- Topic
http://www.examiner.com/article/irenaeus-of-lyon-heresy-fighter-or-major-heretic
I'll just leave this here, though I pray all people will instead come to the bible and the Church of God which is not divided for answers; rather than consulting the wild assumptions posted here or blindly accepting its fabricated evidences.
Brothers and Sisters, and all soon to be children of God; God Bless You.
My dear friend, I am happy to see you back here.
The link you provided, does not work for me but I found the same article on a CoG website. The author neatly uses the term "Passover" but the early christian writings he quotes do not refer to the passover but to the resurrection of Jesus. You cannot spin the resurrection into the passover which was decidedly OT, clearly specified to be celebrated when the Israelites entered the promised land in the time of Joshua.
The new passover is about the one and only passover lamb Jesus.
Regarding the controversy of dates, it was again how the day of Jesus' resurrection was taken. Polycarp, a disciple of John, maintained it should be as per the Jewish calendar. Pope Anicletus, Irenaeus and others followed the teachings of Peter and Paul who adopted the day of the week of the resurrection (Sunday). Neither of these is wrong per se. But the fact that the Jewish calendar drifted and sometimes dated the passover before the spring equinox was an important ingredient in ultimately delinking the resurrection from the Jewish passover.
What you guys call the passover, scripture calls it the Lord's Supper. Read your NT and you will know.
My dear friend, I am happy to see you back here.
The link you provided, does not work for me but I found the same article on a CoG website. The author neatly uses the term "Passover" but the early christian writings he quotes do not refer to the passover but to the resurrection of Jesus. You cannot spin the resurrection into the passover which was decidedly OT, clearly specified to be celebrated when the Israelites entered the promised land in the time of Joshua.
The new passover is about the one and only passover lamb Jesus.
Regarding the controversy of dates, it was again how the day of Jesus' resurrection was taken. Polycarp, a disciple of John, maintained it should be as per the Jewish calendar. Pope Anicletus, Irenaeus and others followed the teachings of Peter and Paul who adopted the day of the week of the resurrection (Sunday). Neither of these is wrong per se. But the fact that the Jewish calendar drifted and sometimes dated the passover before the spring equinox was an important ingredient in ultimately delinking the resurrection from the Jewish passover.
What you guys call the passover, scripture calls it the Lord's Supper. Read your NT and you will know.
144000 wrote:
Many links to sources and further documentaries are highlighted in blue within the above posted article.
Further insight from such a link, provides this source:
"Perhaps amazingly, even the Emperor Constantine understood that Passover was to be a one-time, annual event when, according to the fifth century historian Theodoret, he declared:
"For we could never tolerate celebrating the Passover twice in one year. But even if all these facts did not exist, your own sagacity would prompt you to watch with diligence and with prayer, lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. It must also be borne in mind, that upon so important a point as the celebration of a feast of such sanctity, discord is wrong. One day has our Saviour set apart for a commemoration of our deliverance, namely, of His most holy Passion" (Theodoret of Cyrus. Ecclesiastical History (Book I), Chapter IX. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 3. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1892. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight).""
144k, as per wms usual custom, you are conveniently leaving out the context of what you are citing. Here is a link that has the full context included of Eusebius' writings. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iv.vi.iii.xviii.html
Constantine was arguing for uniformity in celebrating the Passover (Lord's Supper) because some Christians were looking to the Jews for guidance on when to observe the day. It just so happens that the Jews celebrated the Passover twice in one year, so Constantine commenting on how wrong that was.
144000 wrote:
Many links to sources and further documentaries are highlighted in blue within the above posted article.
Further insight from such a link, provides this source:
"Perhaps amazingly, even the Emperor Constantine understood that Passover was to be a one-time, annual event when, according to the fifth century historian Theodoret, he declared:
"For we could never tolerate celebrating the Passover twice in one year. But even if all these facts did not exist, your own sagacity would prompt you to watch with diligence and with prayer, lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. It must also be borne in mind, that upon so important a point as the celebration of a feast of such sanctity, discord is wrong. One day has our Saviour set apart for a commemoration of our deliverance, namely, of His most holy Passion" (Theodoret of Cyrus. Ecclesiastical History (Book I), Chapter IX. Excerpted from Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 3. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. American Edition, 1892. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight).""
144k, as per wms usual custom, you are conveniently leaving out the context of what you are citing. Here is a link that has the full context included of Eusebius' writings. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iv.vi.iii.xviii.html
Constantine was arguing for uniformity in celebrating the Passover (Lord's Supper) because some Christians were looking to the Jews for guidance on when to observe the day. It just so happens that the Jews celebrated the Passover twice in one year, so Constantine commenting on how wrong that was.
History tells us that Constantine had a lot of respect for Easter, Passover, the Lord's Supper or whatever you would like to call it…
History tells us that Constantine had a lot of respect for Easter, Passover, the Lord's Supper or whatever you would like to call it…
Yes Emily. I doubt if 144000 has bothered to read the full text from which the quotes come. The article which quotes those chosen extracts is also from a Sabbattarian Church of God so the conclusions they make are obvious.
144000 talks of fabricated evidences but he backed away from backing up his own claims of the 37 years and many others on which he was challenged. Their only defense is to come to the wmscog and study. Obviously it is not the bible they are studying but some green and blue and red and yellow books.
Yes Emily. I doubt if 144000 has bothered to read the full text from which the quotes come. The article which quotes those chosen extracts is also from a Sabbattarian Church of God so the conclusions they make are obvious.
144000 talks of fabricated evidences but he backed away from backing up his own claims of the 37 years and many others on which he was challenged. Their only defense is to come to the wmscog and study. Obviously it is not the bible they are studying but some green and blue and red and yellow books.
144000 wrote:
Emil
Your reply was:
"Polycarp, a disciple of John, maintained it should be as per the Jewish calendar."
"Pope Anicletus, Irenaeus and others followed the teachings of Peter and Paul who adopted … (Sunday)."
So what your saying is, the apostles disagreed with each other, and Christ was divided?
And in addition, you think its "okay"? I would never dare to take the word of god so lightly. If I thought verses conflicted, then surely it is not the apostles who are wrong, it is the interpretation that is wrong. The bible teaches a different passover than the one you are trying to teach.
John lived in Ephesus while Peter and Paul lived in Rome. So it is quite possible that they were blissfully unaware of their differences of opinion since these were never a matter of grave concern. If they were grave matters that caused division in their time, they would have met and resolved the issue during their lifetime just as they did more grave matters at the council of Jerusalem of 50 AD. These matters got highlighted after they passed away and the next generation came along.
I agree that it is the interpretation which is wrong and not the apostles. That is always the reason for Christian disunity. Bad interpretation is the big reason for the delusion of a "Mother God". You ought to read a book written by Ahn to clear the delusion.
The bible teaches the OT passover which you don't follow in any case my friend. What you call a passover is not called the passover by the bible. In fact, as you well know, the NT calls Jesus the passover lamb. The OT passover supper, after which Jesus instituted the Eucharist, was before the killing of our NT passover lamb so it cannot be the NT passover. The partaking of the body and blood of Jesus is not called the passover but "The Lord's Supper" in the NT.
The other comments
…are answered in the full context of the original source, no matter how many excuses forum members make in order to be people who do as they please; saying "I follow john" or saying "I follow paul".
I have a two page long list of reasons under my message history for how absurd Emily and Emil's other claims are, and I'm not going to get into a circular argument again. I'd suggest that we not pretend anyone "Backed off" before new forum members check my message history and see your track record of fibbing about me and making ludicrous assumptions about my intentions. Running in circles like a fool until somebody gets frustrated and leaves is not a valid argument that you were ever right about anything.
I'd reccomend not trying to divert attention from the main article before new posters see the collossal failure of your (and other member's) ability to stay on topic. In fact I'd advise that you make this your very first thread where you don't shift the goalposts, it would do a lot for your credibility.
Most members of this forum follow Jesus. Only those from the wmscog follow mother.
You keep saying you have answered my questions but you never give the answers and follow through logically. For instance, I asked where Ahn had claimed that he would live for exactly 37 years as you once mentioned. You kept beating about the bush but never gave a definite answer. If I remember right, your answer was that it is in one of his books and I must read them all to find it when you very well know that the books are not available to non-members. You also told me to come to your church and study the answer. So it is you who have used circular arguments to avoid answering us directly.
144000 wrote:
Emil
Your reply was:
"Polycarp, a disciple of John, maintained it should be as per the Jewish calendar."
"Pope Anicletus, Irenaeus and others followed the teachings of Peter and Paul who adopted … (Sunday)."
So what your saying is, the apostles disagreed with each other, and Christ was divided?
And in addition, you think its "okay"? I would never dare to take the word of god so lightly. If I thought verses conflicted, then surely it is not the apostles who are wrong, it is the interpretation that is wrong. The bible teaches a different passover than the one you are trying to teach.
John lived in Ephesus while Peter and Paul lived in Rome. So it is quite possible that they were blissfully unaware of their differences of opinion since these were never a matter of grave concern. If they were grave matters that caused division in their time, they would have met and resolved the issue during their lifetime just as they did more grave matters at the council of Jerusalem of 50 AD. These matters got highlighted after they passed away and the next generation came along.
I agree that it is the interpretation which is wrong and not the apostles. That is always the reason for Christian disunity. Bad interpretation is the big reason for the delusion of a "Mother God". You ought to read a book written by Ahn to clear the delusion.
The bible teaches the OT passover which you don't follow in any case my friend. What you call a passover is not called the passover by the bible. In fact, as you well know, the NT calls Jesus the passover lamb. The OT passover supper, after which Jesus instituted the Eucharist, was before the killing of our NT passover lamb so it cannot be the NT passover. The partaking of the body and blood of Jesus is not called the passover but "The Lord's Supper" in the NT.
The other comments
…are answered in the full context of the original source, no matter how many excuses forum members make in order to be people who do as they please; saying "I follow john" or saying "I follow paul".
I have a two page long list of reasons under my message history for how absurd Emily and Emil's other claims are, and I'm not going to get into a circular argument again. I'd suggest that we not pretend anyone "Backed off" before new forum members check my message history and see your track record of fibbing about me and making ludicrous assumptions about my intentions. Running in circles like a fool until somebody gets frustrated and leaves is not a valid argument that you were ever right about anything.
I'd reccomend not trying to divert attention from the main article before new posters see the collossal failure of your (and other member's) ability to stay on topic. In fact I'd advise that you make this your very first thread where you don't shift the goalposts, it would do a lot for your credibility.
Most members of this forum follow Jesus. Only those from the wmscog follow mother.
You keep saying you have answered my questions but you never give the answers and follow through logically. For instance, I asked where Ahn had claimed that he would live for exactly 37 years as you once mentioned. You kept beating about the bush but never gave a definite answer. If I remember right, your answer was that it is in one of his books and I must read them all to find it when you very well know that the books are not available to non-members. You also told me to come to your church and study the answer. So it is you who have used circular arguments to avoid answering us directly.
About the Passover I just have to say
Colossians 2:14 – having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.
Colossians 2:16-17 – Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
It doesn't matter what the WMSCOG tries to say, Paul is very clear in the Book of Colossians. Those are shadows, the reality is found in Christ.
Galatians 4:8-11: Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces[d]? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.
Again, doesn't matter how you try to change it, he is clear. Those things are weak and miserable principles in the NT.
1 Corinthians 5:6-8 – Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
Hebrews 10:1-2 – The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins.
So as it says in 1 Corinthians, Jesus was sacrificed as our Passover Lamb. One of the Problems that Paul mentions about the OT Passover is that because it didn't make you perfect, it had to be kept year after year. Same as the WMSCOG, keeping the Passover year after year is like saying that Jesus sacrificed wasn't worth it.
Hebrews 10:8-10 – First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law. Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Hebrews 10:14 – For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
Jesus sacrificed once, not every year. The sacrifice makes perfect forever, if it is forever then you don't have to keep it every year. As it says in Hebrews 10:2, "Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered?", meaning, once the sacrifice is perfect, then it has to stop being offered. And as the bible says, Jesus was that perfect sacrifice.
If the Passover was soooo important as the WMSCOG says, then there wouldn't be difference between what the disciples say. But if you notice in Matthew 26:17 Jesus kept the Passover, but if you read the book of John he didn’t.
The WMSCOG says that in John 13, when Jesus washes his disciples feet, that's the Passover day. But if you notice on John 19, 6 chapters later, when Jesus Christ is about to be crucified it says "It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon (John 19:14)." So it's impossible for Jesus to do the Foot washing ceremony on the Passover day and then be crucified on the day of Preparation of the Passover. I'm not Asian, but the math doesn't add up.
And EVEN if yes, we had to celebrate the Passover, if all over the bible everybody says "Remember to keep the Passover", if even the last sentence in the book of revelation was "You better keep the Passover", anyway, WMSCOG nor Ahnsahnghong are special. I say that because MANY MANY MANY churches LONG BEFORE Ahnsahnghong and the WMSCOG were keeping the Passover. So Ahnsahnghong didn't bring it back, nor the WMSCOG is the only church, nor the first that keeps it in the past years.
What I find the most ironic, is that the Passover is a symbol for freedom, for coming out of slavery, but once you celebrate the Passover at the WMSCOG you just become a slave and have to say bye to your freedom. And don't tell me that I'm making this up, I'm still at the WMSCOG keeping all my third days and Sabbath days. So don't tell me that I'm going through the tangent and don't just start trying to offend. Just as I have answered with verses and with the explanation do the same. Don't chose other verses, just explain the verses that I'm showing, I know how some wmscog members just throw other verses that have nothing to do with the discussion just in order to change the whole direction. You can answer through here or through PM, however you feel more comfortable. God bless you.
About the Passover I just have to say
Colossians 2:14 – having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.
Colossians 2:16-17 – Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.
It doesn't matter what the WMSCOG tries to say, Paul is very clear in the Book of Colossians. Those are shadows, the reality is found in Christ.
Galatians 4:8-11: Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces[d]? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.
Again, doesn't matter how you try to change it, he is clear. Those things are weak and miserable principles in the NT.
1 Corinthians 5:6-8 – Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
Hebrews 10:1-2 – The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins.
So as it says in 1 Corinthians, Jesus was sacrificed as our Passover Lamb. One of the Problems that Paul mentions about the OT Passover is that because it didn't make you perfect, it had to be kept year after year. Same as the WMSCOG, keeping the Passover year after year is like saying that Jesus sacrificed wasn't worth it.
Hebrews 10:8-10 – First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law. Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Hebrews 10:14 – For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.
Jesus sacrificed once, not every year. The sacrifice makes perfect forever, if it is forever then you don't have to keep it every year. As it says in Hebrews 10:2, "Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered?", meaning, once the sacrifice is perfect, then it has to stop being offered. And as the bible says, Jesus was that perfect sacrifice.
If the Passover was soooo important as the WMSCOG says, then there wouldn't be difference between what the disciples say. But if you notice in Matthew 26:17 Jesus kept the Passover, but if you read the book of John he didn’t.
The WMSCOG says that in John 13, when Jesus washes his disciples feet, that's the Passover day. But if you notice on John 19, 6 chapters later, when Jesus Christ is about to be crucified it says "It was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about noon (John 19:14)." So it's impossible for Jesus to do the Foot washing ceremony on the Passover day and then be crucified on the day of Preparation of the Passover. I'm not Asian, but the math doesn't add up.
And EVEN if yes, we had to celebrate the Passover, if all over the bible everybody says "Remember to keep the Passover", if even the last sentence in the book of revelation was "You better keep the Passover", anyway, WMSCOG nor Ahnsahnghong are special. I say that because MANY MANY MANY churches LONG BEFORE Ahnsahnghong and the WMSCOG were keeping the Passover. So Ahnsahnghong didn't bring it back, nor the WMSCOG is the only church, nor the first that keeps it in the past years.
What I find the most ironic, is that the Passover is a symbol for freedom, for coming out of slavery, but once you celebrate the Passover at the WMSCOG you just become a slave and have to say bye to your freedom. And don't tell me that I'm making this up, I'm still at the WMSCOG keeping all my third days and Sabbath days. So don't tell me that I'm going through the tangent and don't just start trying to offend. Just as I have answered with verses and with the explanation do the same. Don't chose other verses, just explain the verses that I'm showing, I know how some wmscog members just throw other verses that have nothing to do with the discussion just in order to change the whole direction. You can answer through here or through PM, however you feel more comfortable. God bless you.
@144000 – please show me where exactly Jesus calls the partaking of the bread and wine the passover. If you did read your bible rather than only the verses the wmscog highlights, you would notice that the washing of feet and the Eucharist happened "after supper". That OT passover does not count for us anymore. Since 1 Cor 5:7 tells us that Christ is our passover lamb, the meal they had before His sacrifice on the cross does not count for us as a passover of the NT. It is pretty obvious logic that the passover meal always follows the sacrifice of the lamb and could never precede it.
You guys fail to understand that Jesus offered us his body and blood in Mark's upper room the night before he died. That is the significance of the day he did it. Not the fact that it happened to be the passover seder. I have explained this before. The gospels are a bit ambiguous about whether it was the night of the passover seder or the previous night. The bible would never have an ambiguity about such a thing if the OT passover was important for us. Forget the OT passover and move on. Live the new covenant in which Jesus is the passover lamb of the NT passover.
@144000 – please show me where exactly Jesus calls the partaking of the bread and wine the passover. If you did read your bible rather than only the verses the wmscog highlights, you would notice that the washing of feet and the Eucharist happened "after supper". That OT passover does not count for us anymore. Since 1 Cor 5:7 tells us that Christ is our passover lamb, the meal they had before His sacrifice on the cross does not count for us as a passover of the NT. It is pretty obvious logic that the passover meal always follows the sacrifice of the lamb and could never precede it.
You guys fail to understand that Jesus offered us his body and blood in Mark's upper room the night before he died. That is the significance of the day he did it. Not the fact that it happened to be the passover seder. I have explained this before. The gospels are a bit ambiguous about whether it was the night of the passover seder or the previous night. The bible would never have an ambiguity about such a thing if the OT passover was important for us. Forget the OT passover and move on. Live the new covenant in which Jesus is the passover lamb of the NT passover.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.