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.

 

The Miracle of Israel

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 

The Jews had to eat the sacrifice and so do we.
The sin offerings were not eaten by the people who had sinned but by a priest who would eat the sin, a designated sin eater.
The Israelites would eat the Passover lamb but that was not for sin but protection from the destroying angel.




posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


www.scripturecatholic.com...
edit on 10-12-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 
My understanding of what the Catholic priests do in Mass is to offer sacrifice, a concept I personally find revolting, that men pretend to offer Jesus to God.


edit on 10-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   
What do you make of Daniel's mention of perpetual sacrifice?



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
So you guys thoroughly confussed enough and ready for me to shed light on the "Jew" issue with nothing more than scriputre? I have enjoyed the comments so far

edit on 10-12-2011 by KJV1611 because:




posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
What do you make of Daniel's mention of perpetual sacrifice?

Here's how it looks in the Septuagint:
Daniel 8:11,12
and by which the commander and chief it should rescue the into captivity and by him sacrifice overthrow (ερραχθη errachtheh) and was and he will prosper (κατευοδωθη kateuodotheh) it and the holy place be made desolate and was given for the sacrifice sin and she was tossed to the ground the righteousness and did and that he should prosper the way.

This is the mainly used Greek version which calls it the "sin offering" which is the daily sacrifice they had every evening at the temple. How some people interpret it, it comes out "perpetual" but is another way to say it happens every day regardless of even if they were having at the same time, for example, the Passover lambs being slaughtered.
edit on 10-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
Yes, but the old covenant was abolished and it hasn't been fulfilled yet. It has to be talking about the new covenant.

Even Jesus paraphrased Daniel, so you can't claim that wasn't a divinely inspired book.

Mass happens every day too.
edit on 10-12-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by KJV1611
 




So you guys thoroughly confussed enough and ready for me to shed light on the "Jew" issue with nothing more than scriputre? I have enjoyed the comments so far

" with nothing more than scriputre?"

You mean your interpretation of scripture? No thanks.

However, I'd like you to shed light on my earlier comment...



Show me ONE.... just ONE verse in the bible which explicitly reads "Jews are Gods chosen people", and I promise I will leave this forum for good, and stand corrected all my life.









edit on 10-12-2011 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 





Yes, but the old covenant was abolished and it hasn't been fulfilled yet. It has to be talking about the new covenant.



Hey, hang on.. where in the bible does it say the old covenant was "abolished".



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 





So you're saying that a real, concrete hand, leg or eye is a mere allusion "to abstract spiritual concepts". Such as an abstract, spiritual hand, leg, or eye. Sounds like Plato to me, and that's Greek!


Here's something that could surprise you: Philosophy precedes Plato
.. I know eh?? It must be an amazing revelation, that the ancients of the past, those who wrote those tremendously enigmatic myths, didn't really take the myth - or form - for the thing itself. It is all metaphysics. Any initiate would know this.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I take it you're a "scripture alone" type of guy? I'm still pretty sure it's in there. I remember reading it. But if it's not we just have to read the writings of the early church fathers.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
Yes, but the old covenant was abolished and it hasn't been fulfilled yet. It has to be talking about the new covenant.

Even Jesus paraphrased Daniel, so you can't claim that wasn't a divinely inspired book.

Mass happens every day too.
Jesus said the abomination of desolation, as spoken of in Daniel. Daniel was a popular apocalyptic book so Jesus could make an illusion to it and people would understand what he meant because Jesus would have understood how the people he was talking to understood it. Jesus did not go around at least in public where it is recorded, saying which books were or were not inspired. I doubt he was especially concerned about it and was kind of of the attitude of Why read the book when the person the books are about is with you right now. I think Jesus made it clear that all the prophecies were done with him and he was the new prophet and whatever was going to be prophesied about the future was being done by himself, with his interpretation. If there were writings about good things to come, then he was going to take those and make them better.
edit on 10-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by 547000
Yes, but the old covenant was abolished and it hasn't been fulfilled yet. It has to be talking about the new covenant.

Even Jesus paraphrased Daniel, so you can't claim that wasn't a divinely inspired book.

Mass happens every day too.
Jesus said the abomination of desolation, as spoken of in Daniel. Daniel was a popular apocalyptic book so Jesus could make an illusion to it and people would understand what he meant because Jesus would have understood how the people he was talking to understood it. Jesus did not go around at least in public where it is recorded, saying which books were or were not inspired. I doubt he was especially concerned about it and was kind of of the attitude of Why read the book when the person the books are about is with you right now. I think Jesus made it clear that all the prophecies were done with him and he was the new prophet and whatever was going to be prophesied about the future was being done by himself, with his interpretation. If there were writings about good things to come, then he was going to take those and make them better.
edit on 10-12-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)


He never said any such thing. You're just reading all this stuff into it. THis is not even a view passed down from the apostles.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

Hey, hang on.. where in the bible does it say the old covenant was "abolished".

The old system of sin and death was abolished and replaced by a new system because of Jesus, and to be administered by Jesus.
This is why you have things like in the Gospels, where in Mark, the temple curtain to the holy place is torn in two, and in John you have Jesus saying, It is finished.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 

He never said any such thing. You're just reading all this stuff into it. THis is not even a view passed down from the apostles.
You might want to be a little specific about what it is you are objecting to.
That Jesus said all the prophecies prophesied up until the time of John the Baptist? That's in the Bible.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Full verse please?



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Full verse please?
Luke 16:16
“The law and the prophets were in force until John; since then, the good news of the kingdom of God has been proclaimed, and everyone is urged to enter it.

Matthew 11:13
For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John appeared.

John 1:17
For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   
www.veritasbible.com...:ccb-48/Daniel_12

www.veritasbible.com...:16

www.veritasbible.com...:13

Daniel was not a law but a prophecy, shut up till the end of time.
edit on 11-12-2011 by 547000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by 547000
 

Daniel was not a law but a prophecy, shut up till the end of time.

To quote the page you were trying to link to:
Daniel 12:9
And he said: Go, Daniel, because the words are shut up, and sealed until the appointed time.

That does not mean the end of all time but whenever this was to be interpreted.
Jesus was the one to properly interpret the prophecy at the appropriate time.
He took his understanding of Daniel and used some of the terminology from it to create his own prophecy.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 08:12 AM
link   
You may be right, but I disagree with your interpretation. Even the apostles spoke of the end times, therefore prophesying, which supposedly ended with Jesus.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join