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.

 

"Not one of his bones will be broken"

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Pontious Pilate wrote "JESUS THE NAZARENE, KING OF THE JEWS". Which in Hebrew read:


"Yahshua Ha'Nazarei W'Melech Ha'Yehudim"

Which in Hebrew acrostics is "YHWH". This pissed off the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin, and they demanded the wording be changed slightly to say "He said, I am the King of the Jews." They wanted the acrostic removed from in front of his cross.


edit on 24-2-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Yes, exactly. I think God wanted the pharisees to see who it was they were killing by having Pilate put that there like that. Talk about irony. The entire purpose of Rosh Hoshana was a dress rehearsal to prepare for the arrival of the Messiah and they were so blind they couldn't see it. This happened because they turned judaism into a tradition of men that became repitition and they grew complacent. They were expecting King David 2.0 to come riding in on a white horse and they got a rabbi riding a donkey instead...it was that one little detail that blinded them. I think Caiaphas knew who Jesus really was.




posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 



The scripture that was referred to is either...
Exodus 12:46/ Numbers 9:12 - about unbroken bones from the passover meal.... which basically compares Jesus to a cooked meal.


And? Jesus uses a piece of bread to illustrate a point about Himself at the last supper. He's the Lamb of God, the Passover "lamb" also pictures Christ perfectly.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 




The part about not breaking his bones does come from the old testament but in this case when the Lamb of God was being sacrificed.

If you know anything about the priestly duties, when the lamb was to be sacrificed it's bones couldn't be broken or it would have defiled the sacrifice and the sacrifice would have been negated. This is why Jesus died before the romans could break his legs.


"If you know anything about the priestly duties, when the lamb was to be sacrificed it's bones couldn't be broken or it would have defiled the sacrifice and the sacrifice would have been negated."

The crucifixion, unlike the Israelite lamb sacrifices, was NOT a sacrifice... but a Roman(pagan) style execution.
You keep pointing out to the similarity between Jesus' and the lambs unbroken bones. The similarity of the unbroken bones is superficial and ends there. The difference however, is vast....

You probably know that the sacrificial lambs, were handled by Israelite priests using specific utensils and rituals... and were dedicated to God.
However, the crucifixion procedure was handled entirely by pagan Roman executioners.
They did NOT dedicate Jesus' death to God. He was executed like a common criminal.
So how can christians compare this with the Israelites sacrificial offering to God??




edit on 27-2-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


Believe whatever you like bud, we will all find out who is right and who is damned soon enough.
___________________________________________________________________________



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 

So how can christians compare this with the Israelites sacrificial offering to God??

The obvious answer, at least to me, is that you are not having a discussion with Christians but anti-christians driven by their own sin and Satan to preach against Jesus and his Church.




top topics
 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join