Subj : Today's Thought
To   : George Pope
From : Newborn
Date : Fri Oct 14 2005 23:58:00

  Re: Today's Thought
  By: George Pope to Newborn on Fri Oct 14 2005 08:50 am

 > N>    The Last Supper was NOT a Passover Seder meal.  Why?  because when the
 > N>    rabbis brought Jesus before Pilate the morning of His crucifixion, "th
 > N>    themselves went not into the judgement hall, lest they should be  defi
 > N>    but that they might eat the Passover" (John 18:20).  This was the morn
 > N>    after the Last Supper, but the rabbis hadn't YET eaten the Passover-an
 > N>    neither had Jesus OR His disciples for that matter.  The Passover meal
 > N>    was to be celebrated the NEXT night which turned out to be the nigh
 > 
 > Jews observe, with a seder, both the first & second nights of Passover.
 > 

   Jesus was crucified on the Passover and did not celebrate it either the
   first or second night for He was our 'Passover' lamb and bore our sins for
   us.
 
 > And we know it was the Passover because:
 > 1) they sang the Great Hallel (certain psalms associated with after the
 > Passover meal) after the meal
   
   They probably sang one of the Psalms but the Bible does not record which one
   The Lord never revealed which one, probably because we might then tend to
   place that particular pslam on some kind of pedestal above the other psalms.

 > 2) the crucifixion had to be hurried as the Sabbath was approaching (in
   33CE
 > Passover started on a Wednesday)
   
   There were two Sabbaths.  John 19:31 says "That Sabbath day was an high
   (special day)  Nor are we left in doubt what that specoal Sabbath was; it
   was the Passover. 
 
 > 3) the order of the meal follows the Passover Seder(Seder=Hebrew for "order"
 > 
   Again, it was because they were celebrating His coming sacrifice as our
   Passover lamb

 > N>    "And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, 'D
 > N>     ye all of it: For this is MY BLOOD of the NEW TERSTAMENT which is she
 > ...
 > N>     The OT Covenant was being replaced.
 >                
 > How do you replace an ETERNAL covenant?
 
   Simple.  Thru the will of  an ETERNAL God.

 > Again you're going with poor translations -- the translation should be "rene
 > covenant", not "new". . .
 > 
   The word according to Pope George again!

   The Old Covenant was conditional and included a physical and natioanl
   qualifications given to Isreal only.  The New Covenant is based upon an
   inner, spiritual change withing people (Salvation).  This Covenant is
   written in their hearts (Ezek. 36:26-27), 2 Cor. 3:6-18).  The New 
   is Spiritually superior to the Old Covenant.  All who are involed in the
   New Covenant know the Lord personally.  It is not merely a 'remake', but
   involves COMPLETE forgiveness for ALL people (Jew and Gentile alike)
   UNCONDITIONALY (Heb.8:12)

   The New Covenant is:

   1.  Mediated by Christ (Heb. 9:15; Johhn 1:17)
 
   2.  Is UNCONDITONAL (Heb. 8:9)

   3.  CAN produced the necassary righteousness (Heb. 8:11)

   4.  It is written on living hearts (Heb. 8:10)

Newborn

Christianity is a personal relationship, not a religion.

---
 þ Synchronet þ Origin: The Hard Drive Cafe - Montgomery Al USA - www.hdcbbs.net

.