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.
Originally posted by Tentickles
Religion is a Sham and used by our leaders to create fear and death.
Originally posted by JesusisTruth
I'm gonna let someone with more biblical knowledge take that apparent scriptual fault on.
as for.
I totally agree with you. Religion is a sham, but it is used by the individual to create fear and death. Everyone IS there own leader...people need to stop blaming the top...it all rolls down hill.
No, that's arrogant bias. It's not created by many saints who seen and talked to God face to face and even raised the dead. You people are arrogant as sh**. What the hell gives you the right to judge why people believe?
I don't believe because I create fear and death, and btw that makes no sense because death don't need to be created, it's a reality.
as for fear.
God said. and many saints said, don't fear hell or death, so that's not even what our God said.
There is a such thing as a holy fear. Out of respect. That's a good solid fear.
And everyone is not their own leader, God made souls.
anyways pointless arguing.
I'll let someone else handle the other part of your OP.
Originally posted by Myrtales Instinct
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
I don't see that he is telling anyone to break the law. It seems your issue is with him equating wine to his own lifeblood but you don't have a problem with him equating his flesh to the bread/matza.
It appears that all of the Old Testament quotes you typed out refer to eating blood from animals. He didn't ask them (nor you) to eat his blood but to let it come in to your remembrance, that he is the true vine and the fruit of this vine is his lifeblood connection to us. Another thing that you may want to factor in here is Jesus being from the tribe of Judah and the blessings bestowed upon them that actually mentions the phrase "blood of grapes."
"Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies; your father's sons will bow down to you. You are a lion's cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him? The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his. He will tether his donkey to a vine, his colt to the choicest branch; he will wash his garments in wine, his robes in the BLOOD OF GRAPES. His eyes will be darker than wine, his teeth whiter than milk." Genesis 49:8-12
Wine as a drink offering is acceptable to God. But more importantly the hardcore evidence that the New Covenant Jesus spoke of is the real deal comes in the form of a miraculous sign. In fact, we get many "signs" but two are known as actual "miraculous signs." The first is found in the Wedding at Cana. Jesus takes huge jars, that the Jews used for themselves for ritual cleansing. He had the jars filled to the brim with water and he then changed the water into wine. This is where the mystery of God unveils and you are unified with God. Jesus is not a divider but as Messiah he is the unifier back to God. The mystery can further be explained as the "Son of Man" lifting up in a person.
Love of a man and woman on their wedding night has it's own essence and the love that God has for each of us has it's own essence. Man and woman's essence is from below and God and mans is from above - and the old saying "As above, so below" is very very true.
Originally posted by miriam0566
exodus 24[7] And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. [8] And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
the mosaic law covenant was instituted with blood.
the scriptures you quoted earlier refer to abstaining from blood because it is holy, or "set aside or devoted for a specific purpose"
heb 13:[20] Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
so both covenants were made with blood. who's blood?
well in hebrews, paul refers to the mosaic law as a tutor, something that was set up to point to the christ.
the mosaic law was instituted with animal blood sprinkled on the altar and on the people. animal blood ≠ human blood. so the messiah was still needed. when the messiah arrived, it was to be his blood that would save mankind once and for all.
so this is why the bible keeps talking about blood.
were the apostles violating the law? no. the wine and bread they drank was symbolic. it doesnt turn to real blood or flesh in your stomach. rather it was symbolic of the christians partaking in the sacrifice that would save them, because it was with jesus' literal blood and flesh that they were bought as first fruits.
the mosaic law gave us a preview of this because sin offerings were to be eaten by the priests.
does every christian partake of this sacrifice? no. only the "first fruits" do. these are the one directly bought from christ's blood.
Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
I see what you are saying. The only problem I have with this is that he himself did not do it and with the fact that "if you've thought it, you've done it". He himself is forgoing the act symbolically and physically, yet is telling his disciples to directly violate the law, which he is full filling in not partaking, but conversely is telling them to break.
Does not God require blood at the hand of everyman? Does not each man bare his own burdern? These are spoken from God, who does not change.
Either this is Just, in that Jesus IS everyman or it is unjust in that God who does not change has now changed for the sake of one.
Do you not see the confusion?
Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
Is it ok to worship Idols, after all they are symbolic of God...? Is it that anything done symbolically which is now ok to do?
Christ did not say this was a new covenent, rather this is the blood of the covenent shed for the REMISSION of sins.
Originally posted by miriam0566
Originally posted by letthereaderunderstand
Is it ok to worship Idols, after all they are symbolic of God...? Is it that anything done symbolically which is now ok to do?
your still missing the point of what im saying.
i stated that the reason we do not drink blood is because it is holy.
holy -
3: devoted entirely to the deity or the work of the deity
4 a: having a divine quality b: venerated as or as if sacred
sacred -
1 a: dedicated or set apart for the service or worship of a deity b: devoted exclusively to one service or use (as of a person or purpose)
2 a: worthy of religious veneration : holy b: entitled to reverence and respect
it means that bloody is something set aside for a specific purpose.
your concluding that jesus commanded his apostles to break the law without asking what the law was for in the first place.
Christ did not say this was a new covenent, rather this is the blood of the covenent shed for the REMISSION of sins.
and what was the point of the mosaic law? wasn't it to point to a messiah that would redeem mankind and would put an end to sin? didnt god promise abraham that by his seed the nations would be blessed?
the law was there as a shadow of things to come. everything about the law was symbolic of what was to occur later. the priest class, the high priest, the sacrifices were all symbolic of what jesus and his "first fruits" were going to do for real. not the other way around.
blood was sacred because it was jesus' blood that would literally pay mankind's ransom.
those who are partaking of the wine and bread do not literally partake of flesh and blood, but they show that they are direct benefactors of that arrangement, just as jesus told them to.
Mat 26:29 But I say to you, I will not at all drink of this fruit of the vine after this until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of My Father.
It is obvious that he doesn't partake as he even says he will not.
Now of course this is symbolic, but he is not partaking in "Live Blood and meat" yet, is telling the disciples to in effect break the law, as they are symbolically eating the "living saviors" body and drinking his blood. It says that anyone doing this is "cut off" from there people. He is telling them to do it in remembrance of him. What exchange is taking place?
The first lie told is, "too die you shall not die, for the Elohim know that in the day you eat of it, you shall be made like unto the most high to know both good and evil". Yet, the truth is that you were taken from dirt and to dirt you shall return says the lord who does not change. All of this symbolic lingo is added by teachers interpretations and apologists and it has done nothing, but to create a Tower of Confusion, so that no man understands one another's speech. It has become a Magdol I tell you in truth, nothing is symbolic. I myself have seen those things which people try to interpret, but they are just as described.
Originally posted by Myrtales Instinct
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
I don't see that he is telling anyone to break the law. It seems your issue is with him equating wine to his own lifeblood but you don't have a problem with him equating his flesh to the bread/matza.
It appears that all of the Old Testament quotes you typed out refer to eating blood from animals. He didn't ask them (nor you) to eat his blood but to let it come in to your remembrance, that he is the true vine and the fruit of this vine is his lifeblood connection to us.
Another thing that you may want to factor in here is Jesus being from the tribe of Judah and the blessings bestowed upon them that actually mentions the phrase "blood of grapes."
"Judah, your brothers will praise you; your hand will be on the neck of your enemies; your father's sons will bow down to you. You are a lion's cub, O Judah; you return from the prey, my son. Like a lion he crouches and lies down, like a lioness--who dares to rouse him? The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his. He will tether his donkey to a vine, his colt to the choicest branch; he will wash his garments in wine, his robes in the BLOOD OF GRAPES. His eyes will be darker than wine, his teeth whiter than milk." Genesis 49:8-12
Wine as a drink offering is acceptable to God. But more importantly the hardcore evidence that the New Covenant Jesus spoke of is the real deal comes in the form of a miraculous sign. In fact, we get many "signs" but two are known as actual "miraculous signs." The first is found in the Wedding at Cana. Jesus takes huge jars, that the Jews used for themselves for ritual cleansing. He had the jars filled to the brim with water and he then changed the water into wine. This is where the mystery of God unveils and you are unified with God. Jesus is not a divider but as Messiah he is the unifier back to God. The mystery can further be explained as the "Son of Man" lifting up in a person.
Love of a man and woman on their wedding night has it's own essence and the love that God has for each of us has it's own essence. Man and woman's essence is from below and God and mans is from above - and the old saying "As above, so below" is very very true.
Originally posted by L.I.B.
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
Mat 26:29 But I say to you, I will not at all drink of this fruit of the vine after this until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of My Father.
It is obvious that he doesn't partake as he even says he will not.
Actually, as I read that verse Christ has already partaken, not that he will not. Except that he won't drink again until he can drink it anew (as in celebration) with his disciples when they join him in the Kingdom of the Father.
The part where he says: "after this" is what I am referring to that makes me read the verse differently than you have postulated.
Now of course this is symbolic, but he is not partaking in "Live Blood and meat" yet, is telling the disciples to in effect break the law, as they are symbolically eating the "living saviors" body and drinking his blood. It says that anyone doing this is "cut off" from there people. He is telling them to do it in remembrance of him. What exchange is taking place?
Yes, it is symbolic and many walked away from Christ after hearing those words saying that they were hard teachings (or something to that effect).
The exchange taking place, well I also think that it is symbolic. Symbolic in that by taking in/receiving the blood and body of Christ we are in essence given the life (blood) of Christ and living that life in the body by example and actions.
That's my thought anyhow, which doesn't really have anything to do with the ceremony... except that some believe that that ceremony does accelerate this change somehow.
Edit to add: I think that the first time that Jesus had partaken of the blood and body of Christ (anointing) was right after he was baptized.
[edit on 14-3-2009 by L.I.B.]
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
The first lie told is, "too die you shall not die, for the Elohim know that in the day you eat of it, you shall be made like unto the most high to know both good and evil". Yet, the truth is that you were taken from dirt and to dirt you shall return says the lord who does not change. All of this symbolic lingo is added by teachers interpretations and apologists and it has done nothing, but to create a Tower of Confusion, so that no man understands one another's speech. It has become a Magdol I tell you in truth, nothing is symbolic. I myself have seen those things which people try to interpret, but they are just as described.
Interesting you are so correct and yet wrong too, the part about the death and dust, you are correct.
But I have no problem telling you straight out you are wrong when you say "nothing is symbolic". For example the book of Revelation, have you read it?
So you think all those beasts and creatures are literal and exist, they don't symbolize something or someone?
I will give you just one example or question. What is the image of the beast in Revelation 13:5?
"The second beast was allowed to impart life to the image of the first beast so that the image of the beast could talk and order the execution of those who would not worship the image of the beast."
There are countless other examples, but I think I made the point.
The key to understanding the real truth of the bible is understanding when something is literal or symbolic, from there you have to figure out what the symbolic item represents. It is not easy, it takes years of deep study and meditation and holy spirit.
That's why one of my favorite scriptures is in John 4: 23&24
(Contemporary English Version)
"23But a time is coming, and it is already here! Even now the true worshipers are being led by the Spirit to worship the Father according to the truth. These are the ones the Father is seeking to worship him. 24God is Spirit, and those who worship God must be led by the Spirit to worship him according to the truth."
This has very scary ramifications for people that accept doctrine that God disapproves of as false. Then again Jesus pointed this out at the end of Matthew 25 and he was talking about Christians not non-believers, because the ones he address's called him Lord.
I will leave you with the first and most symbolic prophesy in the bible that has the furthest reaching application. This is God addressing Satan after Adam and Eve sinned.
Genesis 3:15
Bible in Basic English
"And there will be war between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed: by him will your head be crushed and by you his foot will be wounded."