True or False - "Another Jesus"?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Grace911

Active member
Nov 11, 2018
595
148
43
Matthew 5:17
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Hi Jaybird,
As I've studied and become fairly familiar with the foundational truths, ie The Torah, I realized that Jesus fulfilled the Spring Feasts of the LORD PERFECTLY. And because Jesus said "I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" that He will fulfill the Fall Feasts of the LORD PERFECTLY.

H4744 = miqrâ' = From H7121; something called out, that is, a public meeting (the act, the persons, or the palce); also a rehearsal: - assembly, calling, convocation, reading.

See Leviticus 23 for what we are to "rehearse" so that the Second Coming of Christ does not take us as a thief in the night.


1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

Paul was addressing those who know what the scriptures say.
 
Sep 5, 2019
3
4
3
It was necessary first to introduce the law to demonstrate that humanity in its fallen state was incapable of keeping it. Even while the law was the dispensation, there was the promise of the saviour to come who would die for all mankind's sins, past, present and future and observe the law perfectly. Humanity could claim that promise and by that claim gain salvation through the promise of His coming. Jesus did not abolish the 7th day sabbath any more than he abolished any of God's laws. In fact, he fulfilled them. Mark 2:27-28, "“The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. 28Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.”. The institution of sunday as a "day of worship" for Christians was done by Constantine who had a large idol and false god worshiping population and a growing Christian population. The Christians compromised for the sake of unity and accepted sunday, the venerable day of the sun and worship day of the sun god, as a day of worship. The sabbath is still as valid today as it always was. We do not observe God's laws for salvation or to gain perfection. We observe God's laws to honor and acknowlege Him as or Lord and creator. Hebrews 4:8-10, "8For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day. 9There remains therefore a rest for the people of God. 10For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.". "Joshua" is an english translation of Yeshua.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
is that what i said? no, that is not what i said.


Jesus is not Levite.
Jesus cannot be priest under the law.
if there has been a change in priesthood, then there has to have been a change in law.


Hebrews 7 & 8.
it's not hard.


if Jesus is your priest, you ain't under the law, because if you were, He cannot possibly be your priest.
so you're wrong if you think He didn't come to change anything.
if He didn't change anything, we're all in big trouble. the law says only Levites can serve as priests, and requires daily sacrifices, and demands that they can only be made at the temple in Jerusalem. that ain't been happening and ain't about to be. so we're all under the righteous wrath of God in that case.


Peter told Gentiles that they are being made into a kingdom of priests for our God.
something is radically different.
i never really thought about it but your right (i had to look this up) its fun learning something new. isnt there two genealogies for Jesus?
i think all this can get very complicated. there are tone of laws, some are community rules, like the priesthood, some are every day common sense, dont murder. when Jesus rules the world will He rule as king, priest, or both? Moses lead the people (was he a king?) along with his brother Aron, Aron was high priest but there were still times Moses lead them in prayer, just as David and Solomon did. then you have the whole Melchizedek order which is outside the levite order. you also have James leader of the first church who served in the temple, went in to the most holy place, if Jesus was not levite neither was James so how did James do all that not being levite? then you have John the baptist who was a levite, is he the high priest to Jesus like Aron was to Moses?
 

Melach

Well-known member
Mar 28, 2019
2,055
1,524
113
dont mind me deleted message i was way too mean and condescending
 
Sep 5, 2019
3
4
3
Elizabeth's mother and Mary's mother were both levites. Since ancestry and heritage was transferred through the women, that means Mary was also levite. Therefore Jesus was levite.
 

Grace911

Active member
Nov 11, 2018
595
148
43
It was necessary first to introduce the law to demonstrate that humanity in its fallen state was incapable of keeping it. Even while the law was the dispensation, there was the promise of the saviour to come who would die for all mankind's sins, past, present and future and observe the law perfectly. Humanity could claim that promise and by that claim gain salvation through the promise of His coming. Jesus did not abolish the 7th day sabbath any more than he abolished any of God's laws. In fact, he fulfilled them. Mark 2:27-28, "“The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. 28Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.”. The institution of sunday as a "day of worship" for Christians was done by Constantine who had a large idol and false god worshiping population and a growing Christian population. The Christians compromised for the sake of unity and accepted sunday, the venerable day of the sun and worship day of the sun god, as a day of worship. The sabbath is still as valid today as it always was. We do not observe God's laws for salvation or to gain perfection. We observe God's laws to honor and acknowlege Him as or Lord and creator. Hebrews 4:8-10, "8For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day. 9There remains therefore a rest for the people of God. 10For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.". "Joshua" is an english translation of Yeshua.
While it was impossible to not sin, ie Break a commandment and do my own thing, God also spelled out Blessings and Curses. If you chose to accept that the commandments were for our good, good instructions, for how we are to behave, good direction, the light upon our path, for how we are to be blessed and protected, OR we can find ourselves bucking against the LORD and His Son's instructions, refusing to believe that the whole Bible is applicable for our Christian walk today, and receive the curses.

The first use of the word "cursed" was in Genesis 3:14 and Satan was cursed.

Later we see God teaching His people the blessing and the curse.

Deu 11:26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse;
Deu 11:27 A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day:
Deu 11:28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.

Deu_12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Mal_3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

And Jesus is the author of the Book of Revelations

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Heb_13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever


If the above were not true, then I have nothing to believe in the Bible. Any contradictions to these words above, surely I in my flesh am misunderstanding and it is me that needs changing, because The Bible is either all true or a half truth created by Satan. I choose that the Bible is all truth and any changes I create and proclaim that I should be cursed.

Jesus did not come to change the Word, for He is the Word from the beginning to the end. The Holy Spirit is our COMFORTER who leads us to GOD'S TRUTHS.

Joh_17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Psa 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Psa 19:8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
Psa 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
Psa 19:10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Psa 19:11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
 

Melach

Well-known member
Mar 28, 2019
2,055
1,524
113
Elizabeth's mother and Mary's mother were both levites. Since ancestry and heritage was transferred through the women, that means Mary was also levite. Therefore Jesus was levite.
its transferred through women only in judaism

in the bible its mostly listing men in genealogies and says "the son of, the son of".

typical judaizers do everything opposite of the bible lol.
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
i used to be amill actually. i appreciate your attitude.

what made me stop be amil was the tremendous mental tricks needed to make revelation 20 make sense. first resurrection is spiritual, yet rest of the dead lived not until the millennium has passed. contrasting the resurrections. do the lost also get spiritual resurection of course not. but that is offtopic im sorry.

thanks for answer. i agree that its one people in God thru Christ btw.
Good.

You should realize that there are different views concerning the phrase "first resurrection".

My position would be that the "first resurrection" is Jesus' resurrection, and those who are joined to him are resurrected at his coming, but they are still part of the "first resurrection" as they were resurrected when they were joined with him. See Rom 6:1-14.

Regarding "second death", I believe it is a word-play with the "first resurrection". There is a first resurrection for all believers, and a second death for all unbelievers. Both of them happen at the same time.

The greater mental trick is that you can read all the accounts relating to the resurrection in the Gospels and the epistles, which indicate that general judgment will occur at the time of Jesus' return, and come away thinking that the premillennial view is correct. It is really based only upon Revelation 20, which is an unclear portion of Scripture. We are to form doctrine based on clear Scriptures, and not on unclear Scriptures.

Add to this the structure of Revelation, and the fact that it is not sequential in nature like premillennialists claim, complicates accepting their view. For instance, it is clear that the end of Revelation 11 is describing Jesus' return, yet the beginning of Revelation 12 is describing something that happened at the time of Jesus' birth. So, I know that Revelation is not sequential like premillennialists believe. It is a series of visions with overlapping content, and it is not sequential.

I WAS a premillennialist, and find amillennialism more credible now. I think that the premillennial view isn't realistic.

I don't think that historical premillennialism is as wacky as premillennial dispensationalism though. it would be my second choice, after amillennialism. I consider postmillennialism to be next in terms of credibility, and the lowest level of credibility, I would assign to premillennial dispensationalism.
 

Grace911

Active member
Nov 11, 2018
595
148
43
its transferred through women only in judaism

in the bible its mostly listing men in genealogies and says "the son of, the son of".

typical judaizers do everything opposite of the bible lol.
Old Testament is the Word of the LORD. Jesus' words are often to deal with those men (Pharisees and Saducees) that put forth "Man made Traditions" above the Word of the LORD and therefore made the Word of the LORD void. We must determine if the Jesus we have claimed to be our Saviour is the same one of the OT and NT. The reason we are told that these Jews made so many new laws (adding to the Word) was because after the 70 years in Babylonian captivity they wanted to make sure they had lots of fences around the commandments so as to not sin. They were blinded to the Messiah when He came the first time and they wanted to prove He was not the Messiah so they brought Jesus before the Romans to crucity Him. They wanted Him to not be their savior, because they are like the parable, the jealous brother who stayed home and the prodigal son returned and was celebrated. Thus, Jesus wanted them to understand He was bringing the 12 tribes back together to form one kingdom, but He said the time was not for those who stood before Him at that time. Act_1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD (YHWY); and beside me there is no saviour. (Strong's H3467-yâsha‛-A primitive root; properly to be open, wide or free, that is, (by implication) to be safe; causatively to free or succor: - X at all, avenging, defend, deliver (-er), help, preserve, rescue, be safe, bring (having) salvation, save (-iour), get victory.

Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name (YHWY), they bear witness of me.
Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
Joh 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
Joh 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.


Mat_7:23 Then I will tell them to their faces, 'I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!' (anomia = without the law). Jesus is the only way to salvation, but what we do, our acts, after accepting Jesus, has to do with our willingness to be obedient to the instructions He has given us to live by. For many of us, the Torah is not a burden but a delight to walk in. It separates us and sets us apart as believers. Torah is not for salvation, Jesus is the root of our faith and Torah the fruit of our faith.

Jas_2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Jas_2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Jas_2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Luk 13:23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
Luk 13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
Luk 13:25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
Luk 13:26 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
Luk 13:27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
Luk 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.


1Ti 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
 

Melach

Well-known member
Mar 28, 2019
2,055
1,524
113
I don't think that historical premillennialism is as wacky as premillennial dispensationalism though. it would be my second choice, after amillennialism. I consider postmillennialism to be next in terms of credibility, and the lowest level of credibility, I would assign to premillennial dispensationalism.
i am historical premill
 

UnitedWithChrist

Well-known member
Aug 12, 2019
3,739
1,928
113
i am historical premill
Ah ok..it would be my second choice. I am not totally locked into amillennialism. I am conducting a review, but I think it is the most credible. The other two aren't even worthy of consideration.
 

Melach

Well-known member
Mar 28, 2019
2,055
1,524
113
Ah ok..it would be my second choice. I am not totally locked into amillennialism. I am conducting a review, but I think it is the most credible. The other two aren't even worthy of consideration.
early church was very premil too. didache, justin martyr, irenaeus, etc.
 

Whispered

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2019
4,551
2,230
113
www.christiancourier.com
its transferred through women only in judaism

in the bible its mostly listing men in genealogies and says "the son of, the son of".

typical judaizers do everything opposite of the bible lol.
Son of, as well as, daughter of, in the Old Testament represent household kinship language or identity. There were no surnames as we have today in ancient Israel.
The Hebrew term, bet’ ab , would identify the father's household. While bet’ em would refer to the mother's household.
Therefore, in the bet'ab of Judah one who was a member of that house would be known as, for example, Joshua son of Nehemiah. Joshua bet’ ab Nehemiah.
Joshua of the household of Nehemiah.


Matrilineal descent is referenced in the Old Testament. Look to The Book of Ezra chapter 10 as well as The Book of Leviticus and chapter 7.

Matrilineal descent is also in not just the Torah but the Talmud, though it is an article of contention among some. With regard to the Torah Rabbi's will say Torah law does not change therefore Matrilineal descent shall remain as is.
 

Whispered

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2019
4,551
2,230
113
www.christiancourier.com
Son of, as well as, daughter of, in the Old Testament represent household kinship language or identity. There were no surnames as we have today in ancient Israel.
The Hebrew term, bet’ ab , would identify the father's household. While bet’ em would refer to the mother's household.
Therefore, in the bet'ab of Judah one who was a member of that house would be known as, for example, Joshua son of Nehemiah. Joshua bet’ ab Nehemiah.
Joshua of the household of Nehemiah.


Matrilineal descent is referenced in the Old Testament. Look to The Book of Ezra chapter 10 as well as The Book of Leviticus and chapter 7.

Matrilineal descent is also in not just the Torah but the Talmud, though it is an article of contention among some. With regard to the Torah Rabbi's will say Torah law does not change therefore Matrilineal descent shall remain as is.
I will say also to those who charge Judaizer against many of my sisters and brothers in Christ here, if you be a male who is circumcised by the letter of the law, you have been "judaized'.

It is also a false charge when those accused have stated the law of Moses was nailed to the cross. Judaizer applies to those who promote the law of Moses as being necessary to adopt in order to be in Christ. I've not witnessed any sister or brother here who affirms that. While defending the law of God does not constitute the false charge of Judaizer.

A suggestion would be rather than resort to calling sisters and brothers in Christ names, why not practice the law Jesus taught as openly in public here and post after post?
You know, the law of love one another.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
22,752
8,262
113
Concerning good resources regarding the problems with dispensationalism:

https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=126101523139
https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=126101519187
https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=126101510492
https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=126101458424

These audios would be excellent..basically they describe the history of dispensationalism from the perspective of an ex-dispensationalist.

If you live in the USA, and are a fundamentalist Christian, chances are you believe dispensationalism by default, even though you don't understand it, especially if you are a Pentecostal.
Paul in Acts 13 is an exercise in poignant unadulterated dispensational preaching.
There is no possible alternative to the fact the historical progression of revelation in the Bible.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
Elizabeth's mother and Mary's mother were both levites. Since ancestry and heritage was transferred through the women, that means Mary was also levite. Therefore Jesus was levite.
i think the bloodlines only go through the men.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
is that what i said? no, that is not what i said.


Jesus is not Levite.
Jesus cannot be priest under the law.
if there has been a change in priesthood, then there has to have been a change in law.


Hebrews 7 & 8.
it's not hard.


if Jesus is your priest, you ain't under the law, because if you were, He cannot possibly be your priest.
so you're wrong if you think He didn't come to change anything.
if He didn't change anything, we're all in big trouble. the law says only Levites can serve as priests, and requires daily sacrifices, and demands that they can only be made at the temple in Jerusalem. that ain't been happening and ain't about to be. so we're all under the righteous wrath of God in that case.


Peter told Gentiles that they are being made into a kingdom of priests for our God.
something is radically different.
We are under the priesthood of Melchizedek, who has no beginning or end. The change.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
Jesus Descended From Judah Not Levi (Hebrews 7:13-14)
Juli CamarinSeptember 30, 2011Hebrews 7




“He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests” ( Hebrews 7:13-14 )

Did you know that the office of priest as held by the Levites is actually patterned after what takes place in the heavenly sanctuary? ( Hebrews 8:5 ). This is why Moses was warned to make everything according to what he had been shown to him on the mountain ( Exodus 25:40 ). Christ’s priesthood was not patterned after the Levitical institution, it was the other way around, they were patterned after Christ’s eternal position as High Priest.
This is important to us because we must understand that this was the plan from the very beginning. The institution of Aaron’s line merely showed us an example of how it worked. It was a physical representation of a spiritual reality. The institution of this priesthood helped us to understand and visualize what takes place in heaven. However, it was never able to clear the conscience of the worshipper and so all the following generations of priests who made sacrifices merely served to remind the people of their sin ( Hebrews 10:1-4 ).

It is amazing that God kept the Levitical priesthood and Jesus’ eternal priesthood in completely separate lines. He did this to show us that the law could never make us perfect so we would never rely on it for a means of justification ( Romans 5:20, Galatians 3:10-11, Hebrews 10:1-4, James 2:10 ). Being justified can only come through faith in Christ ( Romans 5:1, Galatians 3:13-14, Galatians 3:24-25 ). This is why Jesus had to come from a completely different and separate line. In fact, we cannot even understand Jesus’ office in relation to the Levitical lineage because it is far superior in every way imaginable ( Hebrews 7:15-16, Hebrews 7:18-19, Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 9:8, Hebrews 9:14-15 ).

This is why Jesus came in the order and with the rank of Melchizedek. Not only was he High Priest of the Most High God, he was also a King ( Genesis 14:18, Hebrews 7:1-2 ). The priesthood of Aaron never held this honor. However, Melchizedek and Jesus do. Which is why Jesus came from Judah and the royal line of King David, because it fulfilled scripture that the Messiah would come from David’s line and rule forever ( II Samuel 7:16, Psalm 89:3-4, Jeremiah 23:5, Micah 5:2, John 7:42 ). Being after the order of Melchizedek, afforded Jesus the right to the position of both High Priest and King.
The previous verse in Hebrews 7 records, “For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law” ( Hebrews 7:12 ). This is why Moses never mentioned anyone from the tribe of Judah serving at the altar, “If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already men who offer the gifts prescribed by the law” ( Hebrews 8:4 ). So if there’s been a change in the law with the institution of Jesus’ priesthood, then there is no longer a need for the priesthood of Aaron.

The Levitical priesthood reminded us of our sin and reminded us that perfect fellowship between God and mankind didn’t exist ( Hebrews 9:9, Hebrews 10:1-4 ). However, “Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence” ( Hebrews 9:24 ). And He’s entered once for all which indicates that He has now perfected the relationship between God and mankind bringing us back into fellowship with Him through faith ( Hebrews 9:12, Hebrews 9:14, Hebrews 9:24-28, Hebrews 10:9-10, Hebrews 10:12-14, Hebrews 10:18 ). This is why the priesthood had to switch lines so we could be made righteous and holy through Christ. He was the only one capable of bridging this gap and restoring us. “For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit” ( Romans 8:3-4 ).

Sorry for the length but is a good explanation.