• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Dedicated Altar

@Ancient Paths , can I ask you what your thoughts are on Paul?
Paul was a Pharisee who came to understand two things that were VERY unpopular among his peers:

1. The oral Torah and traditions added on to the Law of Moses were anathema to God and not necessary to be righteous, whole the Torah as written by Moses was still fully valid, and

2. Yeshua was/is the Messiah through whom the exiled house of Israel and any others could be redeemed and brought back into covenant.

Because we do not study the context of his message, the complexities of his audiences or the fact that ha was a top drawer attorney and because we do not know the Torah, Paul is easily twisted and misunderstood. 2 Pe. 3:15-17
 
I agree with you on the identity of Jews, Israelites etc. However, a major error is then to assume that the modern state of Israel accurately represents the Jews. In the above paragraph you jump back and forth between talking about the Jews, and the nation of Israel, as if they were the same thing. Yes, this nation was formed mainly by Jews, however there are many Jews that are not there and many non-Jews who are. And many of the 'Jews' who are there are secular anyway. The political situation regarding its formation and current existence are extremely complicated and could be debated for ever. Depending on how you look at it, it can be seen as a secular political entity that has taken on a religious identity in order to get financial and military support of a certain sector of the West. It is in fact possible to support the Jews from a religious perspective while opposing the state of Israel from a geopolitical perspective - and also vice versa.

I'm not saying that any one position here is correct, just pointing out that you're conflating the religious and political in a way that is debatable.

Without question, the modern state of Israel is an act of God. Equally without question is the secular nature of the nation. But, I am not the Judge and have to surmise that the Father knows exactly what He is doing and this is just part of the process.

Because I trust the Father's promises for full restoration of all thirteen tribes and His guidance to bless and support, I do. Having been in the Land four times for extended periods, I can tell you, He is at work and prophecies are being fulfilled quietly. I know the hearts of many Jews, have lived in their homes, sat at their tables... there is a strong solid remnant I am happy to call brothers and friends. What both Christian and secular media fails to report, I can attest to.
 
I know it's long but please take a look and tell me what you think.

I think he is spot on on many points.

It is not replacement theology. It is the name change that YHWH prophesied for His servants in Isaiah 62:2 and elsewhere.

Jesus said to judge by fruits because you don't gather grapes from thistles! It was so people would not think the wolves in sheep's clothing were true sheep.

The author is not as knowledgable about grafting as Paul was. Wild olive to good domestic proven olive is possible....apple to fig is not.

I really liked the second article too and how he points out that those going back to that land are Khazars. Most Christian's will stay blind, and Edom's judgement and destruction will be carried out by Christ himself. "Who is this coming from Edom with bloody garments?" He will eventually put all enemies under His feet.

Thanks for sharing the links
 
I think he is spot on on many points.

It is not replacement theology. It is the name change that YHWH prophesied for His servants in Isaiah 62:2 and elsewhere.

Jesus said to judge by fruits because you don't gather grapes from thistles! It was so people would not think the wolves in sheep's clothing were true sheep.

The author is not as knowledgable about grafting as Paul was. Wild olive to good domestic proven olive is possible....apple to fig is not.

I really liked the second article too and how he points out that those going back to that land are Khazars. Most Christian's will stay blind, and Edom's judgement and destruction will be carried out by Christ himself. "Who is this coming from Edom with bloody garments?" He will eventually put all enemies under His feet.

Thanks for sharing the links

Isaiah 62:2 is not talking about us, it is talking about Jerusalem, the place.

Nowhere are we ever called Jews. We are grafted into the tree of Israel alongside the Jews. The mistake the author makes is beliving all Israelites are Jews and all Jews are Israelites. Neither is true.

He correctly identifies that there are outward Jews who won't make the cut. He incorrectly believes that non-Jews, grafted in, become Jews.

Scripture prophesies the restoration of all tribes and the two stick prophecy of Ezekiel 37 clearly demonstrates that the reconstituted houses of Judah (Jews) and of Israel (Christians, mostly) will walk side by side with neither replacing the other.

@Cap read especially Ezekiel 37:24-28.Yeshua/Jesus, 'My servant David will be king' and we will walk in the ordinances and statutes in the Land forever. Note: ordinances and statutes include many of the things Christendom deems 'too Jewish', yet they are the very things Yeshua did and Paul did....
 
Isaiah 62:2 is not talking about us, it is talking about Jerusalem, the place.

How can this be talking about the physical city in light of the judgment that was spoken against it? He said He would do to it as He did to Shiloh, and Jesus standing over the city and also speaking in parables confirmed the sentence/judgement.
Nowhere are we ever called Jews. We are grafted into the tree of Israel alongside the Jews. The mistake the author makes is believing all Israelites are Jews and all Jews are Israelites. Neither is true.
I didn't see the author confusing those terms. Wasn't Jew a post exilic term that was applied only to the remnant that returned from Babylon?
Scripture prophesies the restoration of all tribes and the two stick prophecy of Ezekiel 37 clearly demonstrates that the reconstituted houses of Judah (Jews) and of Israel (Christians, mostly) will walk side by side with neither replacing the other.
How does that understanding of Ezekiel's two sticks work with the other scriptures that indicate that the two are reunited in the new covenant? Paul writing about there being neither Jew nor Greek, but rather one body.....and the wall of partition being removed....and Yawheh making of twain one new man?
 
Isaiah 62:2 is not talking about us, it is talking about Jerusalem, the place.

Nowhere are we ever called Jews. We are grafted into the tree of Israel alongside the Jews. The mistake the author makes is beliving all Israelites are Jews and all Jews are Israelites. Neither is true.

He correctly identifies that there are outward Jews who won't make the cut. He incorrectly believes that non-Jews, grafted in, become Jews.

Scripture prophesies the restoration of all tribes and the two stick prophecy of Ezekiel 37 clearly demonstrates that the reconstituted houses of Judah (Jews) and of Israel (Christians, mostly) will walk side by side with neither replacing the other.

@Cap read especially Ezekiel 37:24-28.Yeshua/Jesus, 'My servant David will be king' and we will walk in the ordinances and statutes in the Land forever. Note: ordinances and statutes include many of the things Christendom deems 'too Jewish', yet they are the very things Yeshua did and Paul did....

Zion’s New Name

Isaiah 62 1For Zion’s sake I will not keep silent, for Jerusalem’s sake I will not remain quiet, till her vindication shines out like the dawn, her salvation like a blazing torch. 2The nations will see your vindication, and all kings your glory; you will be called by a new name that the mouth of the Lord will bestow.

Isaiah 62:2 is talking about the New Jerusalem, not the the nation state Israel.

"Nowhere are we ever called Jews. We are grafted into the tree of Israel alongside the Jews. The mistake the author makes is beliving all Israelites are Jews and all Jews are Israelites. Neither is true."

I don't believe he is making that statement at all. It appears to me that he is bringing a new thought into the fact that God is creating a New Tribe under the headship of the Lion of Judah. And all who exercise faith will be grafted in to HIS tree, not a Jews tree that He happens to be a part of, He is the root.

"Scripture prophesies the restoration of all tribes and the two stick prophecy of Ezekiel 37 clearly demonstrates that the reconstituted houses of Judah (Jews) and of Israel (Christians, mostly) will walk side by side with neither replacing the other."

Israel (10 lost tribes, not necessarily Christians, but some are) and the Judah (bad grapes) CAN be grafted into the Judah (good grapes) by faith. But Judah (good grapes) operate under the New Covenant, and follow the Laws that have been placed in their hearts, not the old covenant ones, although they are made up of those as well, but have a higher spiritual implications understood.

I do believe this author of that work does have a clear view of the differences between the two kingdoms and their different prophecies and purpose in the God's History of nations.

I also know that the Son of God DID NOT come to take away the Law, but to fulfill the Law, He IS the Law. I have always wondered, if the ordinances and laws of sacrifice or to be reinstated, does that also mean that the stoning laws will be in place, say for adultery or picking up sticks on a Sabbath (whatever day that is)? If the Son of God must operate under the Laws of the Old Covenant, why didn't He have the woman caught in adultery stoned? Could there be something higher He is trying to achieve?

Could the view you have be on the same lines, and defense, as what is done for monogamy?

Just trying to find the truth.
 
Israel (10 lost tribes, not necessarily Christians, but some are) and the Judah (bad grapes) CAN be grafted into the Judah (good grapes) by faith. But Judah (good grapes) operate under the New Covenant, and follow the Laws that have been placed in their hearts, not the old covenant ones, although they are made up of those as well, but have a higher spiritual implications understood.
Where would you expect to find the Judah good figs (grapes?)? It appears that historically, if they did as the apostles they would have followed Jesus, and would have been called Christian since Antioch.
 
Where would you expect to find the Judah good figs (grapes?)? It appears that historically, if they did as the apostles they would have followed Jesus, and would have been called Christian since Antioch.

Yes, I agree, they would by definition be 'Christians'. But I think the implication is that they are the ones that followed God, Caleb and others from the tribe of Judah from the beginning.
 
How can this be talking about the physical city in light of the judgment that was spoken against it? He said He would do to it as He did to Shiloh, and Jesus standing over the city and also speaking in parables confirmed the sentence/judgement.
It has ben judged and it will be judged again. But the context, a simply reading of the passage, all of chapter 62 is clearly about Jerusalem. Again, Isaiah 2: 1-5 makes very clear that in the last days the Torah will go forth from Zion and the city will be the glory of the earth.

I didn't see the author confusing those terms. Wasn't Jew a post exilic term that was applied only to the remnant that returned from Babylon?
The author uses 'Jew' often in reference to prophesies that apply to Israel and in cases, specifically to the house of Israel. This is a major problem in Judaism and in Christianity. Our understanding of terms is not Biblical. Jew or Judah get conflated with Israel. The restoration of kol Israel is prophesied to more even than the coming of the Messiah, first or second time. But to begin to understand what Scripture actually says, we have to learn to recognize and distinguish the two in the prophets. My recommendation: Take two highlighters of different colors. Assign one to Israel and one to Judah. (I actually have a third that is assigned to 'kol Israel' or the 'whole house of Israel' aka 'house of Jacob.') Then, begin reading the prophets and make all prophesies concerning Judah in their respective color and all of (the house of) Israel in their color and a picture will begin to emerge. You can expedite the process by doing a word search for the respective terms.

In scripture, they are broken down into two groups and called by various names for particular reasons. Here are the groups and their names:

House of Israel: House of Israel, House of Joseph, Ephraim, and sometimes simply Israel

House of Judah: House of Judah, Jews, and occasionally, house of David.

As to the author of that article... Here is a direct quote: "The Church and Judah are the same entity. Although there are non-Judahites who have been grafted into this Judah Church, the Church itself is the legitimate tribe of Judah." That is clear replacement theology.

Here is another quote: "
The Old Covenant was broken and no longer had force in the Divine Court. Those who adhered to the Old Covenant by means of outward circumcision were depending upon an obsolete, conditional Covenant that had been broken and abolished. The only way to have a Covenant relationship with God was through the New Covenant, whose sign was the inner circumcision.

Yes, the New Covenant has replaced the Old Covenant. Hebrews 8:13 says,

13 When He said, A new covenant, He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear."

So, Jesus/Yeshua said, 'I did NOT come to abolish the Law...' but this guy says, 'the covenant is abolished and obsolete.' Recall, the verse he quotes, Hebrews 8:13 does NOT have the word 'covenant' in it. Check the Greek.

Another quote: "Just because unbelieving Jews were able to retain the name of Judah (usually in its shortened form, “Jew”), this did not mean that they were really Jews at all. From the perspective of the Christians (including Paul) the unbelieving Jews had been cut off from their people and no longer had the right before God to call themselves Jews. Only those Judahites who accepted the Mediator of the New Covenant, the King of Judah, the Custodian of the tribal name, could lawfully claim to be Judahites (i.e., Judeans, or Jews)."

False again... Some truth, but more problems. Paul never refered to himself as a Christian. Neither does the Scriptures... anywhere. Paul does call himself a Jew, a Benjamite, a Pharisees, a member of the Way that was regarded by the Jews as a sect of Judaism. Let that sink in!

Bottom line: We are NOT Jews. We ARE Israelites, mostly of the northern house of Israel, whether by blood (they were scattered to the ends of the earth) or by grafting, or both. Either way, the only way back into covenant with God was and is through faith in the Messiah.

How does that understanding of Ezekiel's two sticks work with the other scriptures that indicate that the two are reunited in the new covenant? Paul writing about there being neither Jew nor Greek, but rather one body.....and the wall of partition being removed....and Yawheh making of twain one new man?
Paul also wrote in the same breath that there is neither male of female... so, he must be saying something other than what you are understanding. I submit that he is saying that we all have equal standing before the Father, not that we are a homogenous mass.

Yes, we are headed toward the one new man, but we are not there yet, contrary to ten thousand pages and 55 gallon drums of ink spilled over the subject. Consider: The sign of the New Covenant being fulfilled is that no longer will brother teach brother 'know the Lord.' We aren't there. That comes as a total shock to most 'new covenant' believers, but surprise, if the Torah was written on our hearts as the new covenant promises, we'd be doing it. We are not. We may see shades of the coming New Covenant, but it ain't happened yet. Period.

I am sorry this is so long, but there is so much here to deal with that whole books wouldn't solve it.

Shalom.
 
Isaiah 62:2 is talking about the New Jerusalem, not the the nation state Israel.
No, it is talking about Jerusalem in the Millennial reign of the Messiah.

I don't believe he is making that statement at all. It appears to me that he is bringing a new thought into the fact that God is creating a New Tribe under the headship of the Lion of Judah. And all who exercise faith will be grafted in to HIS tree, not a Jews tree that He happens to be a part of, He is the root.
Then he is wrong. Scripture promises the fulfillment of the promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That involves the full restoration (not replacement) of Israel, all thirteen tribes with the Lion of Judah at the head.

Israel (10 lost tribes, not necessarily Christians, but some are) and the Judah (bad grapes) CAN be grafted into the Judah (good grapes) by faith. But Judah (good grapes) operate under the New Covenant, and follow the Laws that have been placed in their hearts, not the old covenant ones, although they are made up of those as well, but have a higher spiritual implications understood.
Again, we are not grafted into Judah. There is no such scripture. as to the New Covenant, I already covered that. Read Jeremiah 31:33. TORAH is what will be written on our hearts. This is not a different law than what was given at Sinai. (In fact, Yeshua was the Lawgiver. He is the One who spoke to Moshe face to face. He cannot and does not teach something different than what God says. Period.)

Let me explain. His commandments are not currently written on our hearts. Let's take the seventh day Sabbath for example. Nine times. Nine times God explicitly commands the seventh day Sabbath. Never, not one time, is there even a hint of a change of day, nevermind a command to the contrary. There is not a single example of first day worship anywhere in Scripture. Jesus always kept the Sabbath and He was righteous. Paul always kept the Sabbath. Not one contrary example. Why aren't we? Another example, Leviticus 23 gives seven annual feasts also enumerated in other places in the Torah. Four times in that chapter God says that his people are 'to observe the feasts 'as a perpetual statute in all your dwelling places throughout your generations.' Forever... you know, the same thing He said in Exodus 12 concerning Passover. 'it is a permanent ordinance.' Zechariah 14:16-19 clearly tells us that the feast of booths (Tabernacles) will be celebrated in Jerusalem after yet future final destruction of the city.

Simply, the Law written on our hearts is the Torah as promised in the renewed covenant as I previously demonstrated. These are the commandments of which Yeshua said, 'If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.'

I also know that the Son of God DID NOT come to take away the Law, but to fulfill the Law, He IS the Law. I have always wondered, if the ordinances and laws of sacrifice or to be reinstated, does that also mean that the stoning laws will be in place, say for adultery or picking up sticks on a Sabbath (whatever day that is)? If the Son of God must operate under the Laws of the Old Covenant, why didn't He have the woman caught in adultery stoned? Could there be something higher He is trying to achieve?

Yes, Yeshua is the Law and the Lawgiver, but He was at Sinai as well. There is no change in the Law. He will oversee the Torah justly because mere men have never been completely obedient to it. I believe the Torah means what it says and when the Messiah is here, the judgments will be meted out correctly if there is no repentance. As to the woman caught in adultery, go back and read the Torah. The command says the man AND the woman are to be stoned. The Scriptures say the woman was 'caught in the act.' Where was the man? The Pharisees had set a trap. Had He stoned her He would have sinned because the man was not there. Releasing her was meant to make Him look the fool, but, He knew their hearts. The person who throws the first stone has to be a firsthand witness. By throwing the stone, they would commit sin themselves. He flipped the table on them, then demonstrated His power to forgive sin. Jesus kept Torah. It was and remains the standard of righteousness.

Here is a verse to consider: Why is the earth judged by fire? Because it has broken the Torah and violated statutes. Isaiah 24:1-6...
24 Behold, the Lord maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof.
2 And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. 3 The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the Lord hath spoken this word. 4 The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish.
5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws (Torah, see the Hebrew), changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. 6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.

Could the view you have be on the same lines, and defense, as what is done for monogamy?

:D Actually, exactly the opposite. About nine years ago I began to wake up to verses that didn't fit the Christian party line I had been inculcated with and set out to find the truth. Just like monogamy only is a Christian tradition, I found a number of practices within the faith were also traditions entirely unsupported by Scripture. I don't judge others, but I am passionate about contending for truth and the whole picture of what the Word actually says.

Blessings. Enjoying the jousting.

 
Very interesting video and actually saw a friend in the background of one of the shots. There are a number of problems with this particular altar and the timing/manner, etc as revealed in the article from BeastWatchNews that I shared. How it all unfolds will be interesting. The narrator had some good points, but said a few things that were way off base, too... What completely shocked me is that he was allowed onto it for filming. Proof positive that that is NOT the altar. ONLY the Cohenim will be allowed to even see the real altar, never mind walk up on it. Therefore, it was a publicity stunt.
 
I hear what you are saying and respectfully consider it, and we could go 'round and 'round in a BF whirlwind of fun but I am not likely to change your mind and your not going to be able to change mine. I think you are correct that these events are very important and will probable turn out a way that we both least expect. Probably one of those subjects best handled in person.

The one thing that really bothers me is the idea of the renewed sacrifice. If an animal sacrifice was actually made in the name of god, that to me would signal the abomination that causes desolation and our two paths would quickly be divided.
 
Agreed we could go round and round and this type of conversation is best in person...

I have done some studying and writing on sacrifice and specifically the hows and whys of future sacrifice. This is a topic that spools people up, like poly, but deep breaths and methodical study begins to open views into Scripture we never saw before. I'll post a few thoughts and links when back on my laptop.
 
In this rather long drawn out youtube video the author is basically stating the temple and the alter have already been built and dedicated, and done so on a specific time schedule. If you have time @Ancient Paths I would like to hear your thoughts.

 
Paul was a Pharisee who came to understand two things that were VERY unpopular among his peers:

1. The oral Torah and traditions added on to the Law of Moses were anathema to God and not necessary to be righteous, whole the Torah as written by Moses was still fully valid, and

2. Yeshua was/is the Messiah through whom the exiled house of Israel and any others could be redeemed and brought back into covenant.

Because we do not study the context of his message, the complexities of his audiences or the fact that ha was a top drawer attorney and because we do not know the Torah, Paul is easily twisted and misunderstood. 2 Pe. 3:15-17
As Peter says, Paul is very difficult to understand and it is possible to become very lost in his writings if you're not careful. Great comment!
 
@Cap , as promised, here are a few articles that spell out the case for sacrifice. Take a deep breath and read carefully. This is a lot to think about and a big paradigm shift, but worth studying. I organized them in a way that they'll make sense, though internal links add more material and support.

https://natsab.com/2014/01/13/has-the-application-of-the-law-changed/

https://natsab.com/2014/01/03/yep-sacrifice-is-an-ordinance/

https://natsab.com/2013/06/06/sacrifices-in-the-mellinial-kingdom/

I will get to that video, but might not be able to listen until tomorrow morning when I get on the road.

Blessings.
 
In the context of Leviticus and the larger Tanach, ‘sacrifice’ served several purposes.
  1. It pointed forward as a foreshadow, by faith, to the coming One Perfect Sacrifice,
  2. It cost the sinner a spotless/unblemished (valuable) lamb or goat from his/her stock,
  3. It provided food for the Levitical Priesthood,
  4. It provided food for celebrants at the prescribed feasts, and
  5. It became a pleasing aroma both to our Father and in the Temple. (Who doesn’t like standing next to the grill?)

I think ‘sacrifice’ will serve the same function as it did in the Tanach! Watch:
  1. It will point backward as a shadow, by faith, of the One Perfect Sacrifice,
  2. It will cost the bearer a spotless/unblemished (something valuable) lamb or goat from his/her stock,
  3. It will provide food for the Priesthood,
  4. It will provide food for celebrants at the prescribed feasts, and
  5. It will be a pleasing aroma both to our Father and in the Temple. (Who doesn’t like standing next to the grill?)


I don't have any lambs or goats and I am not likely to have any in the future. Accept maybe money is the 'something valuable' I guess, then I suppose the tithe will be required, and I will send my money in and how does that relate to knowing about the death of a animal for my sin. I don't really even recognize that my Wendy's Hamburger came from a cow. Back in the day thousands of animals were sacrificed on a regular basis, there are 7 billion people in the planet now, can you imagine how many animals are going to have to killed today on a regular basis, just to remember what has already been paid? (Can you even imagine the problems this is going to have with the tree huggers of the world?)

I am fully aware of the need to study and understand the Law, not from our prospective but from Gods. I understand the significance of realizing the importance of the Feast Days and I regularly search the Law to find out about things in life that are important to God in my life and how He wants me to live it. When I see a crescent moon, I know its important to God as a time keeper and I keep track of the months to know when the festivals are coming. When they come, I remember them. They are a part of my walk. But, I also go up for communion when the gathering I am attending offers it as remembrance.

I remember these things and I know they are important. But, to be honest, I don't go overboard because I found that trying to fulfill them correctly with very little information is legalistic. I don't know when the real weekly sabbath is. I don't know if it is solar based or lunar based. Lunar seems to be the most likely for me. I guess maybe I should practice even that, but I really haven't been convicted to do that, I remember it though. I don't know if Passover is the first month or second. Is it based on the new moon conjunct or crescent? Am I really suppose to wear a box on my head or is blue strings on my shirttail really necessary when I have the phone in my pocket that has every version of the bible I would want on it? There are many unanswered questions for me to know exactly what laws to actually live or just know about. And no, just because you (you as anyone) think its right for you doesn't make it so for me. It hasn't been placed on my heart. Yet, if that's the case.

If animal sacrifice is to be remembered like Communion then maybe we could build a fire every week/month and throw little wooden animals in it and say a prayer.

And the question I really have is, what about Jeremiah 19. Jerusalem has never been destroyed like what is being described here. One day, the earthly city of Jerusalem and the surrounding area will no longer be livable. I believe that Jeremiah 19 is describing the coming divorce of Judah (bad grapes).

Jeremiah 19

1This is what the Lord says: “Go and buy a clay jar from a potter. Take along some of the elders of the people and of the priests 2and go out to the Valley of Ben Hinnom, near the entrance of the Potsherd Gate. There proclaim the words I tell you, 3and say, ‘Hear the word of the Lord, you kings of Judah and people of Jerusalem. This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Listen! I am going to bring a disaster on this place that will make the ears of everyone who hears of it tingle. 4For they have forsaken me and made this a place of foreign gods; they have burned incense in it to gods that neither they nor their ancestors nor the kings of Judah ever knew, and they have filled this place with the blood of the innocent. 5They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal—something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind. 6So beware, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when people will no longer call this place Topheth or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.

7“ ‘In this place I will ruin a the plans of Judah and Jerusalem. I will make them fall by the sword before their enemies, at the hands of those who want to kill them, and I will give their carcasses as food to the birds and the wild animals. 8I will devastate this city and make it an object of horror and scorn; all who pass by will be appalled and will scoff because of all its wounds. 9I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another’s flesh because their enemies will press the siege so hard against them to destroy them.’

10“Then break the jar while those who go with you are watching, 11and say to them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty says: I will smash this nation and this city just as this potter’s jar is smashed and cannot be repaired. They will bury the dead in Topheth until there is no more room. 12This is what I will do to this place and to those who live here, declares the Lord. I will make this city like Topheth. 13The houses in Jerusalem and those of the kings of Judah will be defiled like this place, Topheth—all the houses where they burned incense on the roofs to all the starry hosts and poured out drink offerings to other gods.’ ”

14Jeremiah then returned from Topheth, where the Lord had sent him to prophesy, and stood in the court of the Lord’s temple and said to all the people, 15“This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: ‘Listen! I am going to bring on this city and all the villages around it every disaster I pronounced against them, because they were stiff-necked and would not listen to my words.’ ”
 
There is not a single example of first day worship anywhere in Scripture.


John 2o:19 & 26 (they weren’t meeting after eight days but on the eighth day) There’s others but these two instances will do.

As to the assertion that Paul and others frequented the synagogues as an observance of Torah or as an example to be followed, this claim overlooks the commission to take the gospel to the Jews first.

If your commission was to take the gospel to drunks, would it not be best to catch them all at the bar on Friday night?

Not to mention that the historical record (that I’ve found to date) doesnt bear out the claim that early christianity observed a 7th day sabbath at all, or that Constantine is responsible for its change. Constantine was only responsible for legally recognizing it as the day “Christians” observed it.

I have loads of 1st and early 2nd century docs to show it, and havent found any evidence to the contrary yet. I have found evidence of some believers observing Passover and that being a disagreement in early 2nd century, but nothing on a 7th day observance other than commission outreach.
 
Back
Top