Why does the Church pass over Passover?

[Desert Snake]

During the Eucharist and during Easter we are remembering Jesus.
Jesus said that we should do this in remembrance of him.
He did not say we should do it in remembrance of the passover. (that would be replacement theology)

It is true Jesus was a Jew, living and acting as Jews did.
However what he taught certainly applies to Christian gentiles (and I would suggest that he intended them to apply to Jews too)

When you read the Didache, it is clear that although those first gentile Christians were taught and mentored about the lords prayer, baptism, the Eucharist, and how to respond to their new status as Christians, they were taught nothing about circumcision, Jewish law or other traditions.
In a single generation these new Jewish-Christian communities had devised a training programme for their gentile converts. It formed the new Christian Tradition, that bore little resemblance to its Jewish forebears.

Christianity has done it self no favours by trying to justify itself by Jewish prophecies.
Christianity is fully justified by the Life work, death and resurrection of Jesus.

Replacement theology is an anathema.

I disagree with your whole premise.
'Replacement Theology' doesn't even enter the picture here. There are incorrect interpretations of scripture, sure, but theres no reason to abandon the Old Testament when clearly Jesus' teachings relate to the O.Testament quite often.

 

[roger1440]

Do you believe Jesus is Israel because of passages such as Exodus 4:22-23 or Hosea 11:1?

Yes I do.

 

[roger1440]

If you are referring to this:



Then, I don't think so. Passover commemorates our redemption from slavery. I can't recall it being connected to arriving in the land of Israel, as the first Passover was held 40 years before that. Ultimately, because the place we are meant to fulfill the Law is in Israel. But in that respect, Passover is no different than any of the other major holidays.

I stand corrected. Passover commemorates the Jews departure from Egypt. I was looking at the Exodus as the Jews journey from start to finish. Passover is only about the start. But, with every start there is a finish. With every departure there is an arrival. Between these two points is a point of transition. A caterpillar turns into a butterfly. It does not happen in a flash. The Jews journey for 40 years is a type of metamorphous. The caterpillar clings to what is below, but the butterfly soars to great heights. None of the Jews that left Egypt made it to the promise land. The Jews that entered the promise land was a new generation much like a new creature. This transition is a transition of spiritual growth. Passover is the beginning of the journey where is the Last Supper is the end of the journey.

 

[CMike]

Actually the journey starts at the time of Avraham.

 

[InChrist]

Yes I do.

In Genesis 35:10 God called Jacob Israel.

In Hosea 1:2 God called Israel an adulterous wife.

In Jeremiah 3:6 God says Israel is a harlot.


Do you think context and proper application of symbolism and/or literalism is important when reading and interpreting the scriptures?



[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[roger1440]

In Genesis 35:10 God called Jacob Israel.

In Hosea 1:2 God called Israel an adulterous wife.

In Jeremiah 3:6 God says Israel is a harlot.


Do you think context and proper application of symbolism and/or literalism is important when reading and interpreting the scriptures?

The Israel of Jewish scripture shows an Israel that went astray. The Israel as Jesus shows an Israel that did not go astray.

 

[Tumah]

The Israel of Jewish scripture shows an Israel that went astray. The Israel as Jesus shows an Israel that did not go astray.

You are a mystery.

 

[roger1440]

You are a mystery.

It’s no mystery I think outside of the box. I’ll give you a little example. In the very first chapter of the very first book in the New Testament it says, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:” (Matthew 1:22) indirectly what the author is saying the reader must be familiar with the Old Testament before reading the New Testament. Otherwise that verse would not make any sense. The starting point for the reader must be the Old Testament. It is only when the reader has with a clear understanding of the Old Testament that the reader can understand the New. The Church starts from the New to explain the Old. That is not the way the Gospels were meant to be read.

 

[roger1440]

If you are referring to this:

Also, I've never heard of the idea of being taught by G-d when G-d is with us. There is a concept of being taught by certain angels, but that is more on an individual basis than a national.

I guess I would say although there is nothing here specifically in opposition to Jewish belief, it isn't found within it either.

“33 But such is the covenant I will make with the House of Israel after these days-declares the LORD: I will put My Teaching into their inmost being and inscribe it upon their hearts. Then I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No longer will they need to teach one another and say to one another, "Heed the LoRD"; for all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed Me-declares the LoRD…” (Jeremiah 31:33-34)
​

How do you interpret this? I see it as the New Covenant will not be taught to “one another”. It will not be taught by a book, scroll, internet or any other means. It will be revealed directly by God. This revelation does not arrive by an angel or prophet. Verse 33 says, ”I will put my teaching…”. Since God is doing the “teaching”, God must be with us. The newness of the New Covenant is not the content of the Covenant. The newness comes from how it is revealed. But then again what do I know, I’m just some heretic, LOL.

 

[Tumah]

It’s no mystery I think outside of the box. I’ll give you a little example. In the very first chapter of the very first book in the New Testament it says, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:” (Matthew 1:22) indirectly what the author is saying the reader must be familiar with the Old Testament before reading the New Testament. Otherwise that verse would not make any sense. The starting point for the reader must be the Old Testament. It is only when the reader has with a clear understanding of the Old Testament that the reader can understand the New. The Church starts from the New to explain the Old. That is not the way the Gospels were meant to be read.

I hear what you are saying. Not that I disagree with you, but technically you can say that once it is fulfilled in that NT sense, you could say that they become moot. The same way that you wouldn't still think about putting a plug in an outlet once you've already put it in.

“33 But such is the covenant I will make with the House of Israel after these days-declares the LORD: I will put My Teaching into their inmost being and inscribe it upon their hearts. Then I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No longer will they need to teach one another and say to one another, "Heed the LoRD"; for all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed Me-declares the LoRD…” (Jeremiah 31:33-34)
​

How do you interpret this? I see it as the New Covenant will not be taught to “one another”. It will not be taught by a book, scroll, internet or any other means. It will be revealed directly by God. This revelation does not arrive by an angel or prophet. Verse 33 says, ”I will put my teaching…”. Since God is doing the “teaching”, God must be with us. The newness of the New Covenant is not the content of the Covenant. The newness comes from how it is revealed. But then again what do I know, I’m just some heretic, LOL.

I was thinking about that. But is that a matter of G-d being with us or a specific term of the new covenant? When we were in the desert, G-d was with us as well, yet we didn't have this knowledge and did need Jethro's set up. So I wonder.

 

[roger1440]

I was thinking about that. But is that a matter of G-d being with us or a specific term of the new covenant? When we were in the desert, G-d was with us as well, yet we didn't have this knowledge and did need Jethro's set up. So I wonder.

I can’t comment on Jethro. I would have to read more into it. The term “God with us” is referred to Jesus in the beginning of Gospel of Mathew. As you know many proper nouns in Jewish scripture has some sort of significance. This type of literary attribute spills over into the New Testament.

“21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[a] because he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).” (Matthew 1:21-23)
[a] Matthew 1:21 Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua, which means the Lord saves.
Matthew 1:23 Isaiah 7:14
​

The concept of God being with us comes from the story of the Jewish Exodus. God had guided the Jews on their Journey.

“21 The LORD went before them in a pillar of cloud by day, to guide them along the way, and in a pillar of fire by night, to give them light, that they might travel day and night. 22 The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people.” (Exodus 13:21-22)
​

It is obvious the “us” in “God with us” refers to Israel. As long as Israel allows itself to be guided by God, God is with them. As I said before, “When Israel is sinless, holy and righteous it is born from above and below. That is the true meaning behind the virgin birth. The virgin birth is not about some hot Jewish chick getting knocked up without a man. The Star of David represents the same. One triangle pointing above, the other down.”

 

[Tumah]

I can’t comment on Jethro. I would have to read more into it. The term “God with us” is referred to Jesus in the beginning of Gospel of Mathew. As you know many proper nouns in Jewish scripture has some sort of significance. This type of literary attribute spills over into the New Testament.

“21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[a] because he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).” (Matthew 1:21-23)
[a] Matthew 1:21 Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua, which means the Lord saves.
Matthew 1:23 Isaiah 7:14
​

The concept of God being with us comes from the story of the Jewish Exodus. God had guided the Jews on their Journey.

“21 The LORD went before them in a pillar of cloud by day, to guide them along the way, and in a pillar of fire by night, to give them light, that they might travel day and night. 22 The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart from before the people.” (Exodus 13:21-22)
​

It is obvious the “us” in “God with us” refers to Israel. As long as Israel allows itself to be guided by God, God is with them. As I said before, “When Israel is sinless, holy and righteous it is born from above and below. That is the true meaning behind the virgin birth. The virgin birth is not about some hot Jewish chick getting knocked up without a man. The Star of David represents the same. One triangle pointing above, the other down.”

Hmm. I wouldn't have thought to make the connection because "with us" and "among us" has two different implications in my mind. But I guess it doesn't have to.
I am unfamiliar with he concept of born from above and below.

I think I hear what you are saying though.

 

[roger1440]

Hmm. I wouldn't have thought to make the connection because "with us" and "among us" has two different implications in my mind. But I guess it doesn't have to.
I am unfamiliar with he concept of born from above and below.

I think I hear what you are saying though.

God is above, man is below. To be holy we must be like God who is above. All of Jewish and Christian scripture is about union with God. The virgin birth stories in the New Testament represent this union. The Star of David is composed of two triangles, one pointing up to God, the other pointing down to man. The union of these two triangles represents the union between God and man. This union is found in observing the Torah. Every triangle has 180 degrees. Two triangles make 360 degrees. A circle has 360 degrees. A circle represents wholeness or completeness. The below picture is a screen shot I took on my computer while watching a movie on the Zohar about 8 years ago.

 

[Tumah]

God is above, man is below. To be holy we must be like God who is above. All of Jewish and Christian scripture is about union with God. The virgin birth stories in the New Testament represent this union. The Star of David is composed of two triangles, one pointing up to God, the other pointing down to man. The union of these two triangles represents the union between God and man. This union is found in observing the Torah. Every triangle has 180 degrees. Two triangles make 360 degrees. A circle has 360 degrees. A circle represents wholeness or completeness. The below picture is a screen shot I took on my computer while watching a movie on the Zohar about 8 years ago.

I am familiar with the concept of the union. I just didn't relate that to the idea of being born above and below.

 

[roger1440]

I am familiar with the concept of the union. I just didn't relate that to the idea of being born above and below.

You probably heard the term “born again Christian”. This term comes from a verse in the Gospel of John. “Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." (John 3:3) The word “again” in the original Greek is “anōthen”. This word can also be translated into “above”. When translated as “above” it fits nice and snug with the virgin birth story interrupted as a metaphor.
Greek Lexicon :: G509 (KJV)

 

[Desert Snake]

You probably heard the term “born again Christian”. This term comes from a verse in the Gospel of John. “Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." (John 3:3) The word “again” in the original Greek is “anōthen”. This word can also be translated into “above”. When translated as “above” it fits nice and snug with the virgin birth story interrupted as a metaphor.
Greek Lexicon :: G509 (KJV)

What are the ramifications of this, what does that mean to you.

 

[roger1440]

What are the ramifications of this, what does that mean to you.

All I’m saying I have a preference for translating the word “anōthen” into the English word “above” rather than the word “again”. By using the word “above” it forms a sort of cohesiveness with other verses in the Bible that use the terms father, son and the virgin birth. You would not get this sort of connectivity with the word “again”.

“Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."” New International Version
​

“Jesus replied to him, "Truly, I tell you emphatically, unless a person is born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God.”" International Standard Version

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” King James Bible
​

Here is an interesting article on the topic:
“Born Again” or “Born from Above”?
86.

 

[Desert Snake]

All I’m saying I have a preference for translating the word “anōthen” into the English word “above” rather than the word “again”. By using the word “above” it forms a sort of cohesiveness with other verses in the Bible that use the terms father, son and the virgin birth. You would not get this sort of connectivity with the word “again”.

“Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again."” New International Version
​

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” King James Bible
​

Here is an interesting article on the topic:
“Born Again” or “Born from Above”?
86.

Right, and this relates immediately to baptism, I just read these verses,... what are your thoughts on that?

 

[roger1440]

Right, and this relates immediately to baptism, I just read these verses,... what are your thoughts on that?

When the phrase is interrupted as “born again” many churches see this as a requirement for baptism. From this point it goes into different directions. The churches that require baptism don’t all define it the same. If I understand the message of Jesus in the canonical Gospels correctly it’s more about living a righteous life rather than things we have to do. It’s not about rituals. I’m reminded of what Paul wrote:


“For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,” (Romans 14:17)

And

1 Corinthians 8 1 Corinthians 8 - Concerning Food Sacrificed to Idols - Bible Gateway

 

[Pegg]

Unless God selects you to be born again, no one is born again. You can't just decide that you are going to be born again.