Otto
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by Otto on Feb 4, 2008 2:11:38 GMT -8
Greeting to all, my name is Otto, I would like some help in answering some question that were asked me, and I would like your perspective about the fellowship offerings and other offerings that did not pertained to sin offerings. Paul took a Nazirite vow and this required offerings. So here are the questions. “I understand that the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom at that moment our Lord gave up his spirit and that he is also our high priest, in the order of Melchizedek, and there is therefore no earthly temple or high priest. So for this reason we do not make these offerings; we can not. May I also draw that same conclusion about the rules for the priests in Leviticus 21? Are these now too obsolete? On this same note I am having trouble with other versus such as Lev 23 when the Israelites are instructed on the feasts. They include offerings of year old lambs, bulls, rams, and seven day long offerings by fire. How do you celebrate these feasts today? Do you exclude the sacrifice part and just observe them on their respective days? But If the abscense of an earthly temple and high priest nullifies a fellowship offering or a thank offering, how does this not show the feasts to be part of a time before the curtain was torn and before Yeshua became our high priest? How can we participate in these partially? They appear abandoned by God himself from my perspective." Thank you PS, If this subject has already been discussed could someone pleas point me to it?
|
|
|
Post by Prodigal Girl on Feb 5, 2008 16:21:08 GMT -8
Question: DID all sacrifices stop after the curtain was torn at the death of Yeshua on the cross? I do not think they did, based on the sacrifices Paul made for the Nazerite vows, after that. I know we have heard it said in church that no more sacrifices took place after the curtain was torn, but I do not think that is accurate. There is nothing wrong with sacrifice per se, just the manner in which it is done. When it is done in the wrong manner, then yes, Israel was warned what would happen; what had also happened on previous occasions in history.
|
|
Otto
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by Otto on Feb 5, 2008 17:50:34 GMT -8
Thank you Prodigal Girl. A few more questions!
1) What was the purpose of the curtain tearing?
2) Why can’t we offer other sacrifices today? [such as the Nazirite vow]
DID all sacrifices stop after the curtain was torn at the death of Yeshua on the cross? I do not think they did, based on the sacrifices Paul made for the Nazirite vows, after that. I know we have heard it said in church that no more sacrifices took place after the curtain was torn, but I do not think that is accurate. There is nothing wrong with sacrifice per se, just the manner in which it is done. When it is done in the wrong manner, then yes, Israel was warned what would happen; what had also happened on previous occasions in history.
|
|
|
Post by Prodigal Girl on Feb 7, 2008 5:16:56 GMT -8
See other thread... let's carry on the discussion there.
|
|
|
Post by Ruchamah on Apr 25, 2008 13:39:38 GMT -8
Hey all, I just dont know where else to write this, as the other Hebrews link is locked. So...
I am working on the book of Hebrews, have been studying it for a long time now...and it seems to me that part of the point of the author is to show that JUST AS the High Priest of Aarons' line is the mediator in THIS PRESENT AGE, so Messiah is Mediator in the 8th day.
He (the author) seems to suggest, in Heb 9, that the covenant (ie Tanakh) is for this present age and that the new covenant is for the 8th day, not for the millenial age. It APPEARS that Messiah will only be present here in the Millenium in the form (for lack of another word lol) of the KAVOD, the glory.
Messiah's high priestly service is NOT OF THIS CREATION, per Heb. 9:11, and is about the BETTER tabernacle, the Coming good things, the NEW heavens and NEW earth. We know also that if he were on earth he couldnt be a priest (Heb 8:4).
As i have been studying Hebrews i have discovered that one of the keys to understanding it is that when i see the word FIRST i ASSUME that the author is speaking of this present age, which correspomds to the Holy Place, where daily service is rendered.
When the author uses the word the SECOND, i assume he is speaking about the 8th day, new heavens and new earth, and new covenant which corresponds to the Most Holy Place, where HP enters the copy once a year and Messiah enters the real once only.
The old covenant pertains to THIS creation, the new covenant pertains to the Coming Creation.
Is anyone else seeing this? I would love to hear other's thoughts.
Blessings, Ruchamah
|
|