It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How Can This Be True?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 10:20 PM
link   
OT
---
Leviticus Chapter 11 3 - Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is wholly cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that may ye eat.

Deuteronomy Chapter 14 6 - And every beast that parteth the hoof, and hath the hoof wholly cloven in two, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that ye may eat.

Jeremiah 31 30 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;

Oral Torah
------------
Mishneh Torah 172 - To obey every prophet in each generation provided he neither adds to nor takes away from the Torah, as it is written "unto him ye shall hearken" (Deuteronomy 18,15).

NT
---
Matt 15:11 "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

Conclusion
-------------
NT Jesus said the unlcean meats would not defile us, but the OT says that any prophet who changes or adds to the existing commandments should not be followed. But in Jeremiah 31 30 it says God will give us a new covenant.

But this means a new covenant should not be accepted according to the traditional view, as it is forbidden according to the OT, even though it states a new covenant will be made according to the OT.

So how can anyone fullfill this prophecy from Jeremiah? Who can give man a new covenant and break the OT law but yet be accepted? It's a paradox, but yet significant since a new covenant was prophecized in the OT too. I provided the scriptures from the OT so you can read it yourself and find alternative books with the texts, and these aren't parabels.

So, did mankind ever recieve a new covenant that we missed? Or is this for a time still to come?




posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Yup you just found one of the many contradictions that there are in this book.

Why would you base your entire life on this.

Anyone can write a book.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by theendisnear69
Yup you just found one of the many contradictions that there are in this book.

Why would you base your entire life on this.

Anyone can write a book.


The OT and NT aren't from the same book, nor written by the same people or time, nor do they posess the same quality in prophecy at all. The OT and NT have many contradictions which everyone is familiar with. If you read them side by side, the NT covenant people can break virtually every law and still be redeemed, but OT covenants cannot.

But if you read the OT, it would seem that a jew who keeps his traditional covenant would not be able to accept a new covenant even though it was prophecized by one of their own prophets. So how can one grasp such prophecy?

Everyone can write books, but prophecy like the OT prophets? No, I still have not seen anyone do such things in history. Remember it was only 60 years ago one of their great prophecies from 2000 years ago came true.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the New Covenant the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross? Wasn't it Jesus dying for our sins so that we all may be saved and dwell in the house of the Lord?

I always took that to mean that since Jesus was sacrificed we are all clean of sin and will all receive the salvation Jesus spoke of as long as we don't refuse it.

Of course, the church would never have it that way



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the New Covenant the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross? Wasn't it Jesus dying for our sins so that we all may be saved and dwell in the house of the Lord?

I always took that to mean that since Jesus was sacrificed we are all clean of sin and will all receive the salvation Jesus spoke of as long as we don't refuse it.

Of course, the church would never have it that way


Yes, thats part of something many would call "a new covenant". But it also breaks almost all old covenants, which therefor also prohibits jews from accepting unless they break their original covenant, yet they were promised a new covenant in their own holy scriptures.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 08:05 AM
link   
If you want to worry about it don't eat things with cloven hooves. For that matter, become a vegetarian. If you don't want to worry about it, go have a ham and cheese sandwich.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   
The NT itself has some weird "paradoxes" or as I might call them Continuity Errors.

The biggest to me is Judas, the silver, "his" field, and some bizarre references to the Tanakh supposed to be dealing with that.

Each of the Gospels contradict each other in regards to Judas and then Acts takes Judas' death way out into leftfield. Not one can agree about his death, the silver, or the field.

I'm inclined to believe if any are correct its Matthew based on the fact this was the only Gospel that was really supported by the Jerusalem Church and its remnants that survived the First Jewish Roman War.



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenflt
 


jesus didnt say that

whats the ref and ill explain it to you (memory like a sieve)

david



posted on Jul, 3 2008 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenflt
 


Yeah they may be completely different books and probably were never meant to be read side by side.

But the god in those books sounds highly disturbing in the OT. OOOO wait a second god says he never changes right? So the sick man in the sky who said owning slaves was allright thousands of years ago, probably still thinks that way.

It is exactly the same god who said those sick things, that people worship today.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join