Maybe Moses was invented by the Rabbis ?

[BukiRob]

Conversion isn't in question. It is what they converted to. It wasn't Judaism, as that did not exist. It wasn't about religion at all. Look at what Ruth said when she joined Naomi.

Ruth 1:16
And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:
​

That is conversion. Becoming part of the nation of Israel; a subject of Yahweh and all the laws he commanded.

You are arguing semantics. You were either Jewish (an Israelite from one of the 12 tribes) or you were goyim. Adonai's covenant existed ONLY with Y'Israel. If you were goyim and you wanted to be in covenant relationship with G-d you had to (if you were male) become circumscribed and begin to keep Torah.

This is what the Acts 15 debate is all about! The men from Judah were saying Goyim's could NOT be saved!

 

[Truthfrees]

Conversion isn't in question. It is what they converted to. It wasn't Judaism, as that did not exist. It wasn't about religion at all. Look at what Ruth said when she joined Naomi.

Ruth 1:16
And Ruth said, Intreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God:
​

That is conversion. Becoming part of the nation of Israel; a subject of Yahweh and all the laws he commanded.

This is an excellent point.

This is exactly the work of Yeshua in ratifying the Re-New-ed covenant with His blood.

Yeshua and Paul attest to the fact that we've become a part of the nation of Israel, the chosen family YHWH wants to use to spread HIS love and truth.

You were either Jewish (an Israelite from one of the 12 tribes) or you were goyim. Adonai's covenant existed ONLY with Y'Israel. If you were goyim and you wanted to be in covenant relationship with G-d you had to (if you were male) become circumscribed and begin to keep Torah.

This is what the Acts 15 debate is all about! The men from Judah were saying Goyim's could NOT be saved!

Absolutely. This is all very true. And in every way compatible with pat34lee's statement.

 

[pat34lee]

You are arguing semantics. You were either Jewish (an Israelite from one of the 12 tribes) or you were goyim. Adonai's covenant existed ONLY with Y'Israel. If you were goyim and you wanted to be in covenant relationship with G-d you had to (if you were male) become circumscribed and begin to keep Torah.

This is what the Acts 15 debate is all about! The men from Judah were saying Goyim's could NOT be saved!

It isn't just a word game. All of the tribes are not Jews. That is like saying all Americans are Texans. All Jews are part of Israel. So are the other tribes. Judaism in OT times was not the religion, but the people left after the Northern Kingdom was dispersed.

In Acts 15, it was not about being saved, but congregating with gentiles, a no-no. The Judaizers wanted the new believers to convert to Rabbinic Judaism and be subject to all rabbinic traditions.

 

[Lulav]

It isn't just a word game. All of the tribes are not Jews. That is like saying all Americans are Texans. All Jews are part of Israel. So are the other tribes. Judaism in OT times was not the religion, but the people left after the Northern Kingdom was dispersed.

In Acts 15, it was not about being saved, but congregating with gentiles, a no-no. The Judaizers wanted the new believers to convert to Rabbinic Judaism and be subject to all rabbinic traditions.

Judaism in OT times was not the religion, but the people left after the Northern Kingdom was dispersed.

Ah,no I think you mean Judah. There were two kingdoms, Judah (comprised of the tribes of Judah, Levi and Benjamin) and Israel (comprised of the other 10 tribes).

Judaism, as the Jewish religion came to be known in the 1st century ad, was based on ancient Israelite religion, shorn of many of its Canaanite characteristics but with the addition of important features from Babylonia and Persia. The Jews differed from other people in the ancient world because they believed that there was only one God.

As far as using the term 'Judaizer', please don't, at least not in this forum. it is insulting, both to the believers here that believe that the Torah is not done away with and also to the men you are referring too, some of the original Messianic Jews.

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed , saying , That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

 

[pat34lee]

Ah,no I think you mean Judah. There were two kingdoms, Judah (comprised of the tribes of Judah, Levi and Benjamin) and Israel (comprised of the other 10 tribes).
[\quote]

That works too. I should have said Jew or Jewish referred to the people, not a religion. I don't know that the word 'Judaism' is even in the bible.

As far as using the term 'Judaizer', please don't, at least not in this forum. it is insulting, both to the believers here that believe that the Torah is not done away with and also to the men you are referring too, some of the original Messianic Jews.

There is nothing more insulting about 'Judaizer' than or Rabbi, Pharisee or Rabbinic Jew, as they all refer to the same group. The notion that one had to convert to Rabbinic Judaism in order to be saved is aptly described as 'Judaizing' and has nothing to do with following the Torah. Like many other early concepts, Christians later corrupted the usage.

 

[Lulav]

And it is the usage today that I am referring to. But also this name was given to believers in Yeshua which many do not realize.

There is nothing more insulting about 'Judaizer' than or Rabbi, Pharisee or Rabbinic Jew, as they all refer to the same group.

So would you call Yeshua a Judaizer?

 

[pat34lee]

And it is the usage today that I am referring to. But also this name was given to believers in Yeshua which many do not realize.

So would you call Yeshua a Judaizer?

Did he tell people they must be circumcised and follow the traditions of the elders to be saved?

 

[Hoshiyya]

Did he tell people they must be circumcised and follow the traditions of the elders to be saved?

As you well know, Yeshua spoke to the Jews most of his life, most of which were circumcised, and briefly spoke to a Samaritan woman, who didn't need to be circumcised.

As for the elders, depends on which elders you mean, and what you mean by tradition. The religion of Moses is tradition. It is literally Kabbala, something passed on from generation to generation. I'm not equating Moshe's Kabbala to Moses de Leon's Kabbala, but they are both tradition, in point of fact.

 

[BukiRob]

It isn't just a word game. All of the tribes are not Jews. That is like saying all Americans are Texans. All Jews are part of Israel. So are the other tribes. Judaism in OT times was not the religion, but the people left after the Northern Kingdom was dispersed.

In Acts 15, it was not about being saved, but congregating with gentiles, a no-no. The Judaizers wanted the new believers to convert to Rabbinic Judaism and be subject to all rabbinic traditions.

That's what I've been saying!

Acts 15 is NOT about wither Gentiles are to observe Torah (Mosaic Law) It was an argument being put forward that Gentiles could not be saved. Their position was that Adonai had ONLY made a covenant with Israel and as such, they argued that goyim's could not be saved

 

[pat34lee]

That's what I've been saying!

Acts 15 is NOT about wither Gentiles are to observe Torah (Mosaic Law) It was an argument being put forward that Gentiles could not be saved. Their position was that Adonai had ONLY made a covenant with Israel and as such, they argued that goyim's could not be saved

I don't think they were going quite that far, the ones who believed anyway.

There were questions of if the gentile believers were clean enough to congregate with the Jews who held onto Rabbinic beliefs of separation from non-Jews. Even Peter withdrew from eating with them around other Jews. And that had nothing to do with eating kosher, as he did, so they did. They felt that the only way to be sure was to convert them and make them follow all the laws immediately. This, because when you convert, you are held responsible to all the law, including the traditions of the sect to which you convert.

 

[BukiRob]

I don't think they were going quite that far, the ones who believed anyway.

There were questions of if the gentile believers were clean enough to congregate with the Jews who held onto Rabbinic beliefs of separation from non-Jews. Even Peter withdrew from eating with them around other Jews. And that had nothing to do with eating kosher, as he did, so they did. They felt that the only way to be sure was to convert them and make them follow all the laws immediately. This, because when you convert, you are held responsible to all the law, including the traditions of the sect to which you convert.

There were non believing jews called "the men from Judah" there was also pharisee's who were referred to as those who believed, James and the elders, Peter, Paul and Barnabas.

The men from Judah were making that implication. The believing Pharisee's said that the gentiles DID need to be circumcised and follow the commands of Moses.

Peter, Paul and Baranabas gave testimony to the fact that G-d was saving the gentiles... the response from Peter, Paul and Barnabas makes absolutely 0 sense unless they were arguing about wither the gentiles could be saved at all....

To put it in modern vernacular, Acts 15:1 Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And when Paul and Barnabas had [a]great dissension and debate with them, the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.

The issue is dealing with SALVATION.

5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.”

Notice carefully that the believing Pharisees did NOT say that the gentiles could not be saved but that they DID need to be circumcised and follow Torah

Peter rebukes them (the men from Judea) by saying 10 Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are.”

We know that scripture says: Deuteronomy 30: 11 “For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it [q]out of reach. 12 It is not in heaven, [r]that you should say, ‘Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?’ 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?’ 14 But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.

Scripture declares that the Torah is not too difficult so why would Peter call it a yoke that which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? We can clearly conclude that Peter is speaking about the Rabbinical tradition imposed by the traditions of man instituted by the Priests.

This even makes more sense when you carefully read James response in FULL.

19 Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, 20 but that we write to them that they abstain from [j]things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. 21 For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since [k]he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath.”


It does make sense that James speaks about "not troubling those who are turning to G-d" Not troubling them by making them become Jewish and under the rabbinical tradition. He makes the point clear as he finishes his thoughts found in verse 2 stating plainly at the very end of his proclamation that Moses (the Torah) is read in every city on synagogue every Sabbath.

To summarize, none of the believers not the Pharisees, Peter, James, elders, Paul or Barnabas believed that the gentiles could not be saved to the contrary the evidence showed they could be.

Vs 1-3 make it pretty clear (when you read it carefully) that the issue is over salvation

 

[FredVB]

In Acts 15, the issue from those from Judea that Paul and Barnabas disputed was that unless gentiles are circumcised according to the custom of Moses they cannot be saved. This was saying that it was for them to become Jewish and keep the Law from Moses. This was what was addressed in the council at Jerusalem from Yahweh's Spirit and the apostles who were with Christ. The answer to that was "No!" and it was given for gentiles coming to Christ in faith that out of the things written for the people of the Jewish Covenant that Christ had not said for all followers, there were just the requirements to abstain from what is offered to idols, from any blood, from anything strangled, and from fornication, with that inclusive of all sexual immorality. This is all of what was included in the epistle sent out to the gentiles coming to Christ at the churches abroad. Sure commandments were still for them, but Christ had taught that, it didn't need to be included, and no Sunday worship was happening, and it would be assumed that to hear scriptures from Yahweh believers would use the opportunity there was for them to go to synagogues where they were on Sabbath for that, with gentile believers going with Jewish believers there, where in many places at the time the gospel of Christ first reached people there.

 

[BukiRob]

In Acts 15, the issue from those from Judea that Paul and Barnabas disputed was that unless gentiles are circumcised according to the custom of Moses they cannot be saved. This was saying that it was for them to become Jewish and keep the Law from Moses. This was what was addressed in the council at Jerusalem from Yahweh's Spirit and the apostles who were with Christ. The answer to that was "No!" and it was given for gentiles coming to Christ in faith that out of the things written for the people of the Jewish Covenant that Christ had not said for all followers, there were just the requirements to abstain from what is offered to idols, from any blood, from anything strangled, and from fornication, with that inclusive of all sexual immorality. This is all of what was included in the epistle sent out to the gentiles coming to Christ at the churches abroad. Sure commandments were still for them, but Christ had taught that, it didn't need to be included, and no Sunday worship was happening, and it would be assumed that to hear scriptures from Yahweh believers would use the opportunity there was for them to go to synagogues where they were on Sabbath for that, with gentile believers going with Jewish believers there, where in many places at the time the gospel of Christ first reached people there.

You start off so well and then promptly go off the rails.

James cites the 4 things to abstain from. What are important about those 4 things?

On the surface that seems like a very odd list does it not? Well not really if you know that ALL 4 of those things were common parts of ritual temple practices in pagan religions. What was the one thing that cause both Judah and Israel to be cast out of the land? IDOLATRY.

To the Jew this was by FAR the most serious, grievous sin you could commit.

James in modern vernacular is saying tell them to immediately stop doing these things that are assocaited with Idolatry and they will get the rest of Torah as they hear it on Sabbath

 

[yesyoushould]

No need to entertain the error of the OP.

 

[FredVB]

You start off so well and then promptly go off the rails.
James cites the 4 things to abstain from. What are important about those 4 things?
On the surface that seems like a very odd list does it not?

I don't think it went off from the reality at all. Sure idolatry, common enough as it was, and in some ways is now, was greatly offensive against Yahweh God, and it good reason for proscriptions against it. Yet it is the case that gentile believers were at first learning among Jewish believers, and Sunday gathering was not a part of that, from what is shown. Abuse of animals was always an issue to God, which can be shown, and avoidance of blood, from using any animals, was told for all people including the gentiles, from the beginning, with any permission for having what they make available to themselves from animals, which is a thing introduced with discussion of responsibility to life and about murder, and not a part of the perfect design for us, which is shown, and to which there is to be a return.

 

[BukiRob]

It isn't just a word game. All of the tribes are not Jews. That is like saying all Americans are Texans. All Jews are part of Israel. So are the other tribes. Judaism in OT times was not the religion, but the people left after the Northern Kingdom was dispersed.

In Acts 15, it was not about being saved, but congregating with gentiles, a no-no. The Judaizers wanted the new believers to convert to Rabbinic Judaism and be subject to all rabbinic traditions.

The text is CRYSTAL clear. Unfortunately people want to interject things that are simply not there.

Verse 1 tells you EXACTLY what the issue is... you simply can not get away from that... no how much you want to.

The fact that the testimony provided by Peter, Paul and Barnabas ALL point to the debate being centered on WHO CAN BE SAVED settles the issue.

Acts 15:1 1 Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”

That is the argument AND NOTHING MORE!

 

[BukiRob]

I don't think it went off from the reality at all. Sure idolatry, common enough as it was, and in some ways is now, was greatly offensive against Yahweh God, and it good reason for proscriptions against it. Yet it is the case that gentile believers were at first learning among Jewish believers, and Sunday gathering was not a part of that, from what is shown. Abuse of animals was always an issue to God, which can be shown, and avoidance of blood, from using any animals, was told for all people including the gentiles, from the beginning, with any permission for having what they make available to themselves from animals, which is a thing introduced with discussion of responsibility to life and about murder, and not a part of the perfect design for us, which is shown, and to which there is to be a return.

Fred, with all due respect. what the heck are you talking about? Every single item James lists in the things Gentiles were to abstain from are DIRECTLY associate with Pagan Idolatry. If you cant see that then I have NO idea what point you are trying to make. Perhaps you should spend some time in studying the religious practices of that era.

I find it AMAZING how people only choose to place a stake at James statement in vs 21 without taking EVERYTHING he says to understand ALL that is being said... it is is plain as the nose on your face when you look at the ENTIRE statement made by James

 

[FredVB]

Fred, with all due respect. what the heck are you talking about? Every single item James lists in the things Gentiles were to abstain from are DIRECTLY associate with Pagan Idolatry. If you cant see that then I have NO idea what point you are trying to make. Perhaps you should spend some time in studying the religious practices of that era.
I find it AMAZING how people only choose to place a stake at James statement in vs 21 without taking EVERYTHING he says to understand ALL that is being said... it is is plain as the nose on your face when you look at the ENTIRE statement made by James

Don't you understand the reference to Genesis 9 that is clearly connected with what is required of gentiles, indeed all people to whom meat was conditionally permitted? And referring to the apostolic epistle from the Jerusalem council with agreement from Yahweh's Spirit is enough for that, without appealing to everything James says needed for that. Notice the relevant verses that connect to that:
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require.

 

[BukiRob]

Don't you understand the reference to Genesis 9 that is clearly connected with what is required of gentiles, indeed all people to whom meat was conditionally permitted? And referring to the apostolic epistle from the Jerusalem council with agreement from Yahweh's Spirit is enough for that, without appealing to everything James says needed for that. Notice the relevant verses that connect to that:
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require.

You COMPLETELY ignore the fact that Noah knew the difference between CLEAN and UNCLEAN animals. You are projecting here brother.

 

[pat34lee]

That is the argument AND NOTHING MORE!

Why did they pick circumcision as their criteria? Because they
wanted the new believers to convert to Judaism, most likely
Rabbinic Judaism. Then they could be discipled by Rabbis and
taught how to act as a Jew.