Jesus in the Passover Lamb (Page 2)

DontNeedChrist
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: Jesus is the Passover Lamb.
3 years ago Report
2
DontNeedChrist
DontNeedChrist:

The Pesach lamb was not a sin offering.

3 years ago Report
2
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: without the blood of the Lamb on their doorposts they would have all met their doom because God would have destroyed them. the lamb was their ticket to life, concretely speaking. some of the symbolism included cleansing sin and life, it's absence meant certain death, literally. the Passover Lamb and all of its symbolism foreshadow Jesus.

3 years ago Report
1
DontNeedChrist
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: you are a filibuster.
3 years ago Report
0
MJ59
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
DontNeedChrist
DontNeedChrist:

You’re afraid to allow posts that prove you wrong.

3 years ago Report
1
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: don't mock and don't filibuster. simple.
3 years ago Report
0
DontNeedChrist
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
DontNeedChrist
DontNeedChrist:

To reiterate before my post was censored, goat’s blood was used as well so singling out lambs is a misnomer. And in my so-called measly 1% knowledge of the Torah/Tanach, I know that the blood on the doorposts was applied on the INSIDE. Not the outside. If you think an all-knowing G-d needed to “see” blood on doorposts to differentiate the Israelites from the Egyptians you are sadly misinformed.

Egypt worshiped animals. The Israelites saw that and in grand defiance slaughtered their gods. The blood was for the Israelites to see and reflect on, not for G-d to identify whose doorpost belonged to whom.

The foreshadowing you tout is the classic bullseyes around arrows mentality that is both forced and deceiving.

Call this a filibuster and delete it or open your mind and learn. Your choice.

3 years ago Report
1
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: this is not a reiteration of your past two comments your past two comments were filibustering and they were mocking and they were quite senseless.

Exodus 12:5

5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:

God gave them the option between the two. I could have used baby goat in my op and all of the symbolism would be exactly the same. this is not an issue for Christians never has been and it never will be.

I never said that you had 1% knowledge. you misrepresenting me even though expressly stated otherwise. I'm not insulting your amount of knowledge. you have no excuse to lie about me. Will you please be honest, thanks.

you said that you know that the blood was applied to the inside of the door. The Passover Lamb symbolism of the blood on the door is symbolic of the blood of Jesus applied to the door of our hearts which not only cleanses us from sin but it's also our ticket to life. The blood is not applied to the external organ of the skin symbolically. I know you thought that you were giving some enlightening detail about it being on the inside of the door but this is Christianity 101.

the Passover Lamb blood was applied to the doorpost with hyssop. in other contexts hyssop could be used like a scrubbing sponge. it is symbolic of cleansing. the blood on the doorpost used with hyssop symbols all work together.

Exodus 12:22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood (of the passover lamb) that is in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning.

the blood had to be put on the door or they would be under God's judgment like the Egyptians were. in other words the blood provided them a way of life and without it, God's wrath. combining the blood with the hyssop branch symbolizes it's cleansing nature, but the symbolism is spiritual so it refers to a spiritual cleansing.

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

the life of the flesh is the blood therefore the blood represents life

in Leviticus 14 hyssop is one of the items used in a ritual to cleanse leprosy.

Hyssop was not only used when cleansing from disease, but David figuratively uses it in his Psalm to cleanse him from sin. (Not literally) Psalm 51:7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. – Read the passage, David wants his heart to be pure and clean and figuratively uses hyssop to demonstrate that.

This is deep and tightly knit symbolism and this is only some of it. everything that Jesus is for us can be summed up in the symbolism of the Passover Lamb. the blood the hyssop the door, the lamb that had to be without blemish, not breaking the Lamb's bones and eating all of its flesh, God passing over the Israelites, the Exodus from Egypt and more.

I'm sorry if you're confused. God himself said when I see the blood I will pass over you. it's never been suggested that God is not all knowing, He doesn't literally need to see it with his eyes, LOL.

The Passover Lamb without blemish is symbolic of a spiritual aspect, in the New testament Jesus is without sin, so spiritually without blemish. a symbol can have many many meanings. the deification of sheep in Egypt translates to “God” and the fact that it was viewed as a sinful object because it was pagan represents Jesus who is God in the flesh “becoming sin, or taking on our sin,” in other words, being the object of sin for us on the cross. You see Jesus on the cross and you see sin…your sin on Him, whose punishment on our behalf is fire, the roasted lamb.

2Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

this symbol in Egypt that God used was not without a very deep meaning and in the NT it has nothing at all to do with pagan Egyptian gods. It’s the spiritual and symbolic aspects that tell the message, and without that you couldn't understand anything. just as the serpent in the wilderness didn’t actually represent a serpent, it represented Israel’s own sin lifted up on a pole, and any who looked at it were healed from the fiery serpents that bit them. Same concept, the serpent was an object of sin, their own sin, they had to see their sin being punished.

xrusaoros pegasos's Picture

I have attached here a beautiful picture and verses about the story of Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness.

John 3:14
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: - Jesus

Jesus was not literally a serpent just as Jesus is not literally a sheep and just as Jesus is not literally a pagan Egyptian god, because symbolism is not the literal object itself. if the literal object itself and the symbolism were exactly one and the same than you could no more except some of the stories as metaphors in the old testament they all have to be historical.



(Edited by Apokalupto)
3 years ago Report
1
DontNeedChrist
DontNeedChrist:

I would respond to this verbose obfuscation but it would be censored/deleted because the OP has no intention of having a rational conversation on a level playing field.

3 years ago Report
1
Apokalupto
Apokalupto: fine by me. I wouldn't mind a break from your mocking 1% point of view.
3 years ago Report
1
DontNeedChrist
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
DontNeedChrist
(Post deleted by Apokalupto 3 years ago)
Roqairol
Roqairol: Very thoughtful posts, Xrusaoros
1 year ago Report
0
DontNeedChrist
1 year ago Report
0
GeraldtheGnome
GeraldtheGnome: Both of you are very matter of fact about a god named God and a certain Jesus. I’ll agree to disagree with both of you about all of that. With certain things I will go by the Hebrew names and by some of the beliefs shown within Judaism. Either way there are things that are true within Judaism and Christianity. What do you mean Jesus in the Passover Lamb ? It doesn’t make sense to me. There are other things that I want answered by you. How long ago was the god named God and how long ago was a certain Jesus named Jesus ?
1 year ago Report
0
Roqairol
Roqairol: God isn't a name, and there never was a God "named" that. The God referred to that way by Jews and Christians when speaking English (both of whom decline to use His actual name, יהוה‎ or Yod, Heh, Waw, Heh; "Yahweh" in transliteration) is the God of the Bible, spoken and written of from Moses to...now. So, pretty old, although not as old as Brahma, to the best of my knowledge.

Jesus lived from somewhere between 4 and 6 BC to about 30 AD, as far as we know. Historians consider those dates to be a good approximation. So he lived around two thousand years ago. Whether he was God or not, or whether he redeemed the world, are matters of belief. I don't think anyone can demonstrate those things.
1 year ago Report
0
GeraldtheGnome
GeraldtheGnome: You made some mistakes there. Regardless of what you claim it is still used in the manner of a name rather than in the manner of a title or whatever you think it is. Here’s the thing, if it’s not a name then it should be the god of it, not the God of it, sure, that way it only looks like a title or whatever you think because you get sentences with God was and so on. A King was pleased is different than the words King was pleased, in the latter King became a name because of how it was used. Yod ? That’s one I haven’t come across, I’m interested in that one. Anyway yes the Moses story is partly about the name of the god but to many times in current Bibles the name of the god is used as God. A god was over there is different to God was over there, the latter has it as a name. If it always was used as a title or what not then it would be God then the name of that god directly afterwards.

I don’t even agree with you that a Jesus was born, even the one who has this forum is, unless I’m mistaken, Greek. Which bit in The New Testament that was written in Greek is there the name Jesus ? Ask him what the authors used as the name for the son of the god of The New Testament. No one else has a BC date for the claimed to be true son of a believed to certainly be around somewhere god of The New Testament. It’s all very interesting, which I’m not mockingly telling you, but it still doesn’t get me any closer to knowing what the name of this forum means.
(Edited by GeraldtheGnome)
1 year ago Report
0
Roqairol
Roqairol: The name of the forum reflects a Christian belief about Jesus. It has nothing to do with his historical existence.

I'm not sure I follow what you're saying, but, the word "God" is simply an English noun meaning a divine being. It is capitalized when it refers to the God of the Bible because those who believe in that God think He is the only divine being there is. The word has become a name in standard English usage because it isn't the custom, among either Jews or Christians, to use that God's proper name.
1 year ago Report
0
GeraldtheGnome
GeraldtheGnome: You made some mistakes there. For a start I love matter of fact statements about things that aren’t facts. It doesn’t matter if it’s about the name Jesus, God or Moses or what have you, it’s always claimed to be certain by someone who still hasn’t proven it. I haven’t said anything with my text message. God is a name, upper case refers to a name in this case, not to anything else. If you think otherwise then look at the various ways God is used in The Bible, lower case is a generic reference to any god. God is an alternative name, it’s a very silly superstition not to use the original name or a derivative of it. Then there is the name Jesus that wasn’t even a name used by anyone before The Middle Ages. Jesus in the Passover Lamb ?
(Edited by GeraldtheGnome)
1 year ago Report
0
Roqairol
Roqairol: Don't you remember Joshua, who was one of those who led the Israelites out of the desert and into the Promised Land? That is the same name as "Jesus". It is the same word in Hebrew, just transliterated differently. So the name was in use in the thirteenth century BC.

I don't understand why you think it a "silly superstition" to not use "the original name or a derivative of it". What do you think the "original name" was? The name was "Yahweh", and the noun was "El". Both Jews and Christians consider the name Yahweh too sacred to use, so, the mere word for God ("God" in English = "El" in Hebrew) became the term by which God was both referred to and addressed. And yes, spelling the word with a small "g" to refer to pagan gods, and with a capital "G" to refer to the God of the Bible, is standard English usage.

As to the "Paschal lamb", I might as well just refer you to this, rather than transcribe its content into this thread for you:

https://www.gotquestions.org/Passover-Lamb.html
1 year ago Report
0
GeraldtheGnome
GeraldtheGnome: You made a number of mistakes there. It depends on which Joshua you mean in order for me to remember one. I do though know of the believed to be true Joshua in the story about 'The Promised Land'. The claim that something such as the name of a god is too sacred to use is based off a strange superstition of what is claimed to happen if it is used, nothing will happen.

God is a name from the Middle Ages, yes there was various names before that and various names are still around, a god is any god, I repeat any god. The word god was only first used after Christianity was introduced to certain areas, so too was the name God so the god word is not solely about Pagan gods, it's about all gods including the Christian god.

Jesus is the same word as the Hebrew name and the same as the Greek name and while I'm at it is it the same as the Aramaic name ? No, it's not a derivative of the original name.



I don't use the term thread, I get what you mean by it though. You are all about a matter of fact way about all of this even though I don't think that way about it, since I don't I just want to know the personal belief of why the one who made this forum specifically used the words 'Jesus in the Passover Lamb'. I'm sure that it doesn't mean that he was inside the Passover Lamb.

Regardless of what the guy said in the video I don't agree with his glossing over of the name Immanuel. Why compare a son of a god to a Passover Lamb ? I never saw the reason why someone not guilty of things was punished for everything others did wrong if we are to believe that it did indeed happen. I can't see why anyone believes that a Jesus was sacrificed when every name used in every religious text prior to 597 AD at the furthest back never used the name Jesus or anything similar to it if you don't think about Latin. So if it did happen then it didn't happen to one named Jesus. If it did happen to someone or not is another story but no one on here will like my answer to that.
1 year ago Report
0