Christian Jews

The difference between the Messianic observance and that of Othodox Jews, is clearly that the Orthodox is limited to the historical deliverance from Egypt, touched with the revelation of Gods willingness to deliver His people.

The Messianic sees Yeshua as being the kingpin of both the historical event in Egypt, and continuing deliverance and the future deliverer from the tribulation. Much of the richness of the Passover is involved in its details, which might well be too much for this thread. But for an example, Yeshua died on the cross at the exact moment the lambs were killed on the altar, 3PM. This is according to the Torah which says you shall kill it (the lamb) "Between the evenings" (Which is exactly 3 PM. ) Yeshua was examined from the 10th day until the 14th by the priests as was the lamb. Yeshua relates his own blood to that of the cup after the meal, the cup of redemption. It was this cup that that he said "this is MY blood." And it is only this cup, the one after the meal only on Passover that is symbolic of the deliverance which was given through His blood. Not a weekly eurcurist which in some magical way turns into the blood. In fact, this would be completely against Torah and the prohabition against consuming blood.

Yeshua gave his life, (blood) to exact our deliverance. Now look also at the facts of the passover and the things yet to come, the tribulation,
Two men are brought as witnesses to deliver Gods word, Pharoah is like antichrist, the judgements, water turns to blood, frogs, fire from heaven, death of cattle ect, and in the final battle God draws out the armies of antichrist, (as he did the Pharoah, to a place in the wilderness to destroy him. Then it was with a parting of the red sea, and Moshe calling the people accross the divide, next time it is rolling the heavens back like a scroll and Yeshua, (the one who was to come in the same authority as Moshe) parting the heavens and calling his own across the divide of heaven.

This is the passover we are given by God, not a weekly mytical service. The weekly passover was only the result of Roman pressure on the Jews during the Jewish wars, which caused the passover, circumcision and sabbath to be prohibited. It was not Gods ordinance that we change to a weekly obserance of some kind. All the feast days are at specific time and done in specific way as lessons to us about Who God is and what is about to take place.

Hope this is recived in the kindness with which I write it.

Charles YTK

Beyond all these things and more

With this we see all the primary elements of a Catholic Mass as early as 107 CE.

Click to expand...

Amen! I would recommend Scott Hahn's book, The Lamb's Supper, to anyone researching the correlation bewtween the Mass and the Passover. It is worth reading, whether one is Catholic or not, as it ties the Early Christian Faith to its Hebrew roots very poetically and meticulously.

Hope this is recived in the kindness with which I write it.

Click to expand...

It most definately was, Charles YTK. Though we differ on our view of the Sacraments and what a Christian's relation to the Law should be, it is good to learn more about my brothers and sisters, and hopefully they will learn more about me.

God Bless,

Neal

Originally posted by Charles YTK

 I do not agree with this. The Eucharist is too tightly connected to the catholic process of transsubstaniation, where the bread and the wine literaly become the flesh and the blood of messiah through the the reciting of magical words. All connected with Pagan practice, and painted over with some christinization paint to make new rituals. Passover is about the Lords deliverance from the Satanic ruled wold, and is also a picture of the tribulation which is coming, the last great exodus.

Penetocst is not the same as Booths. Penecost is the same as Shavuot, (the feast of weeks).

Click to expand...

 

Firstly I must say to you that the words spoken over the elements of the communion table are NOT magical they are scripture - I am insulted that you would even speak in such a way.

Secondly, I am not Roman Catholic although with good reason I call them brethren.

Thirdly, the word Eucharist does not appear in your translations of the bible because you TRANSLATED the word!! Lol

Eucharist:
Pronunciation: 'yü-k(&-)r&st
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English eukarist, from Middle French euchariste, from Late Latin eucharistia, from Greek, Eucharist, gratitude, from eucharistos grateful, from eu- + charizesthai to show favor, from charis favor, grace, gratitude; akin to Greek chairein to rejoice --

fourthly, If you think the Eucharist which is mentioned repeatedly in the Scriptures and in the extra-canonical writings of the apostles and church fathers is a "pagan" idea you are wholly ignorant of the historic Christian faith.

Matt 26:26-28 - Jn 6:51-56 - 1Cor 10:16 - 1Cor 11:23-27

Ignatius of Antioch -- "I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

Ignatius of Antioch -"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. " (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).

Justin Martyr - We call this food Eucharist . . . For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151])

Tertullian (AD 145-220)

"Our flesh eats the body and blood of Christ so that our soul is filled with God. Therefore what He joins together in His work
cannot be separated in His reward"


Texts such as the Didache which very nearly was included into the canon of scripture aslo support the doctrine of the Real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.  What more, Huss, Luther, Tyndale, all of the early reformers agreed that Christ was real in the Eucharist - they may have disagree HOW that was so, but none the less, NONE denied that the elements of the Eucharist were post consecration the Real presence of Christ upon the alter.  KNOX was the first real champion amongst the reformers for the notion that the Eucharist was false. Poor deceived soul that he was.

HISTORICALLY speaking, there has been nothing more central to the Christian faith that the Eucharist.  Before there was a bible, there was the Eucharist.  Which history tells us was reserved for baptized believers only.  While the Agape feast or communal meal was open to all.


As far as Pentecost, my mistake. I connected it to the wrong feast.  Booths is more a rendering of Lent. I am not infallible The point remains, the OT feasts have NT expression.

BrMax:

Firstly I must say to you that the words spoken over the elements of the communion table are NOT magical they are scripture - I am insulted that you would even speak in such a way.

Click to expand...

These are the rules for this forum:

This forum is specifically for the discussion of Messianic Judaism and its beliefs, as well as for congregation of Jewish Christians. Various Jewish feasts, holidays and other traditions may be discussed.

This is an opportunity for Messianic Jewish believers to get together and share their beliefs and love for their Messiah with the rest of Christianity.

This forum is also open to non-Christian orthodox Jews, who want to learn more about the Messiah. Non-practising and agnostic Jews are asked not to post here.

There should be no debate regarding these issues in this forums. All debates or disagreements should be posted in the Meeting Place forum.

NOTE: Just as Catholics may seem very different to Protestants, so will some of the beliefs and traditions of Messianic Jews. Keep in mind that we are all part of the same family of God, Christians, believers in Yeshua, our Messiah and Savior. Anti-Jewish posts will not be tolerated on this forum.

Click to expand...

There's no reason to feel insulted. We're sharing our beliefs with those who are interested. If you are not interested, there's no one forcing you to participate.

In discussing our beliefs, it is necessary for us to explain our observances, and also to explain why we disagree with other observances, such as Christmas, Easter, the Eucharist, and others. The intent is not to offend, but to simply state our beliefs because there are some here who have a genuine desire to understand our point of view. When we speak of matters concerning Torah-observance, it inevitably raises questions: "What about this verse? and what about that verse?" We're here to answer these questions.

But, if you're only interested in debating and arguing, this isn't the forum for it. We'd like to stay within the rules of this forum so that we can continue to be welcomed here.

Shimon

To Shimon:

While this is a forum for sharing beliefs, it is still not the place for denigrating the beliefs of other Christians. Although Br Max was crossing the line with his harsh reaction, the statement that the Catholic teaching of transubstantiation is "magical" is most inappropriate as well.

Please keep in mind the rules of Christian Forums will ALL postings throughout CF.


Peace be with you,
~VOW
Moderator, Christian Forums

oh but there is a reason to feel insulted. I do not defame what you believe by calling it MAGIC implying it is satanic rather than GOD given.

 

Vow: what is harsh about telling some one when they have been insulting?

By the way, since you brought up Ignatius…

We see in the writings of Ignatius written around 107 CE that Shabbat observance was considered part of “obsolete practices,” and believers were coerced to change their calendar in accordance with “the Lord’s Day, …on which our Life rose by His power…”( A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “Ignatius, Letter to the Magnesians,” Ch. 9).

In the Epistle of Mathetes, written around 130 CE, Jewish practices in accordance with the Torah are condemned in no uncertain terms:

But again their scruples concerning meats, and their superstition relating to the Sabbath and the vanity of their circumcision and the dissimulation of their fasting and new moons, I do [not] suppose you need to learn from me, are ridiculous and unworthy of any consideration.

-- A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “The Letter of Mathetes to Diognetus,” Ch. 4.

Click to expand...

So clearly the Church leadership was advocating a change in proscribed worship days. What’s even more disturbing is how the Church put teeth into this policy, because without the ability to coerce the people into this change it could not have lasted. This was done by creating a hierarchical top-down structure that kept the people “in line:”

You must all follow the lead of the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed that of the Father; follow the presbytery as you would the Apostles; reverence the deacons as you would God’s commandment. Let no one do anything touching the Church, apart from the bishop. Let that celebration of the Eucharist be considered valid which is held under the bishop or anyone to whom he has committed it. Where the bishop appears, there let the people be, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not permitted without authorization from the bishop either to baptize or to hold an agape; but whatever he approves is also pleasing to God.

-- A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “Ignatius to Smyrnaeans,” Ch. 8.

Click to expand...

Let no one deceive himself: unless a man is within the sanctuary, he has to go without the Bread of God. Assuredly, if the prayer of one or two has such efficacy, how much more that of the bishop and the entire Church! …he who absents himself from the common meeting, by that very fact shows pride and becomes a sectarian; for the Scripture says: God resists the proud. Let us take care, therefore, not to oppose the bishop, that we may be submissive to God.

-- A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “Ignatius to Ephesians,” Ch. 5.

Click to expand...

Avoid the noxious weeds. Their gardener is not Jesus Christ, because they are not the planting of the Father. …all those that belong to God and Jesus Christ are the very ones that side with the bishop; and all those that may yet change their mind and return to the unity of the Church, will likewise belong to God, and thus lead a life acceptable to Jesus Christ. Do not be deceived, my brethren: if a man runs after a schismatic, he will not inherit the kingdom of God; if a man chooses to be a dissenter, he severs all connection with the Passion.

-- A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “Ignatius to Philadelphians,” Ch. 3.

Click to expand...

Take, then, to partake of one Eucharist; for, one is the Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one the cup to unite us with His Blood, and one altar; just as there is one bishop assisted by the presbytery and the deacons, my fellow servants. Thus you will conform in all your actions to the will of God.

-- A. Roberts, J. Donaldson ed., “Ignatius to Philadelphians,” Ch. 4.

Click to expand...

Once men like Ignatius usurped the authority of the Torah in their churches, all hopes for Torah observance in these congregations was lost. From Ignatius’ writings (107 CE) it is clear that the model for Church government closely mirrored that of the Roman government. The authority of the Bishop was considered equal to the authority of the Messiah. To oppose the Bishop was to oppose God Himself. The Eucharist, baptizing and common assembly were only to be done when and where the Bishop designated, and since Ignatius clearly indicated that each of these practices were necessary for salvation, one was forced to obey the commands of the Bishop or forfeit his soul. Therefore, since the Bishops had ruled Sunday to be the proper day of communal assembly and that only on that day were the sacraments to be effectually enjoined, one could only be saved by worshiping on Sunday. With this the bishops trampled God’s Torah and His Covenants under their feet.

What is more, unity was to be observed, it seems, at all costs. Ignatius could not have been more clear when he said that those who dissented from the Bishop severed all connection with “Christ’s Passion” and could not inherit the Kingdom of God. Yet, this kind of unity was the theme of both the Church and the Synagogue during this time. The writings of the Church fathers are permeated with admonitions for unity and conformity to their new orthodoxy. But as we have seen, so were the Rabbis. Each side was threatening excommunication to anyone who dissented. One side embraced Torah, yet rejected the Living Word. The other side embraced “Jesus Christ,” yet rejected the very Torah that He embodied. And somewhere between these two polar opposites the Messianic faithful struggled to survive.

Shimon

Vow:

While this is a forum for sharing beliefs, it is still not the place for denigrating the beliefs of other Christians. Although Br Max was crossing the line with his harsh reaction, the statement that the Catholic teaching of transubstantiation is "magical" is most inappropriate as well.

Please keep in mind the rules of Christian Forums will ALL postings throughout CF.

Click to expand...

I've provided the quotes from Ignatius above saying this very thing. Whether or not it is what Catholics believe today, it is clear from the early writings that it is what was believed at the time.

Shimon

Shimon: I was waiting for some one to post this

http://www.mnment.com/judaism/613.php

At the above link is a list of the 613 mitzvahs of the torah from a Jewish website. I would like you to find one that states we are to worship on Saturday.

The Lord commands us to REMEMBER the sabbath and to keep it holy. That is NOT a command to worship on that day. What more, what does HOLY mean? According to Ungers Bible Dictionary, Holy mean to keep set apart. As a Christian man, who has Christ in his heart, I remember God every day and keep every day set apart unto his service. If you wish to worship only on saturday that is of course your choice, butI must remind you that the early church gathered on Sunday to celebrate the Agape feast and the Eucharist both as one body in Christ Jesus.

The church fathers NEVER taught other than what they were given by word and example by the apostles.

Look if I came off harsh in my response to Charles and his comment concerning the Eucharist I am sorry. It was not my intent. I am disturbed and upset however when people make such inflammatory statements in obvious ignorance as if they are speaking the gospel truth. Again, it was not my intent to be harsh or judgmental in any way.

To Shimon:

Transubstantiation is not "magical." It is a MIRACLE. To imply that "magical words" or "incantations" are recited over the Eucharist to change it to the actual Body of Christ is offensive to Catholics.


To Br Max:

Believe me, I do understand where you are coming from, but "insulting" is a highly-charged word. We do best to correct misconceptions with gentleness, and we try to assume that people who hold the misbeliefs do not intentionally mean to do us harm.



Peace be with you,
~VOW
Moderator, Christian Forums

Br. Max:

The Lord commands us to REMEMBER the sabbath and to keep it holy. That is NOT a command to worship on that day.

Click to expand...

On the contrary:

Leviticus 23:3: " 'There are six days when you may work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, a day of sacred assembly. You are not to do any work; wherever you live, it is a Sabbath to the LORD .

Click to expand...

Look if I came off harsh in my response to Charles and his comment concerning the Eucharist I am sorry. It was not my intent. I am disturbed and upset however when people make such inflammatory statements in obvious ignorance as if they are speaking the gospel truth. Again, it was not my intent to be harsh or judgmental in any way.

Click to expand...

I've been very open and willing to point out some of the faulty beliefs and teachings of the 1st-Century Jews, so why is it "insulting" to point out what we consider to be some faulty teachings of the early church founders?

Shimon

Shimon, it is insulting to say that a contentiously held Christian belief, a belief held for the bulk of Christian history by the bulk of Christians is pagan in origins and witchcraft. If he had said mistaken, that I could understand. But to say it is witchcraft is way out of line. That should be plain to everyone.

now, as far as Lev 23:3, funny how the Jewish website I gave you notes that a command not to work on YOM KIPPUR. #135 - 137 on the list


 

can you explain the discrepancy between what you believe and what the Jews themselves teach?
 

<P>***MOD HAT ON*** </P>
<P>
<TABLE cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=4 width="100%" border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD id=cat style="BORDER-RIGHT: #828fa2 2px solid; BORDER-TOP: #bfc5d3 2px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #bfc5d3 2px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #828fa2 2px solid" bgColor=#727e93 ?><FONT class=nf color=#ffffff><B><A name=29></A><FONT size=2>Rule No. 2 - No "Trolling" </FONT></B></FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #bfc5d3 2px solid; BORDER-TOP: #ffffff 2px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ffffff 2px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #bfc5d3 2px solid" bgColor=#d6dae6 ?><FONT class=nf size=2>2) You will not post any topic that disrupts the peace and harmony of this forum. This will include any new user with less than 50 posts starting a "discretionable" topic - i.e. a topic not suitable for children. This will also include posts that put down Christianity in general or any posts considered as blasphemy by staff (this is a CHRISTIAN FORUMS site), or posts that put down another Christian group or denomination. This includes links to websites in profiles and signatures. </FONT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></P>
<P>Now, with that said, there will be no more attacks on Transubstantiation--or any other Catholic doctrine for that matter.&nbsp; Disagree with it all you want and debate it all you want.&nbsp; Just do so in a professional, Christian manner.&nbsp; And, take heart, no Catholic will get away with calling Protestantism heretical or anything like that.&nbsp; </P>
<P><EM>I've been very open and willing to point out some of the faulty beliefs and teachings of the 1st-Century Jews, so why is it "insulting" to point out what we consider to be some faulty teachings of the early church founders?<BR></EM></P>
<P>And thus Catholics could do that with the teachings of the Reformers and label them erroneous, etc. but they won't do so.&nbsp; </P>
<P>***MOD HAT OFF***</P>

With this we see all the primary elements of a Catholic Mass as early as 107 CE.

Click to expand...

(*Edited out for inappropriate stetements)


The apostle Paul said, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.&nbsp;For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.&nbsp;Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.&nbsp; Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears" (Acts 20:28-31).

By the time Jude wrote his little epistle he stated, "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.&nbsp;For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained (prophesied) to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ" (Jude 3-4).

(*Edited out for inappropriate statements)

cleon, I will not debate this topic with you here it is NOT the forum for this discussion. This thread is for the dicussion of Christian Jews. The Eucharist was a side issue in the greater discussion.

Romans 1:18&nbsp; "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness"

It is sad that some seek to suppress the truth.

"grievous wolves"; "perverse things"; "ungodly men"; "unrighteousness of men"......

It is sad that some seek to suppress the truth..

Click to expand...

All of which you apply to the Catholic Church, eh, cleon?

One more infraction from you of anti-Catholic trolling, my friend, and you will be taking an extended vacation from this site.

Count on it.

cleon: begone. If you would like to start a thread for this topic in the appropriate forum, I'd be more than happy to refute your errors concerning what catholics believe. &nbsp; And I'm not even catholic!!

Br. Max,

Sorry to have been out of touch with this thread for a few days. We were away from home for a few days.

On the issue of transubstantiation, what I was saying was that the process of turning one thing into another thing, is either miracle, or magic. Now I would emphasise that the error is perhaps in trying to convince someone that this has happened. This is where the mystical things come into play. For the sake of understanding, and not to argue, please allow me to explain;

If I were to go to your mass the coming Sunday and take the "Elements" one sample from before the prayers over them, and another sample from the smae "Elements" after the prayer, and then take these to the lab and anaylze them in a Gas Chromatograph, I can assure you that they will be exactly the same, both bread and wine. Do you doubt my words on this? What do the bread and wine taste like in your own mouth? Do they taste like raw flesh and human blood, or do they taste like bread and wine?

(I'm guessing the latter). (I must warn you that in my ministry as a Messianic, I have served by invitation in a large catholic church, as part of the music and teaching ministry, and as such have had communion many times.)

Now lets ponder a few things; since eating human flesh and drinking any sort of blood is a total abomination to our God, how would this Eucurist fit in with this prohabition? It does not. Could it be that there was something miss applied concerning the teachings of Yeshua? I believe there was. Yeshua identified himself with the bread of the passover, (eaten only once a year) and with the cup of redemption which is the cup after the Passover Seder meal. He speaks of our being filled with his salvation, redemption and deliverance, in other words to be immersed in his word and in the spirit. We are to be filled with Him. Not by eating him, but by allowing Him to become our Messiah King, and to fill us with the Holy Spirit. This is what being born again is all about.

I want to tell you a harsh truth. The so called Church fathers were wrong about a great number of things. If you are not convinced of this, then you should read their writings to see what hatred they held for the Jews and the Torah. This hatred did not change significantly with the reformation either. You might find it interesting to read the speeches of Adolf Hitler calling for the destruction of the Jews, and to find that these words calling for the death and burning of the Jews were quotes directly from the sermons of Martin Luther. Luther learned this hatred from the church fathers of the 2nd and 3rd. century.

Is it wrong to have bread and wine with your worship services? No, not at all. As long as we keep it in the same context as the Nazzarenes of the 1st century. They took part in a covenantal meal, reafirming their oneness through the Messiah, and their membership in the covenant which was sealed in his blood. For millennia before the time of Yeshua the traditional meal of covenant and fellowship has been bread and wine. These are very strong Hebraic practices, going all the way back. And we are always encouraged to remember this covenant made through Messiah and to share the breaking of bread and to drink wine. The idea that this meal was somehow eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the Lord is strickly a Roman catholic tradition and has no biblical foundation. Remember that when Yeshua told us to alway eat this bread in rememberance of him,k he was saying this in the very act of the passover seder on the night of his betrayal, and was identifying himself as the passover lamb. He was saying every year, when you eat this passover (only once a year on the 14th of Nisan), do so remembering that it is me (Yeshua) whose blood is securing your deliverance from the powes of darkness.

Blessing to you,

Charles YTK