Passover vs Eucharist

[Webers.Home]

.
The passage below is deliberately misquoted.

"The dinner shall be a sign for you, in the houses where you are; and when I
see you eating, I will pass over you, and no plague shall fall upon you to
destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt." (Ex 12:13)

No, that's not right. The angel of death didn't look inside their houses to see
whether people were eating the lamb from whence the blood came to mark
the door posts of their homes. The angel looked for only one thing, and one
thing only: the blood itself.

"The blood shall be a sign for you, upon the houses where you are; and
when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague shall fall upon you
to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt."

The lesson is that the dinner had no power to protect the people from losing
their eldest sons that night. The dinner in fact was, and is, strictly
commemorative.

"This day shall be for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to
The Lord; throughout your generations you shall observe it as an ordinance
for ever." (Ex 12:14)

Another lesson is that the bloody part of the first passover's procedure isn't
oft repeated. No, it was only for their sons' protection just that one night in
Egypt, and no other; which is the very reason I insist that the original
passover is obsolete because blood on door posts ceased protecting Israel's
eldest sons after that. The original passover was time-sensitive, i.e. it
provided the Jews a narrow window of opportunity that if missed, didn't offer
a second. In other words; good intentions were to no avail. Had the blood
not been where and when required; it would've been just too bad.

Another lesson is that the Jews didn't include the lamb's blood in their
dinner. Instead of eating the blood, they drained it from the animal and
painted it on their door posts. That was in compliance with the post-Flood
law of God that prohibits using animal blood for food.

"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and as I gave you the
green plants, I give you everything. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life,
that is, its blood." (Gen 9:3-4)
_

 

[Blik]

Ex. 12:14 tells us: This day is to be a memorial for you, and you must celebrate it as a festival to the Lord. You are to celebrate it throughout your generations as a permanent statute.

I don't know where you are getting your "dinner" but it is not from scripture.

Men decided God changed it when God gave us the new covenant, but God never told us He changed it. Men class it as a ritual along with circumcision and kosher food. It isn't a ritual like they are, it is a praise of the Lord's salvation.

 

[garee]

.
The passage below is deliberately misquoted.

"The dinner shall be a sign for you, in the houses where you are; and when I
see you eating, I will pass over you, and no plague shall fall upon you to
destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt." (Ex 12:13)

No, that's not right. The angel of death didn't look inside their houses to see
whether people were eating the lamb from whence the blood came to mark
the door posts of their homes. The angel looked for only one thing, and one
thing only: the blood itself.

"The blood shall be a sign for you, upon the houses where you are; and
when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague shall fall upon you
to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt."

The lesson is that the dinner had no power to protect the people from losing
their eldest sons that night. The dinner in fact was, and is, strictly
commemorative.

"This day shall be for you a memorial day, and you shall keep it as a feast to
The Lord; throughout your generations you shall observe it as an ordinance
for ever." (Ex 12:14)

Another lesson is that the bloody part of the first passover's procedure isn't
oft repeated. No, it was only for their sons' protection just that one night in
Egypt, and no other; which is the very reason I insist that the original
passover is obsolete because blood on door posts ceased protecting Israel's
eldest sons after that. The original passover was time-sensitive, i.e. it
provided the Jews a narrow window of opportunity that if missed, didn't offer
a second. In other words; good intentions were to no avail. Had the blood
not been where and when required; it would've been just too bad.

Another lesson is that the Jews didn't include the lamb's blood in their
dinner. Instead of eating the blood, they drained it from the animal and
painted it on their door posts. That was in compliance with the post-Flood
law of God that prohibits using animal blood for food.

"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you; and as I gave you the
green plants, I give you everything. Only you shall not eat flesh with its life,
that is, its blood." (Gen 9:3-4)
_

The blood was a sign. Not the eternal substance not seen "spirit" Both water and blood represent spirit.

It was a sign of the firstborn our bloody husband Christ. It spoke of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that did follow the grave were opened .

When the temple vail was rent the Passover ceremony was changed to the new ceremonial law 1 Corithians11 which points to the final wedding supper in the new heavens and earth.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● 1Cor 5:7 . . Christ, our passover, has been sacrificed.

Christian communion services, as per Luke 22:19-20, and 1Cor 11:23-26,
commemorate Christ's passover just as the Old Testament service
commemorates Jehovah's passover.

The word "passover" means, in a nutshell, to exempt.

Well; the first lamb's blood did for Jehovah's followers pretty much the same
as what Christ's blood did for his followers; at least that's what the apostle
Peter said.

● 1Pet 1:18-19 . . For you know that it was not with perishable things such
as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed
down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a
lamb without blemish or defect.

The Jews overcame death by means of their lamb's blood, just as Christians
overcome the Devil by means of their lamb's blood.

● Rev 12:10-11 . . And I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying: Now the
salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his
Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down,
who accuses them day and night before our God. And they have conquered
him by the blood of the Lamb
_

 

[JohnR7]

I insist that the original
passover is obsolete

Nothing is obsolete. I had a good friend die because he did not believe miracles were for today. The door post has a Hebrew letter all it's own the Dalet. This then is universal. Jesus said: "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." (John 10:9) Notice He said go in and go out. At the time this was written the people were living in tents. Jesus as the Son (Ben) of the owner of the Tent had authority to decide what was allowed to enter in what was permitted to leave the tent. "No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6) In the morning the door is behind us as we go out to do our work. In the evening the door is in front of us as we return to the home. The Hebrew letters are infinite and we could go on forever talking about their meaning. They are not is "obsolete". Our understanding of the meaning of the Hebrew Letters will continue to grow as we continue to learn.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Rom 15:4 . . .Whatever was written in former days was written for our
instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the
scriptures we might have hope.

The Eucharist speaks of Christ's passover in the same way that the paschal
lamb speaks of the Jews' passover; only Christ's has more to say.

The paschal lamb's death, along with the correct application of its blood,
served to protect the Jews' eldest sons; whereas Christ's death, along with
the correct application of his blood, serves to protect everybody regardless
of age, gender and/or ethnic identity.

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

Was the paschal lamb's blood successful at protecting the Jews' eldest sons?
Yes.

● Ex 12:26 . . And when your children say to you: What do you mean by this
service? you shall say: It is the sacrifice of The Lord's passover; for He
passed over the houses of the people of Israel in Egypt, when he slew the
Egyptians but spared our houses.

Now, the million dollar question is: Does Christ's blood have the potential to
successfully protect the world? Yes.

● 1John 2:2 . . He is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also
for the sins of the whole world.

If yes, then why does anybody, Catholic or Protestant, end up in the sum of
all fears? Well; it's simply because they failed to correctly appropriate
Christ's blood. You see, had the Jews only killed their lambs and eaten them
that night without applying their lambs' blood to their doorposts, their eldest
sons would've been slain.

Now here's the thing: Christ was slain; that part of his passover is done.

● 1Cor 5:7 . . Christ, our passover, has been sacrificed.

The Jews were instructed to apply their lambs' blood themselves with a
desert plant called hyssop (Ex 12:22). That was convenient because
apparently hyssop was not only leafy but plentiful too.

So; what might be a convenient way to apply Christ's blood? Well; for some
the Eucharist's wine species does the trick; and I guess that's okay if it
works for them. But I suggest an even more convenient method. Why not
just go to God in prayer; speak up for yourself and say something like this:

"Father, I would like to appropriate your son's blood to protect myself from
the wrath of God."

And then if people still wish to partake of the Eucharist that's okay because
according to 1Cor 11:23-26, the communion service is a legitimate part of
Christian worship; but I strongly recommend that they speak with God first.
_