|
Post by hakawa on Mar 23, 2022 11:49:53 GMT -8
You do not have to read this, and I'm not here pointing fingers, but here is a few tracts I made for those who feel the same as what is written in the Bible by God. Feel free to give me positive thoughts, and civil, meek criticisms (not rude and aggressive). I'll defend these Bible based beliefs and talk as long as it stays calm. drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jQjZpnsZVUoWVueNbrQoQb7D_9NqC6s3
|
|
|
Post by alon on Mar 23, 2022 18:55:44 GMT -8
You do not have to read this, and I'm not here pointing fingers, but here is a few tracts I made for those who feel the same as what is written in the Bible by God. Feel free to give me positive thoughts, and civil, meek criticisms (not rude and aggressive). I'll defend these Bible based beliefs and talk as long as it stays calm. drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jQjZpnsZVUoWVueNbrQoQb7D_9NqC6s3 We are a civil bunch here. Sometimes direct, but not rude or aggressive. If that happens, often things can be cleared up between posters. If not, I have to step in.
Whenever 2 people disagree, each must defend his position. Increases learning and the ability to talk to others about it. But always remember one or both may be wrong! Also, if you ever watched Fiddler on the Roof you probably remember Tevia talking to the Communist and a customer getting milk. I believe the rabbi was the 4th person there. But the kid makes a point, and Tevia says "You're right." The customer makes a different point, and Tevia says "You are right as well." The Rabbi says "What? They can't both be right!" Tevia says "You are also right." That is a takeoff on an old Jewish joke which illustrates a point: "The opposite of a profound truth is often another profound truth." And scripture is the infinite word of God, so often it is intentionally ambiguous so that we have to search out what is meant. Often there is more than one lesson there, and sometimes those lessons seem to be polar opposites. But there are things to learn from all views. The caveat is the opinion must never contradict scripture anywhere.
I often use Christian resources as a counterpoint to what I am studying. While their Greek approach is the opposite of the Hebrew understanding, both can be illuminating. But you have to be careful. Christian resources are full of false theology, and Jewish resources are not scripture either. They are commentary, and can be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by alon on Mar 23, 2022 18:59:11 GMT -8
Who! That's a LOT of folders!
I'll go through them as I have time. But please, do me a favor. I have to read through whatever is posted or linked to here, so try not to send so much material at a time. I am a slow reader, and as I get older I am a slower reader thinker as well!. (I also make more mistakes ...)
|
|
|
Post by hakawa on Mar 24, 2022 7:26:01 GMT -8
That's all the material I have. I'll post a tract here and there, around xmas, and easter, but it'll all be from this base folder. Who! That's a LOT of folders!
I'll go through them as I have time. But please, do me a favor. I have to read through whatever is posted or linked to here, so try not to send so much material at a time. I am a slow reader, and as I get older I am a slower reader thinker as well!. (I also make more mistakes ...)
|
|
|
Post by alon on Mar 24, 2022 9:00:20 GMT -8
OK, I got through them. Wasn't as scary as I first thought looking at the list and multiple windows each.
They seem ok. But you asked for critique, so:
In one tract you said a mass was a service for the dead. I looked it up from a few resources. The best definition I found (which agrees with the others) was from Wikipedia:
The Mass is the central liturgical rite in the Catholic Church, encompassing the Liturgy of the Word (Mass of the Catechumens) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (Mass of the Faithful), where the bread and wine are consecrated and become the Body and Blood of Christ. As defined by the Church at the Council of Trent, in the Mass, "the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner". The Church describes the Mass as the "source and summit of the Christian life". Thus the Church teaches that the Mass is a sacrifice. It teaches that the sacramental bread and wine, through consecration by an ordained priest, become the sacrificial body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ as the sacrifice on Calvary made truly present once again on the altar. The Catholic Church permits only baptised members in the state of grace (Catholics who are not in a state of mortal sin) to receive Christ in the Eucharist.
Still a lot there to shie away from as believers. But not just for the dead. However I suppose it could be argued it is done for a dead Christ, though I'm not sure how a Catholic would respond to that.
Jews actually see this as a celebration of cannibalism. My only argument to that is I do not, nor have I ever done this either as a Baptist or as a Messianic. Their response is if I ever took communion (which they see as the same) I have. My rejoinder is no, it's not. But it's a moot point anyhow. As a Messianic I keep the biblical feasts. I keep Pesach (Passover) from which that rite was taken. Other than that we do not do communion; nor do we interject communion into the celebration of Pesach. We simply acknowledge the statement of Yeshua as being allegorical, the bread and wine representing Him and His sacrifice. Wine was used to seal covenants (ex Gen 14:18, Malchitzadek brought out bread and wine), but old wine (fermented with yeast) like leavened bread represents sin, thus cannot be used for our Pesach. They represent the covenant Yeshua, who was sinless (as represented by new wine and unleavened bread) made with those who believe in and follow Him, a Jewish Rabbi and Messiah.
Isaiah speaks of this covenant in ch 65 v 8: Thus says the Lord: “As the new wine is found in the cluster, and they say, ‘Do not destroy it, for there is a blessing in it,’ so I will do for my servants' sake, and not destroy them all.
There are many references to old wine: Deuteronomy 32:33; Isaiah 28:7; Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 5:22–24; Isaiah 28:7; Proverbs 20:1; Romans 3:13; none of them good.
|
|
|
Post by hakawa on Mar 24, 2022 9:24:32 GMT -8
I can change that quid bit about the mass being for the dead. It doesn't detract from the... tract. OK, I got through them. Wasn't as scary as I first thought looking at the list and multiple windows each.They seem ok. But you asked for critique, so:In one tract you said a mass was a service for the dead. I looked it up from a few resources. The best definition I found (which agrees with the others) was from Wikipedia: The Mass is the central liturgical rite in the Catholic Church, encompassing the Liturgy of the Word (Mass of the Catechumens) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (Mass of the Faithful), where the bread and wine are consecrated and become the Body and Blood of Christ. As defined by the Church at the Council of Trent, in the Mass, "the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner". The Church describes the Mass as the "source and summit of the Christian life". Thus the Church teaches that the Mass is a sacrifice. It teaches that the sacramental bread and wine, through consecration by an ordained priest, become the sacrificial body, blood, soul, and divinity of Christ as the sacrifice on Calvary made truly present once again on the altar. The Catholic Church permits only baptised members in the state of grace (Catholics who are not in a state of mortal sin) to receive Christ in the Eucharist. Still a lot there to shie away from as believers. But not just for the dead. However I suppose it could be argued it is done for a dead Christ, though I'm not sure how a Catholic would respond to that. Jews actually see this as a celebration of cannibalism. My only argument to that is I do not, nor have I ever done this either as a Baptist or as a Messianic. Their response is if I ever took communion (which they see as the same) I have. My rejoinder is no, it's not. But it's a moot point anyhow. As a Messianic I keep the biblical feasts. I keep Pesach (Passover) from which that rite was taken. Other than that we do not do communion; nor do we interject communion into the celebration of Pesach. We simply acknowledge the statement of Yeshua as being allegorical, the bread and wine representing Him and His sacrifice. Wine was used to seal covenants (ex Gen 14:18, Malchitzadek brought out bread and wine), but old wine (fermented with yeast) like leavened bread represents sin, thus cannot be used for our Pesach. They represent the covenant Yeshua, who was sinless (as represented by new wine and unleavened bread) made with those who believe in and follow Him, a Jewish Rabbi and Messiah.Isaiah speaks of this covenant in ch 65 v 8: Thus says the Lord: “As the new wine is found in the cluster, and they say, ‘Do not destroy it, for there is a blessing in it,’ so I will do for my servants' sake, and not destroy them all.There are many references to old wine: Deuteronomy 32:33; Isaiah 28:7; Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 5:22–24; Isaiah 28:7; Proverbs 20:1; Romans 3:13; none of them good.
|
|