[emil]

The WMSCOG makes a big deal out of two things; keeping the Sabbath and celebrating the Passover. For both things, I understand they teach that the catholic church abolished them in the 4th century.

I am starting this thread to discuss the issue of the issue of the Passover and about when and how it was abolished by the catholic church. I request wmscog members and former members to weigh in.

I am not clear about what the passover is as celebrated by the wmscog. What aspect of it was abolished in the 4th century.

[Simon]

[Simon]

Its set several hundred years earlier dunno about writing date

[Simon]

That’s traditional belief not scripture

[emil]

renita.payno wrote:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Kings+9&version=NIV

This is after Exodus, during Solomon's reign. 3 times a year is referring to the Feasts. I think it's safe to assume that at least up until Solomon the PO was kept as described in Ex. I don't see why, before Jerusalem was destroyed in 70, it would be kept differently.

I am sorry I missed your post. Thank you. I mentioned before Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD specifically because , it has changed after that. I wanted to understand how it was done in Jesus' time. Trying to understand how Jesus celebrated it.

[emil]

OK its time to take this thread to the next step.

So as I understand it, the basic definition of the NT PO for wmscog is:

1. The bread and wine representing (or something more than that?) the body and blood of Jesus? Is that right?

2. This bread and wine is supposed to take away our sins? Is that right?

I would really like if some current members come here and discuss this topic.

@Hal – a special request. I know you do not believe in Yeshua or anything like the NT passover, etc. I request you to avoid attacking Christianity and its beliefs in this thread as it will end up providing escape routes rather than examining what we are trying to examine. I do appreciate your contribution and how you have helped me understand the original celebration as it may have existed in the time of Jesus.

[emil]

Hal wrote:

emil wrote:

OK its time to take this thread to the next step.

So as I understand it, the basic definition of the NT PO for wmscog is:

1. The bread and wine representing (or something more than that?) the body and blood of Jesus? Is that right?

2. This bread and wine is supposed to take away our sins? Is that right?

I would really like if some current members come here and discuss this topic.

@Hal – a special request. I know you do not believe in Yeshua or anything like the NT passover, etc. I request you to avoid attacking Christianity and its beliefs in this thread as it will end up providing escape routes rather than examining what we are trying to examine. I do appreciate your contribution and how you have helped me understand the original celebration as it may have existed in the time of Jesus.

 Does it upset you that a man took already MAN MADE TRADITIONS and made them his own? I see no refutation on any of my previous posts…

The crux of your argument centers around Jesus not being God but a mere man. With that assumption, I cannot refute anything of what you said.

The moment Jesus is accepted as God, which I do, your arguments don't give me cause for concern.

[Love'n Honey]

emil wrote:

Hal wrote:

 Does it upset you that a man took already MAN MADE TRADITIONS and made them his own? I see no refutation on any of my previous posts…

The crux of your argument centers around Jesus not being God but a mere man. With that assumption, I cannot refute anything of what you said.

The moment Jesus is accepted as God, which I do, your arguments don't give me cause for concern.

 And that's how the WMSCOG members feel

[144000]

Jewish bible promises that a human son will be born in the flesh and he is mighty God.

Jewish bible promises that God will make a "New covenant" with us.

We are celebrating that New covenant with the Passover of Bread and Wine and feet washing ceremony.

[emil]

@144000 – I would really appreciate if you would please respond to my post.

emil wrote:

OK its time to take this thread to the next step.

So as I understand it, the basic definition of the NT PO for wmscog is:

1. The bread and wine representing (or something more than that?) the body and blood of Jesus? Is that right?

2. This bread and wine is supposed to take away our sins? Is that right?

I would really like if some current members come here and discuss this topic.

[144000]

Matthew and Luke both have Jesus passover recorded in them, and John 6:53 verifies its significance.

Everything that it represents, everything that it blesses you with, and the correct way to keep it (because we want to keep it correctly, we do not want to keep it in an unworthy manner) are in Matthew and Luke and John.

Do not neglect any appointed time chosen by Jesus who is God and don’t neglect any of his methods including feet washing because the feet are unclean and must be made clean for Passover as Jesus himself says your body is clean, but still your feet need to be washed.

[emil]

^ John starts his narrative of the events by saying John 13:1 – It was just before the Passover Festival.

You guys know that Jesus was the passover lamb. From John's gospel it is clear that the last supper was not the passover meal. The passover meal would have to include the passover lamb which hadn't been slain yet. Jesus was going to be the passover lamb the next day. The curtain in the temple was torn in two at the moment of his death, the exact moment when the lambs were slain in the temple.

Do you guys believe all that?

It was a Jewish traditional family meal.

You said, "Do not neglect any appointed time chosen by Jesus who is God and don't neglect any of his methods including feet washing because the feet are unclean and must be made clean for Passover as Jesus himself says your body is clean, but still your feet need to be washed."

The custom of washing the feet was not limited to passover but was done all the time so you can hardly claim it was passover on the basis of that fact.

[fromtheotherside]

emil wrote:

^ John starts his narrative of the events by saying John 13:1 – It was just before the Passover Festival. You still can't prove it's not part of the Passover week!

You guys know that Jesus was the passover lamb. From John's gospel it is clear that the last supper was not the passover meal. So you're saying the bible conflicts with it's self when Mat and Luke clearly said it's the Passover meal, nice one! The passover meal would have to include the passover lamb which hadn't been slain yet. No biblical proof. Jesus was going to be the passover lamb the next day. The curtain in the temple was torn in two at the moment of his death, the exact moment when the lambs were slain in the temple. Still no biblical proof!

Do you guys believe all that? NO!LOlz

It was a Jewish traditional family meal.

You said, "Do not neglect any appointed time chosen by Jesus who is God and don't neglect any of his methods including feet washing because the feet are unclean and must be made clean for Passover as Jesus himself says your body is clean, but still your feet need to be washed."

The custom of washing the feet was not limited to passover but was done all the time so you can hardly claim it was passover on the basis of that fact.

[emil]

^ FTOS, your arguments are ridiculous. Hope your brother 144000 can see how ridiculous that is. When John says it was just before the Passover festival, you need separate proof that it is not part of the passover week? Can you tell us when the PO week starts?

I said "The passover meal would have to include the passover lamb which hadn't been slain yet." to which you replied, "No biblical proof."

You want proof for what? Both The Unknown and 144000 have agreed that Jesus was the passover sacrificial lamb. He hadn't been slain yet. He was at table with them.

You said: "So you're saying the bible conflicts with it's self when Mat and Luke clearly said it's the Passover meal, nice one! "

I am not saying that. You are saying it. I am merely stating the facts.

I said "The curtain in the temple was torn in two at the moment of his death, the exact moment when the lambs were slain in the temple."

And you replied "Still no biblical proof!" – for what? It is recorded that the curtain was torn in two. The rest of it is the opinion of a vast majority of bible commentators.

[Simon]

We can’t say jesus was sacrificed on Passover because he is the fullfilment of itor he’d need to be sacrificed on the other appointed times to fulfill them too

[emil]

Simon wrote:

We can't say jesus was sacrificed on Passover because he is the fullfilment of itor he'd need to be sacrificed on the other appointed times to fulfill them too

Not really necessary. The sacrifice of the original Passover lamb was to achieve liberation from slavery to the Egyptians. It was a shadow of what was to come. Jesus' fulfillment of the Passover sacrifice is for atonement of our sins. A one-time event.

[Simon]

Atonement is 7months later

[Simon]

6 months on the 7th lol

[144000]

emil

There is nothing ridiculous about fromtheotherside's posts, he nailed it on the head!

I'm starting to suspect that maybe your not even a Christian emil? Your posts seem to infer a lot of authority over Jewish things, when Christ set up New Covenant things to replace the Jewish things.

Why would you call it a family meal, when Jesus says "I am about to go eat the Passover" "Go and prepare the Passover for my disciples" "I eagerly desire to eat this Passover with you"?

How many times does the word Passover have to be reapeated in the bible before you can see that it was in fact the Passover?

"Then the book will be given to the one who is illiterate, saying, "Please read this." And he will say, "I cannot read.""

[emil]

Simon wrote:

Atonement is 7months later

Is it your case that Jesus' death was not atonement for our sins?

[emil]

144000 wrote:

emil

There is nothing ridiculous about fromtheotherside's posts, he nailed it on the head!

I'm starting to suspect that maybe your not even a Christian emil? Your posts seem to infer a lot of authority over Jewish things, when Christ set up New Covenant things to replace the Jewish things.

Why would you call it a family meal, when Jesus says "I am about to go eat the Passover" "Go and prepare the Passover for my disciples" "I eagerly desire to eat this Passover with you"?

How many times does the word Passover have to be reapeated in the bible before you can see that it was in fact the Passover?

"Then the book will be given to the one who is illiterate, saying, "Please read this." And he will say, "I cannot read.""

Lets stick to the facts rather than name calling.

You have agreed that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb of the passover. Correct? John's gospel tells us that the last supper was eaten the night before the passover. Correct? So, if John is correct, then the last supper couldn't have been the passover meal called the seder at which the passover lamb is eaten. Agree so far? Or do you reject John's Gospel?

The Jewish traditional family meal, in case you are unaware, has the same elements of blessing of bread and wine, like the passover but without the sacrifice of the lamb. So if that wasn't the passover, as John says, then it still makes sense because the elements described are common to the traditional meal.

First of all, note that the 3 synoptic Gospels are not considered eye-witness accounts to the extent that John's gospel is. I am personally unsure what the synoptic gospels mean in those quotes. There could be other interpretations. Perhaps Jesus is alluding to the fact that he is the passover lamb. I do not know. But if it is interpreted as you do, that it was the main passover meal called the seder, then Jesus cannot conceivably be the passover sacrifice. So you'll have to take your pick and show me how christian you guys are. Was the last supper the passover seder meal and Jesus not the passover sacrifice, or was the meal without a sacrificial lamb because the time to sacrifice the lamb was the next day?

[Simon]

That’s the opposite of my point in fact