• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

WHat is Passover?

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
So this is the difference between what the Christians believe about the passover and the Jews then?
No, that's just an explanation of what the author of Hebrews got wrong about Judaism in that paragraph.

The differences have been outlined throughout the thread, but I'll give them again in short:

According to Jews:

Passover commemorates the entire Exodus story: the slavery, the plagues, the redemption and the splitting of the sea. The Passover sacrifice commemorates the first Passover sacrifice which showed the Israelites' faith in God and differentiated them from the Egyptians and the faithless.

According to Christians:

Everything Jews believed about Passover was true, until Jesus's time. When he died on the cross, everything changed: No longer was a Passover sacrifice required, because Jesus died on the cross. Jesus symbolizes both the wine, the unleavened bread and the Passover sacrifice altogether, and as an added bonus, also atones for mankind's sins.

According to Jews:

Everything Christians think about Passover is nonsense.
 

1213

Well-Known Member
In what sense should Christians be Jews? Can you explain?

In that sense that they should have the God’s law written in their heart, as promised in the Deuteronomy 30:6-9 and Jeremiah 31:31-34. By what the Bible tells in these scriptures, it would mean person is a Jew. But, as you might know, not all agree with this, but, in any case, this is what the Bible tells, people are free to believe something else, if they want.

For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter; whose praise is not from men, but from God.
Romans 2:28-29

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them, and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree; don't boast over the branches. But if you boast, it is not you who support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, "Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in." True; by their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Don't be conceited, but fear; for if God didn't spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you.
Romans 11:17-21

And that can happen through the words Jesus declared. His words can cause change in persons mind so that he becomes righteous, which means person has the wisdom of the just and person wants to do what is right and good.

But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name: who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

… Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

And that means to be “born anew”.

… "Most assuredly, I tell you, unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" Jesus answered, "Most assuredly I tell you, unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God! That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'
John 3:3-7

When person is born anew by the words Jesus declared, he has the law written in his heart and then he has the correct understanding and wants to do what is right in God’s eyes. And that is why I believe eternal life is promised only for righteous, they want to do what is good and right.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
 
Nah. I'll explain what the author of Hebrews got wrong.

First of all, a descendant of David can't be High Priest. That's a role reserved for the descendants of Aharon.
Second of all, Jesus was wounded on the way to the crucifixion. Far from an unblemished sacrifice.
““ You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it. ””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭7:51-53‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
““ You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it. ””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭7:51-53‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
Classic. Evasion and diversion tactics. Doesn't help your case, though.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
They had police records. Why would that make it any more historical than if they didn't?
Your question was about the historicity of killing innocent babies as if their status as innocent calls the historical existence of the event into question.
What police records?
 
Truth, exactly the same in Acts 7.
You talk about the law and the Torah, Leviticus 16
is forever law, you can’t keep it, you haven’t kept it because no one can. God sent His Son to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. You make excuses and come up with your own way, not going to work. It’s Gods way for everyone, the Jew first then the Gentiles.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
You talk about the law and the Torah, Leviticus 16
is forever law, you can’t keep it, you haven’t kept it because no one can. God sent His Son to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. You make excuses and come up with your own way, not going to work. It’s Gods way for everyone, the Jew first then the Gentiles.
Devarim 30:11-14

For this commandment which I command you this day is not concealed from you, nor is it far away.
It is not in heaven, that you should say, "Who will go up to heaven for us and fetch it for us, to tell it to us, so that we can fulfil it?"
Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, "Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us and fetch it for us, to tell it to us, so that we can fulfil it?"
Rather, this thing is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfil it.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
the papyrus has all worn away. But at the time, whooooweeee, it was something!
So on the absence of evidence you conclude that something is "historical".

According to my understanding the term historical is a technical term which does not mean something definitely did or did not happen, it means upon weighing up the evidence we have what is most likely to have occurred or not occurred.

Thus it would not be correct in the technical sense of the term to call these God killings 'historical' in my opinion
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
So on the absence of evidence you conclude that something is "historical".

According to my understanding the term historical is a technical term which does not mean something definitely did or did not happen, it means upon weighing up the evidence we have what is most likely to have occurred or not occurred.

Thus it would not be correct in the technical sense of the term to call these God killings 'historical' in my opinion
Even if the children were guilty? Then why did you make a point to question their historicity predicated on their being innocent babies?
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Even if the children were guilty? Then why did you make a point to question their historicity predicated on their being innocent babies?
Can you rephrase in simpler language? I'm not understanding the definition of predicated or how it applies here.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Even if the children were guilty? Then why did you make a point to question their historicity predicated on their being innocent babies?
Do you mean, "why did you make a point to question their historicity based on their being innocent babies?".

If so, in my opinion i did not question their historicity based on their innocence, I simply said something about them (that they were innocent) and asked why you think its historical.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
In that sense that they should have the God’s law written in their heart, as promised in the Deuteronomy 30:6-9 and Jeremiah 31:31-34. By what the Bible tells in these scriptures, it would mean person is a Jew. But, as you might know, not all agree with this, but, in any case, this is what the Bible tells, people are free to believe something else, if they want.

For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter; whose praise is not from men, but from God.
Romans 2:28-29

But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them, and became partaker with them of the root and of the richness of the olive tree; don't boast over the branches. But if you boast, it is not you who support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, "Branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in." True; by their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Don't be conceited, but fear; for if God didn't spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you.
Romans 11:17-21

And that can happen through the words Jesus declared. His words can cause change in persons mind so that he becomes righteous, which means person has the wisdom of the just and person wants to do what is right and good.

But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name: who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

… Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

And that means to be “born anew”.

… "Most assuredly, I tell you, unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" Jesus answered, "Most assuredly I tell you, unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God! That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'
John 3:3-7

When person is born anew by the words Jesus declared, he has the law written in his heart and then he has the correct understanding and wants to do what is right in God’s eyes. And that is why I believe eternal life is promised only for righteous, they want to do what is good and right.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
okay....
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Do you mean, "why did you make a point to question their historicity based on their being innocent babies?".

If so, in my opinion i did not question their historicity based on their innocence, I simply said something about them (that they were innocent) and asked why you think its historical.
Here's the thing I have about that, just adding to the thought: many people believe in evolution, right? And, of course, there are things like tsunamis, earthquakes, avalanches, fires, car accidents, the list could go on and on. And there are different interpretations about why, isn't that right? Certainly those who don't believe in God can't blame it on God, right?
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Do you mean, "why did you make a point to question their historicity based on their being innocent babies?".

If so, in my opinion i did not question their historicity based on their innocence, I simply said something about them (that they were innocent) and asked why you think its historical.
So your question, " What makes you think God killing innocent Egyptian babies is 'historical'?" was really just "what makes you think God ____ is historical" and your choice of included details was whimsical?
 
Top