the Apostle Paul kept the Torah!

[brinny]

Jesus didn't keep sabbath. He basically said He superseded sabbath as understood by man. He said He is the LORD of the Sabbath. He came to straighten out any misunderstandings of what sabbath or anything else meant. He's the Creator Himself, come to earth through His Son, to give clarity to what was required of man. It all ties into this verse that is gracious in its simplicity:

"He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" ~Micah 6:8

And is it not IN Christ that we "walk" with God. There is no other way, is there? Didn't Jesus "show" us what pleases God?

 

[Frogster]

He observed the feasts.

Acts 18:20 NKJV
When they asked him to stay a longer time with them, he did not consent, 21 but took leave of them, saying, “I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem;[c] but I will return again to you, God willing.” And he sailed from Ephesus.

evangelistic reasons, good to preach where there is a crowd, besides, heck, the guy had friends, to see, it was a huge event, heck if i were there, i might even want to go....

did he call the jewish calendar a waste of time, when they got under it in gal 4;10-11?

same with col 2..


did he want the church that had jew and greek under the calendar? nope.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Jesus didn't keep sabbath. He basically said He superseded sabbath as understood by man. He said He is the LORD of the Sabbath. He came to straighten out any misunderstandings of what sabbath or anything else meant. He's the Creator Himself, come to earth through His Son, to give clarity to what was required of man. It all ties into this verse that is gracious in its simplicity:

"He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" ~Micah 6:8

And is it not IN Christ that we "walk" with God. There is no other way, is there? Didn't Jesus "show" us what pleases God?

He demonstrated the preservation of life overrides Sabbath restrictions. This is a given in Judaism even to this day.

As for 'the son of man is lord of the sabbath.' Son of man is ALSO an idiom for ANY man or humanity in general.

Jesus' saying that the 'Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath' is echoed in the in the saying of Rabbin Jonathan ben Joseph: Rabbi Jonathan ben Joseph said: For it is holy unto you; I.e., it [the Sabbath] is committed to your hands, not you to its hands. (Yoma 85b.)

 

[cyberlizard]

Jesus didn't keep sabbath. He basically said He superseded sabbath as understood by man. He said He is the LORD of the Sabbath. He came to straighten out any misunderstandings of what sabbath or anything else meant. He's the Creator Himself, come to earth through His Son, to give clarity to what was required of man. It all ties into this verse that is gracious in its simplicity:

"He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" ~Micah 6:8

And is it not IN Christ that we "walk" with God. There is no other way, is there? Didn't Jesus "show" us what pleases God?

a number of issues are raised in this post...

#1 jesus didn't keep the sabbath

#2 jesus is lord of the sabbath


firstly of jesus did not 'keep' the sabbath, then he is not the messiah. Period.

secondly, the passage does not say jesus is lord of the sabbath. its says the son of man is lord of the sabbath and the sabbath is for man. The context can just as easily mean that son of man=mankind in general as the context is speaking of the disciples breaking the sabbath.



Steve

 

[Frogster]

a number of issues are raised in this post...

#1 jesus didn't keep the sabbath

#2 jesus is lord of the sabbath


firstly of jesus did not 'keep' the sabbath, then he is not the messiah. Period.

secondly, the passage does not say jesus is lord of the sabbath. its says the son of man is lord of the sabbath and the sabbath is for man. The context can just as easily mean that son of man=mankind in general as the context is speaking of the disciples breaking the sabbath.


Steve

is the church bound by torah food restrictions? do I have to eat as Jesus did?

 

[cyberlizard]

is the church bound by torah food restrictions? do I have to eat as Jesus did?

are believing jewish people still bound by the Torah's gracious commandment of foods?


Steve

 

[cyberlizard]

is the church bound by torah food restrictions? do I have to eat as Jesus did?

if Jesus went in to a restaurant with you and ordered his food, i'm sure that as you hold him in such high regard you would answer... 'i'll have what he's having'.


Steve

 

[Frogster]

are believing jewish people still bound by the Torah's gracious commandment of foods?


Steve

no, the jewish christians in antioch were living as gentiles, and if paul went around under all that, he would be declaring the gentiles sinners.


Why did Paul say, that if they, the Jews in Antioch, who lived like the Gentiles, not under Moses, hence, "being sinners" in the eyes of the Jews gal 2:15, would not be sinners in Christ? While saying if they did however, live under what was torn down, the Mosaic transgressional system they would be sinners under that legal economy?



2:18 Rather, I am a sinner if I rebuild the old system of law I already tore down.

 

[Frogster]

if Jesus went in to a restaurant with you and ordered his food, i'm sure that as you hold him in such high regard you would answer... 'i'll have what he's having'.


Steve

naaa...he was humble, he said follow me, where the rabbis waited to be aked if they could be followed.

jesus would say, i'll have what frogster is having.

 

[cyberlizard]

no, the jewish christians in antioch were living as gentiles, and if paul went around under all that, he would be declaring the gentiles sinners.


Why did Paul say, that if they, the Jews in Antioch, who lived like the Gentiles, not under Moses, hence, "being sinners" in the eyes of the Jews gal 2:15, would not be sinners in Christ? While saying if they did however, live under what was torn down, the Mosaic transgressional system they would be sinners under that legal economy?



2:18 Rather, I am a sinner if I rebuild the old system of law I already tore down.

it seems the verse you quote immediately above i am unable to find can you help me locate it?



Steve

Steve

 

[Frogster]

it seems the verse you quote immediately above i am unable to find can you help me locate it?



Steve

Steve

gal 2;18, Paul tore down the thing that called them transgressors, the law, the thing that peter rebuilt, recorded on gal 2, that called the gentiles sinners in 2;15.

They were not in line with the truth of the gospel in 2;14, the same wordage as 2:5, the truth of the gospel, and that was a reference to acts 15, adding the law, so the truth of the gospel words, confirms the clear definition, of 2;18, rebuilding the law, and clearly just what peter did, rebuilding, as he was not living as a jew prior, as he was corrected for his actions of rebuilding.

 

[cyberlizard]

it would appear frogster that your god changes the definitions of sin.

according to your theology eating shrimp used to be a sin for jews but then god changed his mind and said it was okay.

this is rather arbitrary.

how do you account for god changing black into white?



Steve

 

[Frogster]

it would appear frogster that your god changes the definitions of sin.

according to your theology eating shrimp used to be a sin for jews but then god changed his mind and said it was okay.

this is rather arbitrary.

how do you account for god changing black into white?



Steve

there was a time of no law also.

 

[cyberlizard]

there was a time of no law also.

you're avoiding.


Steve

 

[Frogster]

you're avoiding.


Steve

not at all, i never do..

i don't see a rebutt about gal 2;18, r u avoiding?

 

[Frogster]

it would appear frogster that your god changes the definitions of sin.

according to your theology eating shrimp used to be a sin for jews but then god changed his mind and said it was okay.

this is rather arbitrary.

how do you account for god changing black into white?



Steve

we have been through that, foods clean in mark 7;19, by the lord in rom 14;14, peter was eating with gentiles in antioch, then we got the sheet in acts, same ole same ole..


the temple destruction shows that god put an end to all that.

 

[Frogster]

He demonstrated the preservation of life overrides Sabbath restrictions. This is a given in Judaism even to this day.

As for 'the son of man is lord of the sabbath.' Son of man is ALSO an idiom for ANY man or humanity in general.

Jesus' saying that the 'Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath' is echoed in the in the saying of Rabbin Jonathan ben Joseph: Rabbi Jonathan ben Joseph said: For it is holy unto you; I.e., it [the Sabbath] is committed to your hands, not you to its hands. (Yoma 85b.)

for jesus to compre his act, with the unlawful act of david, shows he broke the sabbath.


3 He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? 6 I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7 And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”

 

[Steve Petersen]

The first of the times of 'no law' ended with a Great Flood; the second with rebellion against God and into idolatry for the world. Is this the goal? Not good.

Then God chose Abraham of whom it was said in the Scripture:

Genesis 26:4 And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5 because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

it would appear frogster that your god changes the definitions of sin.

according to your theology eating shrimp used to be a sin for jews but then god changed his mind and said it was okay.

this is rather arbitrary.

how do you account for god changing black into white?

Steve

Froggy's god?

I was under the impression it was Paul's god that changed it

http://www.christianforums.com/t7538322/
Romans 14:14,15 Did Paul declare all foods clean?



.

 

[Frogster]

The first of the times of 'no law' ended with a Great Flood; the second with rebellion against God and into idolatry for the world. Is this the goal? Not good.

Then God chose Abraham of whom it was said in the Scripture:

Paul said in rom 5;13, there was a time of no law, from adam to moses, in gal 3;17 it says it came 430 after abe, david, moses, hebrews, paul, and stephen all say sinai with angels, text available if u so desire.

torah in gen 26;5 can just mean general instructions, paul could not use abe, to ward off law, if abe had the law, the judaizers would pounce all over that if abe had the law.

besides, where does the torah teach to offer up children?

heheheh