It's easter...got a question

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/20#post_3543923
sorry, I did get busy.
Leviticus 17:11
Hebrews 9:22

O Sweetie, we were whole different tracks...I thought we were discussing the sacrifices and why we didn't do that now. Okay this is long winded, but I think it's a great study.

I'm very happy to discuss this particular concept. Yeshua was not a human sacrifice, nor did God desire his death for atonement for you. The author of the letter to the Hebrews is trying very hard to explain Jewishness to a gentile people. It's very hard to do, and most seem to think Paul was the author who was very misunderstood...even Peter wrote that about him. 2 Peter 3:16

So lets start with your first example: Lev 17
We are NOT to have anything to do with the blood, we are not to drink it, bath in it or any other pagan concept of using it. It's poured out on the side of the altar and not used. You will have to read the ENTIRE passage to be able to understand that. over and over the author explains that any use of the blood itself is evil. It was spilled because the animal died, it's very life was poured out.



Blood was spilled to make atonement (the animal sacrificed died) , but the blood itself is not to be used, or eaten...it's poured out...even if it was used to "sprinkle" it would be to stain everything as a reminder of the death and loss of life.

Now for Paul's difficult to understand (as presumed written by him) letter: Heb 9

My comments for offering my understanding of the passage will be in (BLUE)
Worship in the Earthly Tabernacle
9 Now the first covenant had regulations for worship and also an earthly sanctuary. [sup]2 A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand and the table with its consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. [sup]3 Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, [sup]4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. 5 [/sup]Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover. But we cannot discuss these things in detail now.
6 [/sup]When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry
. 7 [/sup]But only the high priest entered the inner room (the most holy place)
, and that only once a year, and never without blood, (Never without the death of an animal, the blood remember is poured out) which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed u>in ignorance. (there is and never was, a sacrifice for willful sin) [sup]8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. (As long as you are alive in this world, one side of the veil, you are not entering the other side of the veil (most holy place to stand before God himself...so the author is not talking about doing away with one covenant to replace it with a new one, as I have heard preachers claim.)[sup]9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. [sup]10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order. (Now we get to the meat of the passage, the author is clearly explaining that all of that was just a matter of food and drink in a ceremony, so now he goes to explain the "mystical/Zohar" side of the meaning)
The Blood of Christ
[sup]11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here,[sup][a] he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. [sup]12 [/sup]He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining[b][/sup] eternal redemption. (There was a veil that separated the holy from the most holy, where the only the high priest was allowed to go once a year on Yom Kippur...the veil represents one side of life, then passing through to the other side of this life, Yeshua entered into the most holy place, not by the death of animals, but by dying his own death.)13 [/sup]The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 [/sup]How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, (Yeshua cleans our consciences from ACTS that lead to death) [chttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews+9&version=NIV#fen-NIV-30120c][/sup] so that we may serve the living God! (serve the living God, not Yeshua...he did not want us to worship him as a god)
15 [/sup]For this reason Christ is the mediator
of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. (This is freedom from the punishment and degree, he did not free us from the law.)
[sup]16 In the case of a will,[sup][d] it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, (notice the author is talking about dying, not the blood itself, but the actual death...in a will nothing is done in it, until the person DIES) [sup]17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. [sup]18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. [sup]19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. (to be sprinkled is to be stained and marked, a reminder that the animal that sealed the covenant had died to allow them to be clean before to God...blood of the covenant...blood was spilled to bring them to that point)[sup]20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.”[sup][e] [sup]21 [/sup]In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 [/sup]In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. (something had to die to bring about the forgiveness...the blood itself not is used)
23 [/sup]It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 [/sup]For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 [/sup]Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 [/sup]Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself
. 27 [/sup]Just as people are destined to die once
, and after that to face judgment, 28 [/sup]so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. (Yeshua died one time, now he forever stands before the Most holy to speak on our behalf...so it isn't his blood that saves us, but the fact he stands before God on our behalf, to speak for us) Talmud teaches us that if one righteous person will stand before God, and speak for the people, God will hear them and relent his harsh decree. Yeshua was a righteous man, he died, and God raised him from the dead, and took him up...to forever stand and speak on our behalf.

In the story of the gardener as told by Yeshua, is the same example, the owner of the trees wanted to cut off completely the tree for not having any fruit...but the gardener stood up for the tree, and begged for time (grace) for him to dig around it, and fertilize it, and afterward if it didn't bare fruit, then cut it down. Luke 13:6-8 ...Notice the IF IT DOESN'T BARE FRUIT THAT THE TREE IS DOOMED REGARDLESS OF THE GARDENERS EFFORTS. AKA trampling underfoot the son of God, and insulting the spirit of GRACE.
I think the hardest part is the passage after this one... Heb 10 but the author sums things up as this:
[sup]26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, (a willful sin does not have a sacrifice, it never did)[sup]27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. [sup]28 Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. [sup]29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace
? 30 [/sup]For we know him who said, “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d][/sup] and again, “The Lord will judge his people.”[ehttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews+10&version=NIV#fen-NIV-30164e][/sup] 31 [/sup]It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

The law of Moses is not to be rejected, there is stern punishment for that...but to trample the teachings of Yeshua, knowing what he sacrificed to bring that knowledge to you...its a fearful thing to become the enemy of God. People are not saved by Yeshua's death, his death only allowed him to enter the most holy place
...it's his life that saves us...he speaks to the most high for us, that's what a mediator does. His blood didn't do anything, nor did God demand a human sacrifice, what God needed for the people, was a mediator...not a sacrifice, although Yeshua couldn't be before him without dying first. Moses spoke for the people, he was a mediator as well, there were lots of mediators...even you are a mediator if you pray for someone. However a mediator who never lives, and stands before God to make intersession for you, is real salvation and much more permanent. So you see (I hope) it isn't about the blood, it's all about passing through the veil that separated the holy from the most holy
...the one that was ripped open when Yeshua died. Mat 27:50

There is one mediator between God and man...The MAN
Yeshua (LOL...Christ is not his last name). If Yeshua were a god, it wouldn't be needed for him to die to stand before God, a god of equal standing could always stand in the most holy place.... If he were God himself, he wouldn't have to die at all. However for a righteous man to die, so he could enter the holy of holies and speak for us...that's accomplishing something. For a man to die for a righteous person, one could understand it...but Yeshua was willing to die while the people were yet sinners without hope.

Romans 5
[sup]6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. [sup]7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. [sup]8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Yeshua was not a human sacrifice, he died so he could enter the holy of holies, just as we are all going to die one day and stand before God for judgement...he wanted to die to get to point B from point A. He was willing to die (he sacrificed his life, even the death of the cross to be able to stand there before God on our behalf. God did not demand or require it of him, he was willing to do it because he thought it was worth it...like the fire fighter in my story, who sacrificed his life so the child could live )
9 [/sup]Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 [/sup]For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 [/sup]Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
]O Sweetie, we were whole different tracks...I thought we were discussing the sacrifices and why we didn't do that now. Okay this is long winded, but I think it's a great study.
I am discussing sacrifices.
Between the destruction of the first and second temples were sacrifice still part of duty? The verses I posted are just foundation...I can't comment on them until I have the answer to the temple question.
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3543931
I am discussing sacrifices.
Between the destruction of the first and second temples were sacrifice still part of duty? The verses I posted are just foundation...I can't comment on them until I have the answer to the temple question.

Hi, LOL...all that work for nothing????

Basically yes, the sacrifices are part of the commandments and statutes. However without the temple it isn't possible to fulfill those commandments. The average Joe doesn't do them, the priest (house of Levi) is responsible for doing them. We can eat however, the rabbi makes sure the proper animals are kosher killed. The dark time spoken of by Daniel the prophet is a time without a sacrifice.

Nowadays the sacrifices are spoken of at the time they were supposed to be done as a reminder, but good deeds of charity and obedience are just as good as doing a sacrifice, so we are not without a way of pleasing HaShem. LOL... It isn't a new Christian concept, the way of grace was always there.

The following verse is misquoted in the "new testament"... Heb 10

The original verse:
Psalms 40: 6-8

6Sacrifice and offering you did not desire—
but my ears you have opened[sup]c
burnt offerings and sin offerings[sup]d[/sup] you did not require.
7
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-7.htmThen I said, “Here I am, I have come—
it is written about me in the scroll.e[/sup]
8
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-8.htm
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-8.htmI desire to do your will, my God;
your law is within my heart.”

1 Samuel 15

21
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-21.htm"But the people took some of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the choicest of the things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to the LORD your God at Gilgal." 22
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-22.htmSamuel said, "Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams. 23
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-23.htm"For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry.
 

2quills

Well-Known Member
This better not turn out to be a stale loaf for those of us following along. That's all I'm sayin... :)
 

2quills

Well-Known Member

What is a stale loaf?
Darth, leading us on an epic build up to some ground breaking point with his trail of bread crumbs. Just hoping it didn't lead to a stale loaf.
Carry on.
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3543970
Darth, leading us on an epic build up to some ground breaking point with his trail of bread crumbs. Just hoping it didn't lead to a stale loaf.
Carry on.

LOL... Darth has always been pretty good with these discussions, I have always enjoyed our banter back and forth on religion. I have a habit of answering whatever scripture is being put forth, and don't seem to do very well on "bread crumbs" philosophy. lessons, but we will see where it leads I guess.
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flower http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3543935

Hi, LOL...all that work for nothing????

Basically yes, the sacrifices are part of the commandments and statutes. However without the temple it isn't possible to fulfill those commandments. The average Joe doesn't do them, the priest (house of Levi) is responsible for doing them. We can eat however, the rabbi makes sure the proper animals are kosher killed. The dark time spoken of by Daniel the prophet is a time without a sacrifice.

Nowadays the sacrifices are spoken of at the time they were supposed to be done as a reminder, but good deeds of charity and obedience are just as good as doing a sacrifice, so we are not without a way of pleasing HaShem. LOL... It isn't a new Christian concept, the way of grace was always there.

The following verse is misquoted in the "new testament"... Heb 10

The original verse:
Psalms 40: 6-8

6Sacrifice and offering you did not desire—
but my ears you have opened[sup]c
burnt offerings and sin offerings[sup]d[/sup] you did not require.
7
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-7.htmThen I said, “Here I am, I have come—
it is written about me in the scroll.e[/sup]
8
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-8.htm
http://biblehub.com/psalms/40-8.htmI desire to do your will, my God;
your law is within my heart.”

1 Samuel 15

21
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-21.htm"But the people took some of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the choicest of the things devoted to destruction, to sacrifice to the LORD your God at Gilgal." 22
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-22.htmSamuel said, "Has the LORD as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices As in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, And to heed than the fat of rams. 23
http://biblehub.com/1_samuel/15-23.htm"For rebellion is as the sin of divination, And insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry.

I want to elaborate on my answer above... Being obedient and acts of charity do not and can not replace the sacrifices
, that's a Christian concept and sacrifices were never done away with by Yeshua, I can show in several passages after his death were the Apostles still did sacrifices.

The sacrifices of the Sabbath, High Holy days and the birth of the son or daughter for example, are thanks giving and cleansing sacrifices that can no longer be done, but should be. In the song (Psalm) of David, to do God's will and show devotion requires no sacrifice to approach him, and in the quoted passage of Samuel, God still delights in the sacrifice, but not to the point of disobeying a direct command from God to do it.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Ok, quills, I had more bread crumbs but I will skip to the end.
In between the destruction of the two temples sacrifices were still respected, continued, and honored.
None of the laws changed after the destruction of the first temple. Yet with the destruction of the second temple, Sacrifice was stopped.
My belief is, it wasn't a godly command that brought this about. It was a societal view that did this and was backed by referencing an old law that was put in place upon the creation of the first temple. The law where to make sacrifices was created before the first temple was completed. Yet after its destruction the people went back to the old law until the completion of the second temple. After the second temples completion, there was no following of the old law...even though it was there before.
Does this make sense?
 

2quills

Well-Known Member
Ok, quills, I had more bread crumbs but I will skip to the end.
In between the destruction of the two temples sacrifices were still respected, continued, and honored.
None of the laws changed after the destruction of the first temple. Yet with the destruction of the second temple, Sacrifice was stopped.
My belief is, it wasn't a godly command that brought this about. It was a societal view that did this and was backed by referencing an old law that was put in place upon the creation of the first temple. The law where to make sacrifices was created before the first temple was completed. Yet after its destruction the people went back to the old law until the completion of the second temple. After the second temples completion, there was no following of the old law...even though it was there before.
Does this make sense?
I'm with ya so far. What does it mean?
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3544002
Ok, quills, I had more bread crumbs but I will skip to the end.
In between the destruction of the two temples sacrifices were still respected, continued, and honored.
None of the laws changed after the destruction of the first temple. Yet with the destruction of the second temple, Sacrifice was stopped.
My belief is, it wasn't a godly command that brought this about. It was a societal view that did this and was backed by referencing an old law that was put in place upon the creation of the first temple. The law where to make sacrifices was created before the first temple was completed. Yet after its destruction the people went back to the old law until the completion of the second temple. After the second temples completion, there was no following of the old law...even though it was there before.
Does this make sense?

Darth, No sorry it does not make sense.

Did you read anything I posted? I understand your thoughts, but they are not Bible based at all, and not why nor when the sacrifices were stopped.

Once the temple was gone we could not do sacrifices anymore, that is the ONLY reason it stopped. Yeshua was alive while the second temple was standing...so the second temple was indeed completed, and we indeed followed the law, and sacrifices were done. Remember the animals being sold in the temple that Yeshua was upset about and overturned the tables? Those animals were for sacrifice, but selling them in the temple was the wrong to do. Also it wasn't called an "old" law until the churches corruption in 325 AD
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Flower. Let me ask it this way. After the first temple was destroyed. Sacrifice was still followed and performed. Even though the temple was destroyed the first time. Correct?
 

2quills

Well-Known Member
So essentially unless there's a third temple built then sacrifices are out and good deeds are in?
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
The way flower is reading and interpretting yes. I disagree since i dont believe the timeline of the laws fits. When the first temple was destroyed sacrifice was still followed in various areas until it was rebuilt again. Then they were performed i the temple only. Upon its second destruction some sects performed sacrifice for a short time but this eventually stopped.
When the third temple is built it wont matter anyway as that signifies "end times" to my understanding.
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Quills http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3544024
So essentially unless there's a third temple built then sacrifices are out and good deeds are in?

HI,

There is one serious problem with thinking good DEEDS are in. You see Good deeds are the preforming the statutes and commandments from the law, and Christians are taught to be careful to not follow them because they mistakenly think that to follow the law is to fall from grace. All The Apostle Paul was trying to explain in that very misunderstood passage, is that good deeds is not an "in" to enter the kingdom of God, it never was. If you THINK that it is, THEN you have fallen from understanding what grace is all about and the apostles efforts to teach were all in vain.

When Yeshua was asked by a young man what a person should do to enter, he said to obey what he understands of the law, and to come follow him. This was spoken to a Jewish person.

Paul wanted the Galatians (gentiles) to understand that they didn't need to go get circumcised to be accepted in the beloved kingdom. He explained that if you go that far that you obligate yourself to be beholden to the entire law, which they didn't even know how to preform and would get into trouble. That they were better off to be considered righteous (which would be the Noahide laws)

http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/seven-laws-of-noah/

In Judaism, the Seven Laws of Noah (Hebrew: שבע מצוות בני נח‎ Sheva mitzvot B'nei Noach), or the Noahide Laws, are a set of moral imperatives that, according to the Talmud, were given by God as a binding set of laws for the "children of Noah" – that is, all of humankind.
According to Judaism, any non-Jew who adheres to these laws is regarded as a righteous gentile, and is assured of a place in the World to Come (Hebrew: עולם הבא‎ Olam Haba), the final reward of the righteous. Adherents are often called "B'nei Noach" (Children of Noah) or "Noahides," and may sometimes network in Jewish synagogues.[citation needed]
The seven laws listed by the Tosefta and the Talmud are:
The Noahide laws comprise the six commandments which were given to Adam in the Garden of Eden, according to the Talmud's interpretation of Gen 2:16, and a seventh precept, which was added after the Flood of Noah. According to Judaism, the 613 commandments given in the written Torah, as well as their explanations and applications discussed in the oral Torah, are applicable to the Jews only, and non-Jews are bound only to observe the seven Noahide laws.
p>
The Noahide laws teach to avoid these 6 sins, and obey the 7th
1. Sexual transgression
2. Murder
3. Theft
4. Idolatry
5. Cursing the Holy name
6. Eating the flesh from a live animal
7. To have a fair system of justice to punish offenders


The way I see it, idolatry is to worship any god besides the ONE TRUE GOD, and I have to tell you folks....his name is not Jesus. Yeshua was SENT from The One God, he was not a god, he was not a demi-god, and he is not to be worshipped as a god. To consider him so, is a very serious offence to law of Judaism and Noah's laws. The worship of another god is to nullify everything offered and every door to salvation nailed shut.

There is one more train of thought that I want to address...the lost children of the house of Israel are the children of Isaac the child of promise, and all who are of that bloodline are Jews and beholden to the law.

Israel and Judah were separated after Solomon's death, the Messiah... to be called messiah the promised one...he has to unite Israel/Ephraim with Judah again in order to fulfill the prophecy. If he doesn't do this, he can not be called Messiah, the one promised.

Now, WHO IS ISRAEL? Paul wrote that the scattering of Israel brought salvation to the gentiles...do you know how the scattering did that, and what he means?
Christians THINK this passage pertains to Jews who don't know Jesus, but it's a prophecy concerning the scattered house of Israel, in the writings of the prophets AKA Ephraim. Paul says when Israel returns, it will be life from the dead, and all will be fulfilled. because of this passage Christians THINK they have a mission to save the Jews, but the Jews have the mission to teach Israel when they return
, we have kept the books, and have kept the law just as it was when they were scattered, so they can return, and be a part of the Holy people that they were originally. If the roots are holy, so are the branches that came from it...God has not forgotten the scattered of Israel.

Yeshua said he was ONLY sent to the lost of the house of ISRAEL (Matt 15:24), that does not mean as Christians have been taught, that he was speaking about the Jews, nor is there a lost house...rather he was speaking about the scattered called Israel/Ephraim. He said the healthy do not need a physician, (that would be the Jews who were following the law (Luke 5:31). Yeshua considered the people who were already following the laws, as not sick, but the ones who were sinners were being called to repent. The prophecies say the forces of the gentiles will also be drawn in (Isaiah 49:5-7), he not only would bring glory to the house of Jacob, because they have followed God all along, but he would also RESTORE the remnant of Israel...so that God's promise of salvation will be for all the world, when all the prophecy is fulfilled, all the world will know that there is only One God, and his name will be the only God known by all. (Zac 14:9)

Israel must be separated from the nations, they look and act like every non-Jew... there comes a time when it is declared for Israel to come out of her...now that's a study of the scriptures worthy to be looked at.
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Beth,

After all of that long winded sermon I posted for lack of a better term, the temple being rebuilt is supposed to be rebuilt because of the Messiah when he comes (or returns according to some), followed by a millennium of peace. There is no good reason to not want it rebuilt. That being said, as with everything Jewish, the rabbi's have different opinions on the time frame and what exactly the sacrifices would be, some say prayer and others say grain offerings only, while some say the animals... This is a pretty good summation on the subject. All I have been posting were my own views and references.


Darth,

Again where do you find any information Biblical or otherwise, that made you think the sacrifices were done just anywhere besides the temple when the first one was standing, and only in the temple after it was rebuilt the second time? I can't find any references, nor do I remember ever hearing that before. LOL...No "bread crumbs" please, just tell me where you got that idea?
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
Beth,
Darth,
Again where do you find any information Biblical or otherwise, that made you think the sacrifices were done just anywhere besides the temple when the first one was standing, and only in the temple after it was rebuilt the second time? I can't find any references, nor do I remember ever hearing that before. LOL...No "bread crumbs" please, just tell me where you got that idea?
I am not saying they were done anywhere when the temple was standing. I am saying they were performed after the temple was destroyed the first time not in a Temple. Correct?
 

flower

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/397568/its-easter-got-a-question/40#post_3544044
I am not saying they were done anywhere when the temple was standing. I am saying they were performed after the temple was destroyed the first time not in a Temple. Correct?

Oh... now I see what you are talking about.

The answer is, no not to my knowledge, did you read something that gave you that impression?. The people were taken by Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and the city sat in ruins, including the temple. even before that time the first temple had been slowly pillaged by the Philistines and such because the people were disobedient to God. The books of the Judges tells us that each time God sent prophet after prophet to warn them of the coming dangerous results of their disobedience... but eventually Judah, even after seeing what happened to Israel, committed idolarty and they were also carried away captive.

Unlike Israel that was assimilated into the nations and disappeared, Judah decided to cling to the law as much as they could in Babylon, but sacrifices were not part of that life. The story of Daniel and the 3 Hebrew boys tells a little about the life they lived. Cyrus was a King of Persia who came into power after Nebuchadnezzar and the fall of Babylon ... he allowed the Jews to return and rebuild the temple, which became known as the second temple, it didn't have the splendor of the first.

I don't recall any of the sacrifices being done during the time Judah was sent in exile until they returned. The second temple was really just rebuilding and renovating the first.
 
Top