I’m pretty convinced that some of these “Orthodox” people are just funning us. There is no way anyone could buy into this stuff that deeply.
I’m by no means a Christian, but these guys make being a Protestant seem like an extremely rational way to go.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
Are you saying it would be damning to play with any part of Revelation but perfectly OK with other parts of the Bible? Common sense tells us this standard can be applied to all scripture without that being a private interpretation or stretch of the imagination.[/quote]
No offense, but it feels like I’m teaching calculus to a 3rd grader. Have you not read the Old Testament? According to your “common sense”, the only scriptures you should hail as holy are up to Deuteronomy. Scrap any scriptures after that, including the entire New Testament by your own logic.
Deuteronomy 4:2
“You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.”
According to your own “common sense”, you’ve just damned yourself. Sleep easy for two reasons though; (1) you simply have poor “common sense” and (2) the Orthodox Christian Church has made no additions or subtractions to the Bible since using Her 4th century canon to compile it.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
OK, question: What were Jesus apostles eating when he first instituted the celebration of the last supper?[/quote]
Correction - it’s predominantly known as the last supper in Western Christian theology. In Orthodox Christianity, it’s called the Mystical Supper and it’s more appropriately understood as the first supper because Jesus Christ gave Himself as spiritual nourishment to His followers for the very first time.
[quote]
And did Jesus eat his own flesh and drink his own blood? For he said to his apostles at that time: ?I tell you this, I shall not drink of this fruit of the vine again, until I drink it with you, new wine, in the kingdom of my Father.??Matt. 26:28, 29 Also notice he only called it the fruit of the vine.[/quote]
To answer your question whether Jesus Christ ate His own Body and drank His own blood during the Mystical Supper, I’d have to defer you to an Orthodox Christian priest. I do know that the Twelve Apostles did in fact eat of His Body and drink of His blood. The Apostles and the early Church affirmed this belief and they themselves partook of His Body and Blood again & again during every Divine Liturgy. It’s a false interpretation of scripture to proclaim that Christ’s Body and Blood are mere symbols in the Eucharist. In all four passages of the Bible, the Eucharist is referred to as being the Body and Blood of Christ. It’s never referred to as being a symbol. You may say all four passages coincidentally use figurative language. Then let’s review what the early Church believed:
St. Augustine of Hippo (Tractate 26 on the Gospel of St. John - 4th century AD)
“Wherefore, he that eateth not this bread, nor drinketh this blood, hath not this life; for men can have temporal life without that, but they can in no way have eternal life. He then that eateth not His flesh, nor drinketh His blood, hath no life in him; and he that eateth His flesh, and drinketh His blood, hath life. This epithet, ‘eternal,’ which He used, answers to both. It is not so in the case of that food which we take for the purpose of sustaining this temporal life. For he who will not take it shall not live, nor yet shall he who will take it live. For very many, even who have taken it, die; it may be by old age, or by disease, or by some other casualty. But in this food and drink, that is, in the Body and Blood of the Lord, it is not so. For both he that doth not take it hath no life, and he that doth take it hath life, and that indeed eternal life. This it is, therefore, for a man to eat that meat and to drink that drink, to dwell in Christ, and to have Christ dwelling in him. Consequently, he that dwelleth not in Christ, and in whom Christ dwelleth not, doubtless neither eateth His flesh nor drinketh His blood.”
*The Eucharist [holy communion] is a mystery which Jesus Christ instituted as part of holy tradition within His Church. The Eucharist can not be rationalized; as no human can fathom the dynamics behind God’s Incarnation, neither can any human fathom the dynamics of the mysterious Eucharist.
St. John Damascene (1106 AD)
“Together with the anamnesis, the epiclesis is at the heart of each sacramental celebration, most especially of the Eucharist: You ask how the bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the wine . . . the Blood of Christ I shall tell you: the Holy Spirit comes upon them and accomplishes what surpasses every word and thought . . . Let it be enough for you to understand that it is by the Holy Spirit, just as it was of the Holy Virgin and by the Holy Spirit that the Lord, through and in himself, took flesh.”
You have some serious thinking & praying to do.
Peace be with you.
Thank you stellar. So when the priest blesses the bread and wine, then the Holy Spirit moves through it and effects the transformation of worldly sustenance to that which gives eternal life to the spirit.
And we are admonished to not try to understand this process because it is a mystery which no human mind can fathom.
Where I come from, that’s kinda like saying that priests have magic powers granted to them by God. I know you guys don’t call it that, but that’s what it is. I mean, if I say whatever your priest says and do whatever your priest does I don’t have the ability to transform ordinary bread and wine into something which will give eternal life to someone’s soul… so that makes the priest special somehow. Okay, good enough.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
And if it would literally become Jesus flesh and blood why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience. Why would he make such offensive statements when he was such a masterful teacher at other times? It was because he was testing why many were following him. Those who were just interested in a free meal or wanted to see a miracle were repelled and left. His faithful followers knew he was the Messiah and were willing to wait for an explanation. Otherwise it seems quite strange how easily they accepted that they would now become cannabals.[/quote]
Nice rationalization… but no. We can sit here speculating on the matter till next year and fail to be reconciled. The bottom line is that you draw your own private interpretations on the matter whereas I faithfully accept the interpretation of the Church which Christ commissioned; this Church affirms that the Eucharist is the actual Body and Blood of Christ.
I’ll play along for 2 seconds…
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
“It was because he was testing why many were following him. Those who were just interested in a free meal or wanted to see a miracle were repelled and left.”[/quote]
Jesus Christ was witnessed performing countless miracles by the Jews during His three-year ministry. The majority of those who followed Him were the Twelve Apostles and the various multitudes. They bore witness to Christ when He fed the five-thousand and when He roamed throughout Judea casting out demons, healing paralytics, the deaf, the blind, the maimed, etc. He performed enough miracles for everyone to witness. What “free meal” could the Jews possibly receive by witnessing another miracle? Anyone stricken by an infirmity was healed upon confessing their faith in Him. You’ve failed to establish motive. The ones who departed, according to St. John 6:66, were his very own disciples. Jesus Christ knew this was a difficult concept for humanity to grasp, but the kingdom of God is not for the weak or faint-hearted. His disciples would have to put their complete trust in Him if they yearned for eternal life. They’d also have to obey the Messiah in perfect trust, regardless of the orders given. Refer to Abraham being asked to kill his son Isaac, and how Abraham (a righteous man) would have done this for God.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
His faithful followers knew he was the Messiah and were willing to wait for an explanation.[/quote]
What was the explanation? The Bible gives absolutely no indication that any further explanation was furnished to His followers - nice assumption though.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
Otherwise it seems quite strange how easily they accepted that they would now become cannabals.[/quote]
A strong faith in God leads to a strong compulsion to accomplish His will. Not strange at all.
We could speculate back & forth, which is really what all Protestants do over thousands of phrases in the Bible. Hence the 30,000+ Protestant denominations (and growing) in existence today. I’ll stick to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (Orthodox Christianity) for any interpretations, for only within the framework of this Church was the Bible written and understood.
Peace be with you.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Where I come from, that’s kinda like saying that priests have magic powers granted to them by God. I know you guys don’t call it that, but that’s what it is. I mean, if I say whatever your priest says and do whatever your priest does I don’t have the ability to transform ordinary bread and wine into something which will give eternal life to someone’s soul… so that makes the priest special somehow. Okay, good enough.[/quote]
The Orthodox Christian priest is special. The Orthodox Christian priest has Apostolic succession whose lineage traces back to the Twelve Apostles, who were ordained by Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, Himself. The Orthodox Christian priesthood is endowed with the power of the Holy Spirit to manifest the mysteries of God for the benefit of Christ’s faithful.
Is it appropriate to call this magic? No. The difference between magic and any mystery of the Orthodox Church is that magic can be fulfilled without faith by the power of demons while the mystery is fulfilled only with faith by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Peace out to you.
Rock on stellar. The funny thing about this is that really this is tomayto, tomahto, ya know? I mean, there’s still suspension of disbelief like I do at a Star Wars movie when a Jedi knight jumps twenty feet in the air, does two backflips, and lands on a railing while chopping someone’s head off with a lightsaber.
I just love it because you can’t really get away with telling someone that they’re wrong for believing in something like y’all do, it’s like telling them that they’re wrong for liking chocolate when they should like vanilla better or something.
You guys are completely nuts, and that makes you fun and interesting to me. 
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Thank you stellar. So when the priest blesses the bread and wine, then the Holy Spirit moves through it and effects the transformation of worldly sustenance to that which gives eternal life to the spirit.
And we are admonished to not try to understand this process because it is a mystery which no human mind can fathom.[/quote]
Who admonished you? Surely not me. Surely not the Orthodox Christian Church. You can dream all you want about how bread and wine become the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Nobody’s stopping you, so quit acting like Christianity is destroying your life… You can do whatever you want - you’re a heathen, remember?
If you don’t believe in the mystery of God’s Incarnation, how much less shall you believe in the mystery of the Eucharist…
Missed one, stellar… see my post above. You guys are great fun, and THAT’S why I hang around here and cast my “disrespectful” remarks at your beliefs. That’s what this is supposed to be, buddy… fun. Remember?
Don’t tell me that you take yourself so seriously that this is making you mad. If I anger you, I have but one thing to say to you: tough.
Get over yourself for the sake of keeping this light and entertaining. Don’t make me go “Steve Irwin the Crocodile Hunter” on you and hunt you down and jam my thumb up your pie-hole.
T-Rev warned you that this would happen. If you were going to get upset about this, then you should have taken his advice. I personally think that you mean well, and I’m sure that you’re a stand-up guy, and I respect that. But don’t get pissed off about this because it gets you nowhere. I’m an irreverent jerk, and you better get used to people like me because we’re a dime a dozen.
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Who admonished you? Surely not me. Surely not the Orthodox Christian Church. You can dream all you want about how bread and wine become the actual Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Nobody’s stopping you, so quit acting like Christianity is destroying your life… You can do whatever you want - you’re a heathen, remember?
If you don’t believe in the mystery of God’s Incarnation, how much less shall you believe in the mystery of the Eucharist…[/quote]
Oh, and for the record, St. John Damascene was the one doing the “admonishing”. Read the quote you posted. From what I can tell, somebody asked him about transubstantiation or whatever, and he answered the person with basically “God does it, don’t ask me how.” And that’s admonishing. To caution or advise. To try to understand the “mystery of the Eucharist” is impossible, right?
Besides, I think that St. John’s way sounds nicer than “shut up and eat your flesh of Christ.”
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
The Orthodox Christian priest is special. The Orthodox Christian priest has Apostolic succession whose lineage traces back to the Twelve Apostles, who were ordained by Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, Himself.[/quote]
The pope can also trace back his lineage, thru 264 popes, all the way back to St.Peter the apostle, who was “ordained” by Jesus:
"You are ‘Rock,’ and on this rock I will build My Church…
and
I will entrust to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven."
Well, of course. ALL priests, reverends, fathers, paters, etc. are endowed by their respective God/Gods/Spirits/etc. I mean, would anyone follow a religion while thinking that their spiritual leaders are a crock? Each of the world’s 3000 or so belief systems is, as a matter of “fact”, “the One True Faith”.
You wouldn’t know of an available demon thru which I could cast a “summon 2006 fully-equiped Corvette” spell, would you? I’ve got a low-mileage soul I’m willing to trade-in.
Seriously, (as if…) what you’re saying is that demons have the same power as the Holy Spirit; witht the exception that they don’t require faith? The only difference being that what they do is called “magic” instead of “The Mystery ™”.
Any idea as to why God created demons in the first place?
[quote]doogie wrote:
I’m by no means a Christian, but these guys make being a Protestant seem like an extremely rational way to go.[/quote]
Yes it has been a successful temptation on many.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Oh, and for the record, St. John Damascene was the one doing the “admonishing”. Read the quote you posted. From what I can tell, somebody asked him about transubstantiation or whatever, and he answered the person with basically “God does it, don’t ask me how.” And that’s admonishing. To caution or advise. To try to understand the “mystery of the Eucharist” is impossible, right?[/quote]
Main Entry: admonition
Pronunciation: "ad-m&-'ni-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English amonicioun, from Middle French amonition, from Latin admonition-, admonitio, from admonEre
1 : gentle or friendly reproof
2 : counsel or warning against fault or oversight
If you wanna take his comment on the Eucharist as a warning, go right ahead… St. John Damascene simply explains that God’s mysteries can not be fathomed. Kinda like if someone asked you to figure out what’s beyond the universe. Nobody has a clue - but it’s almost freaky to even ponder such a concept, let alone to furnish an answer. Nobody’s warning you not to do it. Such is the case with all the mysteries of the Orthodox Christian Church which Jesus Christ presented for the physical & spiritual benefit of all the faithful in His Body. Ponder away…
In your initial post, you made it sound as if St. John Damascene says something to the effect of, “how dare you question the mystery of the Eucharist! Thou shalt be damned for questioning God’s miracles!!!” But anyways. Those who don’t have a favorable attitude towards the Christian Faith will continue to interpret the Apostles & the Saints in a mistrusting & twisted attitude as well.
Oh Stella! I especially like the ‘no offense’ pre-empt which is essentially the arrogant person’s way of thinking they can now go ahead and insult someone publicly because they said ‘no offense’ first. And the information ‘I wasn’t ready to handle’ was a classic!
To all who are lurking out there post a simple expression of how reasonable you think Stella is being and how reasonable you feel my posts are. Interested to see a consensus on this. “Let your reasonableness become known to all men.” Phil. 4:5
As I read your replies Stella and mertdawg I am left speechless at how there has been no evident effort to actually use your “power of reason” (Romans 12:1) in your study of the Bible.
First, I’m not Protestant, I get the impression you believe me to be.
Second, your Orthodoxy seems so familiar. How would everyone like to see the extraordinary parallels between the Orthodox church and the Judaism which Jesus condemned? Well, God had given the Jews the Law(Torah). 600 laws which certainly did not go into every detail of their conduct, nor did it have to. HOWEVER, the Jews thought there should be more. So they created the ORAL traditions - the Mishnah. Which Jesus ended up commenting on at Mark 7:13: “you make the word of God(the written Bible lest you take it too literally to actually mean a ‘word’ from God)invalid by your tradition which you handed down.”
Now let’s look at the Orthodox church. God has given his true worshippers(who weren’t Christians before Christ came) the Bible in it’s various levels of completion. COMMON SENSE tells you that for individuals like Abraham to exercise faith in God and meet with his obvious approval he didn’t need any of the writings of what is now called the New Testament as they didn’t exist. Whatever was necessary at the time was what God provided to his worshippers.
But now we have the Orthodox ‘Christians’ saying 'well the Bible doesn’t have all the details, just part, we need the ORAL transmissions through apostolic lineage." Sound familiar? Stella - the Jews had the Orthodox Church beat by centuries in playing that game and they eventually got there just rewards for it. Regarding the Pharisees, as they collected existing oral traditions and searched for Scriptural implication to establish more of their own, the Pharisees saw the need to give added authority to their activity. A new concept regarding the origin of these traditions was born. The rabbis began to teach: “Moses received Torah at Sinai and handed it on to Joshua, Joshua to elders, and elders to prophets. And prophets handed it on to the men of the great assembly.” Avot 1:1, the Mishnah.
In saying, “Moses received Torah” the rabbis were referring not only to the written laws but to all their oral traditions. They claimed that these traditions, invented and developed by men, were given to Moses by God at Sinai. And they taught that God had not left it up to men to fill in the gaps but had orally defined what the written Law had left unsaid. According to them, Moses passed this oral law down through the generations, not to the priests, but to other leaders. The Pharisees themselves claimed to be the natural inheritors of this ‘unbroken’ chain of authority.
Chilling isn’t it?!?
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Thank you stellar. So when the priest blesses the bread and wine, then the Holy Spirit moves through it and effects the transformation of worldly sustenance to that which gives eternal life to the spirit.
And we are admonished to not try to understand this process because it is a mystery which no human mind can fathom.
Where I come from, that’s kinda like saying that priests have magic powers granted to them by God. I know you guys don’t call it that, but that’s what it is. I mean, if I say whatever your priest says and do whatever your priest does I don’t have the ability to transform ordinary bread and wine into something which will give eternal life to someone’s soul… so that makes the priest special somehow. Okay, good enough.[/quote]
The priest is a necesary component of the usual Eucharist service, just like bread and wine are necessary components of the “usual” communion ritual.
The last supper was Jesus body and blood, but his future body and blood from after the resurection when he was no longer composed of this crude matter. Don’t get stuck on the need for a time linear explanation. To the apostles on that day it was not the body and blood, but it became the body and blood later-in a manner of speaking, the past changed. God is not bound by time.
Jesus eucharistic body and blood is not composed of our crude matter because he rose from the dead and now is not part of the fallen universe caused by sin. He is the risen lord who created the perfect cosmos in the beginning.
In this sense, we do have a kind of personal salvation. In the universe you live in, the Eucharist does not make sense, but when YOU have died to your sins and live in the universe of the Orthodox Christians, in that REAL universe, all of these things make sense.
In the Bible, Jesus was transfigured on mount Tabor. What happened. He REVEALED himself to us. In the Eucharist, the best way to put it is that Jesus changes the definition of the bread and wine to be his body and blood. He redefines them. They become the true the only true food which is Jesus, as well as remaining the types/images of the archtypal food which we call bread and wine.
Mertdawg are you just making this up as you go along now? These replies of yours are off in left field. Please come back and explain how your analogies bear on this subject at all.
Fishlips wrote:
why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience.
An analogy here: why would god condemn homosexuality when sex is good?
Why don’t you eat rocks if eating is good?
Now this next statement. Before you’ve seemed to contradict Stella by this statement: Food-of any kind-is only a fallen symbol or type of Jesus’ body and blood which is the only REAL food. In the Eucharist, the bread and wine molecules are accepted by God to become his body and blood. Its more an issue of removing the fallen nature of food from bread and wine. What remains is the only real food.
Excuse me if I’ve misunderstood your statement but it sounds like you’re saying God simply VIEWS the bread and wine as Christ’s flesh and blood and that it doesn’t actually become it in your mouth.(?)
So looking at this next expression 1 Cor. 12:12-26 talks about the church being Christ’s body. Are you a foot in that body? How about an eye? Or a hand? An obvious figure of speech is being used by Paul in these verses to express a thought of harmony in the early Christian congregation. To try and relate this figure of speech to the argument on cannibalism is a no go. Remember, we were talking about Jesus LITERAL body not the figure of speech of the church being Christ’s body.
It is not cannibalism because the church is Jesus’ body.
Fishlips wrote:
The Greeks had a divine bread and also a divine nectar or ambrosia, which their mythological gods sipped and which was supposed to impart immortality. The Hindus had a similar belief.
And God gave them this ritual so that they would understand when they had become ready for Christianity.
Did you just say that God created pagan religious rituals and beliefs? Are you listening to yourself? These the same people he would then turn around and condemn for holding on to those beliefs? My oh my what a web we weave…
[quote]pookie wrote:
Well, of course. ALL priests, reverends, fathers, paters, etc. are endowed by their respective God/Gods/Spirits/etc. I mean, would anyone follow a religion while thinking that their spiritual leaders are a crock? Each of the world’s 3000 or so belief systems is, as a matter of “fact”, “the One True Faith”.[/quote]
(1)I’m not talking about any faith other than the Christianity which cites Jesus Christ as the One and Only True God. So automatically the Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Toasists, Hindues, wiccans, athiests, agnostics, Luceriferians, etc. are cut away from any points I’ve introduced in this dialogue.
(2)Protestants herald almost none of the holy traditions which Jesus Christ instituted. Furthermore, besides the Anglicans and a handful of other Protestant denominations, the concept of Apostolic succession has disintegrated within their belief system. It’s up to all Christians to adhere to the teachings/traditions of the early Church, for Jesus Christ was their Divine source. By this premise alone, there are primarily two Christian Faiths which need be evaluated; Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Christianity. A simple history lesson on the former as well as a study of traditions between the two faiths undisputably enunciates the Orthodox Christian Church as the One True Faith. You see now how thousands of faiths circulating in our world today are diminished to one…
[quote]stellar_horizon wrote:
Is it appropriate to call this magic? No. The difference between magic and any mystery of the Orthodox Church is that magic can be fulfilled without faith by the power of demons while the mystery is fulfilled only with faith by the power of the Holy Spirit.
pookie wrote:
Seriously, (as if…) what you’re saying is that demons have the same power as the Holy Spirit; witht the exception that they don’t require faith? The only difference being that what they do is called “magic” instead of “The Mystery ™”.[/quote]
Demons have the power to facilitate miracles similar to those of God, with the exception they can’t raise the dead. In the end times, the Bible reports that the antichrist will produce miracles to deceive even the elite. Demons don’t need humans to believe in them to facilitate miracles; confirm this with anyone practicing occult rituals. To work miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit requires faith in Jesus Christ. Magic is something anyone can practice, irregardless of faith. Even Christians can delve into the occult, but this would cause a damning loss of grace and infidelity towards the Lord & Savior Jesus Christ, for in Him alone are Christians to put all their hopes.
[quote]
Any idea as to why God created demons in the first place?[/quote]
Demons are simply fallen angles. God created the incorporeal spirits before He made Adam & Eve. These spirits worshipped and praised Him until 1/3 fell away. By God’s grace, all creatures have free will, including the angels. The first angel to rebel was Lucifer; he was a seraphim (if I recall), one of the highest ranks of angels created by God. In his pride, stemming from jealousy of Adam & Eve, he rebelled against God and sought his own kingdom. Lucifer could not accept that angels ceased to be God’s jewels of creation, since Adam & Eve were raised from the earth and given dominion over everything. Angels of higher ranks fell away as well, but Lucifer is perceived to be the king of the abyss because he sparked the downward spiral of other incorporeal spirits. Being that angels/demons have free will like us humans, even Lucifer (who knows that Jesus is the Christ) can repent and make it back to Paradise, but in his bitterness & pride he refuses to reconcile himself to God. And so the story goes. I could go on & on, but something tells me you’re here to challenge and mock rather than learn.
Peace be with you.
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
Mertdawg are you just making this up as you go along now? These replies of yours are off in left field. Please come back and explain how your analogies bear on this subject at all.
Fishlips wrote:
why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience.
An analogy here: why would god condemn homosexuality when sex is good?
Why don’t you eat rocks if eating is good?
Now this next statement. Before you’ve seemed to contradict Stella by this statement: Food-of any kind-is only a fallen symbol or type of Jesus’ body and blood which is the only REAL food. In the Eucharist, the bread and wine molecules are accepted by God to become his body and blood. Its more an issue of removing the fallen nature of food from bread and wine. What remains is the only real food.
So looking at this next expression 1 Cor. 12:12-26 talks about the church being Christ’s body. Are you a foot in that body? How about an eye? Or a hand? An obvious figure of speech is being used by Paul in these verses to express a thought of harmony in the early Christian congregation. To try and relate this figure of speech to the argument on cannibalism is a no go. Remember, we were talking about Jesus LITERAL body not the figure of speech of the church being Christ’s body.
Fishlips wrote:
The Greeks had a divine bread and also a divine nectar or ambrosia, which their mythological gods sipped and which was supposed to impart immortality. The Hindus had a similar belief.
And God gave them this ritual so that they would understand when they had become ready for Christianity.
Did you just say that God created pagan religious rituals and beliefs? Are you listening to yourself? These the same people he would then turn around and condemn for holding on to those beliefs? My oh my what a web we weave…[/quote]
Their beliefs and rituals have been fulfilled. To hold to a factured image of the truth AFTER the truth has been revealed would be evil. 95% of those Greeks mentioned became orthodox. Their pagan rituals were transformed. Just as the Jews of the old testament were not developmentally ready to understand the law, the pagans were not ready. For he says “I will write a new law in their hearts.”
[quote]Fishlips wrote:
Fishlips wrote:
why would God condemn the Jews(remember these were God’s people before they rejected Jesus)in their Law if they drank blood? Leviticus 7:27 “Any soul who eats any blood that soul must be cut off(killed)from his people.” At the time Jesus made his statements he was talking to an all-Jew audience.
We are meant to drink the blood of Jesus. To substitute the blood of an animal for the blood of Jesus would be preversion.
[/quote]
Fishlips, you’re Jewish aren’t you? You and Croooz. No wonder Croooz kept blotting out the “o” in God throughout his posts: “G-d”. I didn’t call him out on it, but I know that’s something Jews typically do so as not to profane God’s name. In fact, judging from your recent account and the few posts you’ve initiated on T-Nation, mostly on this thread, I have a strong intuition you’re one & the same person. I could be wrong but that’s besides the point…
If you lack faith that Jesus Christ is the One and Only True God, then my dialogue with you is terminated.