WT March 15, 2010 - Page 27 (page 3)

agonus

"make the mistake of explaining it"

Heh, you're right J... actually trying to explain that crap would be a bigger mistake than saying, "Look, just believe it because we say so."

hamsterbait

Can anybody find a scripture that ACTUALLY says "mediator of the covenant"explicitly referring to Christ?

I can only find "Mediator between God and Man"

Since the annointed are (purportedly) human, this means them, not the race of all humanity in general. (evidently)

Just because the scripture does not say he ate and drank is no proof of their "evident£ claim.

The Bible not once mentions Christ peeing, crapping, sneezing of coughing. EVIDENTLY he did not do these things.

HB

Hebrews 8:6 (New American Standard Bible)

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the (A) mediator of (B) a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

My best guess is that they are saying that he would have eaten the bread and drunk the wine at the Seder, but the "Lord's evening meal" was something new and separate after the Seder, and that "evidently" he did not partake of that 2nd round of bread & wine.

As has been noted above, "evidently" is code for "the Bible doesn't say, nor even hint, at the matter, but it is convenient for us to speculate about this so that it fits in with our doctrine."

notverylikely

I don't think dismissing the traitor is anywhere in the Bible. That's another Dub "evidently" conclusion.

Matthew and Mark say he dismissed Judas and then instituted the ritual. John says it was after the ritual. Evidently, John meant that Jesus dismissed Judas, but that he forgot his 30 pieces of silver and returned for it, and upon thinking of a witty joke, was in the room with the 11 remaining apostles but did not partake.

Mary

"Jesus is the Mediator of that covenant, not a participant. As the Mediator, he evidently did not partake of the emblems."

That must mean that Jesus is of the "other sheeple" class if he didn't partake of the emblems.

Seriously though, this is really retarded. As Moshe already mentioned, Jesus was celebrating the Jewish Sedar. And, being a Jew himself, of course he participated. The scripture in Mark tells us that Jesus participated in it:

"...Say to the owner of the house he enters, 'The Teacher asks: Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?"(Mark 14:14-15)

Also, I'm not aware of any scripture that states there were two meals that night. While there's no doubt Jesus started something new with the bread and wine, I've always just read the passages to mean that during the Passover ritual, he passed around the bread and wine.

Where do they come up with this shit?

undercover

I remember them teaching that Jesus ate Passover supper together with the disciples. Then AfTER the passover meal He performed this new ritual ,after Judas had been excused .

That's how they push it alright, but it doesn't agree with the actual scriptures. There is no indication that Judas left between the Passover and the new Lord's Evening Meal... Hell, there's no indication that there was two meals. But the WTS can't have Judas at the event and they can't have him partaking or it kills the whole premise of how important the emblems are for the annointed only. So, they "intrepreted" it in a way that aligns with their doctrine.

And now, with no proof from the scriptures, they're trying to imply that not even Jesus partook.

I tell ya, this religion is getting more and more out there. I can't tell if the leadership is really delusional and they actually believe that they do have Holy Spirit or if they just have the balls to say whatever necessary to keep their lies in place and all God's little children will believe it...maybe a combination of both.

boyzone

This is daft. As a Jew, Jesus partook of the Passover as the scriptures already posted have indicated. But before eating and drinking the passover meal together, Jesus gave the emblems a new meaning and significance relating to his blood and body.

And just because he didn't need to take on this new meaning of the emblems for himself, he did need to take them as part of Passover.

Jesus also didn't need to get baptised, but he did to set the example for others.

snowbird

Daft is the word.

Based on their logic, there would have also been no need for Jesus to observe the Passover - heck He is the Passover - but, observe it He did!

1 Corinthians 5:7 The Messiah, our Passover Lamb, has already been sacrificed for the Passover meal ... MSG

Sheesh!

Sylvia

pirata

Doesn't the fact that Jesus basically said " I shall by no means drink anymore of the product of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” immediately after they drank the wine indicate that he also drank it?

WT March 15, 2010 - Page 27