perception. They didn't know themselves as others knew them. Because they craved the cool gifts, they thought more highly of themselves than they should have. They didn't see themselves as others saw them. It's as if they were looking in a hub cap instead of a mirror.

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

What is NOW? Now is when we still think prophecy is cool and end in itself. What is THEN? Then is when we finally get the fact that prophecy is simply a means to promote love. Those who are focused on tongues and prophecy as if these were what matters -- these folks are looking in a distorted mirror and not seeing themselves as they truly are.

But those who finally get the idea, finally mature in their thinking and put the gifts into proper perspective, these are the ones who see themselves as others see them. They get it.

Real Christian maturity is when I see myself as others see me.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 05:37 AM
I understand Mani. I read the text. I know he said "we". :)

Give me a little credit.

Christians have been robbed of the true meaning of this passage because for so long they have been told that Paul is speaking eschatologically. It is taught that Paul is speaking about the second coming of Christ as if all of us will continue to see in a dim mirror until he returns.

Notice, though, that Paul speaks about himself in various stages of his maturity. He says that when he was a child, (past tense) he thought and spoke as a child. But when he grew up (present tense) he put away childish things. He reminds his readers that as we grow in the Lord, we start out with immature ways of looking at the faith, which change over time.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things.

Immature Christians tend to make prophecy and tongues into the important goal, thinking that being a prophet, a minister, a preacher, a teacher makes one important, significant, and cool. But Paul wants Christians to realize that these things aren't the goal; love is the goal. Prophecy and tongues are simply a means to an end.

Prophecies come to pass. People stop speaking eventually. But love will always endure. After all is said and done -- after all is prophesied and spoken, at the end of the day, if it wasn't about becoming a loving person, then it was all a waist of time.

Mature Christians will put the gifts of the spirit into proper perspective. The gifts aren't things we do for God. The gifts are the things God does for us. And if we don't learn how to love each other, the gifts are worthless.

That's his point. The Corinthians were thinking like children. And they need to start thinking like mature Christians and get an adult perspective on the gifts. In their immaturity, they had a foggy self-perception. They didn't know themselves as others knew them. Because they craved the cool gifts, they thought more highly of themselves than they should have. They didn't see themselves as others saw them. It's as if they were looking in a hub cap instead of a mirror.

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

What is NOW? Now is when we still think prophecy is cool and end in itself. What is THEN? Then is when we finally get the fact that prophecy is simply a means to promote love. Those who are focused on tongues and prophecy as if these were what matters -- these folks are looking in a distorted mirror and not seeing themselves as they truly are.

But those who finally get the idea, finally mature in their thinking and put the gifts into proper perspective, these are the ones who see themselves as others see them. They get it.

Real Christian maturity is when I see myself as others see me.

good stuff, thanks

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 06:43 AM
Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.


What does the Holy Spirit have us recall. At the time of Jesus, He only quoted the Old Covenant to His disciples. In His rebuke of satan coming out of the wilderness, you have Jesus responding with Torah. In reference to how the Temple should be treated, He quoted Torah. What did Jesus teach His disciples.

Ac 8:35 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+8:35&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.
Phillip taught and preached from the shadows. It was good enough for the Ethiopian to say where is the water that I might be baptized.


Let me change the word to one of positive in nature. I will try to share my interpretation of the word commonly applied as shadows and say that they are types and emblem in the like that we are made in his image and likeness. These shadows are in the image and likeness of Jesus in regards to his works and character towards us.

The answer to your question is in the scripture given.

he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Do we therefore need two tutors?

Is the Spirit of God not trust worthy enough to teach the things of God as Christ has promised he would?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 06:48 AM
You are correct, and I have said this countless times that the Initial

Covenant cannot be fully comprehended without the Renewed Covenant being added to it, and the Renewed Covenant cannot be fully unvealed without the Initial Covenant being understood.

If the Initial is to be understood, then the types, emblems, and patterns will have to be matched to Jesus and His people. Jesus was called a prophet as well, because He prophisied about things to come. Hence, not all has been fulfilled. Therefore both Covenants have to be married.


This statement is scriptually incorrect according to the words of Christ.

Covenant cannot be fully comprehended without the Renewed Covenant being added to it, and the Renewed Covenant cannot be fully unvealed without the Initial Covenant being understood.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 11:35 AM
This statement is scriptually incorrect according to the words of Christ.

Covenant cannot be fully comprehended without the Renewed Covenant being added to it, and the Renewed Covenant cannot be fully unvealed without the Initial Covenant being understood.

God bless you!

Firstfruits


Provide the Scriptural proof to the contrary.

I will do the opposite kind sir.

Joh 5:39 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=joh+5:39&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Ac 17:11 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+17:11&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Joh 20:9 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=joh+20:9&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
Lu 24:27 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=lu+24:27&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Ac 17:2 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+17:2&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
Ac 18:28 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+18:28&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
2Pe 3:16 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=2pe+3:16&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

And there are more.................

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 12:13 PM
Provide the Scriptural proof to the contrary.

I will do the opposite kind sir.

Joh 5:39 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=joh+5:39&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Ac 17:11 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+17:11&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Joh 20:9 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=joh+20:9&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
Lu 24:27 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=lu+24:27&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Ac 17:2 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+17:2&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,
Ac 18:28 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+18:28&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.
2Pe 3:16 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=2pe+3:16&translation=kjv&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

And there are more.................


Lk 5:36 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=36) And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Lk 5:37 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=37) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Lk 5:38 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=38) But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Lk 5:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

If you still desire the old wine rather than the new, the choice is yours.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Vhayes
Apr 27th 2009, 12:18 PM
Mature Christians will put the gifts of the spirit into proper perspective. The gifts aren't things we do for God. The gifts are the things God does for us. And if we don't learn how to love each other, the gifts are worthless.


Great point!!
And the rest of the 15 characters -
V

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 12:29 PM
Lk 5:36 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=36) And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Lk 5:37 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=37) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Lk 5:38 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=38) But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Lk 5:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

If you still desire the old wine rather than the new, the choice is yours.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

These establish a principle that has nothing to do with the context of our subject, they do not contradict the point I stated with Scriptural Authority.

It is a principle that is true that you do not put new wine in old wine skins because the bag would burst. These saying are speaking about a different matter relating to an old understanding yielding to a new understanding of a thing. He was speaking about fasting, not Torah.

I have a question, which is better to the taste: New wine or old wine.......
According to the text you provide, if you keep reading, Jesus actually gives us an answer which is best.

I actually read and research the post people respond back towards me, if I do not have a command over them. This is one I am very familiar with.

The disciples where told to fast after Jesus left. This is actually a command to Torah. The Priest and religious leaders had mandated fast before they did certain things which would sanctify them for service.

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 12:38 PM
These establish a principle that has nothing to do with the context of our subject, they do not contradict the point I stated with Scriptural Authority.

It is a principle that is true that you do not put new wine in old wine skins because the bag would burst. These saying are speaking about a different matter relating to an old understanding yielding to a new understanding of a thing. He was speaking about fasting, not Torah.

I have a question, which is better to the taste: New wine or old wine.......
According to the text you provide, if you keep reading, Jesus actually gives us an answer which is best.

I actually read and research the post people respond back towards me, if I do not have a command over them. This is one I am very familiar with.

The disciples where told to fast after Jesus left. This is actually a command to Torah. The Priest and religious leaders had mandated fast before they did certain things which would sanctify them for service.

So are you saying that the new covenant has been added to the old covenant?

If so then what Jesus said applies. you cannot have the old and the new in one.

Lk 5:36 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=36) And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Lk 5:37 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=37) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Lk 5:38 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=38) But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Lk 5:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 12:40 PM
So are you saying that the new covenant has been added to the old covenant?

If so then what Jesus said applies. you cannot have the old and the new in one.

Lk 5:36 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=36) And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Lk 5:37 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=37) And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Lk 5:38 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=38) But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Lk 5:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

God bless you!

Firstfruits



No, I did not say that. I thought outside of the doctrinal box. They can be placed in the same chest, on the same self, and on the same table.

Everyone who is a wine taster knows that old wine taste better than new. I am not a wine taster however, though I have tasted both.

What about that drink offering sir.

Vhayes
Apr 27th 2009, 12:50 PM
You are correct, and I have said this countless times that the Initial

Covenant cannot be fully comprehended without the Renewed Covenant being added to it, and the Renewed Covenant cannot be fully unvealed without the Initial Covenant being understood.

If the Initial is to be understood, then the types, emblems, and patterns will have to be matched to Jesus and His people. Jesus was called a prophet as well, because He prophisied about things to come. Hence, not all has been fulfilled. Therefore both Covenants have to be married.

Mani, Jesus called it a New covenant - not a Renewed covenant.

Look at these verses:
Luke 22:20
And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, " A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
(Mani, it DID disappear - the temple was destroyed so there could no longer be sacrifices.)

Hebrews 12:24
and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

V

Tumelo Matebekwane
Apr 27th 2009, 12:51 PM
I love this my brother and to tell you the truth this is one of the most neglected part of the scrpitures, There is something about this book of clolosians, if you like poetry like myself you will agree with me when i say that this book is somehow poetic. For there to be a shadow there has to be an illumination and the again the shadow travels is the same direction as the waves of the light, the shadow also travels before the light. So what is paul trying to say, God is and is still showing us theb way about things to come. God talks of the sabbath keeping and Christ talks about taking rest in Him,

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 01:04 PM
No, I did not say that. I thought outside of the doctrinal box. They can be placed in the same chest, on the same self, and on the same table.

Everyone who is a wine taster knows that old wine taste better than new. I am not a wine taster however, though I have tasted both.

What about that drink offering sir.

True you can offer both, but again what Jesus said applies.

Lk 5:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=5&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Teke
Apr 27th 2009, 01:09 PM
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Col 2:16-17)

I see this Scripture repeated alot, but there has always been one thing that baffles me in all my years of conversing with believers. Most do not understand or comprehend the Shadows of things to come. Yes Jesus came and is coming back. But how can one understand the multiple things and aspects of Jesus without being made witness to the revelations the shadows reveal about the character and works of Jesus.

Relating to Jesus is no different than any other relationship. It is a relationship that takes time to learn and relate to a person. Jesus did not give us all the shadows for us to just throw away, but learn. What is a burnt offering and how is it applicable to Jesus and believers? What about the grades of the burnt offering? What does the bull, lamb, goat, and turtle dove teach me? Yahweh did not just give the grades without reason of purpose. I am to learn and know that the bull reveals my manner of work ethic on my mutual yoke with Yeshua.

For example-
Jesus is said to be our sin offering and yes He is. However, He is also our burnt, meat, peace, red heifer, and trepass offering as well. Each one of these offerings provided a different work in the Yahweh's satisfaction being met. They also set examples of what is expected of our conduct as we immitate Jesus in our service towards Yahweh and others.

It is not that we can be the shadows or accomplish anything with the ritual. It is the spiritual principles the shadows reveal that we have to come to know and immulate. We are told to deny ourselves, pick up our own cross, and follow Jesus. Learning the shadows is the only means forward.

Yes Jesus is the light, but a blinding light to those who have not yet learned their Lord.

How so much power has been lost from Christianity because the shadows have been stripped away. Now we have the light indeed, but do not comprehend it. What we are left with is religion without power.

I can agree that shadows teach. And if you agree also, then why do you not learn from the church Jesus established. The church maintains the sacrifice on the altar, the priests, the worship. What is lacking that you do not understand Christ and His Church.The only thing I can think of is that you have not seen this reality yet.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 01:22 PM
Mani, Jesus called it a New covenant - not a Renewed covenant.

Look at these verses:
Luke 22:20
And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, " A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
(Mani, it DID disappear - the temple was destroyed so there could no longer be sacrifices.)

Hebrews 12:24
and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel.

V
Thanks greatly sister.

I will simply choose to interpret it by another possible world that can be assigned to it, I believe the context of my word fits better. The Hebrew word used in the text could mean the following:
Chadash- new, new thing, fresh

What is said by Jesus has to match the same thought, otherwise we make Scripture contradict itself.

What much also be included in the thought is that Yahweh considered Himself a husband that already had a maritial covenant with Israel. By Torah Yahweh could only legal remarry His former spouse. Hence, it is the placement of the covenant that is different, not the spouse. He renews His vows with Israel.

This makes the thoughts of what Jesus said and what Jeremiah prophisied one.

Jer 31: 31-34 31 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+31:31&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+31:32&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+31:33&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=jer+31:34&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.


This is why I say renewed, not new. To say new leaves room for errors and mistakes by people who do not understand the cohesion of Scripture. The thoughts of the old and new are the same. However, when the word new is used in the translation, some people assign carnal value, worth, or more preference to either one or the other. The new covenant is not any better than the old. Unless you believe that the old is obselete. If this is the cast, then it would be heresy for some Christians to still keep and read the old.

I know you do not believe this, my sister, but maybe you can explain yourself..........

I have come to not depend on English translations as bonafide without a critical study from the original languages. I sometimes find mis-translations in certain text, that are gross in nature. However, that is okay, because that is what a translation is, a person's prospective used to explain a text that is foriegn to them. I want the prospective of the original, for I believe that would contain revelations and data essential to learning truth in a broader scope, and not in a bias box of my modern times. Most of the thoughts and prospective of the original text writers are foriegn to people who read various translations today.

The english translation isn't any better than the spanish. They both are attempts to convey a foriegn thing to a culture that is unfamiliar with it. This should include the thoughts of that foriegn thing as well, but this is often missing, unless a personal search is conducted by the individual. I learned this, so this is what I do.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 01:33 PM
I can agree that shadows teach. And if you agree also, then why do you not learn from the church Jesus established. The church maintains the sacrifice on the altar, the priests, the worship. What is lacking that you do not understand Christ and His Church.The only thing I can think of is that you have not seen this reality yet.

Far from true............ I learn from all of the text from Gen 1 to Rev 22.

The bible should not be divided with one being inferior to the other. Hence why Paul said all Scripture is inspired and good for teaching, admonishing (which is correcting people according to a written or spoken policy), doctrine, and equipping.

I have seen the reality and much more.

It is not a brag, but an endeavor. Now that I have tasted it and see that it is good, would it be good for me to stop.

It is like I have said and experienced in the past. It is hard to understand another person's experiences and knowledge without walking in their shoes. Hence, why I am not understand and seen as a brother in Christ. I am assure of my salvation and destiny in the Kingdom. I could not believe different with all the signs, miracles, and blessings that have taken place in my life. I remember like it was yesterday hearing the voice of the Spirit saying to me in 1992, "who do you say Jesus is to you", and my respond being my personal Lord and Savior.

If others think I have been lead astray since then, that cannot be my concern, for I cannot appease the comforts and fears of man. I simply have come to believe that most of our walks are different according to our personal callings. This should not be a harm, but a benefit.

Teke
Apr 27th 2009, 02:14 PM
Far from true............ I learn from all of the text from Gen 1 to Rev 22.

The bible should not be divided with one being inferior to the other. Hence why Paul said all Scripture is inspired and good for teaching, admonishing (which is correcting people according to a written or spoken policy), doctrine, and equipping.

I have seen the reality and much more.

It is not a brag, but an endeavor. Now that I have tasted it and see that it is good, would it be good for me to stop.

It is like I have said and experienced in the past. It is hard to understand another person's experiences and knowledge without walking in their shoes. Hence, why I am not understand and seen as a brother in Christ. I am assure of my salvation and destiny in the Kingdom. I could not believe different with all the signs, miracles, and blessings that have taken place in my life. I remember like it was yesterday hearing the voice of the Spirit saying to me in 1992, "who do you say Jesus is to you", and my respond being my personal Lord and Savior.

If others think I have been lead astray since then, that cannot be my concern, for I cannot appease the comforts and fears of man. I simply have come to believe that most of our walks are different according to our personal callings. This should not be a harm, but a benefit.

I don't see you as not being a brother in Christ. In fact you seem to be a brother very much interested in the things of the priesthood which pertain to the altar where priests serve. To which I must ask then, why don't you go and ask the priest of the church about these things.

IOW if you believe the church has had it wrong for two thousand years, then show me where. Be specific. Don't just run around in circles with scripture.
And I don't mean isolated instances of heresies. Give some bona fide instance or instances.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 02:46 PM
Are you okay with this "Christians today practice rituals that mean something to them". If you are then there is nothing wrong with what I do by observing the Feast and New Moons. If I find significance and principles in them, then you should be okay with my worship.

Perhaps you misunderstood. I don't recall saying that anything was wrong with keeping the feasts etc. But you are making a claim about them that is backwards from what the Bible teaches about them. I object to your claim that we need the shadows because they give us information we couldn't already get from Jesus.

If I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I have misunderstood, you are saying that keeping the festivals teaches us things about Jesus and the Gospel. According to the title of this thread you say, "the shadows still teach."

In reality, the festivals, sacrifices, and rituals simply hinted at Jesus and his mission here on earth etc. When Jesus came and we read about what he did and what he said we learn the full truth. It is only then that we, if we are interested in such things, can go back and figure out what the shadows meant.

I contend that the festivals etc. don't teach us anything new about Jesus, but rather once we understand Jesus, we understand the festivals better. The shadows aren't teaching us about Jesus. Jesus is teaching us about the shadows.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 03:08 PM
1Co 13:12
(12) For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully kknown.

Assuming we do not stray from the written word....

In Paul's comment, he was referring to a brass mirror, not the modern perfected mirrors we are familiar with. Though they provided a reflection, it was not sharp. And if the brass was not freshly polished, the reflection became even more dim.

Remembering the fact that we do not see God clearly should keep us humble. It should remind us no to criticize other's revelations and experiences with God. Indeed, others may have perceived an aspect of God that we (or I) have not, or vice versa. Neither of us are to be blamed for not seeing the entire picture, or what another has perceived. In the world we live in, the whole, complete picture simply is not available. Yeshua told the Torah teachers of His day:

Joh 5:37
(37) "And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.

If one of us thinks they 'know it all', that the veil for them has been completely lifted then they are stating a position greater than Paul's:

1Co 13:12
(12) For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.


We need to remember the One casting the 'shadows' is God Himself. We best appreciate and treasure what He has given us.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 03:14 PM
I contend that the festivals etc. don't teach us anything new about Jesus, but rather once we understand Jesus, we understand the festivals better. The shadows aren't teaching us about Jesus. Jesus is teaching us about the shadows.

Celebrating the 4th of July or Christmas doesn't teach you anymore about Ameirca's independence or abiout Jesus either. So why bother even getting off the log?

I submit you don't know everything about Jesus.

Teke
Apr 27th 2009, 03:16 PM
Jesus is teaching us about the shadows.

Yes indeed. :saint:

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 03:18 PM
Yes indeed. :saint:

Jesus IS the Shadow Caster.

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 03:20 PM
Celebrating the 4th of July or Christmas doesn't teach you anymore about Ameirca's independence or abiout Jesus either. So why bother even getting off the log?

I submit you don't know everything about Jesus.

Would you agree that the Holy Spirit that teaches all things would teach us all we need to know about Jesus?

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 16:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 03:42 PM
Would you agree that the Holy Spirit that teaches all things would teach us all we need to know about Jesus?

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 16:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

According to His Word, FF -- which is Torah, the Prophets and the Writings, and His teachings regarding their intent and truth. Jesus didn't come usurp God the Father and 'start a new religion' You also must realize that Jesus said and taught many, many more things than the Gospels tell us. The Apostle John says that if all the words of Messiah could be written down, he supposed it would fill all the books ever written. How do we know what those teachings were? Guess? Or do we agree that they are in line with ALL of His other teachings which were in line with the Torah, which He is the Author of?

Yes, the Holy Spirit will teach you the truth regarding the written word, if you open your mind to God and close off the teachings of men.

Paul says to actually test which 'spirit' is teaching you by referring to Scripture as the proof text. At the time, the ONLY Scripture that existed was Torah, the Prophets and the Writings. I suppose someone could arbitrarily make up a new religion and claim it's from the 'teaching of the Holy Spirit', but it would be no better than heresy. Oh, wait. That's happened. Over and over again.

Do we ever learn?

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 03:52 PM
According to His Word, FF -- which is Torah, the Prophets and the Writings, and His teachings regarding their intent and truth. Jesus didn't come usurp God the Father and 'start a new religion' You also must realize that Jesus said and taught many, many more things than the Gospels tell us. The Apostle John says that if all the words of Messiah could be written down, he supposed it would fill all the books ever written. How do we know what those teachings were? Guess? Or do we agree that they are in line with ALL of His other teachings which were in line with the Torah, which He is the Author of?

Yes, the Holy Spirit will teach you the truth regarding the written word, if you open your mind to God and close off the teachings of men.

Paul says to actually test which 'spirit' is teaching you by referring to Scripture as the proof text. At the time, the ONLY Scripture that existed was Torah, the Prophets and the Writings. I suppose someone could arbitrarily make up a new religion and claim it's from the 'teaching of the Holy Spirit', but it would be no better than heresy. Oh, wait. That's happened. Over and over again.

Do we ever learn?

My question is would the Holy Spirit teach us all we need to know about Jesus as promised by Christ, according to what is written?

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 16:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Do we need to masters to teach us about Jesus, knowing that one does not know everything about Jesus that we know thtrough the teaching of the Holy Spirit?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 03:57 PM
No, that's a Catholic concept to hide the Word of God and teach the religion of men.

In 1st Century Synagogues, the Word of God was read by the membership for all to hear.

As far as the Spirit of God, He does guide me to the truth. It's all in the written Word. I dare not add nor take away from what God made Holy.

Firstfruits
Apr 27th 2009, 04:01 PM
No, that's a Catholic concept to hide the Word of God and teach the religion of men.

In 1st Century Synagogues, the Word of God was read by the membership for all to hear.

As far as the Spirit of God, He does guide me to the truth. It's all in the written Word. I dare not add nor take away from what God made Holy.

Not meaning to change the subject, but does that include food that was declared unclean and then declared clean by God?

Firstfruits

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:05 PM
Perhaps you misunderstood. I don't recall saying that anything was wrong with keeping the feasts etc. But you are making a claim about them that is backwards from what the Bible teaches about them. I object to your claim that we need the shadows because they give us information we couldn't already get from Jesus.

If I understand you correctly, and please correct me if I have misunderstood, you are saying that keeping the festivals teaches us things about Jesus and the Gospel. According to the title of this thread you say, "the shadows still teach."

In reality, the festivals, sacrifices, and rituals simply hinted at Jesus and his mission here on earth etc. When Jesus came and we read about what he did and what he said we learn the full truth. It is only then that we, if we are interested in such things, can go back and figure out what the shadows meant.

I contend that the festivals etc. don't teach us anything new about Jesus, but rather once we understand Jesus, we understand the festivals better. The shadows aren't teaching us about Jesus. Jesus is teaching us about the shadows.

Did Paul keep the feast according to the Scripture that records his own words?

Ac 18:19-21 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+18:21&translation=nkj&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) 19And he came to Ephesus, and left them there; but he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. 20When they asked him to stay a longer time with them, he did not consent, 21but took leave of them, saying, "I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem; but I will return again to you, God willing." And he sailed from Ephesus.

Why did he do it? He was observing a shadow from other's prospective. I say he was doing something entirely different that is not understood by most today.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 04:06 PM
Not meaning to change the subject, but does that include food that was declared unclean and then declared clean by God?

Firstfruits

If you're referring to Matthew, you're quoting out of context. The debate was about hand-washing, a MAN MADE religious tradition, not about food.

Pigs are not "Food" for us FF. In the NT Scriptures, God is not talking about pigs, lice, soles of shoes, rocks or anything esle that is not food. He's talking about what HE has defined for us as food.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 04:09 PM
Celebrating the 4th of July or Christmas doesn't teach you anymore about Ameirca's independence or abiout Jesus either. So why bother even getting off the log?

I submit you don't know everything about Jesus.

Keck, the Op quotes a scripture then raises a question.


Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Col 2:16-17)

I see this Scripture repeated alot, but there has always been one thing that baffles me in all my years of conversing with believers. Most do not understand or comprehend the Shadows of things to come. Yes Jesus came and is coming back. But how can one understand the multiple things and aspects of Jesus without being made witness to the revelations the shadows reveal about the character and works of Jesus.

Mani raises a question. He asks whether Christians can know all that needs to be known about Jesus without knowing something about the "shadows", meaning :the festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath.

In the passage from Colosians, Paul indicates that the festivals, new moons and the Sabbaths were "shadows of things to come but the substance belongs to Christ." The comparison is between a three dimensional, physical object, something of substance, with the two dimensional, flat, dark, outline of the object as it is projected onto a wall.

The question is this. What can the shadow tell me that the actual physical object can not? Nothing. That's Paul's point. He recommends to the believers at Colossi that they not put much value in the festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath because since these pointed to Christ, and since they have Christ, these diminish in relevance and importance.

His main point is this. Don't let those who keep the festivals, new moons, etc. be your judge. Don't let them suggest that you need anything other than Christ. Don't let them tell you that you need to keep the festivals, new moons and Sabbaths because you don't need any of these things if you have Christ.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 04:12 PM
Keck, the Op quotes a scripture then raises a question.




You made a comment. It needed to be addressed. We all would like to proceed with our dictates unchallenged, but that's not the way things are in life.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:16 PM
Would you agree that the Holy Spirit that teaches all things would teach us all we need to know about Jesus?

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 16:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Do you know everything you need to know about Jesus? Of course not, I knew the answer before I asked. The same is true of me as well.

If you say no, then what is wrong with my endeavors. Read, analyze, test by the Spirit as Scripture commands. I endorse what Keck says and I have said the same. If it as a battle of wits and experiences then we both lose. I can only speak of the things I have learned so, as well as you can only do also.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 04:16 PM
Keck, the Op quotes a scripture then raises a question.



Mani raises a question. He asks whether Christians can know all that needs to be known about Jesus without knowing something about the "shadows", meaning :the festivals, new moons, and the Sabbath.

In the passage from Colosians, Paul indicates that the festivals, new moons and the Sabbaths were "shadows of things to come but the substance belongs to Christ." The comparison is between a three dimensional, physical object, something of substance, with the two dimensional, flat, dark, outline of the object as it is projected onto a wall.


Why does Paul frame this in future tense? The cross was behind him.

Oh, and the italicized red comment? That is straight out of Plato's Republic. That's a pagan teaching, not a teaching from Christ. I will not subscribe to pagan ideology.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 04:19 PM
Did Paul keep the feast according to the Scripture that records his own words?

Ac 18:19-21 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+18:21&translation=nkj&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) 19And he came to Ephesus, and left them there; but he himself entered the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. 20When they asked him to stay a longer time with them, he did not consent, 21but took leave of them, saying, "I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem; but I will return again to you, God willing." And he sailed from Ephesus.

Why did he do it? He was observing a shadow from other's prospective. I say he was doing something entirely different that is not understood by most today.

He did it because he made a vow. And apparently Paul put much value in keeping a vow. His motivation was loyalty and integrity, which are good values to have.

And, as a matter of course, we don't really need to know what the vow was about in order to understand Paul's motivation. I don't really need to know, for instance, anything about what a Nazarite vow means to Paul, but I understand that it meant something to him. And I perfectly understand what it means to keep a promise, even if I don't know exactly what Paul's promise meant to him.

In other words, I understand how fuller and richer the scriptures become once we learn what some of these terms mean. But I'm not convinced that knowing what these terms mean is a prerequisite to an understanding of the main issue.

The main issue was that Paul's vow included a time limit, which required him to be in Jerusalem within a certain window of time. And while it would be very interesting to know more about what caused this time window to exist, not knowing doesn't rob me of the main point.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:24 PM
My question is would the Holy Spirit teach us all we need to know about Jesus as promised by Christ, according to what is written?

Jn 14:26 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=14&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=26) But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Jn 16:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=16&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Do we need to masters to teach us about Jesus, knowing that one does not know everything about Jesus that we know thtrough the teaching of the Holy Spirit?

God bless you!

Firstfruits

Scripture says study to show ourselves as a good workman. Which means it takes effort to learn and know. Hence, again what is wrong with my endeavors.

To most I am going into dangerous waters, but I to me, I have treasures in this shark infested waters personally.

-SEEKING-
Apr 27th 2009, 04:25 PM
Scripture says study to show ourselves as a good workman. Which means it takes effort to learn and know. Hence, again what is wrong with my endeavors.

To most I am going into dangerous waters, but I to me, I have treasures in this shark infested waters personally.

Mani you just gotta do what you feel God is leading you to.

Blessings to you.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 04:30 PM
Why does Paul frame this in future tense? The cross was behind him.

Oh, and the italicized red comment? That is straight out of Plato's Republic. That's a pagan teaching, not a teaching from Christ. I will not subscribe to pagan ideology.

What is in the future tense?

I would not recommend that you become a pagan. But the fact remains that Paul used the contrast between a shadow and the substance to draw a similar distinction between the festivals etc. and Christ. Therefore, the discussion in this thread is centered around what Paul said about the festivals etc. not what Plato said.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 04:35 PM
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
(Col 2:16-17)

I see this Scripture repeated alot, but there has always been one thing that baffles me in all my years of conversing with believers. Most do not understand or comprehend the Shadows of things to come. Yes Jesus came and is coming back. But how can one understand the multiple things and aspects of Jesus without being made witness to the revelations the shadows reveal about the character and works of Jesus.

Relating to Jesus is no different than any other relationship. It is a relationship that takes time to learn and relate to a person. Jesus did not give us all the shadows for us to just throw away, but learn. What is a burnt offering and how is it applicable to Jesus and believers? What about the grades of the burnt offering? What does the bull, lamb, goat, and turtle dove teach me? Yahweh did not just give the grades without reason of purpose. I am to learn and know that the bull reveals my manner of work ethic on my mutual yoke with Yeshua.

For example-
Jesus is said to be our sin offering and yes He is. However, He is also our burnt, meat, peace, red heifer, and trepass offering as well. Each one of these offerings provided a different work in the Yahweh's satisfaction being met. They also set examples of what is expected of our conduct as we immitate Jesus in our service towards Yahweh and others.

It is not that we can be the shadows or accomplish anything with the ritual. It is the spiritual principles the shadows reveal that we have to come to know and immulate. We are told to deny ourselves, pick up our own cross, and follow Jesus. Learning the shadows is the only means forward.

Yes Jesus is the light, but a blinding light to those who have not yet learned their Lord.

How so much power has been lost from Christianity because the shadows have been stripped away. Now we have the light indeed, but do not comprehend it. What we are left with is religion without power.
I see it as this, you are using the law, as it was given to Moses, to teach you how to relate to what Jesus accomplished. Paul used what He had been taught directly by Christ, to teach the Gentiles the same thing. Such concepts as forgiveness, peace, reconcilliation, justification were all terms that the Gentiles understood. I don't know if Paul ever used the law to teach these, and maybe that is irrelevant to the argument. However, if you read how he describes what Christ did to the Ephesians, you see how he taught the Gentiles. The Torah was still valid scripture that was read in the churches. However, there is no evidence that Paul ever used the pedagogical methods of using the Law to explain Christ. But, as Paul argues in several places, Jesus, in His own Body, fulfilled those concepts so completely that they were not needed to be met ever again as they were practiced in the temple in Jerusalem.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 04:35 PM
What is in the future tense?

I asked you.


Therefore, the discussion in this thread is centered around what Paul said about the festivals etc. not what Plato said.

You quoted Plato, not me. However, I have found some definitions in Scripture about 'shadows'. I will post that next.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 04:36 PM
Do you know everything you need to know about Jesus? Of course not, I knew the answer before I asked. The same is true of me as well.

If you say no, then what is wrong with my endeavors. Read, analyze, test by the Spirit as Scripture commands. I endorse what Keck says and I have said the same. If it as a battle of wits and experiences then we both lose. I can only speak of the things I have learned so, as well as you can only do also.

We aren't in a battle of wits. You asked a question in the OP. We are answering it. You suggest that the shadows teach us about Christ. We are suggesting that Christ teaches about the shadows. If your question is "what is wrong with my approach?" my answer is simply to say that it is highly inefficient.

By analogy we can say that it is certainly possible to crawl around a dark room and ascertain, with much effort, what is in the room. Or we can simply flip on the light switch and see it all at once. Why crawl around the room in the dark when you can turn on the light?

That's what I'm saying.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:37 PM
He did it because he made a vow.

And, as a matter of course, we don't really need to know what the vow was about in order to understand Paul's motivation. I don't really need to know, for instance, anything about what a Nazarite vow means to Paul, but I understand that it meant something to him. And I perfectly understand what it means to keep a promise, even if I don't know exactly what Paul's promise meant to him.

In other words, I understand how fuller and richer the scriptures become once we learn what some of these terms mean. But I'm not convinced that knowing what these terms mean is a prerequisite to an understanding of the main issue.

The main issue was that Paul's vow included a time limit, which required him to be in Jerusalem within a certain window of time. And while it would be very interesting to know more about what caused this time window to exist, not knowing doesn't rob me of the main point.

Where is the Scripture that proves this. The context of the passage does not allude to his motivation for going or say it was because of the vow. This is not true. You cannot assign motivations to him that is not spelled out in the text. However, I do know what his vow was about.

If you knew the Festival system, then you would know that making a vow was connected to it as far as three of the festivals. The vow was to not appear empty handed and offer a gift to Yahweh.

Now he made a vow after he got there, but that was not encouraged by him, but the apostles in order to prove that he up held torah.

Ac 21:17- 23 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+21:23&translation=nkj&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - 17And when we had come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. 18On the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. 19When he had greeted them, he told in detail those things which God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry. 20And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, "You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. 22What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will F90 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+21&t=nkj&st=1&new=1&l=en#F) hear that you have come. 23Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law.

Can't be any plainer and clearer than that, Paul keep torah. I think this would be his motivation if you had to guess.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 04:47 PM
I see it as this, you are using the law, as it was given to Moses, to teach you how to relate to what Jesus accomplished. Paul used what He had been taught directly by Christ, to teach the Gentiles the same thing. Such concepts as forgiveness, peace, reconcilliation, justification were all terms that the Gentiles understood. I don't know if Paul ever used the law to teach these, and maybe that is irrelevant to the argument. However, if you read how he describes what Christ did to the Ephesians, you see how he taught the Gentiles. The Torah was still valid scripture that was read in the churches. However, there is no evidence that Paul ever used the pedagogical methods of using the Law to explain Christ. But, as Paul argues in several places, Jesus, in His own Body, fulfilled those concepts so completely that they were not needed to be met ever again as they were practiced in the temple in Jerusalem.

What is wrong with learning the mechanics behind the machine. Then you could not only recognized it, but drive it.

Yes, I know and everyone keeps telling me that Jesus fulfilled the torah, and I agree. However, he has not fulfilled all that is prophetic.

What is wrong with knowing the how and application to how he fulfilled it. I would think me breaking down the drink offering Paul alluded to would show some mechanics to Paul's life. Paul did not just simply love without a standard before him. He loved according to a standard he learned carnally that he eventually came to know spiritually. I could have added so much more, but no one wanted to indulge me as I wanted to exchange instructions. Most keep repeating the same old things I have been taught since my youth in traditional baptist and pentecostal churches. However, my experiences and encounters have taken me beyond this as I endeavor to discover the mechanics of the machine and not just the appearance. The is more to the sacrifices of Jesus. He fulfilled them all, not just the sin offering. Now if I asked how he fulfilled the Burnt offering, most could not tell me or would even want to know.

I have bounced this off countless believers, and none have been able to explain how Jesus fulfilled the torah in detail. Why because they do not know the emblems and types. If you do not know the types and emblems how can you understand the specifics and mechanics behind the redemptive works of Jesus.

Paul would not have said he was being pour out like a drink offering if he did not understand the ritual as well the follow up spiritual principle the ritual was symbolic of. Paul knew how to describe his actions from the Scripture in ways missing today. How many believers today can say that they are being poured out like a drink offering for others without knowing what a drink offering is and how it can be applicable to love?

I am not trying to live the torah for evidence of my justification but to allow the Spirit to teach me mechanics and standards of love.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 04:55 PM
Can't be any plainer and clearer than that, Paul keep torah. I think this would be his motivation if you had to guess.

That is perhaps, half true. Paul is being asked to accomodate himself to a situation that could cause a deadly commotion, Paul and others could come to harm because of this. Paul agreed to the act, but he did not make the statement.
This seems to be a case where Paul tries to be 'all things to all men' so that he can win some to Christ. He told the Corinthians:
2 Corinthians 9: 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.
The freedom of the Gospel allowed him to walk in many shoes, without compromising the Gospel, so that he could win many to Christ. This was just one opportunity when his freedom allowed him to do just that.

RabbiKnife
Apr 27th 2009, 05:02 PM
Paul "kept Torah" (whatever that means) when around Jewish believers so as to not offend.

Paul ate fried bologna and bacon when eating with Gentiles if that's what they were having.

BHS
Apr 27th 2009, 05:02 PM
Guess we might as well just throw that old testament out the window, seeing that since we have Christ we no longer need it.
While we're at it, we might as well throw out Paul's writings too, since he clearly is a liar, telling us that ALL scripture is good for doctrine and instruction in righteousness.
This is rediculous.:rolleyes:

Yes, a sad state of the modern church when you have to coerce and persuade and try to convince Christians the Hebrew Scriptures are worthy of reading and studying. Can they truly know the God of Scripture, when the "NT" cannot stand alone?

Blessings,
BHS

RabbiKnife
Apr 27th 2009, 05:04 PM
No one says the OT is not "scripture." No one on this forum has ever made such a statement, to my limited recollection.

We do differ on how we are to respond to specific dietary and holy day laws, although I haven't seen anyone advocating sacrificing an ox or stoning a disobedient child lately.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 05:05 PM
What is wrong with learning the mechanics behind the machine. Then you could not only recognized it, but drive it.

Yes, I know and everyone keeps telling me that Jesus fulfilled the torah, and I agree. However, he has not fulfilled all that is prophetic.

What is wrong with knowing the how and application to how he fulfilled it. I would think me breaking down the drink offering Paul alluded to would show some mechanics to Paul's life. Paul did not just simply love without a standard before him. He loved according to a standard he learned carnally that he eventually came to know spiritually. I could have added so much more, but no one wanted to indulge me as I wanted to exchange instructions. Most keep repeating the same old things I have been taught since my youth in traditional baptist and pentecostal churches. However, my experiences and encounters have taken me beyond this as I endeavor to discover the mechanics of the machine and not just the appearance. The is more to the sacrifices of Jesus. He fulfilled them all, not just the sin offering. Now if I asked how he fulfilled the Burnt offering, most could not tell me or would even want to know.

I have bounced this off countless believers, and none have been able to explain how Jesus fulfilled the torah in detail. Why because they do not know the emblems and types. If you do not know the types and emblems how can you understand the specifics and mechanics behind the redemptive works of Jesus.

Paul would not have said he was being pour out like a drink offering if he did not understand the ritual as well the follow up spiritual principle the ritual was symbolic of. Paul knew how to describe his actions from the Scripture in ways missing today. How many believers today can say that they are being poured out like a drink offering for others without knowing what a drink offering is and how it can be applicable to love?

I am not trying to live the torah for evidence of my justification but to allow the Spirit to teach me mechanics and standards of love.

If that helps you, and you can help others to understand Christ, that is all well and good. But it should be remembered that the shadows are what is cast by the substance as it moves through the light, if you take away the substance, you have no shadows, just a darkness that contains nothing. The shadows must always point forward, but the substance must never point backward, for if the substance moves or changes its stance, the shadows are changed altogether. Your way of understanding Christ is good if it brings you to Him who is the face of God, for that is who Christ shows us.

Kahtar
Apr 27th 2009, 05:10 PM
That is perhaps, half true. Paul is being asked to accomodate himself to a situation that could cause a deadly commotion, Paul and others could come to harm because of this. Paul agreed to the act, but he did not make the statement.
This seems to be a case where Paul tries to be 'all things to all men' so that he can win some to Christ. He told the Corinthians:
2 Corinthians 9: 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.
The freedom of the Gospel allowed him to walk in many shoes, without compromising the Gospel, so that he could win many to Christ. This was just one opportunity when his freedom allowed him to do just that.You know, you could be right. But then, if his freedom allowed him to do those things, would it not follow that we also have that same freedom, and do not have to worry about 'being under the curse of the law' by so doing? In other words, if there was nothing wrong with Paul observing the feasts, and keeping the law, having the freedom to do so, then there is nothing wrong with people doing that same thing today, is there? Paul understood that his righteousness was by faith in Christ, not the law, yet he observed the law and the feasts anyway, obviously not for the purpose of earning righteousness, but as a witness to the Jews, and perhaps because he himself was a Jew.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 05:17 PM
That is perhaps, half true. Paul is being asked to accomodate himself to a situation that could cause a deadly commotion, Paul and others could come to harm because of this. Paul agreed to the act, but he did not make the statement.
This seems to be a case where Paul tries to be 'all things to all men' so that he can win some to Christ. He told the Corinthians:
2 Corinthians 9: 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.
The freedom of the Gospel allowed him to walk in many shoes, without compromising the Gospel, so that he could win many to Christ. This was just one opportunity when his freedom allowed him to do just that.

Come on H-town,
Do you really know what you are accusing Paul of here. You would be calling him a liar who was trying to decieve others by an act of hypocrisy when he believed something differently in his heart. As well as a transgression against his own conscience. No this is compromise and hypocrisy if he preached to not observe torah but then he did so to avoid suffering.

Paul's words are recorded in this text by and with Luke being a witness that he went through with it. This is a first hand narrative account. Further we read about his arrest by the judiazers. Yes I believe and call the judiazers heretics. Here in this reading you see them make false accusations against him as they did Jesus. He did not invite or permit the gentile into the Temple, but they accused him of it anyway without evidence.

Acts 18:26-29
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
27Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him, 28crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." 29(For they had previously F92 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+21&t=nkj&st=1&new=1&l=en#F) seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)

Paul was a hard almost uncompromising man who had a very zealous soul. He fully went through with this by his own volition after having his integrity challenged by the other apostles. If he wanted to endorse the point that so many keep repeating that the torah is done away with, then this was the moment to prove it.

It is because we today do not understand the context of that day. The god-given Torah had been corrupted by man made ordinances that had been added along side of torah. Most Jews of that day show them as legitimate. Paul did at one time, but he came to see that God's torah was good, just like he said, and all of the extras man made things were carnal. Paul was preaching against these elements of extra laws in the same manner Jesus did when he said that the Pharisees had constructed rules that violated torah.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 05:22 PM
No one says the OT is not "scripture." No one on this forum has ever made such a statement, to my limited recollection.

We do differ on how we are to respond to specific dietary and holy day laws, although I haven't seen anyone advocating sacrificing an ox or stoning a disobedient child lately.

Man I needed you at this moment. God does provide a ram in the bush. thanks brother. :pp I was getting beat over the head by the deamons trying to discourage me (not the people on this site, but literal deamons). Then all of a sudden you come with the humor. I got to love it.. LOL


You will not ever see me talking about offering a literal animal sacrifice, saying people have to be circumcized, or keep torah to be saved........ NOO way............

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 05:24 PM
I asked you.


You quoted Plato, not me. However, I have found some definitions in Scripture about 'shadows'. I will post that next.

If I had quoted Plato's Republic, I can assure you it was purely accidental. I don't need a philosopher to tell me about the characteristics of shadows. Everyone not born blind knows that a shadow is black, dark, flat, and forms the outline of the object between the light source and the wall.

Okay? :)

But the topic of discussion is Paul's analogy as found in his epistle to the Colossians, in which he employs our common understanding of the physical properties of shadows and the objects they suggest to draw out the distinction between the festivals, etc. and Christ.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 05:29 PM
Where is the Scripture that proves this. The context of the passage does not allude to his motivation for going or say it was because of the vow. This is not true. You cannot assign motivations to him that is not spelled out in the text. However, I do know what his vow was about.

Well, if you know what his vow was about, this presupposes that he made a vow in the first place. I rest my case. :)

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 05:31 PM
A common western interpretation for shadow:

In the 4th Century BC, Plato gave us his Cave Analogy (in Republic). Essentially, the Cave Analogy is that man in his current state is confused in a cave, where the higher reality is 'casting shadows on the back wall of the cave.' Man is limited to knowing reality by what is dimly projected by those shadows.

Plato's view was that truth cannot be known by looking at the shadows - but rather by perceiving the forms that cast the shadows.

Plato was wrong. And Scipture will prove Plato worng.

The word "shadow" in Greek is "skia", in Hebrew "tzel". To comes from the Hebrew root "tzalal", which means 'hovering over'.

Let's look at a few Scriptures and see what "tzel" does:

Gen 19:8
(8) "Now behold, I have two daughters who have not had relations with man; please let me bring them out to you, and do to them whatever you like; only do nothing to these men, inasmuch as they have come under the shelter of my roof."

1Ch 29:15
(15) "For we are sojourners before You, and tenants, as all our fathers were; our days on the earth are like a shadow, and there is no hope.

Job 8:8-10
(8) "Please inquire of past generations, And consider the things searched out by their fathers.
(9) "For we are only of yesterday and know nothing, Because our days on earth are as a shadow.
(10) "Will they not teach you and tell you, And bring forth words from their minds?

Psa 36:5-9
(5) Your lovingkindness, O LORD, extends to the heavens, Your faithfulness reaches to the skies.
(6) Your righteousness is like the mountains of God; Your judgments are like a great deep. O LORD, You preserve man and beast.
(7) How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God! And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of Your wings.
(8) They drink their fill of the abundance of Your house; And You give them to drink of the river of Your delights.
(9) For with You is the fountain of life; In Your light we see light.

Isa 4:5-6
(5) then the LORD will create over the whole area of Mount Zion and over her assemblies a cloud by day, even smoke, and the brightness of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory will be a canopy.
(6) There will be a shelter to give shade from the heat by day, and refuge and protection from the storm and the rain.

So...is a shadow a bad thing, or a good thing...or maybe it depends? What tells you if a shadow is a good thing or a bad thing is not that it is a shadow, but what the shape is pointing to, or outlining. What makes the difference is the substance, or the 'shadow-caster'. Seeing the picture reveals the substance. The shadow reveals the shadow-caster.

__________________________________________________

Isa 51:15-16
(15) "For I am the LORD your God, who stirs up the sea and its waves roar (the LORD of hosts is His name).
(16) "I have put My words in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of My hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, 'You are My people.'"

If this were literal, what would this 'shadow' look like? What shape would it be? Maybe God gives us a clue....

Rom 1:19-20
(19) because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
(20) For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

With this, when we begin to read three references to 'shadow' in the NT, a common pattern emerges from the translators of our Bibles - the translators themselves were steeped in Platism; that they can not see that a shadow coul dbe a 'good thing', and that the reference to a "shadow' is a Hebraic reference to the physical world. They cannot imagine that in our present bodily state, the only way we can see the spiritual is to see the shadows.

So the Plato-steeped interpretation of Col 2:16-17 in KJV that says 'let no one judge you in food or drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ' becomse in Pau's Hebraic though and in concordance with Scripturet = 'So let no one judge you in food of drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of what is coming and the Shadow-caster is Messiah.'

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 05:33 PM
Paul "kept Torah" (whatever that means) when around Jewish believers so as to not offend.

Paul ate fried bologna and bacon when eating with Gentiles if that's what they were having.

Then I guess all that talk of 'being a bold Christian' was just fabrication. And lying and living your testimony by faking it is a New Covenant concept. I didn't know a man of God had to have such fear of other men.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 05:38 PM
A common western interpretation for shadow . . .

Keck, please.

Plato isn't interpreting a shadow. He has employed our common experience with shadows to make his own point, just as Paul is using our common experience with shadows to make his point. This has nothing at all to do with the difference between the western mind and the Hebrew mind. We all experience shadows the same way. It's a common human experience like laughter, and sleeping.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 05:41 PM
Come on H-town,
Do you really know what you are accusing Paul of here. You would be calling him a liar who was trying to decieve others by an act of hypocrisy when he believed something differently in his heart. As well as a transgression against his own conscience. No this is compromise and hypocrisy if he preached to not observe torah but then he did so to avoid suffering.

Paul's words are recorded in this text by and with Luke being a witness that he went through with it. This is a first hand narrative account. Further we read about his arrest by the judiazers. Yes I believe and call the judiazers heretics. Here in this reading you see them make false accusations against him as they did Jesus. He did not invite or permit the gentile into the Temple, but they accused him of it anyway without evidence.

Acts 18:26-29
26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them.
27Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and laid hands on him, 28crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." 29(For they had previously F92 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+21&t=nkj&st=1&new=1&l=en#F) seen Trophimus the Ephesian with him in the city, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)

Paul was a hard almost uncompromising man who had a very zealous soul. He fully went through with this by his own volition after having his integrity challenged by the other apostles. If he wanted to endorse the point that so many keep repeating that the torah is done away with, then this was the moment to prove it.

It is because we today do not understand the context of that day. The god-given Torah had been corrupted by man made ordinances that had been added along side of torah. Most Jews of that day show them as legitimate. Paul did at one time, but he came to see that God's torah was good, just like he said, and all of the extras man made things were carnal. Paul was preaching against these elements of extra laws in the same manner Jesus did when he said that the Pharisees had constructed rules that violated torah.

Paul's recorded words in the 2 Corinthians passage tells the tale, he did not keep the law, or feel beholden to it. If you read the whole context of Chapter 2 in Colossians, Paul's argument is quite forceful. Christ reveals what the 'shadow' could never show you.
If you read his teaching in Galatians four, he sets out quite clearly the two covenants. Paul was talking about the Mosaic law. Now, the fact that the Rabbinic authorities of various parties taught a lot of extra stuff is a fact, and Jesus condemns the Pharisees for this very fact. Paul, and his condemnation fo circumcision in the Book of Galatians is talking about the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant.
Now, Paul did teach and quote from the Old Testament scriptures, that is a fact easily seem from most of his letters. So,, in that respect he did use the Old Testament. But, to say that we have to know the Mosaic system to know what Christ did is stretching it, if in fact that is what your are contending.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 05:45 PM
If that helps you, and you can help others to understand Christ, that is all well and good. But it should be remembered that the shadows are what is cast by the substance as it moves through the light, if you take away the substance, you have no shadows, just a darkness that contains nothing. The shadows must always point forward, but the substance must never point backward, for if the substance moves or changes its stance, the shadows are changed altogether. Your way of understanding Christ is good if it brings you to Him who is the face of God, for that is who Christ shows us.

Thanks to Knife I got a second wind.

I am going to go deep, I mean almost to the bottom.............but not all the way down........ LOL :idea:

I present that we as believers are still of two minds. We can be spiritually minded at one moment and then carnal minded the next. Most people are not even aware of when each mind is dominate and controlling a persons decisions. I speak of myself as well, though I am learning tremedously.

Scriptures says the carnal mind has to be transformed and renewed by sanctification into the likeness of the Jesus. Meaning we have to put on the mind of Christ. This does not happen like a person simply putting on a helmet. It happens by a process. The process is when the Holy Spirit exposes an area of death in our soul that we have allowed to remain consciously or unconsciously. This corrupting virus could be a habit, belief, feeling, thought, condition, or bias. We are given the opportunity to put this corruption to death. Now with this out of the way, a replacement can be inserted so a vacuum will not be left (would not want those demons coming back bringing seven more).

Life in the form of Scripture now advances even farther in its conquest over our carnality. The Holy Spirit now goes about getting to exposing the next area of death crippling our walk and service towards God.

Well, that was brief to say the following.

The carnal mind is death and cannot submit to the torah of God. The carnal mind and torah are at war with one another as mortal enemies.

Torah exposes carnality for what it is, death. It is here that the patterns, emblems, and types (shadows to others) aid a believer. They gives us clear cut examples of what is carnal and spiritual. As well expose a choice we have to make to do one or the other.

I alluded to the meat offering in an earlier post for reference. I stated how the three grades of the meat offering exposed a persons heart an mind towards God and his neighbor. How the fine flour manifested something completely differnt about a person than the ears of corn.

I desire to go farther, but it would be to much at one time............ and the point would get jarred.

RabbiKnife
Apr 27th 2009, 05:45 PM
Then I guess all that talk of 'being a bold Christian' was just fabrication. And lying and living your testimony by faking it is a New Covenant concept. I didn't know a man of God had to have such fear of other men.

Who said anything about fear? Not offending is not the same as being afraid.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 05:53 PM
Well, if you know what his vow was about, this presupposes that he made a vow in the first place. I rest my case. :)

No I said that a making a vow was apart of the Pentecost Festival. Look up vow offering in the OT.......... Never here it goes............

Nu 15:3,4 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=nu+15:3&translation=nkj&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) - and you make an offering by fire to the LORD, a burnt offering or a sacrifice, to fulfill a vow or as a freewill offering or in your appointed feasts, to make a sweet aroma to the LORD, from the herd or the flock, 4then he who presents his offering to the LORD shall bring a grain offering of one-tenth of an ephah of fine flour mixed with one-fourth of a hin of oil
Saints need to get more intimate with the OT, it is like milk, it can do the soul some good. LOL

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 05:56 PM
Who said anything about fear? Not offending is not the same as being afraid.

Rabbi, as much as we agree on things, we depart here. Jesus said simply walking our faith would offend.

Obviously it does.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 05:59 PM
Keck, please.

Plato isn't interpreting a shadow. He has employed our common experience with shadows to make his own point, just as Paul is using our common experience with shadows to make his point. This has nothing at all to do with the difference between the western mind and the Hebrew mind. We all experience shadows the same way. It's a common human experience like laughter, and sleeping.

I'm afraid it has everythiing to do with the difference between the Greek mindset and the Hebrew mindset.

RabbiKnife
Apr 27th 2009, 06:01 PM
Sorry, Keck, we must be having a disconnect here.

I understood you to imply that Paul kept Torah in out of fear of men.

I understand Paul to say that to the Jews he is as a Jew and to the gentile as a gentile. So as not to offend. Having no reference to fear of men at all.


Paul's "so as not to offend" was always directed to a brother, not to a non-Christian.

I believe Paul would acknowledge that Gospel was offensive to the world, but that his use of offense as to brothers was a different use altogether.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 06:04 PM
Paul's recorded words in the 2 Corinthians passage tells the tale, he did not keep the law, or feel beholden to it. If you read the whole context of Chapter 2 in Colossians, Paul's argument is quite forceful. Christ reveals what the 'shadow' could never show you.
If you read his teaching in Galatians four, he sets out quite clearly the two covenants. Paul was talking about the Mosaic law. Now, the fact that the Rabbinic authorities of various parties taught a lot of extra stuff is a fact, and Jesus condemns the Pharisees for this very fact. Paul, and his condemnation fo circumcision in the Book of Galatians is talking about the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant.
Now, Paul did teach and quote from the Old Testament scriptures, that is a fact easily seem from most of his letters. So,, in that respect he did use the Old Testament. But, to say that we have to know the Mosaic system to know what Christ did is stretching it, if in fact that is what your are contending.


So are you saying that Paul made a mockery of Himself and God by going to Jerusalem and doing what he did. He would clearly be in violation of lying and decieveing people if he did, unless we are not understanding him properly.

I said no one has to be physically circumcised anymore, for it is of the heart now. That is what Paul is talking about in Gal. That is the jest of the issue and he is using the examples you provided to demonstrate his proof that physical circumcision proves or add nothing to ones value of righteousness and holiness. His topic is not the entire torah, just the practice of circumcision....

I guess we are at a impass between us today, kind sir... Maybe later....... we can visit this again....... I cannot go to deep today for some reason........................ I think I have to much challenging me at one time.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 06:11 PM
Sorry, Keck, we must be having a disconnect here.

I understood you to imply that Paul kept Torah in out of fear of men.

I understand Paul to say that to the Jews he is as a Jew and to the gentile as a gentile. So as not to offend. Having no reference to fear of men at all.


Paul's "so as not to offend" was always directed to a brother, not to a non-Christian.

I believe Paul would acknowledge that Gospel was offensive to the world, but that his use of offense as to brothers was a different use altogether.

IT sounds like a disconnect is probably the case. If I live in America, I celebrate the 4th of July. In Germany I celebrate Oktoberfest. In Isreal, I celebrate May 14. In other words, I become an American, a German, an Israeli when in those nations.

That doesn't mean I betray God and disobey His commandments. I don't renounce my faith and walk in Messiah, just because I become an Israeli, do I? Of course not! Paul would have done no different. The call to obey God his much higher than anything here on earth.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 06:20 PM
So...is a shadow a bad thing, or a good thing...or maybe it depends? What tells you if a shadow is a good thing or a bad thing is not that it is a shadow, but what the shape is pointing to, or outlining. What makes the difference is the substance, or the 'shadow-caster'. Seeing the picture reveals the substance. The shadow reveals the shadow-caster.



Within the context of Colossians 2, it is a contrast between what is real, what you can take in your hands, what is clearly and fully shown in complete detail, and that fullness of detail is Christ Jesus Himself....

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 06:21 PM
I'm afraid it has everythiing to do with the difference between the Greek mindset and the Hebrew mindset.

The beauty of Paul's illustration here is the fact that his analogy draws from common human experience. We have all seen shadows and we all know what causes shadows to form.

Jesus, when he taught the people with parables, also drew from common human experiences such as farming, cooking, cleaning, and employment to name a few. Again, the beauty of these analogies is that they become immediately accessible to anyone who has ever lived, not only those who have been brought up in Jewish households.

Paul's analogy is immediately accessible to anyone because we all know about shadows. The beauty of his analogy is that he draws from a common human experience, not a uniquely Jewish experience.

But if I was forced to decide whether Paul was drawing upon the Greek mindset as opposed to the Hebrew mindset, it seems clear to me that Paul would use an example from Greek culture since he is talking to Greeks. I always assume, when reading the Bible, that Paul intended to be understood. And so, it seems like a given that Paul would avoid drawing from an obscure Jewish point of view when talking to Greeks.

But as I say, his shadow analogy draws upon a common human experience and does not depend on his readers having familiarity with the Hebrew POV. In this case, all human beings share the same POV with regard to the physical properties of light and how objects react with light.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 07:01 PM
I understand your POV. It's when a certain POV does away with what God calls Holy that raises the red flag. And a POV that extends what God has called in the Bible His covering over us and perverts it to some metephysical projection on the wall is nonsense and human manipulation of His Word.

Another common thread in humanity is satan. And he loves to diminsh that which is holy through our common struggles and our common desire to know God and His ways. satan is a good imitator, but not at all creative.

When God says we are covered by the shadow of His wings, I don't want to look at that from a POV that sees that as a bad thing that was 'done away with'. That's all.

slightlypuzzled
Apr 27th 2009, 07:04 PM
I understand your POV. It's when a certain POV does away with what God calls Holy that raises the red flag. And a POV that extends what God has called in the Bible His covering over us and perverts it to some metephysical projection on the wall is nonsense and human manipulation of His Word.

Another common thread in humanity is satan. And he loves to diminsh that which is holy through our common struggles and our common desire to know God and His ways.

When God says we are covered by the shadow of His wings, I don't want to look at that from a POV that sees that as a bad thing that was 'done away with'. That's all.

I, too, appreciate the beauty of that imagery, it speaks of the full love of one who would go to the cross for His people.....

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 07:11 PM
I, too, appreciate the beauty of that imagery, it speaks of the full love of one who would go to the cross for His people.....

Amen. God is the Author of beauty, life and salvation.

Eben
Apr 27th 2009, 07:20 PM
Tomlane I can only think of one answer now, we must compare the specific scriptures that deal with this :
1Co 13:8 Charitie neuer faileth: but whether there be prophesies, they shall faile; whether there bee tongues, they shall cease; whether there bee knowledge, it shall vanish away.
1Co 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesie in part.
1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part, shalbe done away.
1Co 13:11 When I was a childe, I spake as a childe, I vnderstood as a childe, I thought as a childe: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
1Co 13:12 For now we see through a glasse, darkely: but then face to face: now I know in part, but then shall I know euen as also I am knowen.

This is the scripture referred to.

Now compare it with the following:

Eph 4:11 And he gaue some, Apostles: and some, Prophets: and some, Euangelists: and some, Pastors, and teachers:
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the Saints, for the worke of the ministerie, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the vnitie of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Sonne of God, vnto a perfect man, vnto the measure of the stature of the fulnesse of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we hencefoorth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and caried about with euery winde of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftinesse, whereby they lye in waite to deceiue:
Eph 4:15 But speaking the trueth in loue, may grow vp into him in all things which is the head, euen Christ:

Col 1:9 For this cause wee also, since the day we heard it, doe not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will, in all wisedome and spirituall vnderstanding:
Col 1:10 That ye might walke worthy of the Lord vnto all pleasing, being fruitfull in euery good worke, & increasing in the knowledge of God:
Col 1:11 Strengthened with all might according to his glorious power, vnto all patience and long suffering with ioyfulnesse:
Col 1:12 Giuing thanks vnto the Father, which hath made vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light:
Col 1:13 Who hath deliuered vs from the power of darkenesse, and hath translated vs into the kingdome of his deare Sonne,
Col 1:14 In whom we haue redemption through his blood, euen the forgiuenesse of sinnes:
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the inuisible God, the first borne of euery creature.
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created that are in heauen, and that are in earth, visible and inuisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him.
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Col 1:18 And hee is the head of the body, the Church: who is the beginning, the first borne from the dead, that in all things he might haue the preeminence:
Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulnesse dwell,
Col 1:20 And (hauing made peace through the blood of his crosse) by him to reconcile all things vnto himself, by him, I say, whether they bee things in earth, or things in heauen.
Col 1:21 And you that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in your minde by wicked workes, yet now hath hee reconciled,
Col 1:22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy & vnblameable, and vnreprooueable in his sight,
Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and setled, and be not moued away from the hope of the Gospel, which yee haue heard, and which was preached to euery creature which is vnder heauen, whereof I Paul am made a Minister.
Col 1:24 Who now reioyce in my sufferings for you, and fill vp that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh, for his bodies sake, which is the Church,
Col 1:25 Whereof I am made a Minister, according to the dispensation of God, which is giuen to mee for you, to fulfill the word of God:
Col 1:26 Euen the mystery which hath been hid from ages, and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints,
Col 1:27 To whom God would make knowen what is the riches of the glory of this mysterie among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
Col 1:28 Whom we preach, warning euery man, and teaching euery man in all wisedome, that we may present euery man perfect in Christ Iesus.
Col 1:29 Whereunto I also labour, striuing according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

There is a change that took place. Paul is now saying we can receive the full knowledge by growing in the Body of Christ. That is one of the reasons Paul always pray for us to receive the knowledge and wisdom to fully understand the Word.

Love in Christ

Eben
Apr 27th 2009, 07:30 PM
Manichunter I will go along that we must study the past but then we must do it with the knowledge of the present. In retrospect then we can see how the shadows point to the reality, but we must know the reality before we will understand the shadows. Israel did not understand the shadows while they had all the scriptures.

On Collosians I think you are playing with semantics sir, I think with all respect you are doing it tongue in the cheek?

It is clear in the context that Paul is saying dont consider these things as it is shadows that will dissapear.
In Christ

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 07:40 PM
Within the context of Colossians 2, it is a contrast between what is real, what you can take in your hands, what is clearly and fully shown in complete detail, and that fullness of detail is Christ Jesus Himself....

We all see in the mirror dimly. I suggest reconsidering the perceived detail for what it really is.

manichunter
Apr 27th 2009, 08:35 PM
Manichunter I will go along that we must study the past but then we must do it with the knowledge of the present. In retrospect then we can see how the shadows point to the reality, but we must know the reality before we will understand the shadows. Israel did not understand the shadows while they had all the scriptures.

On Collosians I think you are playing with semantics sir, I think with all respect you are doing it tongue in the cheek?

It is clear in the context that Paul is saying dont consider these things as it is shadows that will dissapear.
In Christ

Most have not seen that this is what I am doing. I am explaining the principles of torah such as the drink offering because I know and have a personal relationship with Jesus. If I did not know Jesus then I could not explain them without Him to refer to.

It is the fact that I have known Jesus that I can now understand what the paths and emblems teach me about him and his works. I would not be able to see revelations about Jesus and share them in reference to the drink offering if I did not desire to know more about Jesus.

Should I go on to explain the burnt offering................. and how Jesus is seen in it, as well as how it is applicable to believers.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 10:46 PM
Amen. God is the Author of beauty, life and salvation.

You guys realize it is imagery, don't you? :hmm: It isn't as if God has wings or anything like that.

keck553
Apr 27th 2009, 10:53 PM
You guys realize it is imagery, don't you? :hmm: It isn't as if God has wings or anything like that.

Oh yeah, that's right. Reality is living in a cave and watching the higher truth cast as a shadow on my wall.

BroRog
Apr 27th 2009, 11:29 PM
Oh yeah, that's right. Reality is living in a cave and watching the higher truth cast as a shadow on my wall.

I don't get it.

bagofseed
Apr 28th 2009, 12:44 AM
Is the law the way to live?

Is the law the truth?

manichunter
Apr 28th 2009, 04:43 AM
Is the law the way to live?

Is the law the truth?


Lets look at the principle of the matter. I will give an example. The Sabbath.

Do you need rest? Yes, it is a universal principle that your body and soul needs rest. So Yahweh being Yireh decided to give man a gift and set the example by taking the same day off as well. He said He made it for man. Hence, it is a day that satisfies a principle that the body needs for health and strength.

Yahweh does all things for our good, so it is not about forcing our free agency, but demonstrating foresight, grace, and love. For Scripture says He knows our needs before we speak. God knew that man would need a day of rest from all his laborers, especially in a cursed world and reality that would do its hardest to kill and strive against mankind.

It is not a day that is forced upon you, otherwise love would not be afforded the opportunity to exercise its preference to show its affections. So you can take accept the gift to your profit and good.

So, it is not about law or being forced to do something you might not want to do. It is about God establishing a system with a benefits package. Like all benefits package, it is up to us to choose our coverage. Hence, principles match the things we need biologically and mentally. But it is up to us to do as we like. Rest or work.................

bagofseed
Apr 28th 2009, 05:48 AM
Lets look at the principle of the matter. I will give an example. The Sabbath.

Do you need rest? Yes, it is a universal principle that your body and soul needs rest. So Yahweh being Yireh decided to give man a gift and set the example by taking the same day off as well. He said He made it for man. Hence, it is a day that satisfies a principle that the body needs for health and strength.

Yahweh does all things for our good, so it is not about forcing our free agency, but demonstrating foresight, grace, and love. For Scripture says He knows our needs before we speak. God knew that man would need a day of rest from all his laborers, especially in a cursed world and reality that would do its hardest to kill and strive against mankind.

It is not a day that is forced upon you, otherwise love would not be afforded the opportunity to exercise its preference to show its affections. So you can take accept the gift to your profit and good.

So, it is not about law or being forced to do something you might not want to do. It is about God establishing a system with a benefits package. Like all benefits package, it is up to us to choose our coverage. Hence, principles match the things we need biologically and mentally. But it is up to us to do as we like. Rest or work.................
That's good.
Keep a day holy to God.

I want to keep every day holy to God.
I should rest from the stresses of my labors.
Yet I have rest and peace in Jesus that in all things and places I find my self I can be assured this is God will and what is best for my life.

Would it be better to have the Holy Spirit tell you to rest and when to rest and how long because He knows His plans for you.
I have had Him tell me go and rest.
He would know that you are going to spend all day pulling someones donkey out of a ditch this upcoming sabbath.

Can we not do better when we rely on Christ who is our sabbath rest, and His Holy Spirit to guide us in a free and custom manor based on His plans for our lives?

I agree if you are lacking this intimacy of relationship go with the standard, and seek the relationship. Which is better to rely on, you friend the king or a book written by him? Sure you may want to read His book and ask Him some questions, But you may find you will do better just sitting at His feet.
He lets us choose.

Can we trust in Jesus to guide us in all things without us relying on our own understanding?
Acknowledging Him in all our ways and trusting Him to direct our paths?

The OT book is Good, The person of Jesus is Best!

manichunter
Apr 28th 2009, 06:36 AM
I want to keep every day holy to God.

Would it be better to have the Holy Spirit tell you to rest and when to rest and how long because He knows His plans for you.
I have had Him tell me go and rest.
He would know that you are going to spend all day pulling someones donkey out of a ditch this upcoming sabbath.

Can we not do better when we rely on Christ who is our sabbath rest, and His Holy Spirit to guide us in a free and custom manor based on His plans for our lives?

The OT book is Good, The person of Jesus is Best!

Jesus is not better, He is it, all, nothing compares. Everything is but a piece of His mind.

Yes I keep everyday holy and honor God everyday, but this a day God honors me. I love my wife everyday, but not everyday is our anniversary date that is sanctified as special for an intended purpose. But hey that is me.

Jesus is our Sabbath rest is not found in Scripture, though it is taught as authoritative. Hence, it is not a fact based principle.

Does me saying I do not depend on the torah for justification or righteousness mean anything to you? I agree with a lot of what you say, but what you say is not the end or complete thought in reference to all Scripture has to say on the same matter.

bagofseed
Apr 28th 2009, 07:21 AM
Jesus is not better, He is it, all, nothing compares. Everything is but a piece of His mind.
:kiss:

Yes I keep everyday holy and honor God everyday, but this a day God honors me. I love my wife everyday, but not everyday is our anniversary date that is sanctified as special for an intended purpose. But hey that is me.

Thats fine, im not sure I desire some special day.
I just want to be in His presence and never go out.


Jesus is our Sabbath rest is not found in Scripture, though it is taught as authoritative. Hence, it is not a fact based principle.

It is not found directly in the scriptures, I agree.
Untrue, I need to study more.
But thanks for the challenge.


Does me saying I do not depend on the torah for justification or righteousness mean anything to you?

Yes.


I agree with a lot of what you say, but what you say is not the end or complete thought in reference to all Scripture has to say on the same matter.
You always stop short, makes you look like you want to have some mystery or keep some secret or knowledge or don't want what you really believe on public display.
You do this a lot, and it sends up warning flags for me.

manichunter
Apr 29th 2009, 05:34 PM
:kiss:
You always stop short, makes you look like you want to have some mystery or keep some secret or knowledge or don't want what you really believe on public display.
You do this a lot, and it sends up warning flags for me.


I agree with this as well, but it is not done maliciously. I try to exercise wisdom when I converse with people not to hide something but to stay in peace. Being at peace with all brothers and man is a commandment of God. It is a higher command than the relaying of information.

As far stoping short. Not really, I believe in getting to know a person first and forming a relationship with them as best as possible. This makes it personal and lets informal..

I know some just want to data dump, share info, let others no something special, and some just want to simply converse with other brothers in the Lord, but I want also to relate to my brotheren in the Spirit.

I am a natural observer and being new to the forums has taught me a lot. One thing, I now practice is relating to others not for the sake of exchanging information, but communing with others in the Spirit.

By the way, pray for me and my family dear brother. My family and I got flooded out of our house yesterday in all of the storms in Houston. We are fine and God is providing. Tempers are flaring a little bit between me and the spouse, but we will be fine. We lost somethings that cannot be replaced, and momma is a little upset, but hey, God is still good, and all the time God is good.

Dani H
Apr 29th 2009, 05:40 PM
By the way, pray for me and my family dear brother. My family and I got flooded out of our house yesterday in all of the storms in Houston. We are fine and God is providing. Tempers are flaring a little bit between me and the spouse, but we will be fine. We lost somethings that cannot be replaced, and momma is a little upset, but hey, God is still good, and all the time God is good.

You and your loved ones have my prayers, dear brother. We can agree to disagree on certain beliefs, but when it comes to being there for each other, there should never be a question. :hug:

Vhayes
Apr 29th 2009, 06:20 PM
Praying for your family, Mani.

I'm too far away to offer physical help but prayer help I can give!
V

manichunter
Apr 30th 2009, 12:55 PM
thanks for all the prayer........ guys and gals...........

Your Advert here


Hosted by Webnet77