why do people think ot covenant are still active?

[Rhema]

You want to cling to the Old Covenant? Fine — but just remember what Jesus said: ‘This is My blood of the New Covenant, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’ (Matt. 26:28)

Bad translations that are based on church tradition lead to bad theology.

You have no idea what the blood is. And having dug your heals into convincing yourself that you're right, it's unfortunate that you shall stay in the darkness.

WHAT'S THE "THIS," GOC? WHAT WAS IN THE CUP?

Dare you even give a truthful answer?

Rhema

(I would point out that my previous post was before I saw you join the thread.)

 

[Rhema]

If animal sacrifices and temple ordinances are still in effect, then you’ve rejected the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29).

Animal sacrifices were NEVER in effect.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

You can rant all you like about Scofield, but you truly need to study the scriptures better.

God bless,
Rhema

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Bad translations that are based on church tradition lead to bad theology.

You have no idea what the blood is. And having dug your heals into convincing yourself that you're right, it's unfortunate that you shall stay in the darkness.

WHAT'S THE "THIS," GOC? WHAT WAS IN THE CUP?

Dare you even give a truthful answer?

Rhema

(I would point out that my previous post was before I saw you join the thread.)

Oh I’ll give you the answer — straight from the lips of the Messiah you claim to follow:

“This is My blood of the New Covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
— Matthew 26:28

What was in the cup, you ask?
The wine.
What did Jesus say the wine represented?
His blood.
Not a Levitical animal sacrifice.
Not a Mosaic ritual.
His blood. Shed once. For many. To establish the New Covenant.

So yes, I’ll cling to that.
Not to shadows and symbols.
Not to the blood of bulls and goats — which could never take away sin (Hebrews 10:4).
Not to an obsolete covenant that has vanished away (Hebrews 8:13).

You’re mocking the words of Christ Himself while hiding behind fake Scofield’s fan fiction.
Let’s be clear:
The Old Covenant is fulfilled. The New is in His blood.

So unless you plan to sacrifice a lamb tomorrow and rebuild a stone temple, stop pretending you're defending truth.
Because the Truth already told you — it is finished.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Animal sacrifices were NEVER in effect.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

You can rant all you like about Scofield, but you truly need to study the scriptures better.

God bless,
Rhema

Ah — so now you're denying that God ever instituted animal sacrifices?

Let’s walk that heresy into the light.
God literally commanded animal sacrifices all throughout the Torah:

“Now this is what you shall offer on the altar: two lambs a year old, day by day regularly.”
— Exodus 29:38

“And he shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.”
— Leviticus 1:4

“It is the blood that makes atonement by the life.”
— Leviticus 17:11

So no — you don’t get to cherry-pick one poetic verse from Jeremiah (which is clearly condemning empty ritual without obedience), then pretend the entire sacrificial system of Moses was just a suggestion.

That’s like quoting Jesus saying "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" and pretending He abolished justice, truth, and the cross.

Jeremiah 7:22 isn’t negating God’s commands — it’s condemning hypocritical worship without faith.

God gave the Law. He gave the sacrifices.
And then He sent His Son to fulfill them.

“Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” — John 1:29
“Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.” — Hebrews 9:22
“We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” — Hebrews 10:10

So here’s the real issue:
You don’t actually believe in the Cross.
You believe in rhetorical gymnastics and bad exegesis.

Jesus didn’t die to make temple sacrifices optional.
He died because they could never save you.

So if you're denying that God ever commanded sacrifices, you're not just rewriting scripture —
you're calling God a liar.

God bless?
Friend, you're going to need more than that.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

You can rant all you like about Scofield, but you truly need to study the scriptures better.

Coming from a brainwashed Evangelical Dispensationalist, that’s the most spectacular case of projection I’ve ever seen.
You’re defending a doctrine invented in the 1800s, propped up by footnotes, and funded by Oxford Press — and yet you think I’m the one who needs to study the scriptures better?

The early Church fathers didn’t believe a word of what you’re preaching.
Your theology didn’t exist for 1,800 years — but sure, I’m the one who’s confused.

 

[MedicBravo]

Last I checked Christians don't:

1. Sabbath Observance – Keeping the seventh day holy as a day of rest and worship (Exodus 20:8-11). Full Sabbath.
2. Feasts and Festivals – The Feast of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles (Leviticus 23).
3. Sacrificial System – Offering animal sacrifices for atonement and thanksgiving (Leviticus 1-7).
4. Circumcision – A physical sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Genesis 17:10-14). Numbers reduce more and more every year.
5. Purity Laws – Observing rituals for cleanliness, including washing and avoiding certain activities (Leviticus 15).
6. Prophetic Teachings – Following guidance from prophets who spoke on behalf of God.

God made all animals good to eat and COMMON SENSE, you wouldn't eat a lot of them.

The "argument" from the pagans and Left make them sound ignorant (not knowing) and stupid when they refuse to learn.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Last I checked Christians don't:

1. Sabbath Observance – Keeping the seventh day holy as a day of rest and worship (Exodus 20:8-11). Full Sabbath.
2. Feasts and Festivals – The Feast of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles (Leviticus 23).
3. Sacrificial System – Offering animal sacrifices for atonement and thanksgiving (Leviticus 1-7).
4. Circumcision – A physical sign of the covenant between God and Abraham (Genesis 17:10-14). Numbers reduce more and more every year.
5. Purity Laws – Observing rituals for cleanliness, including washing and avoiding certain activities (Leviticus 15).
6. Prophetic Teachings – Following guidance from prophets who spoke on behalf of God.

God made all animals good to eat and COMMON SENSE, you wouldn't eat a lot of them.

The "argument" from the pagans and Left make them sound ignorant (not knowing) and stupid when they refuse to learn.

Yes, I know. It’s insane. But that’s exactly what dispensationalists do. They’ve been so thoroughly brainwashed by Scofield’s heretical footnotes that they actually think God has two separate peoples, two separate plans, and two separate covenants running side by side — one for the "church" and one for "ethnic Israel," even if that Israel rejects Christ.

They end up sounding like modern-day Pharisees, clinging to shadows that pointed to Christ while ignoring the Light that fulfilled them. They defend temple sacrifices, seventh-day Sabbaths, and Levitical ordinances — not because they believe Christians should follow them, but because they believe Christ-rejecting Jewish coverts are still under the Old Covenant and don’t need the Gospel yet.

Newsflash lurkers: the entire New Testament exists to make one thing clear — the Old Covenant is over.

Jesus is our Sabbath (Hebrews 4).
The feasts were shadows of Christ (Colossians 2).
Animal sacrifices are done forever (Hebrews 10).
Circumcision is of the heart (Romans 2).
The purity laws were fulfilled and rendered obsolete (Mark 7, Acts 10).
And every prophet pointed to Jesus — not some future Jewish state.

Hebrews 8:13 couldn’t be clearer: “By calling this covenant ‘new,’ He has made the first one obsolete.”

So no — Christians don’t follow the Old Covenant. We’re not supposed to. That covenant was a temporary guardian pointing to Christ. Now that the Messiah has come, we live in the reality, not the rehearsal.

The sad irony is that the same dispensationalists who scream “you’re mixing covenants” are the ones still acting like the Old Covenant is alive and well for Jews. That’s not Christianity — that’s Scofield’s Zionist fan fiction dressed up like theology.

 

[Rhema]

Oh I’ll give you the answer — straight from the lips of the Messiah you claim to follow:

“This is My blood of the New Covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
— Matthew 26:28

If you believe that your English translation is "straight from the lips" of Jesus, you've got worse problems than I thought, friend.

Here is what Jesus said according to the Greek Manuscripts, which are actually translations of the original Hebrew. Had you known that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew? Or am I just talking with another ignorant uneducated person?

τουτο γαρ εστιν το αιμα μου της διαθηκης το περι πολλων εκχυνομενον εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων​

— Matthew 26:28

Not to be combative, but truly, can you understand that the "scripture" you've been reading is missing the word INTO? I highlighted the word in RED so you can see it clearly. Or did you not even read my post, let alone understand it?

But since you don't have the decency enough to be honest and admit that you can't read Greek, I have to ask Why? Why is this? What has convinced you that YOU are so superior in your interpretations? As of right now, your posts show bullying and narcissistic tendencies. I really hope this is not the case, but it doesn't look like you can have civil academic conversation.

What did Jesus say the wine represented?
His blood.

No.

No he didn't. It's not hard to follow unless one is severely brainwashed. He did not say, "My blood is represented by the wine." That's nowhere to be found in any manuscript.

But you are absolutely right (finally) when saying that WINE was in the cup, but Jesus never used the word wine to represent his physical blood. Jesus said the wine is the blood of HIS covenant. So what did Jesus say about wine?

Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.​

- Matthew 9:17 KJV

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.​

- Mark 2:22 KJV

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.​

- Luke 5:37 KJV

You can spit out your hatred and vitriol all you like, you can stomp and fume, but AS ACTUALLY written, true disciples know what New Wine is...

Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:​

- Acts 2:13-17 KJV

It truly isn't hard to understand that the "blood" of Jesus' covenant is the New Wine of the Holy Spirit that is POURED INTO many after their sins are forgiven.

The Gospel of Jesus is not a Gospel of offering up a human blood sacrifice to appease the gods (okay just one God) like the Aztecs and the Romans, and all the other pagan religions.

Then again, I've not run into that many Christians who were actually anointed with the Holy Spirit.

More later,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Ah — so now you're denying that God ever instituted animal sacrifices?

Let’s walk that heresy into the light.
God literally commanded animal sacrifices all throughout the Torah:

Ah -- so now you're denying that God spoke his word through the prophet Jeremiah???

You're problem isn't with me. It's your own problem denying the prophets.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

So let's walk your heresy into the light (thinking that God wants a human blood sacrifice to pay for sins).

Whoever slaughters an ox is like one who kills a human being; whoever sacrifices a lamb, like one who breaks a dog's neck; whoever presents a grain offering, like one who offers swine's blood; whoever makes a memorial offering of frankincense, like one who blesses an idol. These have chosen their own ways, and in their abominations they take delight;​

- Isaiah 66:3 NRSV

And you're trying to tell me that God wanted animal sacrifices? That you know better than Isaiah?

You've got a lot to learn.

Sacrifice and offering you do not desire, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required.​

- Psalms 40:6 NRSV

So now you're calling David a heretic???

"With what shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?​

- Micah 6:6-8 NRSV

Amazing that you're "so knowledgeable" as to call Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah and even David heretics.

Hopefully you know that Jesus shut down the entire system of blood sacrifices and burnt offerings in the Temple, commanding that my house shall be a house of prayer. And you would turn the Messiah himself into a human blood sacrifice?

Jesus, JESUS HIMSELF, never once said that he would become your animal sacrifice.

God literally commanded animal sacrifices all throughout the Torah:

God literally says that the TORAH of Jeremiah's time had been made into a lie.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the TORAH of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Understand, though, that I'm not denying that your OT commands animal sacrifice. You just don't understand that by the time of Jeremiah, nobody had the TORAH that God gave to Moses. It had been turned into a lie, just as Jeremiah said. What lie? Jeremiah already told you -

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

Your problem isn't with me. Your problem is with Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, David, and Jesus (Jesus himself).

And Moses?

This is why one really needs to study in the original languages and reject the traditions of your religion. And I'm not asking anything more of you than you would ask a Roman Catholic.

Question... When the Hebrews arrived at Mt. Sinai, who offered up animal sacrifices? Moses?

No. No he didn't.

So who first offered up animal sacrifices? Moses Father-in-Law, Jethro, a priest of Midian (not even a priest of Jehovah).

Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for his people Israel, how the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt. ... Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, came into the wilderness where Moses was encamped at the mountain of God, bringing Moses' sons and wife to him.​

- Exodus 18:1, 5 NRSV

Jethro, a priest of Midian who didn't even believe that YHWH was the most high of gods, saying...

Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods, because he delivered the people from the Egyptians, when they dealt arrogantly with them."​

- Exodus 18:11 NRSV

That's the guy who did the burnt offerings and sacrifices. (Had you known this?)

And Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law in the presence of God.​

- Exodus 18:12 NRSV

Moses didn't give burnt offerings and sacrifices to God, his father-in-law did. Unfortunately we also know that Moses listened to his father-in-law:

So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said.​

- Exodus 18:24 NRSV

So just who is the heretic here? You? A person who doesn't understand that the priest of Midian influenced what Moses believed? Or me? A person who follows the word of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, David, and Jesus?

Scofield wasn't the first person to come along and turn the Bible into a lie, but at least he did it from the margins.

PLEASE, I beg you to spend the time and carefully read through these scriptures without having preconceived notions. Spend the time. Read the texts. But I doubt you will. It will cause pain to come into the light when you think you already are. And as I've said before, you'll need to read the original languages. And while I hope that God will free your mind, I don't think you'll let Him.

Agape,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

Coming from a brainwashed Evangelical Dispensationalist, that’s the most spectacular case of projection I’ve ever seen.

Unfortunately, this just shows your own ignorance. I am not and Evangelical, I am not a Dispensationalist, nor am I brainwashed, having learned directly from the hand of God over decades, being guided by the Holy Spirit to read and understand the scriptures in their original language.

But I get it. You NEED to condemn me and turn me into an enemy because you do show the signs of being brainwashed: posting trite rejoinders instead of any well reasoned rebuttable. Emotional knee-jerk reactions instead of taking the time to pray and study. It must be pure chaos to be up inside your brain. And I actually pity you.

But there is one question you should ask yourself...

How can you forgive a debt that's been paid?

Agape,
Rhema

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

If you believe that your English translation is "straight from the lips" of Jesus, you've got worse problems than I thought, friend.

Here is what Jesus said according to the Greek Manuscripts, which are actually translations of the original Hebrew. Had you known that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew? Or am I just talking with another ignorant uneducated person?

τουτο γαρ εστιν το αιμα μου της διαθηκης το περι πολλων εκχυνομενον εις αφεσιν αμαρτιων​

— Matthew 26:28

Not to be combative, but truly, can you understand that the "scripture" you've been reading is missing the word INTO? I highlighted the word in RED so you can see it clearly. Or did you not even read my post, let alone understand it?

But since you don't have the decency enough to be honest and admit that you can't read Greek, I have to ask Why? Why is this? What has convinced you that YOU are so superior in your interpretations? As of right now, your posts show bullying and narcissistic tendencies. I really hope this is not the case, but it doesn't look like you can have civil academic conversation.


No.

No he didn't. It's not hard to follow unless one is severely brainwashed. He did not say, "My blood is represented by the wine." That's nowhere to be found in any manuscript.

But you are absolutely right (finally) when saying that WINE was in the cup, but Jesus never used the word wine to represent his physical blood. Jesus said the wine is the blood of HIS covenant. So what did Jesus say about wine?

Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.​

- Matthew 9:17 KJV

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.​

- Mark 2:22 KJV

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.​

- Luke 5:37 KJV

You can spit out your hatred and vitriol all you like, you can stomp and fume, but AS ACTUALLY written, true disciples know what New Wine is...

Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:​

- Acts 2:13-17 KJV

It truly isn't hard to understand that the "blood" of Jesus' covenant is the New Wine of the Holy Spirit that is POURED INTO many after their sins are forgiven.

The Gospel of Jesus is not a Gospel of offering up a human blood sacrifice to appease the gods (okay just one God) like the Aztecs and the Romans, and all the other pagan religions.

Then again, I've not run into that many Christians who were actually anointed with the Holy Spirit.

More later,
Rhema

You just told me Jesus’ blood wasn’t poured out for the forgiveness of sins — even after I quoted Him saying exactly that.

Then you tried to redefine the wine as “Holy Spirit juice” and tossed out 2,000 years of Christian doctrine in favor of Gnostic metaphors and Greek word games.

That’s not theology. That’s sleight of hand. That’s blasphemy.

The blood of Jesus isn’t poetic metaphor. It’s not fermented allegory. It’s the atoning sacrifice of the Lamb of God, poured out exactly as He said — for the remission of sins.

If you’re mocking that — or replacing it with mystical allegory — you’re not honoring Christ.
You’re trampling His blood underfoot and insulting the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29).

You tried to turn the Last Supper into a Pentecost metaphor, rewrote the meaning of Christ’s death, and then called it “revelation.”

What are you even doing here?
Besides misleading sheep 24/7 with your Gnostic nonsense, pseudo-Greek flexing, and arrogant word games?

You’re not defending the Gospel — you’re undermining it.
You twist the blood of Christ into metaphor. You treat the cross like an embarrassment. You dance around the clearest words Jesus ever spoke — not to enlighten, but to deceive.

You’re not here to build up the Body. You’re here to confuse, derail, and sow doubt.
The early Church had a name for people like you: wolves in sheep’s clothing.

You don’t need a lexicon.
You need repentance.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Ah -- so now you're denying that God spoke his word through the prophet Jeremiah???

You're problem isn't with me. It's your own problem denying the prophets.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

So let's walk your heresy into the light (thinking that God wants a human blood sacrifice to pay for sins).

Whoever slaughters an ox is like one who kills a human being; whoever sacrifices a lamb, like one who breaks a dog's neck; whoever presents a grain offering, like one who offers swine's blood; whoever makes a memorial offering of frankincense, like one who blesses an idol. These have chosen their own ways, and in their abominations they take delight;​

- Isaiah 66:3 NRSV

And you're trying to tell me that God wanted animal sacrifices? That you know better than Isaiah?

You've got a lot to learn.

Sacrifice and offering you do not desire, but you have given me an open ear. Burnt offering and sin offering you have not required.​

- Psalms 40:6 NRSV

So now you're calling David a heretic???

"With what shall I come before the LORD, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?​

- Micah 6:6-8 NRSV

Amazing that you're "so knowledgeable" as to call Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah and even David heretics.

Hopefully you know that Jesus shut down the entire system of blood sacrifices and burnt offerings in the Temple, commanding that my house shall be a house of prayer. And you would turn the Messiah himself into a human blood sacrifice?

Jesus, JESUS HIMSELF, never once said that he would become your animal sacrifice.


God literally says that the TORAH of Jeremiah's time had been made into a lie.

How can you say, "We are wise, and the TORAH of the LORD is with us," when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?​

- Jeremiah 8:8 NRSV

Understand, though, that I'm not denying that your OT commands animal sacrifice. You just don't understand that by the time of Jeremiah, nobody had the TORAH that God gave to Moses. It had been turned into a lie, just as Jeremiah said. What lie? Jeremiah already told you -

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

- Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV

Your problem isn't with me. Your problem is with Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, David, and Jesus (Jesus himself).

And Moses?

This is why one really needs to study in the original languages and reject the traditions of your religion. And I'm not asking anything more of you than you would ask a Roman Catholic.

Question... When the Hebrews arrived at Mt. Sinai, who offered up animal sacrifices? Moses?

No. No he didn't.

So who first offered up animal sacrifices? Moses Father-in-Law, Jethro, a priest of Midian (not even a priest of Jehovah).

Jethro, the priest of Midian, Moses' father-in-law, heard of all that God had done for Moses and for his people Israel, how the LORD had brought Israel out of Egypt. ... Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, came into the wilderness where Moses was encamped at the mountain of God, bringing Moses' sons and wife to him.​

- Exodus 18:1, 5 NRSV

Jethro, a priest of Midian who didn't even believe that YHWH was the most high of gods, saying...

Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods, because he delivered the people from the Egyptians, when they dealt arrogantly with them."​

- Exodus 18:11 NRSV

That's the guy who did the burnt offerings and sacrifices. (Had you known this?)

And Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, brought a burnt offering and sacrifices to God; and Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law in the presence of God.​

- Exodus 18:12 NRSV

Moses didn't give burnt offerings and sacrifices to God, his father-in-law did. Unfortunately we also know that Moses listened to his father-in-law:

So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said.​

- Exodus 18:24 NRSV

So just who is the heretic here? You? A person who doesn't understand that the priest of Midian influenced what Moses believed? Or me? A person who follows the word of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Micah, David, and Jesus?

Scofield wasn't the first person to come along and turn the Bible into a lie, but at least he did it from the margins.

PLEASE, I beg you to spend the time and carefully read through these scriptures without having preconceived notions. Spend the time. Read the texts. But I doubt you will. It will cause pain to come into the light when you think you already are. And as I've said before, you'll need to read the original languages. And while I hope that God will free your mind, I don't think you'll let Him.

Agape,
Rhema

You just told me God never commanded sacrifices — while ignoring the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

You quoted Jeremiah 7:22 out of context (like every heretic since Marcion) and pretended God’s rebuke of hypocritical ritualism means He never issued the sacrificial system in the first place. Which makes sense — since your theology depends on rewriting the entire Old Testament to fit your Gnostic narrative.

Let’s be clear:

God commanded sacrifice (Leviticus 1–7)
God accepted sacrifice (Genesis 4, Exodus 12, 2 Chronicles 7:1)
And Jesus fulfilled the sacrifice (Hebrews 10:10, Matthew 26:28)

You said Jesus never offered Himself as a sacrifice?
Funny — He said the opposite.

“This is My blood of the new covenant, poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” — Matthew 26:28

You don’t follow Jesus.
You follow a clever lie dressed in Greek and sprinkled with smugness.

You slander Moses, you twist the prophets, you pretend the Torah is a lie — and then you have the audacity to say you follow Christ?
You’re not exposing deception.
You are the deception.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Unfortunately, this just shows your own ignorance. I am not and Evangelical, I am not a Dispensationalist, nor am I brainwashed, having learned directly from the hand of God over decades, being guided by the Holy Spirit to read and understand the scriptures in their original language.

But I get it. You NEED to condemn me and turn me into an enemy because you do show the signs of being brainwashed: posting trite rejoinders instead of any well reasoned rebuttable. Emotional knee-jerk reactions instead of taking the time to pray and study. It must be pure chaos to be up inside your brain. And I actually pity you.

But there is one question you should ask yourself...

How can you forgive a debt that's been paid?

Agape,
Rhema

You claim you’re not brainwashed, yet you deny the Gospel, elevate your private revelation above scripture, twist the prophets, and accuse Jesus of never offering Himself as a sacrifice.

But sure — let’s pretend you’re the humble one here, “taught by the hand of God,” superior to the apostles, prophets, and every martyr who gave their life to defend the very Gospel you now redefine.

You say “How can you forgive a debt that’s been paid?”
Easy: Because payment enables forgiveness — it doesn’t replace it.

“In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” — Ephesians 1:7

The blood paid the price.
Faith and repentance apply the gift.

“God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, to be received by faith.” — Romans 3:25

So no — you’re not above correction. You’re not a divine translator.
You’re not a prophet.
You’re just another voice with a bookshelf full of mirrors.

 

[Garee]

I'm rather sure that my point was "Which covenant?" since the book of Hebrews doesn't specify the Mosaic Covenant (i.e. the covenant with Israel). Yet we have the testimony of Jesus:

Do not think that I came to annul the TORAH, but to FIX it (make perfect, or fill in / fill up). Truly I say unto you that until heaven and earth depart, not one letter or dot shall be abolished from the TORAH or the Prophets, because all will COME TO PASS. He who shall transgress one word of these commandments and shall teach others (to do so), shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever upholds and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.- Matthew 5:17-19 Howard (revised)

I find it interesting that Paul called himself the "least."

Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;- Ephesians 3:8 KJV

Now remember, Matthew was written after the resurrection, and after 40 days of Jesus teaching the disciples right before the ascension. One would think that the author of Matthew would have made a notation if something so important as the law passing out of existence had occurred. Jesus gave no indication that such would happen.

Can't measure faith the unseen eternal by looking at the temporal dying.

The words Paul spoke were not of his own self. Why venerate dying flesh and blood? Why make Jesus the Son of man into a circus seal

John 4:48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

You could try reading your bible.... It's somewhat obvious that the crucifixion came before the resurrection, no? And how could the book of Hebrews be written before these things happened?

Truly, Bill, I don't understand what your gripe is this time. (Though I rarely do.)

Agape,
Rhema

The demonstration of the finished work Christ as a lamb slain from the foundation the six days he did work. Hebrews records the result. The time of reformation had come. Hebrew 9

A pattern for all reformations whenever two or three (a family) gathers under the authority of sola scriptura.

 

[Rhema]

You just told me Jesus’ blood wasn’t poured out for the forgiveness of sins — even after I quoted Him saying exactly that.

But you didn't quote saying that Jesus his blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sin. Speak with any tenth grade English teacher. Your claim cannot be justified by the words, as the words are written.

You need to read again. The Wine is poured out INTO those who have had their sins forgiven.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.​

(Acts 2:38 KJV)

The gift of the Holy Ghost described in Acts 2 is the New Wine of the covenant of Jesus.

Then you tried to redefine the wine as “Holy Spirit juice”

Do you know you're a nasty piece of work? Just nasty. And you know why? By using the word "juice." You did that, and that's a nasty thing to say. And you should repent before God for saying "Holy Spirit Juice." That you would belittle and even ridicule the sanctity of the Holy Spirit by adding the word juice. That's a horrible thing to say, just terrible, and if you have no shame about saying such a thing, you are not one of His.

I didn't "redefine" the wine. Jesus taught about the New Wine, and the second chapter of Acts describes what happens when believers (real ones) are filled with the New Wine of the Spirit. In communion, Jesus said that the blood of his covenant was THIS... the Wine that is in the cup - the Wine - poured-out INTO many when they repent.

tossed out 2,000 years of Christian doctrine in favor of Gnostic metaphors and Greek word games.

You're just pissed that you have a mutilated translation, thinking you can make sense of it. If you want 2,000 years of Christian doctrine, then you'd better join the Greek Orthodox Church or the Church of the East (started by the Apostle Thomas) but don't go claiming to others that you understand and preach the Gospel of Jesus. Because you don't. And you don't know squat about Gnostic Theology either, because NOTHING can be found in Gnostic teaching that the Wine of Communion represents the Holy Spirit. You just look like an idiot when you spout of unfounded ideas.

And to dismiss a valid translation concern as a game? You think translation is a game? You have no clue. What you do have is a malignant Bible that is missing the word INTO. And you're upset because you're stumped since you don't know enough to even provide a rational rebuttal. I'm used to it. Christians having emotional meltdowns because they don't know any better. It's a dang shame.

It’s the atoning sacrifice of the Lamb of God,

I am stunned that you preach a religion that has a god who demands to be given a human blood sacrifice as an atonement offering.

So where did Jesus Himself ever say that HE would be your atoning sacrifice as the Lamb of God ????

Because I don't think you know the Teachings of Jesus very well. But I might be wrong, so... put up... answer the question. (Bet you can't.)

Gnostic nonsense, pseudo-Greek flexing, and arrogant word games?

An arrogant word game is spewing out terms like "Gnostic nonsense" and "pseudo-Greek Flexing." A person resorts to such embittered blather when they deep down know that they're wrong. But from what I can tell at this point, your Faith is nothing different than the Aztecs or Pagan Romans who offer up a human blood sacrifice as an atonement to God.

You’re not defending the Gospel — you’re undermining it.

Your Gospel, sure. Because your Gospel is not the Gospel that Jesus taught. What was the Way that Jesus taught that one's sins would be forgiven? I don't think you know. I don't think you can post a concise explanation about what JESUS taught with regards to the forgiveness of sin. (I can.)

You twist the blood of Christ into metaphor.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is hardly metaphor. It's real, and it comes with real evidence.

For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. ... But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.​

(Acts 1:5, 8 KJV)

So what power do YOU have? I mean seriously. Millions of people claim to be baptized with the Holy Ghost and yet have Nothing - NO power - at all. And I don't think you do either.

You quoted Jeremiah 7:22 out of context (like every heretic since Marcion) and pretended God’s rebuke of hypocritical ritualism means He never issued the sacrificial system in the first place. Which makes sense — since your theology depends on rewriting the entire Old Testament to fit your Gnostic narrative.

And here lies the evil tricks of the true heretic. To accuse someone of taking a clear and concise statement "out of context." And then adding in words to scripture to paint a context that cannot be found in the text. Jeremiah 7:22 says absolutely nothing about "hypocritical ritualism." You added in those words. And that's true evil.

The verse means EXACTLY what it says:

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

(Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV)

Plain as day, no explanation or spin needed. God never spoke to the Hebrews nor did God ever give any command to the Hebrews concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

(Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV)

Can you be honest and admit that you never even read this verse before? I don't think you can be honest. And the evil I see is you trying to explain away what the Prophet Jeremiah clearly proclaimed with some nonsense about a rebuke of hypocritical ritualism.

You should read this verse over and over, ten or twenty times a day for a month until the truth of the ACTUAL words sinks into your head, instead of inventing excuses as to why it cannot mean what it says.

GOC - it says what it says, In Hebrew, in Greek, and in English as best put by the NRSV -

For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices.​

(Jeremiah 7:22 NRSV)

For I spoke not to your fathers, and commanded them not in the day wherein I brought them up out of the land of Egypt, concerning whole-burnt-offerings and sacrifice:​

(Jeremiah 7:22 Brenton- LXX)

But I see from your replies that you are one of those persons imprisoned in your religious traditions and cannot read scripture as it is written.

May God free you to read the words as written,
Rhema

 

[Rhema]

You don’t need a lexicon.

You do.

 

[Rhema]

You say “How can you forgive a debt that’s been paid?”
Easy: Because payment enables forgiveness — it doesn’t replace it.

That REALLY doesn't make any sense at all. How old are you? Ever taken out a loan where you are in debt to a bank? School loan? Car loan? A mortgage perhaps?

Go down to your banker, and PAY off your debt and then tell them that this "enables" the bank to forgive you. They will look at you like an idiot, because you just said something idiotic that doesn't make sense.

A debt can be discharged by one of two means. It can be paid OR forgiven. If it's paid, then there is nothing left to Forgive - because it was paid. If the debt is forgiven, it means that it wasn't paid, but rather discharged and the debt is no longer owed.

You need to go talk with some smart people about this.

Seriously, dude, you really think that you can pay somebody to forgive you? That's not true forgiveness. That's a discounted debt payment.

I'm now wondering just who I am talking to.... your Avatar says you're 54 years old, but I'm thinking no college right? Let me know. It will help me to structure my posts so you can understand them better.

Agape,
Rhema

 

[Garee]

You're just pissed that you have a mutilated translation, thinking you can make sense of it. If you want 2,000 years of Christian doctrine, then you'd better join the Greek Orthodox Church or the Church of the East (started by the Apostle Thomas) but don't go claiming to others that you understand and preach the Gospel of Jesus. Because you don't. And you don't know squat about Gnostic Theology either, because NOTHING can be found in Gnostic teaching that the Wine of Communion represents the Holy Spirit. You just look like an idiot when you spout of unfounded ideas.

Mutilated translation (started by the Apostle Thomas)?

The Greek Orthodox just like the Roman Catholic are together an extension of the Pharisees with Sadducees. Two religions that have no salvation. Just a continued suffering.

In that way not all of the of the Pharisees with Sadducees resisted the first century reformation under sola scriptura (all things written in the law and prophets)

They both teach that a queen mother named after our blessed sister in the Lord Mary of heaven alone received the fulness of grace the whole cost of salvation. While the rest of the world a unknow remnant of God's Grace (purification after death) .In that way Catholics with a literal fire and Greek orthodox not literal fire .Again (purification after death).

The living word infallibly (1 Corinthians 11:19) informs us there must be heresies (matters of personal opinions among us ) called sects just as long as they do not do despite to the fulness of grace (the entire cost of salvation)

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Those who look to a queen mother of heaven teach the normal persecution of Christ who indwells the Christians sons of God makes up for Christ's inability to save as they claim it does work only with the queen of hell .

Colossians 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

 

[Garee]

But you didn't quote saying that Jesus his blood was poured out for the forgiveness of sin. Speak with any tenth grade English teacher. Your claim cannot be justified by the words, as the words are written.

You need to read again. The Wine is poured out INTO those who have had their sins forgiven.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.(Acts 2:38 KJV)

The gift of the Holy Ghost described in Acts 2 is the New Wine of the covenant of Jesus

Blood without the spiritual essence of life is dead it returns to the field of clay from where it was formed. The spirit returns to the Father of all spirit life

While the life of the flesh is in the blood that life is unseen spiritual. God is Spirit. He pours out his doctrines called the water of the word on dying mankind in jeopardy of his own Holy Spirit life. Called to "drink the blood" in the John 6 parable.

Using all forms of water to represent the pouring out of His Holy Spirt. Even sweat and spit in parables

Deuteronomy 3232 Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:

Ephesians 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Wine as blood or life of the grapes.

Genesis 49:11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes:

2 Samuel 23:16-18And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord.
;And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood (the water turned to the blood of the grapes called wine) of the men (Holy Spirit) that went in jeopardy of (His Holy Spirit life) their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men.(three denotes the end of a matter )

Water and blood are used together many times to represent the unseen work of the Holy Spirit

Exodus 4:9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.

Water mixed with dry land "clay" for the Potter. Out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.(clay)

Exodus 7:17 Thus saith the Lord, In this thou shalt know that I am the Lord: behold, I will smite with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood.

In the parable below the Holy Spirit used sweat to show the work of the Holy Father giving His Spirit life in jeopardy of his own Spirit life

He gives us little of that wok of his faith or labor of love calling sons of God Ye of little faith (power) Plenty to please Him.

Luke 22:44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.(returning to dust )

 

[B-A-C]

he demonstration of the finished work Christ as a lamb slain from the foundation the six days he did work. Hebrews records the result. The time of reformation had come. Hebrew 9

But even though His work was finished, some didn't make it.

Heb 4:1 Therefore, let us fear if, while a promise remains of entering His rest, any one of you may seem to have come short of it.
Heb 4:2 For indeed we have had good news preached to us, just as they also; but the word they heard did not profit them, because it was not united by faith in those who heard.
Heb 4:3 For we who have believed enter that rest, just as He has said, "AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH, THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST," although His works were finished from the foundation of the world.
Heb 4:4 For He has said somewhere concerning the seventh day: "AND GOD RESTED ON THE SEVENTH DAY FROM ALL HIS WORKS";
Heb 4:5 and again in this passage, "THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST."
Heb 4:6 Therefore, since it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly had good news preached to them failed to enter because of disobedience,