I'm pretty sure if Christ is "separate" then God is too.

I'll be digging further.

Quote from the lying bigLet:
CLV Lv 22:3 Say to them: Throughout your generations, every man of all your seed who is coming near to the holy things which the sons of Israel are sanctifying to Yahweh, when his uncleanness is on him, that soul will be cut off from My presence: I am Yahweh.

It seems your KJV has let you down once again. He is talking about physical death here. Every soul is cut off from His presence. Even so...

CLV Ps 139:8 If I should climb to the heavens, You are there, And should I make my berth in the unseen, behold, You are there.

It's confusing if what is being intended "that soul will be cut off from My presence" means to be cut off at physical death - but that is not the intent.

When unclean the person was "cut off" - that was reversed when they were not unclean.

(Lev 22:6 KJV) The soul which hath touched any such shall be unclean until even, and shall not eat of the holy things, unless he wash his flesh with water.

(Lev 22:7 KJV) And when the sun is down, he shall be clean, and shall afterward eat of the holy things; because it is his food.

"The opposite of reconciliation at the Cross. Doesn't it?

Yes, the cross restores fellowship with God, the fellowship that Adam had with God in the "garden"

Maybe re-word that Rich, not sure what you mean..

There's an interesting statement in Hebrews:

(Heb 9:8 KJV) The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Even though we know Christ did enter in, look at what John says in the book of revelation:

(Rev 15:8 KJV) And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.

The "first tabernacle" was still standing when Hebrews was written.

Until it when *poof* in the war of 66-70 AD "no man was able to enter into the temple".

Question: "What was the significance of the temple veil being torn in two when Jesus died?"

Answer: During the lifetime of Jesus, the holy temple in Jerusalem was the center of Jewish religious life. The temple was the place where animal sacrifices were carried out and worship according to the Law of Moses was followed faithfully. Hebrews 9:1-9 tells us that in the temple a veil separated the Holy of Holies—the earthly dwelling place of God’s presence—from the rest of the temple where men dwelt. This signified that man was separated from God by sin (Isaiah 59:1-2). Only the high priest was permitted to pass beyond this veil once each year (Exodus 30:10; Hebrews 9:7) to enter into God's presence for all of Israel and make atonement for their sins (Leviticus 16).

Solomon's temple was 30 cubits high (1 Kings 6:2), but Herod had increased the height to 40 cubits, according to the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. There is uncertainty as to the exact measurement of a cubit, but it is safe to assume that this veil was somewhere near 60 feet high. An early Jewish tradition says that the veil was about four inches thick, but the Bible does not confirm that measurement. The book of Exodus teaches that this thick veil was fashioned from blue, purple and scarlet material and fine twisted linen.

The size and thickness of the veil makes the events occurring at the moment of Jesus’ death on the cross so much more momentous. “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom” (Matthew 27:50-51a).

So, what do we make of this? What significance does this torn veil have for us today? Above all, the tearing of the veil at the moment of Jesus' death dramatically symbolized that His sacrifice, the shedding of His own blood, was a sufficient atonement for sins. It signified that now the way into the Holy of Holies was open for all people, for all time, both Jew and Gentile.

When Jesus died, the veil was torn, and God moved out of that place never again to dwell in a temple made with hands (Acts 17:24). God was through with that temple and its religious system, and the temple and Jerusalem were left “desolate” (destroyed by the Romans) in A.D. 70, just as Jesus prophesied in Luke 13:35. As long as the temple stood, it signified the continuation of the Old Covenant. Hebrews 9:8-9 refers to the age that was passing away as the new covenant was being established (Hebrews 8:13).

In a sense, the veil was symbolic of Christ Himself as the only way to the Father (John 14:6). This is indicated by the fact that the high priest had to enter the Holy of Holies through the veil. Now Christ is our superior High Priest, and as believers in His finished work, we partake of His better priesthood. We can now enter the Holy of Holies through Him. Hebrews 10:19-20 says that the faithful enter into the sanctuary by the “blood of Jesus, by the new and living way which he opened for us through the veil, that is, through his flesh.” Here we see the image of Jesus’ flesh being torn for us just as He was tearing the veil for us.

The veil being torn from top to bottom is a fact of history. The profound significance of this event is explained in glorious detail in Hebrews. The things of the temple were shadows of things to come, and they all ultimately point us to Jesus Christ. He was the veil to the Holy of Holies, and through His death the faithful now have free access to God.

The veil in the temple was a constant reminder that sin renders humanity unfit for the presence of God. The fact that the sin offering was offered annually and countless other sacrifices repeated daily showed graphically that sin could not truly be atoned for or erased by mere animal sacrifices. Jesus Christ, through His death, has removed the barriers between God and man, and now we may approach Him with confidence and boldness (Hebrews 4:14-16).

Isna, how many times do I have to say it? I'm against Trump's wall. I would let all Mexicans in if they would agree to be guests and not apply for government assistance.

The Catholic Church is one organization that accepts anyone who wishes to join, anyone of any race, so long as they repent of their sins. Large numbers of people on all six continents are Catholic. Go to a Catholic Mass sometime, Isna, and you will see Irish, Italians, Polish, Filipinos, Africans, Hispanics, Koreans, Chinese---people from all over the world. It is a beautiful thing.

If they let a sinner like me join, they'll let anybody in.

If a child from Mexico---or anywhere else in the world---is born on Canadian soul, is that person automatically a Canadian citizen? Is Ted Cruz a Canadian citizen?

You don't have any problem with people coming in from other countries, having cbildren on Canadian soil, claiming that their children are Canadian citizens, and insisting that those children receive an education at Canadian taxpayers' expense, and being able to file for welfare at Canadian taxpayers' expense?

Time to address unfounded myths about immigrants

The OECD finds that employment for foreign-born Canadian citizens has gone up since 2008, while it has stalled for native-born citizens (see p.71 here). The employment rate for Canadian immigrants in 2012 was the third highest in the OECD. This shows that immigrants are quickly integrating into the labour force and putting their skills to work.

For that matter, it is worth noting that more than 50 per cent of Canadian immigrants are highly educated, putting Canada at the top among the OECD countries. As well, a significant number of the almost 100,000 foreign students visiting Canada each year decide to stay after getting a degree from one of our world-class universities (McGill, University of Toronto, UBC, etc.). Many other immigrants are also looking in Canada’s direction, attracted by job prospects and the open-arm culture for which Canadians are known.

One reason why foreign immigrants favour Canada as a destination is the labour mobility it offers. According to its latest Global Competitiveness Report published last month, the World Economic Forum ranks Canada as the world’s seventh most efficient labour market.

High labour-market efficiency means that workers are more likely to be allocated to their most effective use and provided with an environment where they are encouraged to give their best effort. On a macroeconomic level, this also means that the country’s work force is flexible enough to shift workers from one economic activity to another – for example, from factories in Quebec and Ontario to oil sands in Alberta – rapidly and at low cost. It also means that there are strong incentives in place for employees, promoting meritocracy and providing equity in the business environment.

Canada has gone to great lengths to liberalize its labour market, and it is paying off. Canada’s labour market now offers a great deal of mobility to its workers; it is quite easy for anyone to move from Montreal to Toronto, Calgary or Vancouver (and vice versa). As a former Quebec minister responsible for economic development and trade, let me tell you that I am proud to have had the opportunity to work with my provincial counterparts on internal trade agreements, fostering Canada’s economic ties, and ultimately strengthening the federation.

Positive implication on Canadian economic growth – and real estate

Canada’s strong economic performance since 2008 is explained by many factors, including well-capitalized banks, massive public infrastructure spending – and a strong influx of immigrants. Immigration last year explained two-thirds of Canada’s population growth of 1.2 per cent, well ahead of the 0.7 per cent and 0.3 per cent seen in the United States and the euro zone, respectively.

Why is this so important? Because without this immigration flow, Canada’s population aged between 20 and 44 years old would be declining. That cohort, which constitutes most of the labour force, is the one that creates new households, buys new houses, has children and pays the greater part of taxation revenue. Without immigration, Canada’s natural population growth would not be enough to sustain economic growth and welfare. Quebec, given its demographic structure, especially needs immigration to increase its labour force in the short term so as to sustain the costs of its social programs.

We also note that a large percentage of every province’s immigrants are in the 20-to-44 age group, meaning that the benefits of household formation are spread all across Canada. This helps explain why the housing market in Canada has been so resilient during the past five years.

I would not be against Mexican immigration if some provision could be made for not allowing them access to govenment freebies. And I am opposed to building a wall between Mexico and the U.S.

It seems mindya has gotten himself banned again. His loud-mouthed (a person who tends to talk too much in an offensive or tactless way) manner has again paid off.

beauty lurks upon the night,
i lost me teeth i look a fright,
if i'm not careful me dog may bite,
but i'll keep on sucking lemons

i'll jam a cossie under me frock, (swim togs cossie)
me girlfriend gets a tiny shock,
jump in amongst the sleepy flock,
it's time 4 sum romancin

I canna stand this tawdry bar ,
and there you even bloody are
a dancing there with Nungidar
still a bloody prancing

just waffling here

Don Johnson 12-jul-11