Good Friday

[Theofilus]

It is even more illogical to deny the accuracy of Mark 16:9. And I'll tell you right now that if you refuse to permit the Lord's cross to own crucifixion day all to itself; then I can easily guarantee that you'll never come up with the correct chronology.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

Excuse me, but who made you Pope? Do you alone have the authority to interpret Scripture? Do you think that if anyone disagrees with your understanding of a verse that he is necessarily denying the accuracy of God's Word? Let's look at that verse a little closer.

Now after He had risen, early on the first day of the week, He first appeared to (A)Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons. (Mark 16:9 ASV)
​

He appeared to Mary early on Sunday morning, which was after he had risen. This doesn't say that he actually rose on Sunday morning, but that Sunday morning was after he rose. Understood this way, there is no need for elaborate mental gymnastics to make things fit. They all fall into place quite neatly and logically. None of this "The Jews back then were so stupid that they didn't know the difference between two minutes and a whole day" nonsense.

 

[Proverbs3/5]

Re: Good Friday (07)

The High Day

†. Luke 23:54 . . And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.

This is the tricky part. The sabbath about which Luke wrote in that passage, wasn't the regular seventh-day sabbath, but rather, the very first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Ex 12:1-27). That particular day (which begins at sundown ) is a sabbath as mandated by Moses' covenanted law.

†. Ex 12:16 . .You shall celebrate a sacred occasion on the first day, and a sacred occasion on the seventh day; no work at all shall be done on them; only what every person is to eat, that alone may be prepared for you.

John called the first day of the feast an "high day".

So that's the two sabbaths that occurred during crucifixion week : the high day, and the regular seventh day. The glitch in most people's computations comes in failing to factor in the high day; and not only failing to factor it; but also failing to correctly position it relative to the regular seventh day.

Positioning The High Day

God inspired three of the gospel authors to report the Lord's preparation for Passover as being right on time.

†. Mtt 26:17-20 . . On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked : Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?

†. Mrk 14:12-17 . . On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb, Jesus' disciples asked him : Where do you want us to go and make preparations for you to eat the Passover?

†. Luke 22:7-13 . .Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. Jesus sent Peter and John, saying : Go and make preparations for us to eat the Passover.

However, those three reports are according to the Lord's religious calendar. God inspired John's report relative to Judaism's calendar.

I have read, and reread this, and still can't figure out exactly what day of the week was the "high day". In the notes in my Bible (NKJV) for Mark 14: 1-2, it says that the Passover was celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan, and the F.U.B. followed on the 15th through the 21st. The high day (15th) would be AFTER the passover, would it not? Would that also make the preparation day on the 13th of Nisan?
Do we know for sure what actual day of the week the 14th of Nisan was?

 

[Webers_Home]

Now after He had risen, early on the first day of the week, He first appeared to (A)Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons.

If not for the second comma in that sentence, your interpretation might have squeaked by.

I'm going to revise it so that you can see how your mind has been twisting it to say something other than what the syntax is saying in writing.

"After he had risen, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene early on the first day of the week."

See your mistake?

Just for comparison, here's that same verse from some other translations.

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. (KJV)

Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons. (NKJV)

When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. (NIV)

Now after He had risen early on the first day of the week, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons. (NASU)

Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. (NASV)

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Webers_Home]

Re: Good Friday (07)

In the notes in my Bible (NKJV) for Mark 14: 1-2, it says that the Passover was celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan, and the F.U.B. followed on the 15th through the 21st.

This is confusing because of the kooky way the Bible begins and ends its 24-hour cycle of night and day.

The first night of the Feast of Unleavened Bread coincides with Passover night. The pesach is not supposed to be eaten till after sundown the afternoon of the 14th which technically is the beginning of the 15th since the Bible's 24-hour cycle of night and day begins at sundown rather than midnight. So then, Passover is not celebrated on the 14th because that day is specifically designated for getting everything ready for the dinner to be eaten that night.

The high day (15th) would be AFTER the passover, would it not?

No. The High Day begins with the Passover dinner because that's the first night of the Feast Of Unleavened Bread.

Do we know for sure what actual day of the week the 14th of Nisan was?

The 14th of Nisan floats because it's regulated by the Bible's calendar rather than the civil calendar; which is why Passover night sometimes falls on a seventh-day sabbath night rather than always on a night of the week of its own.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[tim-from-pa]

Yeah, reading thru all these posts that Jesus was crucified on a Wednesday (Nisan 14) as I believe, it goes without saying that this will also throw "Palm Sunday" off to another day of the week. Now our traditionalists have two days to worry about. :biglol

 

[Proverbs3/5]

Re: Good Friday (07)

The 14th of Nisan floats because it's regulated by the Bible's calendar rather than the civil calendar; which is why Passover night sometimes falls on a seventh-day sabbath night rather than always on a night of the week of its own.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

Let me rephrase my question: Where is the proof that the 14th of Nisan (in the year Jesus was crucified) was on Friday?

 

[Webers_Home]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

Where is the proof that the 14th of Nisan (in the year Jesus was crucified) was on Friday?

The seventh-day sabbath always falls on Saturday. The day preceding Saturday is always Friday. With that information it is very easy to conclude Friday is the day upon which the Lord was crucified.

†. Mrk 15:42-43 . . And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counseller, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.

†. Luke 23:52-54 . .This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid. And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.

†. John 19:31 . .The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Theofilus]

If not for the second comma in that sentence, your interpretation might have squeaked by.

There is no comma in the original text. In fact, there aren't even spaces between the words. This comma, as with all other punctuation, was inserted by the translators. Different translators will put commas in different places, depending on their preconcieved beliefs. For example:

11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11-12 KJV)​

Notice that there are two commas in verse 12, indicating that the people mentioned in the previous verse are supposed to do all three things - perfect the saints, do works of ministry and edify the body of Christ.

11And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11-12 NASB)​

Here we have only one comma in verse 12, indicating that the people in verse 11 are supposed to perfect the saints, so that the saints can minister to each other, thereby building up the body of Christ.

See the difference? And it's all because of a single comma - one that isn't in the original text, but was put there by the translators of the KJV. Since a single comma can have such an effect on the meaning, and since there were no commas originally, we have to look to all of Scripture and consider various possible meanings, to find out what the correct understanding is. We cannot base our theology on commas.

It is possible to place the commas differently, and arrive at the following understanding:

After Jesus rose, he appeared to Mary Magdalene on the morning of the first day of the week. (Mark 16:9, my paraphrase)

Since the difference between these two understandings is basically down to a single comma, which was inserted by some translators but not others, we cannot base our understanding on this verse alone. Other verses say the women came while it was still dark or at dawn (which is not the same as sunrise). My understanding of Mark 16:9 does not conflict with these other verses. Your's does, since it has them arriving both before and after sunrise.

I'm going to revise it so that you can see how your mind has been twisting it to say something other than what the syntax is saying in writing.

"After he had risen, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene early on the first day of the week."

See your mistake?

No, but I see yours.

Just for comparison, here's that same verse from some other translations.

Like I said, the translators of different versions interpreted this, as well as many other things, in light of their theology and beliefs they already had, and inserted or ommited commas and other punctuation accordingly. Whatever version you read, you are reading the personal understanding of the translators of that version. That's why it's important to compare versions and look at other possible meanings, whenever there is any doubt.

 

[Webers_Home]

Good Friday (18)

.
FAQ : Why would the Lord leave Israel without establishing the predicted theocratic kingdom?

It was unavoidable because prophecy cannot be broken. Daniel predicted Messiah would disappear (be cut off) sometime between his arrival and the destruction of the second Temple. (Dan 9:26)

Another reason the Lord departed is related to the chronic habit of Yhvh's people refusing to heed their own sacred messengers. (Dan 9:5-6)

As a corporate body, the nation of Israel rejected the New Testament's Jesus as God's anointed king. That fatal error led to the withdrawal of the offer to restore the kingdom in Christ's day. He continually, and tirelessly, advertised that the kingdom was "at hand" viz: ready to be installed and up and running if only the nation would repent. It didn't; and subsequently activated the biblical axiom that if you reject God, He will reciprocate and reject you.

†. Zch 7:11-13 . . But they refused to pay heed. They pulled away the shoulder and turned a deaf ear. They hardened their hearts like adamant against heeding the instruction and admonition that the Lord of Hosts sent to them by His spirit through the earlier prophets; and a terrible wrath issued from the Lord of Hosts. Even as He called and they would not listen, "So" testified the Lord of Hosts: "let them call and I will not listen."

Also, at the time, the Lord was not yet installed as a monarch. He had to go up to God's abode on official business and get his crown as per another of Daniel's predictions.

†. Dan 7:13-14 . . As I looked on, in the night vision, one like a son of Adam came with the clouds of heaven. He reached the Ancient of Days and was escorted to Him. Dominion, glory, and a kingdom were given to him; all peoples and nations of every language must serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingdom, the one that shall not be destroyed.

Had the people of Israel accepted the Lord's claims, and met the prerequisite of repentance, he would have returned immediately after his coronation to install the kingdom. But as it is, now the nation has yet another long wait ahead of it while Yhvh takes care of other business on His agenda.

†. Acts 1:6-9 . . So when they met together, they asked him : Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel? He said to them : It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

†. Mrk 16:15-16 . . And then he instructed them: Go into all the world and preach the gospel everywhere to everyone. Whoever believes and is baptized will be spared. But all who disbelieve will be damned.

So then, while God's plans with Israel simmer on the back burner, He's busy utilizing the time to spread the Gospel throughout the whole world.

†. Rom 11:25-27 . . I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins. (Isa 59:20-21)

Continued > >
|

 

[Webers_Home]

.

There is no comma in the original text. In fact, there aren't even spaces between the words. This comma, as with all other punctuation, was inserted by the translators. Different translators will put commas in different places, depending on their preconcieved beliefs.

You were the one who quoted the ASV to substantiate his point. Are you now retracting your original defense and admitting that you no longer trust the punctuation of the very translation that you quoted to prove your point to begin with?

BTW : the official Bible of the Catholic Church also has that same second comma in Mark 16:9

"When he had risen, early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons." (NAB)

The NAB is the basis of the faith of something like 1,142,604,000 Catholic Christians. Are you suggesting that those 1.43 Billion Catholics have put their trust in a false translation?

The balance of the world's 2,264,492,000 Christians for the most part rely upon the KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASU, and the NASV; all of which have the same second comma in Mark 16:9.

For the record, my explanation of the three days and three nights, that the Lord predicted at Mtt 12:39-40, is geared for mainstream Christianity; in other words : Christians whose faith is based upon the ASV, NASV, KJV, NKJV, NIV, NAB, and the NASU.

As an item of interest; the Jehovah's Witness Bible renders Mark 16:9 like this :

After he rose early on the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had expelled seven demons. (NWT)

Not that I recommend the Watch Tower Society's New World Translation. I only quoted it to emphasize just how far removed you are from the major translations that are in common use regarding the day of the civil week upon which the Lord revived. Are you familiar with the colloquialism "jousting windmills". It means to waste one's energy fighting a lost cause. Think about it.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Theofilus]

.

You were the one who quoted the ASV to substantiate his point. Are you now retracting your original defense and admitting that you no longer trust the punctuation of the very translation that you quoted to prove your point to begin with?

BTW : the official Bible of the Catholic Church also has that same second comma in Mark 16:9

"When he had risen, early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons." (NAB)

The NAB is the basis of the faith of something like 1,142,604,000 Catholic Christians. Are you suggesting that those 1.43 Billion Catholics have put their trust in a false translation?

The balance of the world's 2,264,492,000 Christians for the most part rely upon the KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASU, and the NASV; all of which have the same second comma in Mark 16:9.

For the record, my explanation of the three days and three nights, that the Lord predicted at Mtt 12:39-40, is geared for mainstream Christianity; in other words : Christians whose faith is based upon the ASV, NASV, KJV, NKJV, NIV, NAB, and the NASU.

As an item of interest; the Jehovah's Witness Bible renders Mark 16:9 like this :

After he rose early on the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had expelled seven demons. (NWT)

Not that I recommend the Watch Tower Society's New World Translation. I only quoted it to emphasize just how far removed you are from the major translations that are in common use regarding the day of the civil week upon which the Lord revived. Are you familiar with the colloquialism "jousting windmills". It means to waste one's energy fighting a lost cause. Think about it.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

First of all, it doesn't matter how many people read a certain version. Biblical truth isn't determined by a popular vote. Second, An estimated 20% of the world's population speak English, most of them as a second language. There are about 7 billion people in the world, which means that about 1.4 billion have the ability to read an English Bible. I doubt that everyone who knows English as a second or third language chooses to use an English Bible. But you say that over 2 billion people use English Bibles. You might want to redo the math. The fact is that most Christians in the world don't use an English Bible at all, but one in their own language. I would guess that the number of people in the world using English Bibles on a day-to-day basis is probably closer to half a billion, or about 1/4 of the number of Christians you estimate there are in the world.

 

[Proverbs3/5]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

The seventh-day sabbath always falls on Saturday. The day preceding Saturday is always Friday. With that information it is very easy to conclude Friday is the day upon which the Lord was crucified.

Maybe I am missing something here, but is not the objective of this whole study to show that Jesus was crucified on Thursday (Friday being the high day, and Saturday being the regular sabbath) in order to get 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb??

 

[Webers_Home]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

is not the objective of this whole study to show that Jesus was crucified on Thursday (Friday being the high day, and Saturday being the regular sabbath) in order to get 3 days and 3 nights in the tomb??

The way your request was worded; I assumed that you wanted to see the proof for a Friday crucifixion.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Proverbs3/5]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

The way your request was worded; I assumed that you wanted to see the proof for a Friday crucifixion.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

I am really confused now. You used 20+ pages of Bible references and Jewish history and law to prove a Thursday crucifixion an burial, and then tell me that it was on Friday:

The seventh-day sabbath always falls on Saturday. The day preceding Saturday is always Friday. With that information it is very easy to conclude Friday is the day upon which the Lord was crucified.

I just want to know the truth. Was it Thursday or Friday?

 

[Webers_Home]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

You used 20+ pages of Bible references and Jewish history and law to prove a Thursday crucifixion an burial, and then tell me that it was on Friday:

I have told no one the Lord was crucified and buried on a Friday. The proof that you requested is the evidence that Friday's fans use to make their case for that day; not me.

Friday's fans typically always fail to take into account the fact that Passover night is a sabbath regardless of what day of the week it falls upon because it coincides with the first twenty-four hours of the Feast Of Unleavened Bread : thus those first twenty-four hours are pretty special and easily qualify as a High Day.

I just want to know the truth. Was it Thursday or Friday?

Well, for me the truth is Thursday; but you're going to have to sort this out and come to your own conclusion. The upside is that there's no penalty for getting it wrong, however the downside is that if you settle on Friday you may have to endure the world's taunts now and then when they gleefully point out that it's impossible to get three days and three nights between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Webers_Home]

Good Friday (19)

.
FAQ : Where was the Lord's mom on resurrection morning? Didn't she believe he would be back from the dead?

Answer : I don't think so. I mean, her pals Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome weren't expecting him back, nor were any of the apostles; so why would she? Search the list of names of the women who went out to the Lord's gravesite on Easter morning, and you will not find her mentioned among them; nor is she mentioned among the people in 1Cor 15:1-8 who saw Christ back from the dead.

Any truly loving mother would want to be on hand when her boy was restored to life and his injuries healed. Surely that would be just as much cause for a joyous reunion as a son coming home alive and well from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mary loved her boy deeply; there can be no doubt about that because it was predicted while he was yet an infant that the Lord would cause his mom to experience the pain of a sword piercing her soul (Luke 2:35) which I take to mean she experienced a depth of anguish at the Lord's crucifixion that only a mother who's watched her own precious flesh and blood mutilated and crucified can truly understand how that really feels.

So I believe, with all my own parental heart, that the Lord's mom would have been the very first person out at the cemetery on Easter morning if for no other reason than to be there just in case what her son predicted about his three days and three nights resurrection might actually be true. I think she would have been out there with food and water, and a fresh change of clothing like any normal mother would do for a child who's survived a terrible ordeal. My wife and I would certainly have been out there for our own son if for no other reason than to give him a ride home.

Anybody who's watched the televised home-comings of servicemen returning from Iraq and/or Afghanistan; have seen for themselves what that does to the emotions of kin waiting for their loved ones' safe return. And where do the families typically wait? At home? No, they mostly wait at the airport; sometimes several hours ahead of arrival times. If Mary had sincerely believed that her boy was going to return from his ordeal in just three days; there's no doubt in my mind whatsoever that she would have already been out there on Easter morning way before anybody else arrived.

Didn't Mary believe her son would be back from the dead? I don't think so; and that unbelief would explain her absence.

My whole position is of course inadmissible because it's based upon what's known as an argument from silence; which erroneously affirms : If something isn't clearly stated, then it's inferred from the silence that there was nothing to state. So then, just because the Lord's mom isn't named doesn't prove she wasn't out there at the cemetery. I just think it's very curious that her name is left out.

The End of Good Friday 2011
|

 

[Proverbs3/5]

Re: Good Friday (07)

Well, for me the truth is Thursday; but you're going to have to sort this out and come to your own conclusion.

After further study, I am convinced as well that Thursday is the day that Jesus was crucified and laid in the tomb.

The upside is that there's no penalty for getting it wrong, however the downside is that if you settle on Friday you may have to endure the world's taunts now and then when they gleefully point out that it's impossible to get three days and three nights between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.

I have never had anyone taunt me about that. Most people I know say it is Friday, because that is what they have been taught. Many don't even give any thought to the fact that it does not add up. A dear friend of mine (a Roman Catholic), keeps saying "on the third day" without taking into account the scriptures that say "three days, and three nights". She says- "you take the Bible too literally". She fails to see that even with a Friday evening burial, there is only two "days" that are counted.
I take the Bible seriously, and believe that Jesus meant what he said when he said "three days and three nights".

 

[Webers_Home]

Re: Good Friday (07)

.

I take the Bible seriously, and believe that Jesus meant what he said when he said "three days and three nights".

My response to your friend is that if the Lord wasn't literal, then the prophet Jonah wasn't literal either.

†. Jonah 1:17 . . Yhvh provided a great fish to swallow Jonah; and he was inside the fish three days and three nights.

There is an illogical argument called an "Argument From Incredulity" which is a kind of logic that concludes that since one's own imagination cannot think of an explanation; then there cannot be one; which inevitably leads to claims that many parts of the Bible aren't literal.

Then there's another illogical argument called an "Argument From Projection" which is a rather conceited kind of logic that concludes if one's self doesn't know something, then nobody else knows it either; which again leads to claims that many parts of the Bible aren't literal.

Then there's something psychologists called scotoma; which if you've watched The Davinci Code you know to be a subconsciously induced mental blindness caused by the mind's propensity to disregard concepts that are incongruous with deep seated, preconceived notions. In other words, the human mind sometimes overlooks something unexpected even when it's right in front of one's nose— which is why it happens sometimes that we walk right past someone we know when they turn up somewhere unexpected.

All three of those psychological hang-ups come into play with people who claim we shouldn't take the Bible literally simply because in their mind's eye the Bible says certain things that you know just can't be true. Well, maybe to them certain things just can't be true; but as for me, I'm fine with certain things being true whether I fully understand them or not.

C.L.I.F.F.
|

 

[Webers_Home]

Addendum

.
FAQ : When Paul said to keep the feast (1Cor 5:8) was he indicating that born-again Christian Jews are supposed to keep the Passover in accordance with its rules and stipulations as per Moses' covenanted law?

Answer : NO

First off, right out of the box, if born-again Christian Jews were to literally keep the feast it would entail cannibalism because their lamb isn't an animal, but rather one of their fellow men; viz : a human being.

†. John 1:29 . .The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said : Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

†. 1Cor 5:7 . . For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us

In order for born-again Christian Jews to literally keep the feast, would require that they slay Christ again and again every year at Passover; but the Bible says the Lord was slain once and never to be slain again.

†. Rom 6:10 . . For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him.

†. Heb 7:27 . . Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

Along with the crucial issue of a human lamb is the fact that Passover law has no jurisdiction over born-again Christian Jews because they've undergone one of the supernatural births about which the Lord spoke at John 3:3-8. That birth transfers a Jew out of the current scheme of things and puts him into a scheme of things totally brand new.

†. 2Cor 5:17 . . If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come.

†. Gal 6:14-16 . . May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation.

Another reason is because Christianity is lethal. On the books, born-again Christian Jews are reckoned executed and gone to heaven before they even leave here to get there.

†. Rom 6:3 . . Don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

†. Rom 6:6 . . Our old self was crucified with him

†. Gal 2:20 . . I am crucified with Christ

†. Col 3:3 . . For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.

†. Col 1:13 . . For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the son He loves.

Dead born-again Christian Jews no longer live by Old Testament law; for example :

†. Rom 7:1-2 . . Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

It's paradoxical that a religion that executes born-again Chrisitan Jews also gives them life.

†. Rom 6:4 . . We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

†. Gal 2:19 . . For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.

†. Col 2:16-17 . . Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

FAQ : What if a born-again Christian Jew wanted to participate in a Passover dinner with some friends. Would they be sinning in doing so?

Answer : NO

Although born-again Christian Jews are under no obligation to participate in a Passover dinner, they aren't forbidden to do so if they wish.

The modern Passover dinner is pretty harmless. For one thing; Lamb's flesh isn't a requirement. What they do is obtain a whole, unbroken shank bone (zeroa) from a roasted lamb and place it on their plates as a symbol of the lamb of the original Passover.

And another thing is; though Passover is a pilgrimage kind of feast; permissible to be observed only in the actual State of Israel; hardly anybody practices that part of Passover law anymore; which is really not an issue since Passover, as it's practiced by modern Judaism, is done all wrong anyway.

C.L.I.F.F.
|