Speak for thy self John Alden?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is it wrong to wear a crucifix
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
- Status
A quick note on Rosh HaShana, the Jewish "New Year".
"The 15th of the month of Sh’vat was known as the New Year of the Trees. Although the Torah refers to Nisan as the first month of the Jewish year, the first day of Tishrei has become Rosh HaShanah. A couple of concepts led to the acceptance of this day for the one celebration of the new year".
"The first goes back to the days of the Babylonian captivity of the Israelites. The Babylonians once a year marked a “Day of Judgment.” They believed that the deities held a council. During this time, the gods renewed the world and judged each individual, handing him an eternal destiny and fate which was inscribed in a tablet".
"The legend was a powerful one and seems to have influenced the Jews as they carved out a celebration of their new year. They filtered the idea that a council of gods met to judge into the truth that God judges ever Jew on that day, assigning the righteous to the Book of Life and condemning the wicked to an eternal damnation. Those individuals who were “on the fence,” God would grant ten days which would conclude on Yom Kippur. During these days the individual was to repent and thus be sealed in the Book of Life".
And so, it says: "The legend was a powerful one and seems to have influenced the Jews as they carved out a celebration of their new year".
Care to explain this in light of your response above?
Source: From Shiva.com, The resource for Jewish mourning.
No not at all. IMO You are on track with all you have said about Satan's futile attempts to "prevail" over the church.
Last edited:
Dave G
Well-Known Member
Sure.
According to Leviticus 23:23-32 the Law prescribed the keeping of a set of holy days for the Jews, which has come to be known as "Rosh Hashana".
It coincides with other pagan festivals that take place around the same time of year...harvest.
The months were not named in the Law, but when the Israelites were in Babylon in the 70 year captivity, the Babylonian months were used for reference.
Please see the books of Esther, Nehemiah and Daniel.
There was no legend that influenced the setting aside of a set of days called, "Rosh Hashana", it was the commandment of God given through Moses.
The Jews were not to observe the "holy" days of the idolatrous nations around them...God had His own days He commanded them to set aside for Him.
Anything God specifically sets aside is holy...anything dedicated to another god is unholy.
Last edited:
Not only the Babylonian months, but their "gods". Again, and this time read carefully: "The Babylonians once a year marked a “Day of Judgment.” They believed that the deities held a council. During this time, the gods renewed the world and judged each individual, handing him an eternal destiny and fate which was inscribed in a tablet"
And then they (the Jews) did this: "They filtered the idea that a council of gods met to judge into the truth that God judges every Jew on that day, assigning the righteous to the Book of Life and condemning the wicked to an eternal damnation".
They (the Jews) FILTERED THE IDEA ( which means they got the idea from the Babylonians) that a council of gods (they turned gods into one God) met to judge INTO the truth that God judges every Jew on that day....
Now how can you not see what I see, that the Jews created this holiday from the pagan Babylonians? It's right there in black and white and you deny this truth? (Even Leviticus says it coincides with the pagan festivals).
Adonia much of the world's religion and religious practices were descended and distorted from the Semites who held the truth long before their captivities.
e.g. The Epic of Gilgamesh is a distortion of Noah's flood
https://www.studocu.com/en-us/docum...es/the-epic-of-gilgamesh-summary/1680852/view
so you don't know for sure that the "pagan festivals" are not distortions of the truth held by the fathers long before the law was given
Genesis 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments (mitzvah), my statutes, and my laws (torah).
And you do? So let me see if I have this right. The earliest Jews (Semites) set this stuff out there, then it was picked up by the pagans, and then these other Jews (Semites) came along centuries later after getting captured and then to set up their new year, they copied from the Babylonians what had actually been there from earlier Jews (Semites)? Oh, and they had never been told about it from their ancestors (the Semites) either?
Boy oh boy, do you ever know how to spin a tangled web!
You have a lot to learn grasshopper.
Have you never heard we have a common ancestory/history back to Noah and his sons - Shem, Ham and Japhet?
The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh
Read the narrative.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
Read carefully:
Leviticus 23.
They didn't "filter the idea"...your source is wrong.
They got the "ideas" for all their holy days from Moses, whom God spoke through.
I deny the idea that Israel's holy days were adopted from pagan practice.
I cannot speak for present day Israel, but the holy days mentioned in God's word are not god-sponsored...they are GOD sponsored.
All Scripture is God-breathed ( inspired ).
God had men write it down, and those words are His words.
God is the one who instituted the Jewish holy days of old, not men.
Of course you do. If what I have reported (from a Jewish source) is true then that puts an end to your idea that the takeover of pagan holidays and festivals was not part of Gods plan.
What you seem to miss Is the fact that the celebration of religious holidays and the observances of them is part of the human makeup. We are compelled to do these things and in the case of Christ there is nothing wrong as it is seeking to uphold Him, to make Him known to world and the co-opting of these type of days is one way to do it.
The Pagans had their festivals and holidays, the Jews had theirs, Christ Himself followed the Jewish ways on these matters, and we in turn can do the same for Christ as He did concerning the Jewish ways. Only very few Christians, people like you, seem to have a problem here.
What does that have to do with the Jewish source I cited, can't you read? It's right there in black and white, I didn't just make it up, I pasted it verbatim from what I read. Again, you are twisting things to your own ends despite the clear evidence of what was written. The sky is blue my friend, not orange green!
You used terms incorrectly citing your "sources" you seem a naive student of even recorded biblical history.
And He instituted them through the men whom He had chosen to do His work here. Are you saying that this would only be valid as regards Judaism and the same thing does not happen in the Christian faith?
So after the Apostles passed on and the Universal Christian Church started forming and the Bishop's of that church drew up the canon of the New Testament, that that was not "God ordained"?
When the whole theological concept of "the Trinity" was worked out by those same Bishop's, that was not "God ordained" either?
This is your folks' main problem. Everything did not stop at the death of the last Apostle and nothing new that concerned religious matters or practices was ever to come about again. Jesus left a church where it's leaders (the Bishop's) would decide things - they had the authority to do this. So, as long as the things they decide (like observing Lent or Christmas) for instance keeps within the spirit of the Scripture, it is just fine and ultimately can be looked at as "God ordained".
It's only a few small Christian sects that do not believe this, that if something is not specifically mentioned in the Scriptures then it somehow cannot be done. That type of thinking cannot be further from the reality of the Christian experience for over 2000 years.
Steve Allen
Member
As to answering the OP:
To those objecting to the wearing of a cross: "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." (Or, as the song goes, "I will glory in the cross.")
To those objecting to the use of a crucifix: "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." And, "...before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently [i.e. according to the vision] set forth, crucified..."
And to those objecting to the depiction of Jesus as idolatry: This was thoroughly discussed at the 7th Ecumenical Council, and the theological underpinning of the practice found to be firmly rooted in the reality of -- and as a confession of faith in -- the Incarnation. The key/summary is that God actually gave (Ex. 20:22-23; Deut. 4:15-19, 23, 24) the reason for His prohibition of image-making under the Law, and that reason is no longer valid with the coming of "the image of the invisible God" in the flesh. In fact, it's beyond "no longer valid", and actually directly overthrown, to the point where to refuse images of Jesus Christ is to deny the Incarnation, or else to dissolve Him and divide what God has joined together; John says this is the spirit of antichrist.
Note: I'm not going to argue the point beyond this. I'm saying this as an assertion, not a request for debate. Questions, I'll answer. Rhetoric? I have better things to do, like celebrating the Feast of the Annunciation of this very Incarnation to the Virgin Mary, which is today! Happy Feast, y'all!
To those objecting to the wearing of a cross: "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." (Or, as the song goes, "I will glory in the cross.")
To those objecting to the use of a crucifix: "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." And, "...before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently [i.e. according to the vision] set forth, crucified..."
And to those objecting to the depiction of Jesus as idolatry: This was thoroughly discussed at the 7th Ecumenical Council, and the theological underpinning of the practice found to be firmly rooted in the reality of -- and as a confession of faith in -- the Incarnation. The key/summary is that God actually gave (Ex. 20:22-23; Deut. 4:15-19, 23, 24) the reason for His prohibition of image-making under the Law, and that reason is no longer valid with the coming of "the image of the invisible God" in the flesh. In fact, it's beyond "no longer valid", and actually directly overthrown, to the point where to refuse images of Jesus Christ is to deny the Incarnation, or else to dissolve Him and divide what God has joined together; John says this is the spirit of antichrist.
Note: I'm not going to argue the point beyond this. I'm saying this as an assertion, not a request for debate. Questions, I'll answer. Rhetoric? I have better things to do, like celebrating the Feast of the Annunciation of this very Incarnation to the Virgin Mary, which is today! Happy Feast, y'all!
BeautifulAs to answering the OP:
To those objecting to the wearing of a cross: "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." (Or, as the song goes, "I will glory in the cross.")
To those objecting to the use of a crucifix: "For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." And, "...before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently [i.e. according to the vision] set forth, crucified..."
And to those objecting to the depiction of Jesus as idolatry: This was thoroughly discussed at the 7th Ecumenical Council, and the theological underpinning of the practice found to be firmly rooted in the reality of -- and as a confession of faith in -- the Incarnation. The key/summary is that God actually gave (Ex. 20:22-23; Deut. 4:15-19, 23, 24) the reason for His prohibition of image-making under the Law, and that reason is no longer valid with the coming of "the image of the invisible God" in the flesh. In fact, it's beyond "no longer valid", and actually directly overthrown, to the point where to refuse images of Jesus Christ is to deny the Incarnation, or else to dissolve Him and divide what God has joined together; John says this is the spirit of antichrist.
Note: I'm not going to argue the point beyond this. I'm saying this as an assertion, not a request for debate. Questions, I'll answer. Rhetoric? I have better things to do, like celebrating the Feast of the Annunciation of this very Incarnation to the Virgin Mary, which is today! Happy Feast, y'all!
- Status