Why don't Christians worship as Jews do?

[Quahom1]

[/i]

Don't forget about being "tender vittles" for the lions for "grabbing it".

Ah, but that wasn't the Jewish way. Romans liked that kind of feeding frenzy. It was a circus to them, until they became the main dish...to the Visigoths.

v/r

Q

 

[InChristAlways]

Originally Posted by InChristAlways


Don't forget about being "tender vittles" for the lions for "grabbing it".

Ah, but that wasn't the Jewish way. Romans liked that kind of feeding frenzy. It was a circus to them, until they became the main dish...to the Visigoths.

v/r
Q

Hi Q. The christian jews and gentiles were getting it from both "ends". You made me think of something I had written down concerning that.

If you count about 40 yrs from the Cross of Jesus to the fall of Jerusalem and 390 yrs from the Cross to the sacking of Rome, that would just about be the 2 time periods of Ezekiel 4 on the southern Nation of Judah and the Northen Nation of Israel. 2 birds with one "Stone"?

I have never really studied this prophecy and wonder if it is added together or seperate. Just thought that was interesting.
Steve

Ezekiel 4:5 "For I have laid on you the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days; so you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Israel. 6 "And when you have completed them, lie again on your right side; then you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days. I have laid on you a day for each year.

Titus captured the Temple in September 70AD but it was not until 73AD that the city was completely leveled and Massada was captured. The removing of stones from the walls and the Temple took place after 70AD was over, outside of the alleged three and a half years of tribulation. [size=+2]

[/size]410 AD Rome Sacked by Visigoths- After a series of battles that continued sporadically for over ten years, the Visigoths under the command of Alaric, sacked Rome in August 410 A.D. For twelve days, Alaric and his men rained ruin upon the city. 439 AD Cathrage Captured By Vandals - The Roman city of Carthage was captured by Vandals, under the command of Genseric. Carthage became his capital.

 

[chokmah]

Oh noooooooooo!!!!!!I have a relative the same way LOL and she used to call me "anti-jewish" for my view of the Bible after I had read it through a few times. Untrue of course.
Actually I study revelation using Exodus [lead out of bondage] and Joshua [victorious in conquering] as it has a lot these OT "ingredients" in it, whether it is past, present, future or ongoing, it is still a fascinating book to me.
Steve

The Camp--The Court--The Tabernacle--The Brazen Altar--The Laver-- The Table--The Lampstand--The Golden Altar--The Mercy Seat and Ark--The Gate--The First Veil--The Second Veil--The Significance of These and Their Antitypes.

LOL! I'm glad you could follow along with my humor. I find your viewpoint of Scripture to be rather interesting, and intriguing enough to hear about. I just hope you don't have a problem with me not just going along with your thoughts.

 

[chokmah]

I find it ironic that some could think that Christians have attempted to "steal" from the Jews, when according to scripture, the Jews threw away what they did not accept, while the gentiles (proto-Christians) grabbed for it with desperation, and now refuse to let it go...

Q:

What Scripture exclaims this? The Tanakh or the Christian testament?

 

[chokmah]

Eh, I don't really have a problem with that my friend...since 75% of the Buckeyes come from Michigan, and 75% of the Wolverines come from oHIo...

LOL

v/r

Q

LOL! How true that statement is. I grew up in Marietta, OH, but I went to school at Eastern Michigan U. in Ypsi-tucky. I went because of a particular curriculum, but EMU also had a reciprocal relationship with U of Toledo where students from OH and MI would get in-state tuition.

I will tell you that going to school five minutes east of Ann Arbor really helped me hate that school and all it stands for even more.

 

[Quahom1]

Hi Q. The christian jews and gentiles were getting it from both "ends". You made me think of something I had written down concerning that.

If you count about 40 yrs from the Cross of Jesus to the fall of Jerusalem and 390 yrs from the Cross to the sacking of Rome, that would just about be the 2 time periods of Ezekiel 4 on the southern Nation of Judah and the Northen Nation of Israel. 2 birds with one "Stone"?

I have never really studied this prophecy and wonder if it is added together or seperate. Just thought that was interesting.
Steve

Ezekiel 4:5 "For I have laid on you the years of their iniquity, according to the number of the days, three hundred and ninety days; so you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Israel. 6 "And when you have completed them, lie again on your right side; then you shall bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days. I have laid on you a day for each year.

Titus captured the Temple in September 70AD but it was not until 73AD that the city was completely leveled and Massada was captured. The removing of stones from the walls and the Temple took place after 70AD was over, outside of the alleged three and a half years of tribulation. [size=+2]

[/size]410 AD Rome Sacked by Visigoths- After a series of battles that continued sporadically for over ten years, the Visigoths under the command of Alaric, sacked Rome in August 410 A.D. For twelve days, Alaric and his men rained ruin upon the city. 439 AD Cathrage Captured By Vandals - The Roman city of Carthage was captured by Vandals, under the command of Genseric. Carthage became his capital.

Being sacked is not the same as Rome falling. Rome as a power of any kind did not fall for good, until roughly 560 AD. Jesus (according to scholars) was born 7 BC (this we know from prophecy, and historical dates of say, King David's beginning rule "1007 BC" and the prophecy that Christ would come 1000 years later. Christ's announcment (that is to say His baptism and beginning of His publicly known work) was in 29 AD (this we know for fact from historical dates in the Bible pertaining to certain secular leaders' rule at the time of His announcement). That would mean Jesus began his public work at age 36 (vise 30 as we are taught in Sunday school), and that He was crucified at age 39, and not 33. (this I think is very very important, since a man then as now is not a man settled and with anchors accepted by society until the age approaching 40).

This actually makes sense since a man was not considered a man until age 30, and only a whelp of a man at that. Who would listen to a man of youth?

Now, If this is all accurate stuff, then Christ died in the year 32 AD. Forty years later the city of Jeruselem was raized...not bad. (the church got something nearly right). 390 years later (422 AD), Rome got its butt kicked. But that wasn't the end of Rome. That did not come until 100 years later at the hands of Germanic warriors (who were cold, tired and simply wanted a piece of the action) who found out that "Rome" wasn't what they'd dreamed and heard about. So they took matters into their own hands.

Please note: Rome was dying at the time of Christ's life. Since they could not enforce the "law" with soldiers, they started writing the "law" in Golden ink, thinking that would whoo the citizens...how pathetic. Pilate couldn't make a decision on his own to save his own butt, if you think about it. The Jews made the decisions for him, and he acquiessed. (Who was in control?)

Carthage, you should remember, was not Rome, but a conquered city, under Roman rule. It wasn't even in Europe.

But by 520 AD Rome was a shell of its former self. A house of cards to be blown over by the wind. And that is what happened.

v/r

Q

 

[Quahom1]

Q:

What Scripture exclaims this? The Tanakh or the Christian testament?

Both. Ask any Jew who Christ is. Then ask any Christian who Christ is. Oops, let me re-phrase that who is Jesus?

v/r

Q

We can get into the 'minor' laws of the Talsmud. I'm sure you will find some of this very interesting concerning "Christians" (though not named) and "Jesus".

Your call.

v/r

Q

 

[Quahom1]

LOL! How true that statement is. I grew up in Marietta, OH, but I went to school at Eastern Michigan U. in Ypsi-tucky. I went because of a particular curriculum, but EMU also had a reciprocal relationship with U of Toledo where students from OH and MI would get in-state tuition.

I will tell you that going to school five minutes east of Ann Arbor really helped me hate that school and all it stands for even more.

Try patrolling the water front of Erie when the "parties of OSU start"...then have to fight (struggle with), the very drunk idiots you're trying to keep from drowning...or killing someone else in their "joix de bourbon vivre" state of mind

And every damn time, I knew the town they came from...(it wasn't in oHIo)...hmmm

lol

v/r

Q

 

[chokmah]

Both. Ask any Jew who Christ is. Then ask any Christian who Christ is. Oops, let me re-phrase that who is Jesus?

v/r

Q

We can get into the 'minor' laws of the Talsmud. I'm sure you will find some of this very interesting concerning "Christians" (though not named) and "Jesus".

Your call.

v/r

Q

You've got me confused.

You made the statement:

the Jews threw away what they did not accept

And I asked what Scripture you're using to make that statement. Would you mind answering it again as the above doesn't seem to address it?

Thanks,

c

 

[Quahom1]

You've got me confused.

You made the statement:



And I asked what Scripture you're using to make that statement. Would you mind answering it again as the above doesn't seem to address it?

Thanks,

c

Obviously I was referring to New testament Scripture and references concerning the death of Jesus. Sorry if I misunderstood your original question.

And obviously I was referring to the Old testament Scripture, and references concerning the death of the redeemer.

It is in both places...shall we explore this?

v/r

Q

 

[chokmah]

Obviously I was referring to New testament Scripture and references concerning the death of Jesus. Sorry if I misunderstood your original question.

And obviously I was referring to the Old testament Scripture, and references concerning the death of the redeemer.

It is in both places...shall we explore this?

v/r

Q

Sure. I'm not interested in the Christian testament section, but I'd be open to investigating the Tanakh.

 

[InChristAlways]

You've got me confused.

You made the statement:

Originally Posted by Q the Jews threw away what they did not accept...
Obviously I was referring to New testament Scripture and references concerning the death of Jesus. Sorry if I misunderstood your original question.

And obviously I was referring to the Old testament Scripture, and references concerning the death of the redeemer.

And I asked what Scripture you're using to make that statement. Would you mind answering it again as the above doesn't seem to address it?

Thanks,
c

Hi chokmah. I believe Q is distinquishing between the "common" jew and the Priests/rulers of Judah/Judea who Jesus described as sitting in "Moses seat".

For example, if you read Isaiah 28 and Malachi, it concerns the "Rulers/Priests" in Jerusalem it appears. I could add a lot more, but I believe these passages speak for themselves.
What do you think?
Steve

Isaiah 28:14 Therefore hear the word of the LORD, you scornful men, Who rule [#04910] this people who [are] in Jerusalem,.............[This passage also shows the "Precious Stone" being layed]

Matthew 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, 2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.

John 19:15 But they cried out, "Away with [Him,] away with [Him!] Crucify Him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar!"

Here is how the "common" jews reacted to Him:

Zephaniah 3:15 Yahweh, hath set aside, thy judgments, hath turned back thy foe,--The king of Israel, Yahweh, is in thy midst, thou shalt not fear calamity, any more.

John 19:12 The next day a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 13 took branches of palm trees and went out to meet Him, and cried out: "Hosanna! 'Blessed [is] He who comes in the name of the LORD!' The King of Israel!"

 

[chokmah]

Hi chokmah. I believe Q is distinquishing between the "common" jew and the Priests/rulers of Judah/Judea who Jesus described as sitting in "Moses seat".

For example, if you read Isaiah 28 and Malachi, it concerns the "Rulers/Priests" in Jerusalem it appears. I could add a lot more, but I believe these passages speak for themselves.
What do you think?
Steve

Steve:

I can't remember if I've asked you before, but are you very learned on the idea of Oral Torah?

But I have to also be honest with you, I don't think that is the direction that Q was coming from. I will await the answer though.

 

[InChristAlways]

Steve:
I can't remember if I've asked you before, but are you very learned on the idea of Oral Torah?

But I have to also be honest with you, I don't think that is the direction that Q was coming from. I will await the answer though.

quote from chokah on another thread:....... Does anyone mind if a Noachide comes and hangs out with ya?.........
......... "The Oral Torah is something that I believe every Christian should get a primer on, because it really helps to understand exactly what Torah is as a whole.

Oral Torah is the explanation that supports and clarifies the Written Torah. Anyways... it's a topic we should entertain more later".

I will let Q and others respond to your post # 46 after this. This is the "Oral Torah" Paul and Jesus taught us [Christ-ians] from the Christ-ian NT, since we believe Jesus the Christ died and was crucified. [btw, you used to be a Christ-ian didn't you?]
May I respectfully ask how this differs from your "Oral Torah"? Peace
Steve


[EDIT: removed superfluous scripture]

 

[Quahom1]

Sure. I'm not interested in the Christian testament section, but I'd be open to investigating the Tanakh.

Sure, I can stay away from the NT for this one, as far as scripture is concerned, but I'm not sure my thoughts and internal referencing or orientation won't peek out from time to time...we'll just have to catch that as it comes.

v/r

Q

 

[Bandit]

Is this thread only for Christians to answer or are you looking for other groups' insights?

hey chokmah, are you an othodox Jew?

 

[Quahom1]

hey chokmah, are you an othodox Jew?

Bandit...be nice to the guests.


v/r

Q

 

[Bandit]

Bandit...be nice to the guests.


v/r

Q

i am being nice . i have been wanting an orthodox jew to join ever since i came here & newage did not stay very long .

 

[Bandit]

Why is it that Christians don't worship as Jews do?

I think that in Jesus' message he was trying to bring God's chosen back unto him. He said that he did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. So why do Christians feel like we don't have to worship on the Sabbath day? And why do we use the Old Testament when we need to make reference to the 'words in red' but we feel like we don't really have to follow anything but the ten commandments, when Jesus himself was a Jew?

hey Truthseeker

here is my little take on this.

some churches & christian organizations have church on both days. that does not mean that the entire organization/religion that particular church belongs to does it on saturday or saturday only.

i suppose if the first business day was sunday & everyone started work on sunday, then i would view saturday as the 7th day. i have always viewed sunday as the last day of the 'work week' & saturday as the 6th day (regardless of the calendar or tradition) & due to business days or for whatever reason, i just do.

so i guess my question would be (outside of tradition) if we are supposed to work 6 days & rest on the 7th, then would not the first work day be sunday instead of monday?
just a question of mine, since i did not create, edit or change the calendar or the work week. that is just what i was born into

 

[Quahom1]

hey Truthseeker

here is my little take on this.

some churches & christian organizations have church on both days. that does not mean that the entire organization/religion that particular church belongs to does it on saturday or saturday only.

i suppose if the first business day was sunday & everyone started work on sunday, then i would view saturday as the 7th day. i have always viewed sunday as the last day of the 'work week' & saturday as the 6th day (regardless of the calendar or tradition) & due to business days or for whatever reason, i just do.

so i guess my question would be (outside of tradition) if we are supposed to work 6 days & rest on the 7th, then would not the first work day be sunday instead of monday?
just a question of mine, since i did not create, edit or change the calendar or the work week. that is just what i was born into

We weren't supposed to have to work at all. But man's life is like a pendulum. So God said "one day will be a day of rest for man". And He modeled it after His work week.

The first day of the week is Sunday. But we (who work 5 days instead of 6, officially, take two days off and call it the weekend.