Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,195,062 members, 7,956,962 topics. Date: Tuesday, 24 September 2024 at 12:26 AM |
Nairaland Forum / Mbaemeka's Profile / Mbaemeka's Posts
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (of 36 pages)
Religion / Re: What Shall It Profit God to Burn People In Hell? by mbaemeka(m): 10:56pm On Dec 20, 2014 |
James 2:26 KJV For as the body without the spirit is dead.... Those who have eyes will see. |
Religion / Re: Why Is He Called "Jesus Of Nazareth" If He Was Born In Bethlehem? by mbaemeka(m): 10:48pm On Dec 20, 2014 |
It is because he was popular in Nazareth. You have to understand that the name 'Jesus' was a common name. And even more so that there would have been other Jesus' in Nazareth. But this particular one had made a name for himself so he was referred to as the Jesus of Nazareth. I.e the one who was popular in Nazareth. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 7:50pm On Dec 13, 2014 |
There has been a lot of confusion concerning the Person called Melchizedek and it is clear that we may never fully know who he really was on this side of the divide. But with the few available biblical references to him, I tend to believe that he is more deity than otherwise and if so, then he would have to be a Theophany. Some of those proposing a non-deity position are doing so purely based on extrabiblical ideas. There is not a single scripture that says Salem was literal. For one, Abraham was said to be physically looking and searching for a city whose builder and maker was God, but he never did find the city. If the city in question, was an evolved Salem turned Jerusalem, then the Hebrew writer was giving unispired scripture and we shouldodo well to disregard the whole book. But the Hebrews writer, Paul, NEVER gave uninspired text. For the records (and borrowing NLmediators excellent posers) we are faced to deal with the following scriptural facts: Melchizedek was described as NOT HAVING beginning of days and end of life;He was attributed as NOT HAVING mother or father;He was said to be made LIKE THE SON OF GOD. He was said to be a priest forever, made before the law was given yet similar to the son of God in having an endless life etc. Even most interesting of all (and often overlooked by the non-deity camp) is the fact that God the Father and Almighty one is said repeatedly to have made his son a priest after the Order of Melchizedek. This is important to take into cognizance because priests were ONLY named after an order if they hailed from the order and could be traced to the lineage of the first priest in that order. Taking Aaron for example, the bible attributes all levitical priesthoods to be of the Aaronic order and we can relate with this because Aaron was the first priest in this order and all subsequent priests of the order were descendants of him. Now, juxtaposing this fact with the one that God named Jesus to come according to Melchizedek's order leaves us to have one conclusion: that Jesus hailed from Melchizedek and as such Melchizedek would be as much man as Jesus is and was. The big error with the Shem attribution to Melchizedek is also clearly shown in the bible. Hebrews 7 argues that priests were ALWAYS designated according to the order of the one that they hailed from. In that sense the writer reasoned that if Jesus' priesthood was ordinary like normal fallible mortal men then he should have been named after Aaron's order. But that was not the case, instead Jesus was named after Melchizedek's order. Secondly, we know Shem's father, we know his mother. We know when he was born, and when he died. Shem had no similarieties with Christ and neither was he ever attributed with an endless life so he being the said Melchizedek is DOA. In the OT we see that Joshua met a particular man shortly before he was to attack Jericho (Joshua 5 vs 13). The MAN in question was holding a sword and he looked very much like any other man so much so that Joshua had to question the man's loyalty: are you one of us or of the enemy. The MAN said to Joshua "I am the Captain of the Host of the Lord". As soon as Joshua heard this, scripture says he immediately bowed down to worship the MAN. The man in question asked him to take off his sandals because he was standing on holy ground. We know what the term "Captain of the Host of the Lord" means but just incase we are in doubt we have a few pointers to show us who that MAN was. Joshua didn't recognise him but as soon as he introduced himself Joshua knew such a man was worthy of worship. Another interesting thing is that the MAN said "as the Captain of the Host of the Lord have I APPEARED unto you". The last point is that the MAN asked Joshua to take off his sandals- the same thing that the Holy spirit told Moses at the burning bush. I submit it to you today, ladies and gentlemen, that this man was the HOLY SPIRIT IN FLESH. The same one that Abraham met in his house whom the bible said ATE food. He is also the same one that Genesis 32 says wrestled with Jacob and caused him to change his name. He is the same one who appeared at the fiery furnace with Shedrach, Meshach and Abednego. The one whom Nebudcadnezzar described as "LIKE THE SON OF GOD". He is the captain of the Host of the Lord, the ancient of days, and the angel of the Lord's presence. He is Allos Parakletos; the one Jesus described as exactly like himself. That is why his features and characteristics are very SIMILAR with Jesus'. He has neither beginning of days nor end of life. He has no mother or father, no genealogy or descent. He is the same one that appeared to Abraham as the king-priest and offered the communion (bread and wine) to the Patriarch. He is the one whom the bible described as the KING of PEACE and RIGHTEOUSNESS. The same to bless the Patriach (something no ordinary man could do). It is a bit debatable since we have just a few things to say about him from the scriptures but Paul said there is more to know about him if only we could be more spiritually alert. I think I have an idea as to why Paul could say that and even more so why Jesus could be named after his order in line with a forever priesthood and after an endless life. It is because the Holy spirit, like Jesus, CANNOT DIE. I rest my case. 2 Likes 2 Shares |
Religion / Re: Did Jesus Go To Hell Between His Death And Resurrection? by mbaemeka(m): 11:26pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
OLAADEGBU: You can call anything a doctrine of devils as long as you don't understand it or t doesn't line up with what you believe. Even your questions defeat you. Did God not make a body for Adam with clay and then breathe into him? Does it not prove that what was put into him is different from what it was put into? Job 32:8 says it clear. It is left for anyone to call that book devilish. |
Religion / Re: What Is The Book Of Life, And How Do We Get In It? by mbaemeka(m): 11:20pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
Revelation 20:12 KJV And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. There is more than one book. This verse above says the dead were judged out of those things which were written in THE BOOKS which was according to their works. It is different from the BOOK of life that was described as another and kept aside. I believe the book of life, the lambs book of life, the book of rememberance, the book that has our tears (David mentioned) or the strands of our hair (Jesus mentioned) are amongst the various books. 2 Likes |
Religion / Re: Did Jesus Go To Hell Between His Death And Resurrection? by mbaemeka(m): 2:12pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
OLAADEGBU: The body is an abode for the spirit. If the body was part of the man then it should go with him wherever he goes. If the spirit leaves the body yet still exists somewhere else with features that other spirits can recognise then it is clear that the body is NOT the man. For example, you live in a house but you are NOT your house. So if you leave your house, your house remains where it is but you are somewhere else. |
Religion / Re: Did Jesus Go To Hell Between His Death And Resurrection? by mbaemeka(m): 12:49pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
OLAADEGBU: You have answered your own question. If the body was part of him, he should have gone there with it but he didn't. Which means the body is ONLY an abode that the spirit lives in. 2 Likes |
Religion / Re: Did Jesus Go To Hell Between His Death And Resurrection? by mbaemeka(m): 12:24pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
OLAADEGBU: Trash. When Jesus said the rich man was taken to Hell and Lazarus was taken to Abraham's bosom was it the spirit, soul and body that was taken there? 2 Likes |
Religion / Re: Did Jesus Go To Hell Between His Death And Resurrection? by mbaemeka(m): 12:22pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
1 Corinthians 9:27 KJV But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. "I" keep under MY BODY. Who is the I that is keeping the body under? JMAN05: 1 Like |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 12:16pm On Dec 10, 2014 |
Hebrews 9:21-23 KJV Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. A very long pile of rubbish no offence. This is what happens when we push aside many scriptures to arrive at a convoluted understanding of Christ's sacrifice. I have told you one too many times to read the whole book of Hebrews 9 and not isolate verses that seem to confuse you further and further. As per John 20:27 I don't think I have read a more illogical interpretation of that verse. Jesus told Thomas to put his hands into his piercings and you said those piercings were what? Don't be ridiculous. Why should an immortal, incorruption, incorruptible body maintain the piercings? BECAUSE THEY ARE MEMORABILIA FOR US WHEN WE GET TO HEAVEN HE WOULD SHOW THEM TO US. Don't jump from one point to another in quoting Paul in Corinthians. We are not Jesus. Jesus kept his marks and piercings for a purpose same way he took his blood to heaven to sprinkle on the mercy seat. Hebrews 9 said it, and you want us to delete it from the bible to take your position. A big No sir. As per atonement and your link when I have the time. I am eager to see you explain away the verses I put before you in this post. vooks: |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 11:49pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
^^^ So how did the priests of old go into the Tabernacle? That verse also say BY the blood of bulls and goats. Come on bro, you can do better. The verse said he didn't do it by the blood of Bulls and Goats, he did it BY his own blood. By in this context means WITH man. As per injuries, John 20:27. The IPhone? Whatsoever you desire, when you stand praying...you know the rest. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 5:18pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
vooks: 1. OMG what is he saying about Priests again? Have I ever said any priest was inherently clean? Even the high priest was unclean but he wore a holy garment and he sacrificed a goat for himself and this was enough to keep him clean before he sacrificed a bull for others. While at it, NONE OF THE OTHERS was allowed to contaminate him. 2. Your statement on Matthews account magnifies your obduracy. Matthew did not mention that Jesus saw Mary Magdalene ALONE, When Salome, Peter and co had left her. This was before she met with Salome again when he reappeared to her. If you can't merge the accounts then we can say that either Matthews account is wrong or Mark and John are wrong. Mark 16:9 said he appeared to Mary of Magdala FIRST. 3. Hebrews 9:12 says so. Tell the Holy spirit that he doesn't know how to express himself. 4. Links and verses have shown they couldn't be touched. You can ask your beloved commentaries. Let us see them. 5. The Tabernacle Jesus entered is in heaven. The one not made with human hands. Hebrews 9. I will not tire to show you. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 5:08pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
Hebrews 9:12 KJV Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. vooks: Please think through these things yourself too by praying about it. Will a glorified body have injuries? Why did Christs body maintain the injuries? |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:46pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
Hebrews 9:11-12, 14, 23-25, 28 KJV But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. I don't know how to argue with clear scriptures or to respond to questions about arteries or veins. All these are absurd. Blood is blood. vooks: |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:42pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
vooks: 1. AND SO IS EVERY WORK OF THEIR HANDS AND WHAT THEY OFFER THERE IS UNCLEAN. If they are unclean why will he let them touch him? Won't it make him unclean? 2. You are confusing yourself by not merging accounts. I have said so before. Read Mark 16:9, Jesus met with Mary Magdalene ALONE first. That is what John 20:17 corroborated. The way it actually happened is merged by all accounts. First of Mary Magdalene, Salome and co went to the sepulchre Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24. They didn't see his body but instead saw an Angel who told them he had arisen. They partially believed so they went their way to tell his disciples. Mary told Peter and John. John outran Peter but stopped at the entrance while Peter entered and didn't see the body. After much ado Peter and John left but Mary stayed put still sobbing. Jesus then appeared to her and told her what he told her I.e that he was ascending, don't touch me etc. So she went back to Peter and co and told them what he said. The and co included Salome (the one who accompanied her to his grave). Now shortly after Jesus appears to her and Salome together then they bowed and kissed his feet. This time he allowed them obviously because he had completed the sacrifice. We know this because he said ALL HAIL which means HAIL ME (for I have done something big). And also because he told the women to tell his disciples that he would meet them at Galilee. That was when he appeared inside the room in the evening. This meeting with Mary and Salome in Matthews 28 isn't the same with John 20 because in John 20 he told MARY not them..that he was ascending and not that he would see his disciples in Galilee. Please learn to merge accounts. 3. The point about blood and life is trash sir. The spirit is also life. Why didn't he take his spirit too? Please stick to the scriptures. Hebrews 9:12, 14, 18, 25. They are clear. Throw everything else away. Please. 4. No link ever said ANY HIGH PRIEST WAS TOUCHED. The absence of evidence is evidence of absence. 5. The lamb is slain at the door of the Tabernacle. Not inside. The blood is then taken through the first veil into the second which is called the Holy of Holies. Jesus was slain on earth. It represents the door of the tabernacle. Then he took his blood into the Holy of Holies in Heaven. The bible said so. I don't know how to argue with clear scriptures. That seems to be your forte. Unenviably so I must add. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 3:42pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
vooks: 1. They are not the only commentaries, so sad for those who anchor all their beliefs on such commentaries. If we are to consider that I asked you for commentaries ON THE DAY OF ATONEMENT then it would be funnier because we noticed the sidetrack but we played along. 2.Any proof on Mary not touching Jesus will trump all the balderdash that you and the commentaries have said put together. Jesus told someone don't touch and he said why. You lot threw away the reason he said and began making half-witted statements like cling or grasping knees. As though the greek rendering only meant to cling or grab. Wonder why they didn't check out the last meaning- To touch. Or maybe it is because they didn't understand it but to form "I must comment" they decided to take only the cling and neglect the reason that JESUS HIMSELF GAVE. That sort of wisdom is worthy of every disdain it is getting. 3. When the High priest slains the sacrificial lamb, does that end the atonement process? NO. So in the same vein Jesus dying on the cross wasn't the end. Like the High priest does when he confesses all the sins of the nation on the lamb, Jesus took all our sins upon himself. Then he died like the lamb had to be slain. Subsequently, the High priest takes the blood of the slain lamb and goes INTO the Tabernacle and the seat of mercy where he sprinkles the blood as the final rite. Then if the sacrifice is accepted, the High priest comes out and declares it to the people. Without even saying so, for the very fact that he comes out alive is already a good sign. Jesus in the same token had to do same to COMPLETE THE SACRIFICE for he wasn't done when Mary saw him. He took his blood into the tabernacle in heaven and into the mercy seat and did as was necessary. Hebrews 9 said it emphatically. So take your wild allegations accusation to the author of Hebrews 9- the HOLY SPIRIT. 3. Adding to scriptures? Hahahahaha. Please read Hebrews 9 and let us see who is adding to what. I am taking the verses at face value. You on the other hand, wished that book wasn't in the bible to begin with. 4. He didn't take sins anywhere man. He destroyed sin on the cross but that was not the end because he only took away the PUNISHMENT FOR SIN here. He needed to paralyze the one that brought sin. He also had to wash away the nature and guilt associated with sin. Last and not least he had to remove the record of sin which could ONLY BE DONE BY BLOOD. That is why he went to the main Holy place- the one in heaven. - he took his blood, the divine one, the one spilled at calvary but not totally drained from his body. That was the blood he took. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 3:20pm On Dec 09, 2014 |
vooks: 1. Your issue is basic scripture-on- scripture analysis. Leviticus 16 already said the High Priest would be put on Holy garments so as to be clean and holy while carrying out the sacrifice. The same book says he might need to wash several times to make up for any unclean act or saying the Lord's name until he enters the veil. When he does so he would first of all, make sacrificea for himself so as to be clean enough to make sacrifices for the nation. Latter verses says he is to be the ONLY one to enter into the Most holy place (a place he had to go in clean). Now if Haggai 2:14 says that all the people that the High priest is to make atonements for are unclean and infectiously so, doesn't it imply that they would make him unclean? If they make him unclean prior to atonement doesn't it defeat the essence of the atonement? 2. Don't side step the do not touch. Juxtapose it with why he said so. Then ask yourself why he let touch him later when he should have been more in a hurry than this earlier time going by your illogic. 3. The Mercy seat, the Ark of the covenant, people around him, the other priests etc. Wild allegations has been the excuse of those who refuse to study precepts upon precepts, line upon line. I am quoting scriptures. How I wish you would just do so. 4. Hahahahaha, you are so funny. I provided scriptures. I provided a link. I was ready to give more than one. I even gave you the lee-way to do YOUR OWN research on the subject matter and come up with any one that contradicts my assertion. You did none yet you maintained my scriptural citations were extra-biblical. How risible. 5. Your last point is a clincher and should be archived. It is ample proof that you do not even understand what is been discussed. The lamb is ALWAYS slain outside just at the door of the Tabernacle of the congregation (people will see it being killed) Leviticus 4, then the High priest takes the blood inside (The Holy place) to sprinkle it around the Tabernacle itself and (on days of atonement) also on the mercy seat( most Holy place). So in the same way Jesus was slain outside/at the door of the tabernacle of congregation where everyone saw him. When he was raised and needed to go for the atonement he went ALONE inside the Tabernacle of congregation and sprinkled his blood there and on the Mercy seat in the Holiest place in Heaven Hebrews 9. That is why he could not let Mary touch him before he ascended. Your question is moot. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 10:35am On Dec 09, 2014 |
...By the way, read the link. Read a few of the commentaries and I stopped to laugh hard. This is what happens when we take the scriptures and try to force them to say what we want them to say. That verse is EASY as A B C. Jesus didn't leave us in doubt as to why he told her not to touch him. Based on that, EVERY OTHER THING the commentaries have to say is ERRONEOUS. Jesus said don't touch me FOR/BECAUSE I have not ascended unto my father. The reason he told her not to touch him was because he hadn't ascended. If you disagree take the complaints to Jesus himself. I am regurgitating his words to you and you are disregarding them and using yours to suppress his. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 10:21am On Dec 09, 2014 |
Haggai 2:14 KJV Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the Lord ; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean. 1. You are jumping here and there now. For your point to make any sense we would have to prove that they were doing any of the said things before the INITIAL command was given and not after. There was nothing of the sort. Don't do this means don't do it. It doesn't mean stop doing it. Any other arrangement is illogical. 2. Hahahahaha at Ritual uncleanness is transferrable and not sin. I cannot remember even remotely referring to sin in any of my posts on this thread. I said if she touched him she would have rendered the sacrifice unclean and it will be disallowed. Then I compared it with the OT high priest on the day of atonement. He too was not allowed to touch anything on entering into the most holy place so as not to render the sacrifice unclean. I never mentioned sin and you know it. The verse above shows that everything was regarded as unclean (including humans and the works of their hand). 3. I have given scriptures. I have given links of proponents of Judaism. They all say the same things. This is an aside from the fact that you have tried to dismiss clear words in John 20:17 and Hebrews 9 because you want to maintain a belief that keeps some of your errors looking right in your eyes. 4. I have shown you Leviticus 16:17, I have shown you Haggai 2:14. Nobody touched the priest. It is that simple. vooks: |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 11:31pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: Scriptures say something different. I will stick to them. Thank you. Hebrews 7:15-16King James Version (KJV) 15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest, 16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life. Similar to Melchizedek another priest arose. This priest like Melchizedek was made after the power of an ENDLESS LIFE. 1 Like |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 11:26pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: Hebrews 7:11King James Version (KJV) 11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? This proves that ALL levitical priests were AFTER THE ORDER OF AARON. Hence Eleazer, Eli etc. Did you notice the question Paul asked here? He said if the levitical priesthood was perfect why should Jesus become a priest and not be designated after the Aaronic order? Why did God make Jesus a priest according to Melchizedek's order? It shows that the Melchizedek order was perfect and that is why Jesus was named after it. How do I mean perfect? 1. Sinless 2. Deathless 3. Eternal. Melchizedek MUST be deity. 1 Like |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 11:16pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: I am lost. If the Holy spirit is high just like Jesus? Jesus is the only mediator between who and who? what is the role of the High priest? 1) People go to know the high priest to know the will of God. The holy spirit does that for us (Romans 8:27) 2) to offer a sin-offering regularly. Jesus already did so ONCE and for all. So need to repeat it. 3) He intercedes for the people. Christ does it for us christians (Romans 8:34), he also does it for non-christians (Hebrews 7:25). But the Holy spirit does it for ONLY christians (Romans 8:26) So as we can see, Jesus is the mediator between God and MANKIND. He did all he did for mankind. But the Holy Spirit still intercedes, purifies and sanctifies (Makes us Holy) us by his indwelling in us, tells us the will of God etc. and each represents priestly duties that he does and will always do. Hence the forever priesthood. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 10:46pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: I said Christ is a High priest for THE WHOLE WORLD, while the Holy Spirit performs priestly functions for ONLY CHRISTIANS. The role christ performs as the High priest he has already done ONCE and FOR ALL TIMES AND PEOPLE. Now he is seated in Heaven as the proof that all men's sins have been forgiven. If a sinner comes to him he doesn't need to go and re-do his sacrifices. Same way with a saint who feels unholy or unworthy. As per the Holy spirit, he is the personal advocate and intercessor. Intercession is part of the functions of a priest and the Holy spirit does that for the christian and the christian alone on the go. in other words, he does his functions based on our daily experiences and not ONCE and For all. Romans 8:26Amplified Bible (AMP) 26 So too the [Holy] Spirit comes to our aid and bears us up in our weakness; for we do not know what prayer to offer nor how to offer it worthily as we ought, but the Spirit Himself goes to meet our supplication and pleads in our behalf with unspeakable yearnings and groanings too deep for utterance. Hebrews 9:24Amplified Bible (AMP) 24 For Christ (the Messiah) has not entered into a sanctuary made with [human] hands, only a copy and pattern and type of the true one, but [He has entered] into heaven itself, now to appear in the [very] presence of God on our behalf. It is clear that the "our" in both verses is different. The former is referring to us christians in context (because we are the only ones who have the Holy spirit within) while the latter refers to more than christians because a) the Hebrews were Jews that Paul was trying to convince that Judaism was a thing of the past and this book was addressed to them largely b) christ didn't die for only christians. He died for the whole world. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 10:02pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: 1. Yes the command was not to touch. The question is do you tell someone who is already touching you not to touch? Come on ! 2. I gave you books to read from Leviticus 16, Exodus 29 and 30, Numbers 4, Haggai 2 etc. All these verses give a picture that when viewed holistically will show the idea. If you want links I can provide them in a subsequent post. The point is that the reason for the atonement was to cleanse people of their sins. If he needs to cleanse them, then it implies that they were not clean already. If they are unclean and touch the high priest on his way into the Tabernacle does he cleanse them or do they make him unclean? Haggai 2:11-15 (uncleanliness is infectious, cleanliness is NOT) If he is unclean whilst making the sacrifice for them will it stand? All these things can be readily seen from those verses. Here is one link I readily found; http://www.lwbc.co.uk/Feasts%20of%20the%20Lord/day_of_atonement.htm 3. Your point is wrong. The scriptures clearly say he is to stay away from everyone. And not because he is busy. He was even mandated to wash as much as 5 times within that short time. Leviticus 16:17 |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 6:08pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: 1. Any won't do. That much is clear. "Don't do it" is a world apart from "stop doing it". 2. Every human being was ritually unclean. They were all sinners all of them. And the evidences abound concerning what the priests did and didn't do. I asked you to do ANY research and bring ANY evidence that what I said was not so. Basically ALL the commentaries know this fact. Also, I didn't say they became pure post-resurrection for the fun of it. It was only after the resurrection that they got born-again. When the High priest was done with the sacrifice he was allowed to take of the apparel, wash, and go back to his family. But was he allowed to hang around his family during the atonement? NO. 3. It is the presence of the Lord that makes a place holy. So exactly where Jesus was killed was a holy place (because God's presence was there before he deserted Jesus). The bible didn't say the sacrifice was killed inside THE MOST HOLY PLACE. There is a difference between a holy place and THE most holy place. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 5:52pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: 1. Will Jesus say "don't touch me" to someone who was already touching him or would he say it to someone who was about to touch him? 2. Mary as was every human being on earth at the point of resurrection was unclean to touch him. Then he ascended into heaven, peformed all the necessary rites, was declared King, High Priest, given the highest name and authority etc. And then returned to earth. This time Mary like everyother person was now allowed to touch him. 3. I don't understand the question. The sin offering was killed on the side of the altar northward towards God. So? |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:55pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: The holy spirit always came in and out as he was sent by the father UNTIL Jesus came. When Jesus came, he dwelled in Jesus permanently helping him to carry out his mission. So the question is amiss because the Holy Spirit whenever he came on earth during the OT did so usually as a Man. It is like asking me where the men that met Abraham in his house are now. As per Jews being led out by An angel, I can see why you still don't understand me. The so-called Angel that led the Jews out of Egypt was THE HOLY SPIRIT. Isaiah 63:9-10. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:49pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: The FYI was to preempt the lame excuse that he was averse to women touching him. Glad we can put that out of the way. I am puzzled that you can see clear scriptures saying she saw someone and said something and was told not to touch and yet I am being asked to prove that she didn't. As per unclean thing in relation to dead things that was one aspect. A woman in her P was also unclean, a leper was unclean etc. Let us not reduce it to absurdities. Every evidence (both scriptural and otherwise) states that the Priests weren't touched when entering the Holy of Holies. For you to prove that assertion wrong, it is incumbent upon you to show us any verse to the contrary. When Jesus bore the sins of the world, he did so on his body. Which is similar to the slaughter lamb on whom the sins of the nation is confessed upon. Then the lamb is slain like Jesus was crucified. After that the blood of the slain lamb is taken into the Tabernacle (the Most holy place) where it is then sprinkled there. So Jesus had to take his blood into the Most Holy place in heaven to do so. He did this after he resurrected. I know what happened for 3 days while he was in a tomb but it is surfeit to the discussion. As per his blood in Heaven, Hebrews 9. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:39pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: Wrong. I asked you a question which you failed to respond to. When the bible says Eleazer, Eli were priests according to Aarons order what did it mean? Is it that they merely shared the type of priesthood? The answer is No. Aaron was the FIRST priest of this order and as such everyone that came from him became a priest according to his order. If the bible was just saying Jesus is the FIRST priest in his order the way Melchizedek was the first THEN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG TO SAY JESUS IS A PRIEST ACCORDING TO MELCHIZEDEKS ORDER. The bible or Hebrews writer would have just said Jesus is a priest like Melchizedek. Guess what makes it even more interesting? It was GOD the father, that said the son, Jesus, would forever be a priest ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK. Also, you are wrong in saying the similarities between Jesus and Melchizedek was in being the first priest. That is extrabiblical. What the bible made us know as their similarity is THEIR INDESTRUCTIBLE LIFE. 1 Like |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:31pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
Zikkyy: I am using my phone now so won't post many scriptures. But for starters, the verse above states clearly that JESUS is the mediator between GOD (the father) and MANKIND (not Christians). Mankind includes Sinners and Saints. For sinners he is there to ensure that they can be saved if they come to him. For saints he is there to ensure they remain eternally saved as they abide in him. (1 John 2:1-2). But when it comes to the Holy Spirit is role is EXCLUSIVLEY to only Christians. His intercessory, mediatory, advocatory, priestly role is for those in whom he lives in. And that means ONLY Christians. In John 15 & 16 when Jesus explained the coming of the Holy Spirit he said God would send Allos Parakletos. He didn't say Heteros Parakletos. Heteros would have meant another one but a different kind but Allos means another one but EXACTLY of the same kind. If you use the AMP they would give 7 meanings of that phrase Allos Parakletos and it meant; Teacher, Helper, INTERCESSOR, ADVOCATE, comforter, STANDBY etc. This shows he has some priestly roles as I had earlier said. 1 Like |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:20pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: LOL, read my posts well. When the son put on flesh he was called JESUS. When the Spirit put on flesh he was called Melchizedek. Mechizedek will ALWAYS exist in so far as the spirit decides to put on flesh. That shouldn't be hard to understand. He made several appearances in the OT and you and I can agree that it wasn't Jesus. For example, the one who led the Jews out of Israel wasn't Jesus. |
Religion / Re: N'landers, Who Is Melchizedek As Described In Hebrew 7vs1-3? by mbaemeka(m): 4:17pm On Dec 08, 2014 |
vooks: The bible said she first of SAW who it was and yelled "Master". Then he said "Don't touch me". This simply means she wanted to touch him to probably feel that he was real and not an apparition. To solidify this claim he met his disciples later and almost begged them to touch and feel him. Hope you know Jesus let women even kiss his feet. So he had no qualms with the opposite sex FYI. As per the books I gave you, really the notion is scattered around scriptures even in Haggai and Numbers as well as in Exodus 30. The notion was that no unclean thing should touch the priest. If in doubt, we can readily Google Judaism in relation to the day of atonement and see it expressly stated by those who mastered the law. So we can put it to bed. Yes he bore our sins at the cross but that is NOT where all he did started or ended. We would need to compare scriptures with scriptures to have real time display of how things panned out. For example, he told John in Revelations 1:17-18 that he took the keys of hell and death from satan. Did this also happen at the cross? |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (of 36 pages)
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 205 |