This morning study on Colossians and the Gospel

[HIM]

Give a listen and post remarks on points shared. Such as God's victory for us over sin in this present evil world through Christ.

And because of the forgiveness that we now have in Christ, the context of chapter 2 when it mentions sabbaths, can't possibly be speaking of the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments, but the sabbaths that pertained to the ceremonies that were tied to the forgiveness mention in verse 2:13 in respect to the sacrificial system and judgments that were against us as verse 14 states, These were fulfilled in Christ, as were the Atonement, Passover, feast of Tabernacles and such. So the sabbaths tied to these holy days and their observance is not needed.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Give a listen and post remarks and points shared.

Happy Sabbath Him! Pretty skies in your video. I love nature it reveals so much about Jesus.

 

[HIM]

Happy Sabbath Him! Pretty skies in your video. I love nature it reveals so much about Jesus.

Happy Sabbath SB! Yes God is so good in all things!

 

[Studyman]

Give a listen and post remarks on points shared. Such as God's victory for us over sin in this present evil world through Christ.

And because of the forgiveness that we now have in Christ, the context of chapter 2 when it mentions sabbaths, can't possibly be speaking of the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments, but the sabbaths that pertained to the ceremonies that were tied to the forgiveness mention in verse 2:13 in respect to the sacrificial system and judgments that were against us as verse 14 states,

I don't believe the popular philosophy promoted by this world's religious system, that God's Words, Laws or Feasts were against Jesus, Paul or the Body of Christ. I know Paul doesn't teach this in Col. 2, and would offer the reason for my understanding.

Col. 2: 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (Through whom God created all that was created in heaven and earth) 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

So like Jesus, Paul is also warning about the traditions and philosophies of men.

13 And you, (Colossians/Gentiles) being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, (Just like the Ephesians) hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the "handwriting of ordinances" that was against us, "which was contrary to us", (Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ) and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Now Him, I don't listen to internet u-tube sermons or videos because of the warnings of the Christ, and Paul, including the warnings in this chapter. If King Solomon can be deceived by letting the religious traditions and rudiments of this world into his mind, who am I to believe I can do the same, and overcome? I am certainly not as wise as Solomon, and would be a fool to believe I could do, what he was not able to do. For this reason I don't watch the sermons on the internet, nor to I rely of religious websites to teach me about God. It's nothing personal about you, it's more personal about me.

But I would like to address your teaching here as shown to me above. You are promoting the Philosophy that it was the "Feasts of the Lord" that were against Jew and Gentiles, and were "Contrary to Paul and the Body of Christ". Other religious sects of this world also promote that it was God's Laws that were against and contrary to the Church of God. That the "handwriting of ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ, were "hand written" by God. And that Jesus came to take God's Laws, or as you teach above, the "Feasts of the Lord" that were written by God, and take them out of the way, nailing them to His Cross. Implying that the problem that Jesus, Paul and "Body of Christ" encountered in their time, was the result of God's "handwritten Laws", or as you are teaching, His "Feasts of the Lord".

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, (So in your teaching above, the Principalities and powers Jesus "Spoiled" was His Father's "handwritten Laws") he made a shew "of them" openly, (So in your teaching above, this would mean that Jesus made a show of His Father's Laws, or the "Feasts of the Lord" you claim were "handwritten ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Church of God), triumphing "over them" in it. (So in your teaching above, Jesus "Triumphed over His Father, and His Father's "handwritten Ordinances" that you teach were against Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ)

But Paul continues.

16 Let no man therefore judge "you" (This would be the Body of Christ, Yes?) in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow "of things to come"; but the body is of Christ.

18 Let no man "beguile you" of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

But you just taught that all these "Feasts of the Lord", are "Against" Paul and the Body of Christ, "Contrary to them". But Paul is telling these same people not to let any man "Judge them" in their voluntary observance of these shadows of things "Yet to Come". That doesn't make any sense. That would mean the First Church of God under HIS new High Priest, engaged in obedience to God that was "Against" Jesus, and the Church of God at Pentecost. And Yet, for their obedience God gave them His Holy Spirit. How was this "Against them"?

19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the "increase of God". It seems prudent that men know and study about things "Yet to Come". As opposed to walking in the high days and traditions of men which are shadows of "Nothing".

20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ "from the rudiments of the world", why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21(Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines "of men"?
COLOSSIANS 2:20 KJV Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world,...
Since when is God's Laws or His Feasts, "rudiments of this world"? Since when are the "Feasts of the Lord" "commandments and doctrines "of men".

No my friend, the "Handwriting of ordinances" that were against Jesus and the Body of Christ, were not God's Commandments or "God's Feasts". They were the Philosophies and traditions of this world's religious system that ruled over Jerusalem. They were the "Rudiments of the World", not Commandments of God.

Jesus didn't expose His Father, Him, or His Father's Laws as a Yoke of Bondage, or "Beggarly Elements" as so many, who come in Christ's Name" teach. The "handwriting of ordinances" that were against God's Church were to commandments of men the Jews taught for doctrines. Things like teaching Gentiles that they were "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world". That was the Law of Commandments contained in ordinances that were against Gentiles. Of course, if a person actually reads God's Laws, this is proven to be an insidious lie.

The "Jews Religion" declares, "We have a Law, and by our Law, HE should die"! Was there a Law of God that was against Jesus? No, but there were "handwritten ordinances" promoted by the rulers of Temple in Jerusalem, that were against Jesus. Were the "Feasts of the Lord" against Paul? No!!! God forbid!!! But the Jews religion, the Pharisees, "Persecuted the Church of God". Their traditions and philosophies were "Against Paul after his conversion, and against Stephen before Paul's conversion".

Jesus didn't "Spoil" His Father's Words, or make a Show of His Father's Laws openly, or Triumph over God's ordinances. HE exposed the Commandments of men these deceivers taught for doctrines.

These were fulfilled in Christ, as were the Atonement, Passover, feast of Tabernacles and such. So the sabbaths tied to these holy days and their observance is not needed.

No my friend, all of these things have yet to be fulfilled. The Lamb has been slain, but the judgment has not yet appeared. Our fathers, and we too if Christ doesn't return soon, will die and rest in Hope of the Resurrection, and the reward Jesus promised to bring for them who loved Him and kept His commandments. We are still strangers in a strange land, waiting for a New World in which dwelleth Righteousness, still sojourning in a corruptible body, temporary "Booths", waiting for God to put on us, an incorruptible body.

This is why Paul told the Body of Christ not to let men judge them in their honor and respect for God, who created His Sabbaths "For man", that they might observe the Shadows of these things, knowing they are given to prepare His people for the things yet to come.

And to show once again, the dangers of adopting this world's popular religious philosophies.

I know it is hard for old dogs to learn, trust me on that. And pride is a formidable adversary and obstacle for correction. It is my greatest hope that you might reconsider your philosophy concerning Colossians and Ephesians, according to what is actually written.

 

[HIM]

I don't believe the popular philosophy promoted by this world's religious system

I won't read your posts until you stop posting things like above.. So do what you want. I don't have time for such.

 

[Studyman]

I won't read your posts until you stop posting things like above.. So do what you want. I don't have time for such.

Well, you could post the entirety of my statement, before you use it as an excuse to refuse to engage in an honest challenge to this philosophy you are promoting on a Biblical Forum.

"I don't believe the popular philosophy promoted by this world's religious system, that God's Words, Laws or Feasts were against Jesus, Paul or the Body of Christ. I know Paul doesn't teach this in Col. 2, and would offer the reason for my understanding."

How is my challenge any different than your challenge to my post? Didn't I address your challenge, one that I have heard countless times over and over and over, over the last 30 years?

I have heard preachers promote that the "Hand writing of ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Church of God, was God's handwriting, and were God's Laws since my youth. This is simply the truth from my heart. Why are you so offended?

What are you saying here, you will only discuss your own preaching with men on a public forum, as long as they are not honest about the sermons they have already heard, and come to discern as questionable?

What happened to you? You are wrong about the "handwriting of ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Church of God, that Jesus took out of the way, and Triumphed over, being God's handwriting. At least according to what is actually written. My post points this out. If you think my post is wrong, or misrepresenting what is written, please show me. But don't walk away and then blame me for it because I told you an absolute truth.

I thought that seeing you are preaching to others, you might want to know.

But if you don't want to talk about it on a public forum, that's OK. Perhaps others reading along might do the study, and be edified.

 

[Studyman]

HIM replied to a thread you are watching at Christian Forums.

This morning study on Colossians and the Gospel​

Pompous idiot

View this thread

Watched threads​

Please do not reply to this message. You must visit the forum to reply.

This message was sent to you because you opted to watch the thread This morning study on Colossians and the Gospel at Christian Forums with email notification of new replies. You will not receive any further emails about this thread until you have read the new messages.

Thank you for your spirit filled, from the heart reply "Him". It explains everything.

Perhaps you are already just too holy for me, a nobody, a pompous idiot, to question or challenge anything you preach. I'm sorry to have bothered you, I guess I was a fool to believe your signature was also meant for you.

Thanks for setting me straight.

Bye for now.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Well, you could post the entirety of my statement, before you use it as an excuse to refuse to engage in an honest challenge to this philosophy you are promoting on a Biblical Forum.

"I don't believe the popular philosophy promoted by this world's religious system, that God's Words, Laws or Feasts were against Jesus, Paul or the Body of Christ. I know Paul doesn't teach this in Col. 2, and would offer the reason for my understanding."

How is my challenge any different than your challenge to my post? Didn't I address your challenge, one that I have heard countless times over and over and over, over the last 30 years?

I have heard preachers promote that the "Hand writing of ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Church of God, was God's handwriting, and were God's Laws since my youth. This is simply the truth from my heart. Why are you so offended?

What are you saying here, you will only discuss your own preaching with men on a public forum, as long as they are not honest about the sermons they have already heard, and come to discern as questionable?

What happened to you? You are wrong about the "handwriting of ordinances" that were against Jesus, Paul and the Church of God, that Jesus took out of the way, and Triumphed over, being God's handwriting. At least according to what is actually written. My post points this out. If you think my post is wrong, or misrepresenting what is written, please show me. But don't walk away and then blame me for it because I told you an absolute truth.

I thought that seeing you are preaching to others, you might want to know.

But if you don't want to talk about it on a public forum, that's OK. Perhaps others reading along might do the study, and be edified.

Thats not what Paul is saying, he was quoting what laws he was referring to in Col2:14KJV

Which is everything BUT the Ten Commandments that Moses wrote in a book placed besides the ark as a WITNESS AGASINT. Deut 31:24-26 the context the laws that were contrary and against.

The laws in this book is everything except for the Ten Commandments that God wrote and God spoke that was placed inside the ark. Exo 31:18 Exo 40:20

So what Moses wrote included the feast days and animal sacrifices etc, the context of Col 2:14-17 that were added after the fall of man. I do not believe Paul was saying the feast days were against us, just wanted his reader to know he was not speaking of the Ten Commandments but the laws Moses handwrote that was placed outside the ark. Deut 31:24-26 Obviously these are not all contrary and against while they hold the curses for breaking God's laws, it also held all the blessings as well. The feasts always pointed forward to Jesus and His great Sacrifice. John 1:29 1 Cor5:7 We can't even keep the feast days now because the earthy temple was destroyed and Jesus put an end to animal sacrifices at the Cross Heb 10:1-10 they were always a placeholder for Jesus.

 

[Soyeong]

Give a listen and post remarks on points shared. Such as God's victory for us over sin in this present evil world through Christ.

And because of the forgiveness that we now have in Christ, the context of chapter 2 when it mentions sabbaths, can't possibly be speaking of the Sabbath of the Ten Commandments, but the sabbaths that pertained to the ceremonies that were tied to the forgiveness mention in verse 2:13 in respect to the sacrificial system and judgments that were against us as verse 14 states, These were fulfilled in Christ, as were the Atonement, Passover, feast of Tabernacles and such. So the sabbaths tied to these holy days and their observance is not needed.

In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten sign to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews. This fits perfectly with the concept of the handwritten sign that lists the charges that are against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross.

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law in contrast with saying that he came not to abolish it and he warned against relaxing the least part of it, so you should not interpret fulfilling the law as meaning the same thing as abolishing it or as relaxing the least part of it. Rather, "to fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so Jesus fulfilled the law by teaching us how to correctly obey it. In Galatians 6:2, bearing one another's burdens fulfills the Law of Christ, yet you do not consistently interpret that as meaning that we observance of the Law of Christ is not needed.

 

[Aaron112]

I won't read your posts until you stop posting things like above.. So do what you want. I don't have time for such.

Concerning this, you seem very right-on. The things in the offending post are so full of utter error(s) it is not likely an understanding can be reached in the very very limited space and time available here, and the lack of love of truth overall ..... No one has time for such !? No amount of time can produce a difference under the circumstances here.

 

[HIM]

HIM replied to a thread you are watching at Christian Forums.

This morning study on Colossians and the Gospel​

Thank you for your spirit filled, from the heart reply "Him". It explains everything.

Perhaps you are already just too holy for me, a nobody, a pompous idiot, to question or challenge anything you preach. I'm sorry to have bothered you, I guess I was a fool to believe your signature was also meant for you.

Thanks for setting me straight.

Bye for now.

That is exactly how you are perceived when you make comments like this, "The truth of God's Word offends many" in response to someone in relation to them.
And then you repeat what instigated this in the first place above, quoted below after you were asked to stop. Which is why you received the notification you responded too btw.

I don't believe the popular philosophy promoted by this world's religious system

 

[HIM]

In Matthew 27:37, they nailed a handwritten sign to Christ's cross that announced the charge that was against him that he was the King of the Jews. This fits perfectly with the concept of the handwritten sign that lists the charges that are against us being nailed to Christ's cross and with him dying in our place to pay the penalty for our sins, but has nothing to do with nailing any laws to the cross.

No it doesn't.

Did you listen to the video? If one does not accept chapter 1 up to verse 2:13 truth then they will not understand what 2:14 through is getting at.

In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus said that he came to fulfill the law in contrast with saying that he came not to abolish it and he warned against relaxing the least part of it, so you should not interpret fulfilling the law as meaning the same thing as abolishing it or as relaxing the least part of it. Rather, "to fulfill the law" means "to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be" (NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo), so Jesus fulfilled the law by teaching us how to correctly obey it. In Galatians 6:2, bearing one another's burdens fulfills the Law of Christ, yet you do not consistently interpret that as meaning that we observance of the Law of Christ is not needed.

Not sure why you are going there. Been rather consistent here since the start of posting at this site. The just live out of Faith. And this Faith establishes the Law. In that the word, the Law through Christ is in our hearts. That is the word of faith in which we are to preach.

 

[HIM]

Concerning this, you seem very right-on. The things in the offending post are so full of utter error(s) it is not likely an understanding can be reached in the very very limited space and time available here, and the lack of love of truth overall ..... No one has time for such !? No amount of time can produce a difference under the circumstances here.

I didn't read it, so I don't know. I do know that almost no one I ever heard shares what the video brings out. So his comment about it being of the philosophy of this world is unfounded.

 

[HIM]

@Soyeong and @Studyman the context starts in chapter one.

There is a hope, a joyful expectation that has been laid up in Heaven for us. vs 5. Which we heard in the truth of the Gospel. This joyful expectation is present with us to walk worthy of the Lord. Bearing fruit in every good work. And Increasing in the recognition of God. Being endued~ in all power, in accord with the mightiness of His *glory, into all endurance and patience with joy. Giving thanks to the Father. The One who has made and continues to make us competent, partakers of the inheritance of the saints, in light. Rescuing us out of the power of darkness. Transferring us into the kingdom of His Son of His love. In Whom we have deliverance, the remission, removal of the sins through His blood that are past. And through him all things consist, are held together, including us. For in Him we live, move and have our being. For we are Reconciled in the body of His flesh through His death to present us holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight through His resurrection: IF WE CONTINUE in the faith grounded and settled and not moved away from the hope (expectation) of the gospel. The expectation laid up in heaven for us. The mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope, expectation of glory, the MYSTERY to which Paul speaks. Which we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect, Holy, unblameable and unreprovable in and through Christ Jesus. Being rescued from the power of darkness being translated into the Kingdom, the Body of Christ, the Temple of God. Wherein we labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in us mightily.

That our hearts be comforted, knitted together in love. In full assurance of the understanding and the acknowledgment of the Mystery of God which is Christ in you the hope. joyful expectation of His glory. In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge so we are not beguiled by enticing words and that we remain steadfast in in the faith of Christ Jesus. In that we whom have received Christ, Christ in you, so walk ye in Him.

Rooted and built up in Him. Established in the faith. Rescued from the power of darkness. Translated into the Kingdom of His dear Son. Made competent to present us Holy, unblamable and unreprovable in His sight.

Therefore Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments, the first principles of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And we are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also we are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him being dead in our sins and the uncircumcision of our flesh, hath he quickened together with him, therefore we walk in newness of life. Wherein we labour, striving according to his working, which works in us mightily. Being endued with all power in accordance with the mightiness of His Glory in Christ Jesus.

Having been forgiven all trespasses; having made peace through the blood of his cross, reconciling all things unto himself the deliverance, the remission, removal of the sins through His blood. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances, the certificate of indebtedness. What we owed because of our sin according to the hand writing of ordinances, the certificate of indebtedness that Moses penned due to our sin. For this is that which was against us. And is that which was contrary to us. This He took out of the way, nailing it to his cross. Spoiling THESE principalities, that which was first established and it's power nailing it to the cross. Making a show of them openly. Therefore, because of what was just said, let no man, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath, these which are of those handwriting of ordinances. That which was written because of our sin and therefore done away with at the cross. For we have been forgiven of all our trespasses. For they were a shadow of things to come, but the body, the church (vs.1:18,24) is of Christ.

 

[Studyman]

Thats not what Paul is saying, he was quoting what laws he was referring to in Col2:14KJV

I appreciate the post, and it is true that it is traditionally accepted by this world's religions, that Paul is teaching that is was God's instruction, given in the Law and Prophets, that were the "handwriting of ordinances" that was against Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ.

They also say the same thing about God's Law in Eph. 2, that it was God who created the "Wall of Separation" and it was God's Law that relegated the repentant Gentile as "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world".

These same men promote the very popular religious philosophy that God and His Word amended the 10 Commandments, specifically the 4th Commandment. But when a person studies for themselves, they find this too, is a falsehood. This same religious system preaches to who ever will listen to them, that the "Yoke" the Pharisees were trying to place on the necks of the Disciples that neither they now their fathers could bear in Acts 15, , was also God's Laws, and not the Grievous Burdens Jesus exposed in Matt. 23, of men who "Said" they promoted the Law of Moses, but didn't. This same religious system also preach that Jesus and His Father were not ONE where His Father's Commandments are concerned, they preach that in Matt. 5, the "Them of Old Time" Jesus referred to was God and Moses, and not the corrupt Priests and scribes who had become "Partial in the Law", I'll give one quick example.

Matt. 5: 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

The 10 Commandments does indeed teach not to kill. But God also taught through Moses:

Lev. 19: 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

In every case, the Law and Prophets, and Jesus' Teaching are aligned perfectly. He wasn't talking about God and Moses, HE was talking about the righteousness of the Pharisees, AKA "The Jews religion" who had "omitted" the weightier matters of God's Laws, and were teaching for doctrines the Commandments and traditions of men...

Matt. 5: 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

But I know you have witnessed the power of the religious traditions of men, and the difficulty men find to accept what is written, over the popular, sometimes ancient religious traditions of their fathers and grandfathers. I see you defend the Truth of Scriptures where God's Sabbath is concerned, against people who refuse to accept the truth of Scriptures, and good for you. I don't want you to take my word for it, rather, that you might consider that both you and I are placed into a world, just as Jesus and Caleb was, where adversarial religious voices, "Who profess to know God" promote philosophies and traditions of men, many times in Christ's Name..

I laid out a concise, very detailed examination of Scriptures for "Him" in two posts. If you find something in them that you believe doesn't align with the rest of God's Word, please show me. I would hope that you wouldn't reject the study simply because the conclusion doesn't align with popular religious philosophy or traditions of men.

Col. 2: 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (By whom all things were created)

This is an important part of Col. 2. In what world is God's Laws, even the least of them, is a "man-made" tradition.

Which is everything BUT the Ten Commandments that Moses wrote in a book placed besides the ark as a WITNESS AGASINT. Deut 31:24-26 the context the laws that were contrary and against.

Let's look at what God inspired Moses to actually say.

Duet. 31: 24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, 25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, 26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness "against thee". 27 For I know "thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck": behold, "while I am yet alive with you this day", ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death?

So SB, how in the world can it be true that God is saying that the "Book of the Law" was a witness against Jesus, Paul or the Church of God? When it is clear that the "Book of "Gods" Law" was a witness against the rebellious Jews. Listen to Stephen.

Acts 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

How is the "Book of the Law" a witness against the "Church of God/Body of Christ", and also a witness against those men who have rejected God's Laws, and are promoting doctrines and philosophies of men?? Whose Law condemned Jesus to death? Whose Law relegated repentant Gentiles as "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:" Whose Law promoted the persecution of God's Church? Who wrote the Talmud?

I hope you might consider these things, just as you considered the Truth about God's Holy Sabbath. There is no where in any of Colossians or Ephesians where Paul is accusing the Laws of God as being "Against him and the Church of God". Shouldn't that mean something?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I appreciate the post, and it is true that it is traditionally accepted by this world's religions, that Paul is teaching that is was God's instruction, given in the Law and Prophets, that were the "handwriting of ordinances" that was against Jesus, Paul and the Body of Christ.

They also say the same thing about God's Law in Eph. 2, that it was God who created the "Wall of Separation" and it was God's Law that relegated the repentant Gentile as "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world".

These same men promote the very popular religious philosophy that God and His Word amended the 10 Commandments, specifically the 4th Commandment. But when a person studies for themselves, they find this too, is a falsehood. This same religious system preaches to who ever will listen to them, that the "Yoke" the Pharisees were trying to place on the necks of the Disciples that neither they now their fathers could bear in Acts 15, , was also God's Laws, and not the Grievous Burdens Jesus exposed in Matt. 23, of men who "Said" they promoted the Law of Moses, but didn't. This same religious system also preach that Jesus and His Father were not ONE where His Father's Commandments are concerned, they preach that in Matt. 5, the "Them of Old Time" Jesus referred to was God and Moses, and not the corrupt Priests and scribes who had become "Partial in the Law", I'll give one quick example.

Matt. 5: 21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

The 10 Commandments does indeed teach not to kill. But God also taught through Moses:

Lev. 19: 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

In every case, the Law and Prophets, and Jesus' Teaching are aligned perfectly. He wasn't talking about God and Moses, HE was talking about the righteousness of the Pharisees, AKA "The Jews religion" who had "omitted" the weightier matters of God's Laws, and were teaching for doctrines the Commandments and traditions of men...

Matt. 5: 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

But I know you have witnessed the power of the religious traditions of men, and the difficulty men find to accept what is written, over the popular, sometimes ancient religious traditions of their fathers and grandfathers. I see you defend the Truth of Scriptures where God's Sabbath is concerned, against people who refuse to accept the truth of Scriptures, and good for you. I don't want you to take my word for it, rather, that you might consider that both you and I are placed into a world, just as Jesus and Caleb was, where adversarial religious voices, "Who profess to know God" promote philosophies and traditions of men, many times in Christ's Name..

I laid out a concise, very detailed examination of Scriptures for "Him" in two posts. If you find something in them that you believe doesn't align with the rest of God's Word, please show me. I would hope that you wouldn't reject the study simply because the conclusion doesn't align with popular religious philosophy or traditions of men.

Col. 2: 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (By whom all things were created)

This is an important part of Col. 2. In what world is God's Laws, even the least of them, is a "man-made" tradition.




Let's look at what God inspired Moses to actually say.

Duet. 31: 24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, 25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, 26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness "against thee". 27 For I know "thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck": behold, "while I am yet alive with you this day", ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death?

So SB, how in the world can it be true that God is saying that the "Book of the Law" was a witness against Jesus, Paul or the Church of God? When it is clear that the "Book of "Gods" Law" was a witness against the rebellious Jews. Listen to Stephen.

Acts 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

How is the "Book of the Law" a witness against the "Church of God/Body of Christ", and also a witness against those men who have rejected God's Laws, and are promoting doctrines and philosophies of men?? Whose Law condemned Jesus to death? Whose Law relegated repentant Gentiles as "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:" Whose Law promoted the persecution of God's Church? Who wrote the Talmud?

I hope you might consider these things, just as you considered the Truth about God's Holy Sabbath. There is no where in any of Colossians or Ephesians where Paul is accusing the Laws of God as being "Against him and the Church of God". Shouldn't that mean something?

You missed the entire point and put words in my mouth that were never stated. Nor did you even address how the feasts days can be kept when the earthy temple was destroyed and animal sacrifices ended.

Regarding Deut 31:24-26 these other verses answers the context. No one said the law of Moses that was written in the Book of the Law that was set besides the ark was against Jesus Paul or the Church. But pray tell when one is disobedient to God, and the consequences or curses that were placed in the Book of the Law how is disobedience NOT against God? Didn't it put Jesus on the Cross?

Deuteronomy 31:26 KJB - Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Sorry, this verse is very clear, there is no need to re-interpret it.

Deuteronomy 31:28 KJB - Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them.

Deuteronomy 30:19 KJB - I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

 

[Studyman]

I didn't read it, so I don't know.

But I did read your post, and I responded to it, because although it is a popular religious philosophy promoted by this world's religious system, it is untrue just the same, according to the Holy Scriptures. The preaching that God's Laws, and Feasts, even the Least of them, are against Paul and the Church of God, is not true, according to Scriptures. The "Jews religion" had Laws and Commandments of men that were against Paul and the Church of God, but God's Laws were not, at least this is what my study has found. I made this case in the post you refused to read, because you made a false assumption about my "Comment" being about a video that I told you I didn't watch.

With just one google search I found over 160 u-tube videos on the book of Colossians alone, all by men who call Jesus Lord, Lord and are convinced they hold the truth. My friend, consider Paul's words here.

Gal. 6: 1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. 3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

At some point, a man needs to take responsibility for his own work. I did you no wrong, and yet just look at the way you are treating me.

I do know that almost no one I ever heard shares what the video brings out. So his comment about "it" (Your Video) being of the philosophy of this world is unfounded.

Had you read my post, which is only the simplest of common kindness, you would have known that I don't watch religious u-tube videos. I even told you why in a kind and respectful way. And yet because you didn't read my post, as I read yours, you are now telling falsehoods about me to others, about me judging your video, after you judge me as a Pompous idiot for questioning your teaching.

Shouldn't you step back a little Him, and check yourself?

" but the sabbaths that pertained to the ceremonies that were tied to the forgiveness mention in verse 2:13 in respect to the sacrificial system and judgments "that were against us" as verse 14 states,

This Philosophy that God's Laws and Judgments, including His Holy Feasts, were against Paul and the Church of God, is very popular. Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, all the Popes, countless Protestant preachers from many different religious sects and businesses have all promoted this philosophy that you posted, I have heard them since I was a kid 60 years ago. And they still do.

Now I get being frustrated, getting angry when questioned, lashing out at others because of pride. Lord knows I struggle with these things every day. So I understand and certainly am not going to hold any of this against you, although someone greater than I might.

I would prefer to have an honest, open discussion about whose "handwriting of Ordinances" were against Paul and the Body of Christ, and while we are at it, "Whose law relegated a repentant Gentile as "without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world" and built a "wall of separation" mentioned in Eph. 2.

Remember your own signature, which I love, " We can never learn if we think we are learnt. The greatest thing we can know is we don't know anything. At that point we can learn. Many teach, but not many been taught."

Read my post, and speak to it if you want. Or not. But stop lying about me judging a u-tube video that I never watched.

 

[Studyman]

You missed the entire point and put words in my mouth that were never stated. Nor did you even address how the feasts days can be kept when the earthy temple was destroyed and animal sacrifices ended.

I don't agree with you, the first Church of God under His New Priest didn't agree with you either, as they were gathered on Pentecost and received the Holy Spirit. Was god's Laws against them?

Paul didn't agree with you. The "Feasts of the Lord" were never about killing animals. Paul continued in the Feasts of the Lord his entire Life, as he teaches both Jew and Gentile, "Let us keep the feast".

As long as there are men who "Yield themselves" to God in Faith, the Temple of God exists on this earth. God's Temple was never about buildings or shrines of worship made of Wood and Stone, as it is written;

Acts 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; "as saith the prophet", 49 Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord: or what is the place of my rest?

Faithful men are the temple of God on this earth. "To obey is (and has always been) better than sacrifice".

Regarding Deut 31:24-26 these other verses answers the context, I am going to choose to believe the plain Scriptures.

Me too, except I'm not going to divide God's Word in two, and accept one part, while rejecting the other.

Deuteronomy 31:26 KJB - Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against "thee".

27 For I know "thy" rebellion, and "thy" stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with "you" this day, "ye" have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death?

So you are promoting the philosophy that the "Book of the Law" is against the "Church of God", those whose refuge is the Lord. But Moses said it was against the corrupt Jews who taught for doctrines the commandments of men.

I'm going to choose to believe the Scriptures, one just one here and another one over there, but as the Jesus "of the Bible" teaches, "Every Word of God".

Deuteronomy 31:28 KJB - Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them.

29 For I know that after my death "ye" will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded "you"; and evil will befall "you" in the latter days; because "ye" will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of "your" hands.

The "book of the Law" was against the rebellious Jews. Not against the men of Faith who "Yielded themselves" to God.

Deuteronomy 30:19 KJB - I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Why do you say I'm missing the point, when you choose to omit more than half of God's teaching, just so you can justify a popular but wicked religious philosophy that God's Laws are against those who trust Him enough to walk in them? Hear what God actually said, when a person doesn't cherry pick His Words.

15 See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;

16 In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest "live and multiply": and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

Now you and "Him" are promoting the popular religious philosophy that these Laws of God are "Against" those who trust Him and "Yield themselves" to God like Paul and the Body of Christ. Why did you omit this part of God's instruction, if not to justify a philosophy that can not be justified is "Every word of God is believed.

Will you acknowledge your mistake, or even acknowledge these Word's of God you omitted even exist? We shall see.

Now here is the part where God defines who His Laws are a witness against

17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;

18 I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.

19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, (Those who have turned away from God) that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

20 That thou mayest "love the LORD thy God", and that thou mayest "obey his voice", and that thou mayest "cleave unto him": for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: "that thou mayest dwell in the land" which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

Now I ask you again, although it seems you will not answer, how are these Laws of God against Paul and the Church of God?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I don't agree with you, the first Church of God under His New Priest didn't agree with you either

So you're the only one left who understands God's Word and can judge everyone else and can speak for people in the Bible. This thinking does remind of the parable Jesus taught Luke 18:9–14

The "book of the Law" was against the rebellious Jews. Not against the men of Faith who "Yielded themselves" to God.

Did you not even read my post? The Book contained blessing and curses. Again you missed the entire premise of my post and went off on a whole other tangent based on conjecture and still never answered the question I had.


You still re-interpreted the very plain Scripture.

Deuteronomy 31:26 KJB - Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against "thee".

It doesn't say rebellious people in this verse at all, it says the Book of the law that IT (The Book) may be there for a witness against thee. As it held both the BLESSINGS and CURSES and everything else except what was inside the ark of the covenant. These laws were added because of sin. Most of Isarel rebelled against God, why many never made it to the promise land. The same condition and climant we are into with the same choices Rev22:14-15


Take care.

 

[Studyman]

So you're the only one left who understands God's Word and can judge everyone else and can speak for people in the Bible. Reminds me of Luke 18:9–14

Oh no, there are a lot of people who believe what is written in Scriptures over popular religious traditions of this world. That was the point of the Act's 2 reference. Had the first Church of God under His New and Prophesied High Priest adopted you and "HIM's" philosophy concerning the "Feasts of the Lord", they would not have been gathered on God's Holy Feast, convinced instead that these feasts were "Against them", "Nailed to the Cross". But even a novice can see that they didn't adopt the philosophy you and Him are promoting. That they counted the Sabbaths correctly so as to be gathered together on God's Holy Feast. And as a result, God gave them His Holy Spirit. This is simply undeniable Biblical Truth. It doesn't matter if others believe it or not, it is still the truth. If you think it isn't, then please make your case and show me. But through scriptures, not traditions of men.

I posted the parts of God's Word that you omitted. I'm not sure why you omitted them, but when a person considers more of what God says, their understanding changes. You are free to consider the parts of the Scriptures that I posted that you didn't find worthy of posting, and engage in honest discussions about them, including answering questions and asking questions. Or you can continue to promote a religious philosophy that these omitted verses bring question to.

Either way, it doesn't matter to me. I am simply posting and discussing what is written.

Did you not even read my post? The Book contained blessing and curses. Again you missed the entire premise of my post and went off on a whole other tangent based on conjecture and still never answered the question I had.

Wow, I guess perhaps you didn't read my post. Those who trusted God and Yielded himself to Him, are promised blessing. Those who turned away from God and teach the religious philosophies and traditions of men are promised curses. The Law was a Witness against the Latter, but not the Former. That is what the Scriptures you posted said. Are you denying that?

The "Feasts of the Lord", Passover, Feast of Unleavened bread which led to Pentecost, brought "Blessings" on the Church of God who humbled themselves to God in them. It's right there in your own Bible.

You and "Him" are trying to promote a philosophy that preaches these same "Feasts" were against Paul and the Church of God.

Now I know there existed in the religions of that time, "Handwritten Ordinances" that were "Against Paul and the Church of God" and even Jesus, as it was these same "ordinances" that condemned Jesus to death. But according to Scriptures, these ordinances were not from God as throughout the entire Bible, men who turned to God in obedience were blessed, not cursed.

It doesn't say rebellious people in this verse at all, it says the Book of the law that IT (The Book) may be there for a witness against thee. As it held both the BLESSINGS and CURSES and everything else except what was inside the ark of the covenant.

This is true. If you only consider this one sentence from God as truth, and separate it from all of the Other Word's of God, even the next sentence in His Message and refuse to continue reading His instruction, you can make this case.

This tactic is also very popular in the religious system of this world. Even Eve was placed in a world where this tactic was used. As it is written:

Gen. 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

And if I read God's Word I find this sentence:

Gen. 2: 15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

So there you are. This is God's Word confirming that the serpent is right according to what God said, and there it is for all the world to see. Adam and Eve were Commanded "BY GOD" that they may freely eat of every "Tree of the garden".

But when a person reads the very next verse, the entire message changes.

I'm surprised that you are so zealous to believe one sentence of God as truth, but refuse to accept the very next sentence as truth.

Nevertheless, these discussions about what is actually written in scriptures, are good to have, in my view.

You take care as well.