Torah ScrollDaughter of Zion Eternally




So What?

There has been a growing trend in the church to look again, at what Covenant is. The Jew has long been inescapably faced with the concept of covenant. He faces it in the mirror of Torah Law. The covenential position of his birth heritage places him into a maze of complex rabbinic gates and fences that often contradict each other in an attempt to "keep the Law". Paul tells us in the New Testament that the Law cannot establish a proper covenant because the law cannot "save to the uttermost". So the Jew complains that the way of the Jew is "hard" and hard it is for often the regulations set by the rabbis concerning the Law restrain the Jew from being able to live life freely.

Along comes the gentile, proclaiming a Savior he has received and living a freestyle, hodge podge life of "walking in the Spirit". The Law bound Jew looks at this, disdains the poor misguided gentile, and sees his "god", as other than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. There is no comparing these apples and oranges and so the Christian walks away from the Jew thinking the Jew is ignorantly rebellious and the Jew walks away from the Christian thinking he is simply ignorant.

What has happened here? Why was there a break down of communications of the Holy Spirit between the Christian and the Jew? Because one of the two people talking had no idea what they were talking about, they just thought they did. Usually the one with no clue is the gentile believer in Christ. Two things have happened here to remove from us the idea of the covenant. First was the switch in languages from the Hebrew to the Greek in the scripture.

The switch in languages occurs at the transition between two covenants, which are not separate but nested one within the other. You see the covenant of Sinai had a fatal flaw. Because that it never was designed to save but to teach! Therefore, it could never fully deal with the heart. This left us unrepentant in God's eyes. For under the Law the ceremonial system was the plumbline of spiritual acceptance. But if the Law was enough then we would not have needed Jesus. Still according to the Law, anyone who was not found worthy under the Law could never stay in the land of promise. When Israel was found unworthy under the law, God who is judge, jury, and executioner having promised retribution for unrepentant hearts deported, if you will, Israel from her lawful land. Its much like I.N.S. is today. If you are an immigrant, and you violate the laws of this land in certain ways, you will be caught, prosecuted, and sentenced, but your Visa can be revoked. Moreover, your Immigrant status can be overturned even for a naturalized citizen. You can be deported back to the land of your birth. Remember that Canaan is not Israel's birthplace. Abraham, whom Israel eventually came into being through, was born in UR of the Chaldees. When found unworthy under the Law, Ephraim was deported to Assyria and Judah was deported to Babylon. Ephraim or the ten tribes which "broke faith" with David's house went out into a mixing of people that later spoiled them. In Jesus day, they were the Samaritans. Judah then, the "sceptered" and chosen two-tribe group, wound up in Babylon among the Chaldees! They were deported back to their home country! Now I see the need to draw a distinguishing line here between the two kingdoms. Recall the covenant made to David and his house. There would lack no man for the throne as long as they walked after God in righteousness. Also ultimately, the throne of David or David's royal lineage would yield a ruler whose reign was to be eternal! Jesus of course, was the ruler. Therefore, this meant that the Davidic house was the covenant. Now the covenant is simply this; you will be my people and I will be your God. Another way He put it is; you will be my possession my choice gemstones, I will possess you. Finally and most importantly He says; you will be my children and I will be your father! Is it then just a coincidence that Jesus called the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob "father"?

Now understanding this, then we see why Judah was deported, and Ephraim was "polluted". You see the son of Solomon was a rash young buck who thought he had his father's fabled wisdom. All he truly had was his father's dotage and money! Therefore, when he made his choice to raise the taxes and listened to his young friends instead of the older wiser court advisers he tore up the kingdom. Still, though he was wrong, he was God's anointed and lawful king under the covenant. This made those who ceded from under his rule also out from under the covenant of God. They proved their error when they erected Golden calves to serve as a place to worship God instead of allowing travel to Temple. In these compounded errors, they polluted themselves and when Assyria came, they made a spiritual pollution into a cultural pollution. Assyria's idea of conquering was to take some of newly conquered people away and replace them with another people group that would ruin their culture. So, it is that Samaria was visited being in great darkness by Jesus and a woman at Jacob's well.

Now on the tree or cross of Calvary a second covenant was enacted. This one became the outer shell for the Sinai covenant. However, instead of replacing or annulling the Sinai covenant it gave the first covenant the rightful status it had deserved all along. For the first covenant lay intact within the second. Why is that? Because the Sacred Blood shed on that tree fulfilled the need to empower the Law to fulfill the original intention of the God. Back at the original fall, a promise was made of one to come from Eve's loins. This one would damage the serpent but be bitten in the process. Jesus becomes the one who damaged the serpent by usurping his dominion over humanity. Yet, in the process was bitten by the "sting of death". This new covenant enables the old to hold sway and actually enforces the old in that it finally deals with the heart. Once the heart is dealt with then the God of Torah can come in and write Torah on the "heart". Then Torah is easily and happily enforceable without rabbinic constraint! For the Holy Spirit becomes the enforcer of it.

But because of the language switch between the two covenants we don't view the relationship between the Testaments as such. Jesus is Jewish, raised kosher, and of the Sons of Israel through the human link of maternal passage to Abraham via David's house. However, the "lingua franca" of the day was Greek, not Hebrew. Therefore, the story of the new covenant was written in the language of the common man, Koine Greek. Now there is a real need for the language change because Hebrew is a language that best paints a historical picture. However, Hebrew falls woefully short of the specificity in vocabulary, which would be needed to both explain the connection between the cross and the Law, and explain to non-Jews the Law itself. Torah was cut and dry it gave the general and casuistic rules and it was expected that these rules would be strictly adhered to. It painted dark and foreboding pictures of torment for the "transgressor" and bright and blissful pictures of the good life for the "obedient". The historical and prophetic data painted the panorama of the blessing and the curse for obedience and rebellion as well as the unfolding of the ancient promises made from the fall. But, as the actual life of the promise is played out the detail is so minute that another and more specific language had to come into play. Greek brings out color variations and details and adds "headers" and "footers" of written explanation to the unfolding of the promise fulfilled like no other language can. Greek in the hands of Paul, Peter, Jude, James and John, will later add the needed headers and footers to the original portrait of the Old Covenant. But, though in its own right it was an asset it also became a liability. For like a joke translated out of its original language risks the loss of the punch line. So to the transition of languages, however necessary, risks the failure to fully explain the intent and connection of the second covenant to the first.

Furthermore, in the quest to learn what was in the pages of sacred writ men came along and further blurred the lines of demarcation between the two covenants by translating these two languages into a third! When the translation from Greek and Hebrew into the Latin Vulgate was done by Jerome, it was a masterpiece. It was a major breakthrough for now in this text an understanding of the intentions of the God of Sinai concerning man could be made by westerners for the first time ever. But, at the same time, it increased the gap between the covenants and furthered our misunderstanding of what covenant meant to man. Then the Old and New Testament was codexed (put into book form). When the Old Testament was codexed, its uninterrupted scroll form was cut up into pages. This produced grammar changes in the reading of the text, for neither the Hebrew nor the Greek, were punctuated. Finally the Latin was translated into English that was updated by the time of the King James Bible and for ease of study, it was subdivided into chapter and verse. Once this happened the lines began to become impossibly blurred and error began to come into the understanding of, interpreting of, and indoctrinating from the two covenants. Because men read the subdivided texts that sometimes did not allow the thought flow to become expressed as the Original Authors intended they began to misread the intent of the texts in both testaments. Now the covenants became doctrinally separable. Now license and legalism could enter where pure truth once stood. Then to deal a final watercolor smudge to the lines, the heart of the church grew cold and politically motivated. With this coldness other voices crept in and gave new and greater error to the understanding of the "mystery", of the "grace of God". Teachings rose out of Germany that promoted emotionalistic viewing of the God of covenant or that promoted philosophical overlays of human reason to the absolutes of scripture. Though, the German reformer Luther in his thesis caused truth for the first time in centuries to triumph. For He spoke of the redemptive work by faith as an act of grace from God and a gift to be received. Yet because the hapless gentile let the format of the text guide him. Never thinking to look past the obstacles of chapter, verse and book format; he began to believe that the covenant of God was passe and the Torah law was fulfilled and no longer required to be enforced under grace!

However thankfully in these last days, new understandings of the truth are being ferreted out of the mess of language changes and book formatting. Those with hearts that burn for the pure Word of God by the Holy Spirit take themselves back to the study of the languages, history and geography of the Testaments to discover a long unsuspected truth. The grace of God through Jesus has brought non-kosher outsiders who are considered strangers under the Law into the house of the original Sinai covenant. Not only to live out the fullness of the Law written on their "hearts" but also become partakers of the original Covenential blessings and curses. For it has always been understood by the writer of all scripture, that mankind was to abide by the original Sinai covenant. Under that covenant if anyone willingly and knowingly transgressed the Law, he would receive due penalty, which was commutable, in the eye of the judge, only when the transgressor threw his/herself on the mercy of the judge! Now for nearly two thousand years the gentiles have trod on the Torah Law and trod underfoot the "City of Peace" by virtue of their ignorance of the connection between the covenants.

This is changing. But, here too, another and worse risk is played into the revelation. The enlightened believer now realizing that he is not free to live under some goofy grace to live out some undisciplined and unstructured Christendom in an unrestrained, untutored manner. A life lived without true purpose and future intent. To these come the Jews who once again attempt what they tried in the beginning to Judaize the Elect and cause Christendom to be absorbed into their system of worship. But, ministry and service of God are not the future intent of the Christian they are only the temporary demand of obedience to the commission to "get the word out" about the cross. The future intent is far beyond the present obedience as far beyond as the man to the amoebae. Yet there is a structured, ordered, established, and patterned manner in which to live out the Christian witness before men. Moreover, it has nothing what so ever to do with rabbinic traditional Judaism. For of a truth in one sense the old Covenant did die on the cross with Christ. The ceremonial religious system died with Jesus but not the instruction unto perfection. The Hebrew Temple worship system has in it the template of the proper approach to the God who sits on the circle of the Earth. So what of this commission and this witness?

Let us though for one moment consider the "witness of the Jew". Now what do I mean by that, for surely the poor unredeemed Jew as no witness at all having rejected Jesus, has he? A witness is something that gets the attention of all surrounding viewers. When there is a crime or an accident the one who is the witness will testify. Having been at the scene of the incident and having seen he now testifies to what he has seen as either a disinterested third party or a conspirator attempting top bargain for a lighter sentence through betrayal! Either way their word carries weight because they are separated by the event from all others including the ones involved in the incident itself! I can be the passenger in the car of my spouse or friend who is charged with an accident and testify to what happened to me and either convict or clear the accused. Similarly, I can be in the same place as not in the actual accident and do likewise. I am not convicted and I am not on trial, for I am only a witness. Therefore, what sets me apart is that I was changed by the event and enabled to give credible testimony that will aid the executing of the Law. I stand out because of my involvement with the accused. I am identified with accused as either having seen or having been in the car with, the individual. I am not like the jury or the peanut gallery in the background!

The same will hold true for the testimony of Jesus the Savior/ Redeemer and those who have no covenential status as believers. In the case of the Jew, his Jewishness becomes his witness of the faith of the sons of Abraham as he identifies with his event and all those who are participants. His event is Exodus and Sinai and the participants are all whose natural birth lineage is traceable through the mother into Judaism. What is the first thing we see that will separate the Jew from the Christian? The Sabbath day of worship is one. Another obvious thing his clothing and if you have reason to look, his circumcision. In Temple days, the entire ritualistic religious system made them stand out like sore thumbs in the crowd!

Now lets us again turn to the enlightened Christian. And I use that term in its truest sense of having become aware and illumined by the Father as to the mysterious connection between the covenants of the Old and New Testaments. The "enlightened Christian" realizes that the cross deals with sin and rebellion, and the "stoppered ears" of Satanic dominion through the Lambs/ Goats blood shed. His testimony would appear to be more hidden having separated himself from his Jewish brother by a day change in the day of worship from Sabbath to Lord's day. Yet, for him everything he says and does is the testimony of his event! His event is the meeting of man and God face to face at an altar where the blood is shed. It is the Lambs/Goats blood shed.

Some don't understand the concept of Lamb's blood and the atonal shedding being of goats blood. They ask," Isn't the goat the satanic thing"? Yes it is, for it is their symbol, but it is also a perverted expression of choice obliterating the true function there in. On the other hand, Jesus is heralded by the Baptizer as the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world. We read it and we say, "ok that's cool I am redeemed by the Lambs blood." But, we are not redeemed by Lambs blood for redemption in this sense is the redemption of atonement. Let me explain.

In the Torah Law, a series of events called feast days are mandated to be observed with proper decorum by all Jews. Let us recall Paul's' statement of engraftment into "something". One such feast day on a scheduled calendar of feast days is the Day of Atonement called Yom Kippur. For the Jew, it is a day that when he "makes it" to the end and will live to be blessed another year. You see the Jew understands that on the day of the Feast of Trumpets also called Yom Turrim, or Rosh Hashanah, the books are opened. These are the books of the deeds and the people and the promises of the Ancient of days and of Life. During the ten day interim between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur the greeting of Jew to Jew is "May your name be written in the book of life this year". They understand that only those who make it through the ten days and are found to be written in the book of life will have the promises of the blessings having had their deeds lawful and transgressional covered by BLOOD. But, at the Day of Atonement when the blood covering is laid it is not Lambs blood, it is goats blood! In the Yom Kippur ceremony of old, the priest went into the Holy of Holies. There he kindled and flashed off a significant amount of incense, enough to fog the room. Then he lays hands on the bull and slaying it, offers up the blood in the Most Holy Place. Then he casts the lot for the two goats as to which will be slain and which will be led away. (The second goat was eventually led to its death off a cliff to avoid the consequence of its return to the country of Israel. This became a necessity as the populations grew and the wilderness decreased and the likelihood of the sin filled goat staying clear of populated areas with it. But all this does not make the second goat as the first, which will be actually ceremonially slaughtered. It is still the Goat bearing away alive the sins of the people.)

The priest now goes lays hands on the goats and hands the live sacrifice over to another, while he slays the Goat dedicated to God. He now offers the goats blood. Finally, the bulls blood is mixed with the goats blood and the ritual of temple and altar cleansing ensues so that the house of worship may be set back into the same covering as the people. The Temple and the Altar now cleansed receives the final sacrifice of the Ram, which rededicates the Altar back to God. In essence, the Jew experiences in the successful fulfillment of the ceremony an annual grace of atonement from God. But it annual, and will be repeated again at the same time next year! Since the death of Jesus, it was recorded that a certain indicatory miracle of the atonments success or failure failed to indicate the grace of God extended into this rite. Even though there was a second and more substantial indicator to counter it! The first indicator comes in the form of a scarlet thread tied to the horns of the goat that is led to his doom. In the days before Jesus death it is said that the thread would "magically" or "miraculously" turn white thus apparently fulfilling literally a prophecy meant as a figurative promise of the second covenant. (Isa 1:18) The second indicator however was a most definitive marker. If the designated priest, a high priest in service at the time was found ritually impure. Yet he went into the Holy of Holies, he would die on the spot in the presence of the Glory of Lord. His sacrificial offering for himself, his brother priests, and his people the nation will be unacceptable (piggul or tumnah). The people would suffer the curses of uncovered sin before God until the next Yom Kippur. For it appears that once the ritual process begins it cannot be repeated by another designate for the chosen animals themselves become, having been touched by the unclean priest, unacceptable to be the atonal sacrificial vessels! Since the process required the prepare the selected animals, and there is only one set per Kippur (atonement), cannot be completed in the 24 hour period of the day. Yet, the sacrificial time window of acceptance is confined to that one day!

Now the significance of the greater Kippur of the cross takes on a new and more blinding meaning. Not for naught is it written that once Jesus had offered His blood for a atonal sacrifice once and for all that He sat down at the right hand of the Father. (Heb. 10:12) The hour however is not Yom Kippur is it? No, it is Passover. Now, because this "Kippur" is offered out of season with the time of the calendar, we must look at why God would choose this day. Why this day to make the final ordained atonement on a day that celebrates the deliverance of the nation from bondage? It is not until I was led to go back and reread the passage about the Passover sacrifice that I got the connection between the impossible Lamb and Goat thing. Exodus 12: 5 tells us what selection for the Passover sacrifice is allowed and where to get it. NASB "Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may either take it from the sheep or the goats." You see the offering is called a Lamb, for whatever reason, that is the name God chooses. But as you can plainly see by the text this Lamb can be obtained from sheep or goats! Now I can see one reason why the sacrifice would be call a LAMB because that designation was applied to a man many years later, his name is Jesus. Another is that a Lamb is the juvenile and innocent form of the animal designated for the ordination of the priesthood. As well as the annual burnt offering that is conjunctionally offered on a "cleansed" altar for himself the priests and the people. The Ram is the designated animal found in the ordination ceremony of Aaron and sons, as well as the atonal or sanctifying animal designated for the annual Kippur ceremony for the priesthood and the people. Remember, in the Kippur ceremony, the High priest and household is sanctified or atoned for by the bulls blood first. Then being himself sanctified, he may boldly proceed to offer up the sanctifying or atoning blood of the goat for the priests and for the people. Thereafter, having also utilized these bloods to cleanse the house and the altar he may boldly proceed to offer the burnt offering for sin and rededication on the newly cleansed altar for the people. (Ordination passage Ex.29:10-28 emphasis 15-20 Lev.8:18-29 and the Kippur passage Lev. 16 all.) This procedure then explains the reason why the Jew views the tens days of awe as he does. The gist of this is that the house and altar are sullied and unclean by reason of all the traffic of half hearted sin offerings all through the year. Each time an individual sin offering is done the house receives the debit of the sin upon it and as time passes the atonal effectiveness appears to be less effective. Now I can be wrong on this but never the less. On this day, they say the books are opened, the atonement made the heavens open, the prayers are heard, and the recorded of the New Year and balance of the blessing versus the curses is set. On this day, it appears that the offerer is sanctified or atoned for in the bull. The priesthood, people and the house are sanctified or atoned for in the blood of the goat and the "scape goat" does a living sanctification or atonement for the land. Then the blood having cleansed sanctified and atoned the house removing the debt of the sins piled up by blotting them out the house may now receive the proper sin offering and burnt offering to atone for the people fully. But in Jesus' one death the entire rite is summated and complete in a permanence that no ceremony could ever have hoped to accomplish.

This brings us now back to point of covenant. So what? Well seeing the Passover and Yom Kippur connections of the cross and remembering Paul's statement of being grafted into "something" we now need to consider what that something is. Paul goes into great detail to tell us that the Jew forms an original branch set to a vine and we immediately recall the famous vine and branch discourse of Luke Chapter 15. Jesus is the vine we are the branches and Father is vineyard owner. Jesus also factors in as the vine tender in another related parable. Paul tells us that when the Sacrifice of all eternity was made it created a definitive barrier. That kept out the unwanted and dead branches and designating then to fire and then making room on the vine "trunk" to receive grafted in branches from another vine or in this case olive tree. Realize this that Paul's New Testament Olive tree is the same Old Testament Grape vineyard, and the same Vine of which there are individual branches called disciples. Each of these archetypes represents a people commonly known as the Children of Israel. But the wild olive is not the normally acceptable plant yet it is permitted to be grafted in to the designated tree. The other covenant has a prophecy relating to this, in fact it has several. Isa 9:2 we are the ones who walked in darkness and saw the great light. Isa 42:6 we are the nations He is the light of. But Hosea 2:23 tells of the people who are not a people being called God's own and they answering "You are my God". Mirrored in Rom 9:26. Peter says the same thing about the gentiles in 1 Pet 2:10. Now in all this realize then that we the gentiles are grafted into and called unto a God of Covenant who changes not. Who is as He was and will always be and whose covenant in its completed form will never become void. So then we are now called unto Sinai's Torah law and this is the Law that is supposed to be written on the heart. Now that raises questions faced by early believers. To eat Passover it is said that the man must be circumcised to which Paul's answers that after the death of Jesus the heart was the circumcised member of the human body and not the "foreskin. You see the Old covenant taught, and so it used imagery, and sacerdotal ritual to teach what would one day become a living reality of the inner person. Its sole function was to establish a line of discrimination between God's things and everything else.

The Circumcision commonly called in the Ashkenazic the Bris which is done to all Jewish boys on the eight day is a permanent outward sign. It is a mnemonic. That definitely reminded one whose he was everytime he bathed! The new covenant turns that outward symbol into living reality inside the man. The conscience is circumcised and just as the "Bris" causes the "head" to become exposed to anything it touches. Thus causing a risk of irritation and or injury or infection from not being it its protective foreskin. Similarly, the conscience void of its "self -protective mechanisms" having been surrendered in a long overall process is also exposed. It is exposed to every temptation and to every pain and every spiritual foray of an enemy bent on its destruction. The Bris will never allow the "Head" to ever have protection again and its permanence is a required thing leaving no option and no choice. The Bris of the conscience however equally mandated (is not so easily and permanently accomplished. But you can choose the depth of that Bris and you can choose to withdraw from the process and let self protect the conscience and heart. But without it you cannot enter in. You will never enter the Mishkon, the Tabernacle of the Beloved and the place prepared for you in the Holy of Holies.

Now if all this Hebrew form is needed and there is a need for a circumcising of the heart then what would exactly be required? The absolute Law is no more than Ten Commandments and seven Feastdays; plus new moon and Sabbath. Jesus new commandment of brotherly love comes about later, and is the eleventh commandment. He Himself has said it, that if we loved Him we would keep His commandments. Are there any other commandments to be kept in all of scripture, beyond those of the Sinai Covenant? As a Jew speaking to a Jewish audience, what other commandments would He be referring to? Then what of the Jerusalem decision which seemed good to the Holy Spirit? Acts chapter15 does indeed give a loophole doesn't it? You Gentiles need not worry about the Law except for eating things with blood in them and fornication. Yet, there is another principle at play here for are we not also told that if one transgresses one point of the 10 commandments then he is guilty of the whole of them. Just so then, if one point of law is placed upon us then we are bound to the whole law! In addition, this is similar to the writ of divorce among the Jews, which Jesus tells us was given because of the hardness of the heart. Can it be that the Decision founded in Acts is given because of the hardness of the Gentile heart? We are not however bound to the rabbinic and Judaising aspects for they are the traditions of the fathers, which Jesus Himself decried as a travesty of the Law. The temple also doesn't stand so how can we keep the sacerdotal aspect? The key then, is in our circumcision of heart, for the Law is a living entity in the heart.

Now, the little point about "the day". There are two days mentioned in the bible. There is the issue of Sabbath and the Lord's day. In Jesus day, He had to deal with the Pharisees of the day concerning the Sabbath. When Paul taught he went teaching to the synagogue, to the Jews first on the Sabbath. Now also realize that the principle message of the New Covenant was to be expressed to the people of the Old Covenant. That's right, it is written by Jews to Jews and then to the world. Jesus Himself said it to the woman at the well that salvation comes from the Jews. So first we must deal with the fact that these covenants revolve around each other and thus the Sabbath and the issues dealing with the Sabbath were the major deal of the Lord's ministry and the early church. Then we have a man isolated on Patmos who is in the Spirit on a day he does not call the Sabbath. Now if this day were the Sabbath then why would John being a Jew not simply use the term Sabbath? Why in this instance should the bible suddenly not follow its previously established pattern? Scripture never contradicts itself. It's only our misunderstanding of it that causes it to appear to do so. Therefore, if all along the Sabbath was a day clearly marked; then this must be another day he was in the Spirit on. One clue is that he calls it the Lords' day and there is indeed a "Day of the Lord". Back in the gospel story, the day is established as the day of the resurrection, which is the first day of the week. Now why that day and not the day of the crucifixion? Because of Paul's statement concerning the resurrection itself. (1Cor 15:12 -20 emphasis verse 17) If Christ is not raised from the dead then your faith is worthless. Its the resurrection and the atonal sanctifying blood that gives the cross the power to save to the uttermost. For the empty tomb triggers faith to believe that this is the one whose blood could atone for sin forever. Indeed, this is the Redeemer and Savior of Israel and all humanity! Looking at those days in this light we see a clear commandment to observe the Sabbath from the Old covenant which is on the last day of the week. Yet, we are also encouraged to come together again on the Lord's day in the Spirit. This is the first day of the week and thus Jesus literally becomes the beginning and ending of the workweek. You see the Sabbath is a day of rest to study the scripture to pray to worship and no regular work is done in it! The Lord's day is not so and thus regular work may coincide with the continued keeping of the heart in Spirit and truth and continued gathering of the body of Christ. In fact, history records that the early Christians went from house to house, breaking bread, and fellowshipping.

One last item to address. Paul spoke of the Lord's supper, which is actually a part of the Passover Seder. It coincides with the third cup or the Cup of Redemption. Yet Paul says as often as we eat this bread and drink this cup we are to do it in remembrance of Him. Thus showing forth His death till He comes. The Sabbath the Lord's day, the Feast Days, the other miscellaneous times of coming together should always be marked with the bread and the cup. The Catholic Church may have it right in one sense with their liturgical masses which look suspiciously like a "Gentile meets Temple worship and throws in other stuff" thing. In some of the form is reflected the beauty and the order of the Temple service. One might do well to reflect on what the early church had to deal with in its struggle to understand the Old and New Covenants without the full benefit of the New Testament. One would also do well to marvel at the power they had and they manner in which the God of Sinai moved among them. One might well wonder what it would take to see that day again

Because "it be a Jewish thing"

Back to Kingdom Things