Why was the Priesthood Changed?

[Aaron112]

Then Paul would most certainly tell the New Convert Gentile who was eating slugs or swine's flesh, Unclean according to God, to "Abstain" for eating it as well.

The gentiles as well as the Jews had the Torah read to them every Shabbat... so they all knew well and never disagreed that eating what was forbidden , eating what was unclean, was not of faith - it was not changed by Jesus.

 

[Studyman]

So is Romans 14 not about teaching us not to judge each-other ?

Truly there are many who us this chapter to justify unrighteousness by making that claim. But if a man reads what Paul actually says, in conjunction with his other teaching, it is clear he didn't write this letter for that purpose.

Rom. 1: 1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to "doubtful" disputations.

"Disputation" = "a debate about right and wrong."

A Judgment was made in the opening sentence. "To the Weak in faith".

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Another Judgment.

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

Another Judgment.

Surely if you see your brother stealing from someone, or committing fornication, or polluting themselves with Idols, or eating unclean foods, it would be the utmost Love towards him, to point out that the God of the Bible, that Jesus told us to worship, Esteems these works of man "As Wrong" or "Unrighteous".

WE would not "Judge" each other, but certainly we should be able to Judge between God's definition of right and wrong and share God's definition with a brother. After all, true Faith and respect is from the heart. As Paul also teaches, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Notice Paul didn't say, "Let every man create his own definition of righteousness".

If having milk on the table makes meat unclean in a brother's mind, or if he believes all meat is unclean and only eats herbs, to him it is unclean. There is no unrighteousness committed here. Don't cause this brother grief over such a thing by judging him.

Paul isn't saying, or even implying, that the "weak in faith" should be allowed to walk in unrighteous. Not here, and not anywhere in the Bible.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Truly there are many who us this chapter to justify unrighteousness by making that claim. But if a man reads what Paul actually says, in conjunction with his other teaching, it is clear he didn't write this letter for that purpose.

Rom. 1: 1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to "doubtful" disputations.

"Disputation" = "a debate about right and wrong."

A Judgment was made in the opening sentence. "To the Weak in faith".

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Another Judgment.

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

Another Judgment.

Surely if you see your brother stealing from someone, or committing fornication, or polluting themselves with Idols, or eating unclean foods, it would be the utmost Love towards him, to point out that the God of the Bible, that Jesus told us to worship, Esteems these works of man "As Wrong" or "Unrighteous".

WE would not "Judge" each other, but certainly we should be able to Judge between God's definition of right and wrong and share God's definition with a brother. After all, true Faith and respect is from the heart. As Paul also teaches, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Notice Paul didn't say, "Let every man create his own definition of righteousness".

If having milk on the table makes meat unclean in a brother's mind, or if he believes all meat is unclean and only eats herbs, to him it is unclean. There is no unrighteousness committed here. Don't cause this brother grief over such a thing by judging him.

Paul isn't saying, or even implying, that the "weak in faith" should be allowed to walk in unrighteous. Not here, and not anywhere in the Bible.

What is 'unrighteous' about eating only vegetables ?

 

[Studyman]

What is 'unrighteous' about eating only vegetables ?

I am happy to discuss this chapter, and my post. There is nothing in either which assumes suggests or even implies the assertion in your question.

 

[LW97Nils]

This is what I see .

#1 The OLD COVENANT with all its LAW all ABOLISHED as written in Eph 2:14 and 15 and 2 Cor 3:13-14 .

I would not say all. Only the ceremonical laws.

 

[LW97Nils]

Truly there are many who us this chapter to justify unrighteousness by making that claim. But if a man reads what Paul actually says, in conjunction with his other teaching, it is clear he didn't write this letter for that purpose.

Rom. 1: 1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to "doubtful" disputations.

"Disputation" = "a debate about right and wrong."

A Judgment was made in the opening sentence. "To the Weak in faith".

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Another Judgment.

13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

Another Judgment.

Surely if you see your brother stealing from someone, or committing fornication, or polluting themselves with Idols, or eating unclean foods, it would be the utmost Love towards him, to point out that the God of the Bible, that Jesus told us to worship, Esteems these works of man "As Wrong" or "Unrighteous".

WE would not "Judge" each other, but certainly we should be able to Judge between God's definition of right and wrong and share God's definition with a brother. After all, true Faith and respect is from the heart. As Paul also teaches, "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." Notice Paul didn't say, "Let every man create his own definition of righteousness".

If having milk on the table makes meat unclean in a brother's mind, or if he believes all meat is unclean and only eats herbs, to him it is unclean. There is no unrighteousness committed here. Don't cause this brother grief over such a thing by judging him.

Paul isn't saying, or even implying, that the "weak in faith" should be allowed to walk in unrighteous. Not here, and not anywhere in the Bible.

I would 95 % agree, however, it does not match the very subject we are discussing, to say the least.

As far as "unclean foods" are concerned, keep in mind - Acts 10 is a great reference to both the man and the food having been made clean. Could Gentiles live in OT Israel? Of course. Enter the sanctuary? No.

 

[LW97Nils]

Rom. 14:
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself:

This is of course true. A maggot or swine or snail didn't make itself unclean for food. They were created by God for a purpose, but some things that were created was not created for men to eat. Paul, whose faith was great, knew and understood this by the Teaching of the Lord's Christ regarding how disobedience and lust for evil things comes from within, not from without. And of course, if God Esteemed something was clean, or unclean, Paul esteemed it the same way as God. Just as if God Esteemed one day above another, then Paul also, in likeminded manner, submitted to God's Judgment, as opposed to his own.

Keep in mind that there is nothing that would point towards the OT dietary laws being health reasons. In fact, I have eaten pork and not gotten sick. The Bible also does not adress sugar, so it would have been considered unclean in the OT law. It was not, of course, sugar did not exist there yet, but even for vegan things, some foods are less good than others. See also Genesis 9:3.

 

[Studyman]

I would 95 % agree, however, it does not match the very subject we are discussing, to say the least.

As far as "unclean foods" are concerned, keep in mind - Acts 10 is a great reference to both the man and the food having been made clean. Could Gentiles live in OT Israel? Of course. Enter the sanctuary? No.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. If I might be so bold, I which to share a perspective, and get your take.

Please consider that the Priest's in Israel had corrupted the Priesthood, according to Scriptures in my view. (Mal. 2) The Jews, according to the Jesus of the bible, were "Transgressing the commandments of God by their own traditions". According to actual Scriptures, "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

Both the Homeborn and the Stranger would need cleansing to partake of the Sanctuary. This is true yes? And what has been cleansed by God, let no man call unclean. Remember that the Levites were separated by God to minister before Him in the Priest's Office. The Rest of Israel were not allowed to partake of the priesthood duties. Would this not include the "Homeborn" and the "stranger" that sojourned among them?

In fact, God's Law itself protected anyone who would turn to Him in Faith. He wasn't a respecter of persons in this regard. A man's DNA was not to be the standard in which men were judged to be clean or unclean. God only used it as a standard for the Old Priesthood.

Leviticus 19: 33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Could Gentiles live in Israel? Rahab and her family did. There was a mixed multitude coming out of Egypt.

God even told us through Isaiah 56,

6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

Is this not Leviticus 19:33?

Where in the Bible is it written that God made "fornication" or "adultery" clean? Where has HE made the "blood" of animals " clean? or Idols. Where has HE made slugs, maggots or swine's flesh "clean"?

The lusts of man to disobey comes from within a man's heart, according to the Jesus of the Bible. God has commanded from the very beginning, that "ANYONE", as Paul teaches, (Rom. 6) that "Yields himself" a servant to obey God, is freed from Sin and becomes a servant of God's Righteousness.

Paul understood this.

2 Cor. 6: 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

In this world God placed me in, there are "many" religions who preach in His Name, who "Profess to know Him". (Titus 1:16) And for centuries these religions who call Jesus Lord, Lord, have transgressed God's commandments by their own traditions. They have pretty much rejected the Feasts of the Lord and have created their own high days and sabbath. They have rejected God's Judgments regarding clean and unclean and have created their own judgments. Not just regarding men, but behaviors and lusts as well. They have created their own images of God in the likeness of some random long haired handsome man.

This is not a judgment but a snapshot of the undeniable truth. As a result, I advocate that men study the scriptures themselves, as opposed to adopting the religious philosophies and traditions of this world God places us in.

Perhaps it doesn't matter. But it seems important enough to the Christ of the Bible, to warn His People over and over about being convinced of things regarding God which were not true, AKA, be "Deceived".

In my understanding, God forgave men of their sins, He didn't make Sins "clean".

I look forward to further discussions regarding why the Priesthood Changed.

 

[Studyman]

Keep in mind that there is nothing that would point towards the OT dietary laws being health reasons. In fact, I have eaten pork and not gotten sick.

I have stolen for others in my youth, committed adultery, and lied and yet I didn't get sick either. And yet, if I continue in these transgressions, I will not enter the Kingdom of God. And what difference does it really make if I don't agree with God's Judgments regarding these things? Can I say in God's Name, "Nope, I really like fornication from the heart, so I'm going to continue to fornicate"?

Would this not be the "old man and his deeds" which are "corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;" that must be crucified, to be replaced by "putting on" the New man "which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."? (Eph. 4)

Would it matter if the women were all really pretty? Or that a lot of other folks liked to fornicate as well? I think you would agree that "fornication" is not unclean of itself. It is "unclean" because God esteemed it as unclean. And it isn't the pretty woman walking by me that defiles me, Yes? But the Lusts from within my heart to partake of that which God Deems as unclean, this defiles a man, Yes. Whether the Unclean thing feels good, or looks good to our flesh, doesn't matter in the case disobedience, in my view?

I used to eat pork as well, and I liked it, and it didn't make me sick either. And this world's religious tradition of eating swine's flesh is certainly one of many that transgresses the commandments of God.

But then I turned to the God of the Bible and read about God's Judgments regarding all these things. And wondered, "what shall I eat, what shall I drink? And then I heard the Words of the Lord's Christ.

Matt. 6: 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seekfor your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. 33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

There is a lot more to say regarding this topic, even that Jesus didn't cast "unclean spirits" on what God esteemed as "Clean animals" that His people eat, rather on swine. Why swine, because it is an unclean animal. And it was still "unclean" according to Jesus, which is why HE cast the unclean spirits on them. And also why it is unclean for me.

The Bible also does not adress sugar, so it would have been considered unclean in the OT law. It was not, of course, sugar did not exist there yet,

Gen. 43: 11 And their father Israel said unto them, If it must be so now, do this; take of the best fruits in the land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present, a little balm, and a little honey, spices, and myrrh, nuts, and almonds:

Ex. 3: 8 And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites.

Ex. 30: 34 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte, and onycha, and galbanum; these sweet spices with pure frankincense: of each shall there be a like weight:

Is. 7: 14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.

Sugar is what makes fruit "sweet". It exists since creation naturally in many forms. How is it you have come to the understanding that sugar didn't exist in the very beginning?

but even for vegan things, some foods are less good than others. See also Genesis 9:3.

Gen. 7: 1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. 2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

Gen. 8: 18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him: 19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the earth, after their kinds, went forth out of the ark. 20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

Gen. 9: 3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

It seems God's Judgment regarding food is not "more good or less good", rather "Unclean vs clean". I'm not sure Gen 9:3 erases God's judgment in this regard, although if a person separated this verse from the rest of the Bible, it could be construed in this way.

In Scriptures, God connects what is Food with what is Holy.

Lev. 11: 45 For I am the LORD that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth:

47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.

I know in this world God placed me in, it is one of this world's religious traditions to disregard this difference.

I place no judgment, but simply want to post the perspective of a nobody who has chosen to let God define what "what I shall eat, or what I shall drink", or what covering (Way) I should clothe myself with.

It seems in this world's religions God's Judgments are not honored. This was true in OT times as well. That is why I choose not to trust them "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."

But like Paul said, "Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind".

 

[Carl Emerson]

I am happy to discuss this chapter, and my post. There is nothing in either which assumes suggests or even implies the assertion in your question.

Would you participate if I opened this topic on a seperate thread - there are heaps of folk who think Romans 14 is about not judging fellow believers...

 

[Studyman]

Would you participate if I opened this topic on a seperate thread - there are heaps of folk who think Romans 14 is about not judging fellow believers...

Yes, Paul is addressing that one man believes one thing, and another believes another thing.

But it seems that we should be interested in what God actually says, not one man or another man, Yes?. I posted a very detailed study for your examination, and frankly, it seems the only thing you saw was something regarding vegans being sinners?

It seems if you were interested in a discussion you would have addressed the post, or even PM'ed. So You are free to post a thread, but I think I got the hint regarding any real discussion.

Thanks for the replies anyway, such as they were.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Hi Studyman,

I am interested in discussion, but the way you present seems to suggest you consider yourself having a superior grasp on truth.

So to help moderate this, I suggest broadening the discussion to include those who are able to give the time to process your claims because my time is limited right now.

However the issue is important as many down through the ages have accepted Romans 14 as teaching the consequences of judging one another.

Now we have an unknown from cyberspace, claiming superior understanding.

So for the sake of folk reading let's start a thread that will attract those able to spend the time weighing your claims.

FYI at this moment I am under the pump with university work so my time is very limited.

 

[Studyman]

Hi Studyman,

I am interested in discussion, but the way you present seems to suggest you consider yourself having a superior grasp on truth.

So to help moderate this, I suggest broadening the discussion to include those who are able to give the time to process your claims because my time is limited right now.

However the issue is important as many down through the ages have accepted Romans 14 as teaching the consequences of judging one another.

Now we have an unknown from cyberspace, claiming superior understanding.

So for the sake of folk reading let's start a thread that will attract those able to spend the time weighing your claims.

FYI at this moment I am under the pump with university work so my time is very limited.

But you do have time to reply to my posts, then belittle me for posting them.

Nevertheless, I will not return rude and inconsiderate for rude and inconsiderate. If you post a thread, I will acknowledge the Scriptures you actually post, and will discuss what you actually say. Because I enjoy when others do the same for me.

 

[Carl Emerson]

But you do have time to reply to my posts, then belittle me for posting them.

Nevertheless, I will not return rude and inconsiderate for rude and inconsiderate. If you post a thread, I will acknowledge the Scriptures you actually post, and will discuss what you actually say. Because I enjoy when others do the same for me.

Wow...

I must have hit a nerve...

You misunderstand me completely.

I am hoping to encourage others to respond to your well woven theology simply because the readers deserve to hear alternative interpretations so they can judge for themselves whether Romand 14 is about not judging one another or not.

 

[LW97Nils]

I have stolen for others in my youth, committed adultery, and lied and yet I didn't get sick either. And yet, if I continue in these transgressions, I will not enter the Kingdom of God. And what difference does it really make if I don't agree with God's Judgments regarding these things? Can I say in God's Name, "Nope, I really like fornication from the heart, so I'm going to continue to fornicate"?

Would this not be the "old man and his deeds" which are "corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;" that must be crucified, to be replaced by "putting on" the New man "which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."? (Eph. 4)

Would it matter if the women were all really pretty? Or that a lot of other folks liked to fornicate as well? I think you would agree that "fornication" is not unclean of itself. It is "unclean" because God esteemed it as unclean. And it isn't the pretty woman walking by me that defiles me, Yes? But the Lusts from within my heart to partake of that which God Deems as unclean, this defiles a man, Yes. Whether the Unclean thing feels good, or looks good to our flesh, doesn't matter in the case disobedience, in my view?

This has no relation to food. In fact, it is a childish argument. Friend, are you a blood Israelite? I do not think so. There is no way to practice Judaism anymore without the temple. Like it or not, while gentiles were able to live in OT Israel, they were underprivileged in comparison to the blood Israelites. Moses was not wrong, but he was only delivering what he been revealed. That was all. God could have delivered everything right from the beginning even to Adam and Eve. He however didn't. Why not? Well, only He knows.
I too attempt to avoid eating pork, BUT I cannot condemn others for it. If you think eating pork is like getting drunk or adultery, you have a strange worldview, to say the least.

Wow...

I must have hit a nerve...

You misunderstand me completely.

I am hoping to encourage others to respond to your well woven theology simply because the readers deserve to hear alternative interpretations so they can judge for themselves whether Romand 14 is about not judging one another or not.

Exactly. I wonder how someone can believe "all" in verses like Romans 14:2 did not mean all. It is amazing.

 

[Studyman]

This has no relation to food. In fact, it is a childish argument. Friend, are you a blood Israelite? I do not think so. There is no way to practice Judaism anymore without the temple.

What is Judaism? Was Jesus a Judaizer, as defined by you? Or were the Pharisees Judaizers, whose religious traditions caused them to transgress God's commandments?

I understand this world's religions don't like to be told or instructed regarding "what shall we eat", or what shall we drink, even though Jesus spoke to this, and their tradition is to reject God's Judgment and definition of Holy and Clean, and they have gone about establishing their own definition of clean and holy. But Paul and the Apostles in Acts 15 told New Gentile Converts to "Abstain" from one of their practices of eating meat which was Biblically Unclean. (By that I mean unclean, according to the God and Father of the Lord's Christ). So given Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ in Paul's Time, honored God with respect and obedience concerning HIS definition of Holy and Clean, I believe I should as well.

Men are free to "Yield yourself" a Servant to obey whomever you want, (Rom. 6:16) and maybe it doesn't matter. Nevertheless, it was "Christ-like" to Honor God in submitting to His Righteousness in Paul's Time, and so for me, it seems prudent to Honor Him in my time as well.

Like it or not, while gentiles were able to live in OT Israel, they were underprivileged in comparison to the blood Israelites.

This is what the Pharisees taught, and the Corrupt Priests. But it's not what God Taught through Moses.

Lev. 19: 33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. 34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

This is because an "Israelite" is one of the heart, not of the Flesh.

Moses was not wrong, but he was only delivering what he been revealed. That was all. God could have delivered everything right from the beginning even to Adam and Eve. He however didn't.

You have absolutely nothing to support your assertion that God didn't teach Adam and Eve what they needed to know to be Righteous and Just before HIM. You mentioned "Silly" earlier. How much sillier can a man be than to believe or imply that God only spoke to Adam and Eve, the Words recorded in scripture.

Gen. 6: 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Do you really believe that when God (Christ) was walking with Noah, that HE didn't teach Noah in the way that he should go? Or are the Word's recording in Scriptures the only Word god spoke to Noah?

Why not? Well, only He knows.
I too attempt to avoid eating pork, BUT I cannot condemn others for it.

I am simply posting what the scriptures teach VS. what this world's religions teach. If a man has his fly undone, and I tell him, "Friend, your fly is undone!", am I condemning him? Or Loving him?

If you think eating pork is like getting drunk or adultery, you have a strange worldview, to say the least.

Who am I to Judge God or His Laws. God said both adultery and swine's flesh are unclean. Again, there is no condemnation in pointing out God's Word. Men are free to choose whoever they want to "Yield themselves servants to obey". Everyone makes the choice.

Exactly. I wonder how someone can believe "all" in verses like Romans 14:2 did not mean all. It is amazing.

Romans 14: 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

What does it matter to me what one man believes, or another man believes? Is the God "of the Bible", not the one who I am to trust and worship?

All this chaos, "Which religion of this world do I adopt and clothe myself with", "What is food and what is not food", "what shall I drink or not drink". Jesus has already instructed me in this regard.

Matt. 6: 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?

31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?

32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

33 "But seek ye first" the kingdom of God, and "his" righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

In my understand Paul knew and believed this as well. "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."

 

[LW97Nils]

What is Judaism? Was Jesus a Judaizer, as defined by you?

Simple as that, brother. He was not. We cannot celebrate the feasts today without animal sacrifices.

 

[LW97Nils]

May I also add that the animals in the OT were symbols? Acts 10:28 gives evidence for this. I too try to avoid pork now and replace it with beef and chick. I however will suggest to read the Epistle of Barnabas. The early saw great value in his writings, considering he's mentioned in the Book of Acts

 

[Studyman]

Simple as that, brother. He was not. We cannot celebrate the feasts today without animal sacrifices.

I know you are only promoting what you have been taught by this world's religions. And it is clear you don't really want to examine and discuss the scriptures posted. So it's of little use to keep posting them.

So I must move on. But in closing, I would point out that the Body of Christ honored the God "of the Bible" by observing Pentecost, and not one animal was sacrificed.

 

[LW97Nils]

I know you are only promoting what you have been taught by this world's religions. And it is clear you don't really want to examine and discuss the scriptures posted.

The same thing could be said by you, attempting to mix Christianity and Judaism.