Mosaic Legalism and the Law of Moses

It’s often said by everyone that we will be where we will to be. And for God’s people it’s always been as the sands of the sea and as the stars of the sky. Some look to the earth while others look to the heavens. ....

SwordmanJr said:

First, your intended definition for "religion" seems much more broad than my understanding of that term in modern times.

Click to expand...

Definition of religion

1a: the state of a religious (a nun in her 20th year of religion)
b(1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

It seems that according to the English definition of religion, Your original post was a religious post. This is why I attributed the word to it.

If there is another definition of these characteristics that you displayed on your OP, I am more than glad to receive them.

Given my heightened sensitivity to the term "religion," I have come to realize that many other people are suspicious of that term both because they have seen the damage that religious extremism can cause and because they have become disillusioned from belief systems they found overbearing, restricting, senseless, and unfulfilling. Additionally, ANYONE can be "religious." Pagans can be "religious."

Click to expand...

But according to the actual definition of religion, you are a religious person. You may exclude yourself for unknown to me reasons of your own making, but you should not get so judgmental of folks who simply read your voluntary posts, and then apply the English language and its definitions regarding the content therein.

I agree that many "have become disillusioned from belief systems they found overbearing, restricting, senseless, and unfulfilling." Jesus had to live with this truth His whole life.


John 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?

63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

These most certainly found the Religion Jesus walked and promoted as "overbearing, restricting, senseless, and unfulfilling".

I would ask a question, expecting you will not answer. I could be wrong on that thought, we will see.

These Disciples what no longer walked with Jesus, do you believe they became Atheists? Or did they just create a religion that was not "overbearing, restricting, senseless, and unfulfilling" in their opinion?

What's the difference? Simply stated, all of life for the true follower of Christ Jesus is sacred, thus leaving religious practice and mere religion to those who walk in ways other than faith in the one true Lord.

Click to expand...

Matt. 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Greek for Faith ="pistis" means persuasion, credence, conviction (of religious truth or the faithfulness of God or a religious teacher) esp. reliance on Christ for Salvation; by extension the religious system of religious (Gospel) truth itself:- Faithful, believe, fidelity.

Faith itself is a religious practice, at least according to the Greek definition.

Greek for Religion = Threskeia "Ceremonial observance"

James 1:26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.

27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

According to these definitions, Jesus was a very "religious" man and so were the Pharisees. If I follow God's instruction, and strive to "Walk as He Walked", then I am also a religious man, like HE was.

And if I call God my Lord, but ignore His instructions, and misrepresent His Words, and partake in man made images of God in the likeness of a golden calf, or a handsome long haired man, etc., etc., I am still a religious person, like the Pharisees were.

You have an opinion regarding religion that seems to reject both the Greek and English definitions. You are free to have this opinion, but it is unrighteous, In my view, to judge others as malicious, just because they don't share your opinion. If you can show Scriptures which grant you the liberty to judge others in this way, please share them.

After all, I'm sure we can agree that your belief in your own mother's existence is not a "religious" belief, so why apply that term in relation to the One who created your mother?

Click to expand...

I didn't create the term, I just understand it's meaning. You are free to re-write or ignore it's meaning if you like. But it isn't just that you make judgments or imply that someone is malicious, simply because they understand and apply the English Language to your posts they read.

According to the actual definition of religion, just believing my Mother was created by God, is a religious belief.

Opinion? Let's dispense with that one as well, shall we? Bottom line, I have stated many times that folks can believe whatever they wish, even in fairies. Opinions are not worth a flip without empirical substance upon which to build it....at which point it is no longer an opinion, but fact that has objective foundations to stand on.

Click to expand...

The following is your judgment of me for applying both the factual English and Greek definition of Faith and Religion to your post.

"Trying to force the term "religion" where it doesn't belong is a strange way to strike up a healthy conversation, but, then, I'm not here to take away your right to misrepresent others in whatever way you choose...."

On the one hand, the sheer arrogance and self exaltation of this judgment was enough to raise my eye brows. Your judgments against a fellow believer for simply applying the English Language and its definition to your religious posts is most certainly cause for rebuke.

Sadly, it seems you may be incapable of even understanding what I'm talking about, time will tell.

Given that I have quoted specific verses, relying on the context they sit within, if you can show that those verses mean other than the application and meaning I highlighted, then by ll means, let's talk.
Jr

Click to expand...

My posts are still there, the questions and Scriptures I posted are still there. The points I tried to make are still there. If you are sincere about discussing the very first scripture you posted, there is nothing but yourself stopping you.

I will amend and post my first reply again, and remove all reference to the word "religion". And we will see.

Paul said we are justified by Faith. How were men justified "Before Faith Came"? What Law were they "kept under" until this faith was revealed?

So this is important to know what "works of the Law", according to the scriptures, the Jews were trying to bewitch the Galatians with. Before we can enter heaven, our unrighteousness needs to be cleansed, Yes? Our sins must be atoned for. What Law provided for the atonement of sins "before faith came"?

When a man sinned, did God tell them through Moses to "Go and Love thy neighbor as thy self", and their sins are forgiven? Or if a man sinned, did Moses tell them to go and "keep the 10 Commandments" and your sins are forgiven?

No, not according to the Word of God which became Flesh. Did God provide a "Law" for men to have their sin's forgiven "Till the SEED should Come? Yes, it was called the Levitical Priesthood in Hebrews. Paul said this LAW was ADDED to something, because of Transgressions of something, till the Seed should come.

According to the Word of God, when man sinned, that is, transgressed a Law of God, He was to take an animal specifically to a Levite Priest who would them perform sacrificial "Works" after which it was declared that this man's sins were forgiven.

Lev. 4:25 And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering.

26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.

It seems it was this Law, that foreshadowed the sacrifice of the unblemished Lamb of God, that was to lead them to the Christ. Not the Laws Jesus walked in, Love God with all your heart, and Love your neighbor as yourself, and the Law and Prophets which hang on them. These are instructions they would learn after Passover, after the "ADDED" Law lead them to Christ. Once they knew the Christ, then HE would teach them to Love God and Love their neighbor as themselves. Is this not truth according to Scriptures?

The implication of your OP here is that the Jews were bewitching the Galatians by trying to convince them to "Love God with all their hearts, and to Love their Neighbor as themselves. And that after Jesus comes, these Laws are no longer valid. It seems This is untrue if the Scriptures are our guide. The Jews were still promoting "works" of atonement Laws for the forgiveness of sins. Atonement Laws Abraham didn't have, yet Abraham did have God's Commandments, God's Statutes, and God's Laws. Weren't the atonement Laws "ADDED to God's Law, because of transgressions of God's Law? If not, what was added to what?. This same God promised of a time when there would be no more sacrificial "Works" for Justification according to the "ADDED" Law. God would provide His own Self as a sacrifice, as even Abraham knew.

Gen. 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

And this same God also promised in Jer. 31, that there would come a time when God Himself would write His Laws on the hearts of His people, no more Levites to administer His Laws. A New Covenant to replace the "ADDED" Covenant God made with Levi on Israel's behalf, for the atonement of sins, and administration of God's Laws.

This is a great topic, and one that is essential to understand, so as to understand who Paul was fighting against, and what Law they were "Bewitching" the Galatians with.

So before you go any further, would you please answer the questions posed here? What "LAW" were people cleansed or "justified" by, before Faith Came, according to scriptures? How were sin's atoned for before the SEED came?

Thank you for the post.

Click to expand...

eleos1954 said:

The Lord speaks of the new covenant as being “a better covenant” than the old one. (Hebrews 8:6.) This clearly indicates that the old covenant was not perfect in its provisions. There was weakness in it, and that weakness was to be corrected in the new (the old made better) covenant.

Click to expand...

I think you are missing the biblical truth of the New and old Covenant here.

The weakness of the Old Covenant were the men God made the covenant with. At least according to the Creator of the Covenant. Please consider God's Actual Word's on the matter.

Mal. 2:4 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

5 My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name. (Ex. 32)

6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity.

7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

The Covenant was perfect. It foreshadowed the Christ's Sacrifice perfectly. So what happened then?

8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

So what did God do?

Heb. 8:
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, (Levite Priests who became Partial in the Law and broke God's Covenant with them) he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

A New Priesthood, with a Priest who will not lead God's People astray and those Shepherds of old did. A Shepherd who will not corrupt the Priesthood, but perform it's duties perfectly as God commanded. "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Not as those Levites who departed out of the way of God.

Jer. 50:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their resting place.

I think it's important to remember that the Priesthood duties are perfect and Jesus is still performing them to this day. Writing God's Laws on the hearts of HIS people, and forgiving their sins. It wasn't the Covenant that that had fault, it was the men who God entrusted to perform it, that were turned out of the way.

Studyman said:

I think you are missing the biblical truth of the New and old Covenant here.

The weakness of the Old Covenant were the men God made the covenant with. At least according to the Creator of the Covenant. Please consider God's Actual Word's on the matter.

Mal. 2:4 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

5 My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name. (Ex. 32)

6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity.

7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

The Covenant was perfect. It foreshadowed the Christ's Sacrifice perfectly. So what happened then?

8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

So what did God do?

Heb. 8:
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, (Levite Priests who became Partial in the Law and broke God's Covenant with them) he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

A New Priesthood, with a Priest who will not lead God's People astray and those Shepherds of old did. A Shepherd who will not corrupt the Priesthood, but perform it's duties perfectly as God commanded. "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Not as those Levites who departed out of the way of God.

Jer. 50:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their resting place.

I think it's important to remember that the Priesthood duties are perfect and Jesus is still performing them to this day. Writing God's Laws on the hearts of HIS people, and forgiving their sins. It wasn't the Covenant that that had fault, it was the men who God entrusted to perform it, that were turned out of the way.

Click to expand...

no ... I am not misunderstanding .... the better is indeed Christ being our High Priest ... what I am trying to get across is that the sanctuary system was nailed to the cross ... it's purpose was pointing to Christ (Messiah to come) ... the earthly sanctuary system had no power to save. And the earthly sanctuary system was put in place until the seed came and that seed was Christ. After Christ the sanctuary system was nailed to the cross.

Christ ministers from the sanctuary in heaven (the REAL one)

The 10 commandments were ... are not done away with they are forever.

Writing God's Laws on the hearts of HIS people

Click to expand...

Correct (all of them - the 10) .... not done away with and are forever.

eleos1954 said:

no ... I am not misunderstanding .... the better is indeed Christ being our High Priest ... what I am trying to get across is that the sanctuary system was nailed to the cross ... it's purpose was pointing to Christ (Messiah to come) ... the earthly sanctuary system had no power to save. And the earthly sanctuary system was put in place until the seed came and that seed was Christ. After Christ the sanctuary system was nailed to the cross.

Christ ministers from the sanctuary in heaven (the REAL one)

The 10 commandments were ... are not done away with they are forever.



Correct (all of them - the 10) .... not done away with and are forever.

Click to expand...

Yes, and not only the 10, but the two greatest on which all the Law and Prophets rest.

The New Covenant is only the Change in the manner God's Law is administered, and the manner in which sin was forgiven. No more Levite Priest to be the only person even allowed to touch the Book of the Law, and no more Levite Priest to perform Sacrificial "works of the Law" for atonement. A new and Better way. If this is what you were saying, then I agree 100%.

SwordmanJr said:

I don't see in those passages that the Galatians ever observed the Judaiism's Lawful feasts and holy days. It speaks of them observing the pagan holidays, but not the Law of Moses and the holy days prescribed therein.

Click to expand...

It is possible that Soyeong interpreted your words, as I did, as implying that God's Law is the Yoke of Bondage these men had "returned again" too.

"But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?"

The theme of your OP, as your words speak to me, is that God's Law is a "chain" for those who strive to abide by them, and it seems you used this verse to promote that theme. Soyeong was just pointing out that what they desired to "return again to" was not the Holy Scriptures and the instructions contained therein. That the Beggarly Elements mentioned by Paul was not God's Law, but something else, possible religious traditions of man or Rudiments of the world.

This scripture is great for exposing the dangers of man made religious doctrines and traditions, which was the Yoke of Bondage that "chained" the mainstream preachers of Paul's time to deception and blindness. But this scripture is not implying or otherwise suggesting that God's instructions for man are Beggarly Elements or Yoke of Bondage, which seems to be what you are trying to imply.

Well, let's see now:

[Heb 7:11-12 KJV] 11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need [was there] that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

I've seen some folks fall from dizzying heights trying to claim that this is not a reference to the Law of Moses, of necessity, being changed;

Click to expand...

Actually there is no need speculate or "Try to claim" anything to determine what "LAW" is referenced here. All one needs to do is read the rest of the paragraph in which the Spirit of Christ, in HIS great wisdom and tender Mercy, defines, in great detail, exactly the Law that Changed.

Here, let's let the Holy Scriptures put an end to the speculation about what Law changed once and for all.

Heb. 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

The Levitical Priesthood Law, that was ADDED until the True High Priest should come, required by Law that only a Levite could hold the office of the High Priest. If you are unaware of this, let me know and I will show you the Word's of the Creator of the Levitical Priesthood which confirm this.

Jesus wasn't a Levite though. He was from Judah, a Tribe that was not allowed, by the ADDED Law, to become the High Priest. So when Jesus became our High Priest, there was needed, by necessity, "a change of things established or instituted." so as to allow someone other than a Levite to hold the office of the High Priest of God.

This is why, in my opinion, Jesus instructed; "Man shall live by Every Word of God". Because if I had just read your post, and not looked for myself, I might have thought the Hebrews author was saying that just because the Priesthood changed, the entire Law of God had to change as well.

But as you, and everyone reading along can clearly see, that is not what the Hebrews Author was saying at all.

SwordmanJr said:

You're right. There are many verses and contexts that sometimes challenge readers, and also expose lapses in memory and sometimes for properly understanding what is being said. Even the best of intentions can go astray without properly applied forethought.

[Act 15:1, 5-10 KJV] 1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. ... 5 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. 6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. 7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men [and] brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as [he did] unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Now, there are those who have tried to argue that Peter was talking about man-made traditions. The context NOWHERE said anything about man-made traditions in relation to Peter's declaration. The focus of the context of that sections of scripture CLEARLY is addressing circumcision AND THE LAW OF MOSES. This is without a doubt, in my mind, an attempt to turn the context on its head, and inset into the text what is not there to try and deflect attention away from the Law of Moses by those who have chosen to venerate it as something that it is not. They choose to ignore the fact that Peter clearly viewed the Law of Moses as a YOKE that neither their fathers nor they could bare.

Click to expand...

That is a popular rendition of Acts 15 to be sure. And I have no doubt the Pharisees who were preaching contrary to the Apostles of Christ truly believed they were teaching the Laws God gave to Moses. They believed this same thing when they stoned Stephen to death, and crucified the Lord Jesus.

But Jesus said they Taught for Doctrines the commandments of men, not God, even though they said they taught the Law God gave Moses. Jesus said they "omitted" the weightier matters of the Law God gave Moses, like the Law of Mercy,the Law of Judgment and the Law of Faith. He said Moses gave them them the Law, but none of them kept it. Jesus said they didn't believe the writings of Moses, and therefore didn't believe His Words. Jesus said they, not God, placed heavy burdens on the shoulders of men. (Like preaching that the Law of Moses says you can't take a walk on His Sabbath and pick a blackberry to eat)

So to believe your preaching in this matter, I would have to believe that all the sudden, these same Pharisees, coming out of the same city where they practiced their religion that they always said was the Law of Moses, but according to Jesus was not, have now miraculously became obedient servant's to the God of the Bible. Loving God and loving their neighbor as themselves, and striving to share these same Laws God gave them with those who the Apostles were teaching. And that Peter rejected their religion because they were preaching obedience to God, that Peter just said a few days earlier that men "Ought to do"..

Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

And Peter also said; 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

But now, according to you, that has all changed. That Peter is now preaching that men shouldn't "obey" God, and that God no longer gives His Spirit to those who obey Him. In fact, that Peter is now saying that "obeying God" is a "yoke of Bondage" that plagued men like Zacharias and Simeon.

Surely you can see why someone who is versed in the Holy Scriptures might question the implications of your preaching on Acts 15.

So I would argue that the "Yoke" the father's couldn't bear, was not God's Laws at all, rather, the doctrines and traditions of men these Pharisees "SAID" was the "Law of Moses".

10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Peter knew that the Jews didn't teach "The Law of Moses". They called it the Law of Moses, they may have even been deceived into believing is was the Law of Moses, but Jesus, the Prophets, and the Disciples all knew it was not. As even Paul understood.

Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they (Pharisees) call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Jer. 50:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace.

Mal. 2:7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Jeremiah-50-6/
8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Jeremiah-50-6/
9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

So the implication in your preaching that the Yoke the fathers couldn't bear, was the two greatest commandments and the Law and Prophets which hang on them, is a popular religious doctrine to be sure. But untrue just the same, if on believes the Word's of the Christ. (of the Bible)

No, the Yoke the father's couldn't bear, was the doctrines and commandments of men they called God's Law. Not God's Law, at least according to the Christ of the Bible.

It seems that the idea of those sectarian pharisees being wrong is an unbearable thought to some; so much so that it drives them to irrational ends of manic denial of what can clearly be gleaned from the text by a Greek 101 student.

Click to expand...

But the sectarian pharisees were wrong, they were deceived. You are the one who has chosen to believe their words over the Word's of the very Christ who defined them. You are the one who is willing to erase Peters own words because they contradict your belief regarding God's Laws.
I know the sectarian pharisees were wrong. If they were truly teaching the Law of Moses, they would be standing right beside Peter, teaching the new converts with them.

Why do you suppose that is....that they would think to present what they think is a scholarly sounding rendition of what simply is not there after having done the age old switcheroo, assuming that they can brow beat all others into a false belief about that section of scripture?

Click to expand...

I am merely pointing out that Acts 15 isn't the only chapter in the Bible, and that Jesus instructed me to "live by" Every Word of God, not just those words that religious men twist to promote this doctrine or that. You are the one "browbeating" those who would believe "ALL" that is written.

[Act 15:19-21 KJV] 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood. 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

One may ask, "Is that ALL that they were expecting of the Gentile followers? I would say, no, for it only said that they will have done "well." There is indeed still Law that is binding upon us all who are in Christ. What gets some people's britches in a wad is when one dares to point at the Law of Moses in its entirety as something that is no longer binding upon the followers of Christ Jesus.

Click to expand...

Yes, there is still "LAW" binding on those in Christ. Eating Blood and animals killed in a certain way, from partaking in idols, like maybe man made "Feasts unto the Lord", and images of God in the likeness of a handsome long haired men, etc., etc.

What bothers me about religious men is their practice of twisting scriptures in order to defend their particular religious lifestyle, and preaching things that are just not true.

Things like Paul is calling God's Laws "a yoke of bondage and beggarly elements" in Gal. 4. A teaching which is easily exposed as an insidious falsehood. And yet religious men still preach it.

Falsehoods like the Pharisees were placing God's Laws on the Necks and shoulders of man that they could not bear. Implying that it was God's Law that burdened men, not their rejection of it as the entire Bible teaches. Another insidious lie that is perpetuated by religious men who call Jesus Lord, Lord.

Falsehoods like Hebrews 7 teaches that the "entire Law God gave to Moses" changed when Jesus became the High Priest. A popular lie told every day by "Many" who come in Christ's Name.

What gets my britches in an uproar is religious men who have exalted themselves as "Judge" of God's Law, and a Judge of those who post God's Word's instructing men to trust God in them. Placing themselves as the sole mediator over what Word's of God to ignore and reject, and what Word's of God are considered worthy of respect. And when someone doesn't fall in line to their particular religious belief. You know, like the mainstream preachers of Peters time telling them they must follow their version of the Law of Moses to be saved, the judgments and ridicule begin.

This really is a kick in the shins of some who have chosen to appoint themselves as allegedly upholding the Law of Moses, which they don't.

Click to expand...

I find this so funny. If a man today tells you "You must follow the Law of Moses", you immediately accuse him of not upholding the same Law they claim to preach.

But when the Pharisees did the very same thing in Acts 15, you believe them and immediately trash God's Laws as the problem, not the known liars who appointed themselves to define it.

Some have even told me that attempting to live by those laws, they are showing their greater love of Christ, never minding that they, like the scribes and teachers of the Law whom Jesus described as white washed sepulchers, or tombs, filled with dead men's bones, fail miserably, and are even living within intentional disregard of certain of those laws that simply don't work for today, and routinely ignore the Spirit within who is our qualified and ONLY teachers who will never lead us astray.

Click to expand...

Jesus never called a "teacher of His Law" a "white washed sepulchers". Jesus was a Teacher of God's Law, like Moses, Like Isaiah, like Jeremiah. Only Jesus is greater, as the creator of the law is greater than those who keep it. Jesus called those religious men who claimed to be His Children, but taught for doctrines the Commandments of Men, white washed walls. Not because they may have slipped up in sin from time to time, but because they claimed to be teachers of HIS Father's Way, but then taught for doctrines the commandments of men.

Imagine a deception so powerful that it causes men to believe that the Christ of the Bible, the Creator of all things, is a liar. That HE created LAWS for men to follow that are "Beggarly Elements" and a Yoke of Bondage, impossible to follow. But Commanded man to follow them anyway, then slaughtered men by the thousands for not following these Laws you imply in your teaching are Beggarly Elements and Yoke of Bondage. A deception that implies man is simply an innocent victim of an unjust God's Laws and that it was the Law of God which caused the downfall of men, not their rebellion and lack of Godly respect.

And yet, this is the belief written on the hearts of "many" who come in His Name.

Glory to God for His rich mercy and grace toward us, especially me, a fallible man. The Lord is true, and all the rest of us are liars by comparison.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, something on which we both agree.

What in the world is a Mosaic Legalist? these terms get crazier and weirder as time goes on...

Scripturally, people who sought to obey God’s commandments were pleasing in God’s sight.

It is a good thing to strive to obey all of God’s law (the law he gave Moses)

loving God and doing what is right means obeying his law:

Exodus 20:6

And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Click to expand...

Deuteronomy 6:17-18

Ye shall diligently keep the commandments of Yahweh your God, and his testimonies, and his statutes, which he hath commanded thee.

And thou shalt do that which is right and good in the sight of Yahweh

Click to expand...

Deuteronomy 11:1

Therefore thou shalt love Yahweh thy God, and keep his charge, and his statutes, and his judgments, and his commandments, alway.

Click to expand...

Loving God = obeying his commandments/law

Hating God = not obeying his commandments/law

saying you love God but don’t obey his law/commandments is like saying you are vegetarian but you eat meat.

SwordmanJr said:

Ok, so let me get this straight....you think Peter, who spoke out saying that the Law of Moses was a yoke too great for their forefathers and for them to bear, he didn't actually know that he was talking about traditions of men as law?

Click to expand...

Acts 15:5 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. 6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Peter didn't say God's Laws are the yoke as you preach. You did that to promote your philosophy.

What I am saying, is that to believe your preaching, I would have to believe that Peter completely reversed, and is now teaching against his belief spoken in Acts 5.

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

I would have to reject EVERY WORD Jesus spoke about the Pharisees. I would have to ignore EVERY Prophesy about them from "EVERY PROPHET" God sent to them throughout the entire Law and Prophets. I would have to conclude that Stephen was a liar. I would have to believe that God sent the Prophets to them because they were placing God's Laws on their fathers, and that is why their fathers fell in the wilderness.. In essence, to believe in your philosophy here I must reject, omit, and call a liar "EVERY" Spirit of Christ inspired Word regarding the Levite Priests and Pharisees written throughout the Holy Scriptures.

I'm only asking you to consider the possibility that maybe the Holy Scriptures are right.

What if the "Yoke" this sect of the Pharisees were trying to place on the necks of the disciples was their version of the Law of Moses. What if they were teaching that before you could be saved, you had to go to the High Priest with an animal offering who would then perform "works of the law" for the remission of sin? What if these Pharisees were practicing the same religion they called the Law of Moses in Jesus time, and Stephen's time?

What if Jesus was right?

Matt. 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

They still called their religion the Law of Moses.

No JR. The Yoke the Pharisees laid on the necks of the fathers was not God's Law.

4 For they (Pharisees) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

Doesn't it seem strange to you that neither Peter nor any others in that council meeting said anything about the traditions of men? It is only YOU who is talking about that here by deviating over to other sections of scripture that have nothing to do with what was clearly stated in that council meeting among the apostles, and that sect of believing pharisees, and a handful of disciples.

Click to expand...

What seems strange to me is that you seem to really believe the YOKE the Pharisees placed on the necks of the fathers was God's Laws.

Those Judaisers clearly proclaimed circumcision, which was commanded by God to Abraham for his descendants and for the generations to follow, AND the Law of Moses. Meanwhile, you and some others I've encountered lace together other versus into this context that are not contextually related nor even in proximity for such a tie, and you want us all to buy into that?

Click to expand...

Peter clearly mentions the "Yoke" placed on the necks of their fathers which they couldn't bear. Shall we not look at what that "Yoke" was that the Pharisees placed on the necks of men? The entire Bible talks of it. A 10 year old could identify what the Yoke was in 20 minutes of study. You equate the "Yoke" to God's Laws. The serpent equated God's Commandment to causing blindness. But Paul said God's Laws are written "for our sake's no doubt" and Peter said we ought to obey God rather than men.

Peter knew full well these religious men were not promoting obedience to God as you preach. Rather, they were trying to place the same "YOKE" on the necks of the people that they did in their fathers time.

Popular or not, the text says what it says, and your attempt at eisegetically injecting something into the text what is not there, stacked over against the writer's capable hand and mind of God to move the hand that wrote that ext to identify and record the traditions of men as an element in the mix, had that been an element in that dialogue at all.

Click to expand...

I'm not injecting anything. I am just not willing to flush the Holy Scriptures down some religious toilet in order to gain the praise of men. It is easy to find the "Yoke" that the Pharisees laid on the necks of the fathers. Why would you refuse to accept what is written in your own Bible?

I hope you can appreciate the magnitude of the things you're silently suggesting through the logical conclusions to your words. I mean, these are the kinds of tactics I would expect from mormons and jehovah's witnesses, not someone who would declare their allegiance and bonds to the purity of what's written.

Click to expand...

I'm not silently suggesting anything here. I am declaring loudly that the "Yoke" the Pharisees placed on the necks of men was not the Law of Moses. They called it the Law of Moses, but it clearly was not. Peter knew what the "Yoke" they TEMPTED GOD with was. The fact that you really believe they were tempting God by teaching others to obey God is fascinating in itself.

None of the other apostles corrected Peter by saying, "Now, hold on there, fella! Those sectarians in our midst were teaching the disciples traditions of men, not the real Law of Moses." No. He said what he said without challenge, and there is no hint from anything said by anyone in that chamber that would introduce a mix of the "traditions of men."

Click to expand...

It is a tradition of religious men to honor one part of God's instruction, while omitting other parts their religious masters tells them are unimportant. The Disciples unanimously agreed to tell the new converts to abstain from living a lifestyle that included transgressing God's Commandment where clean food and blood is concerned, fornication, and idolatry. Then told them where to hear the rest of God's Laws from Moses every Sabbath Day.

In fact, the Disciples simply gave the New Converts in Jerusalem the exact same instruction HE gave HIS Disciples.

Matt. 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; (Like don't eat blood, abstain from fornication, don't eat animals that are strangles to death, etc.)

but do not ye after their works: for they say, (They promote the Law of Moses) and do not.

Peter knew the story of Eve, where the deceiver, using some of God's Words, deceived her into believing God's Laws were a burden that make her blind. He knew the dangers of listening to the "other voice" as Eve did. So the Disciples sent the New Converts to hear first hand, straight from the mouth of Moses, God's instruction, the same thing Jesus taught them. And away from the religious men who were trying to place the SAME Yoke, the Pharisees laid on the necks of their fathers.

Why? Because the "YOKE" the mainstream preachers of that time were laying on the necks of the fathers, was not God's Laws, but their own religion they called God's Law.

Let's look at this for what it really is, shall we? That sect in the midst of the Jewish, Messianic believers, nobody can say with any degree of qualification that they were believers in the added traditions of men to be followed by all followers of Christ Jesus, including the Gentiles. You're trying to cast them into the same grouping as the Judaeo pharisees who were NOT followers of Christ Jesus.

Click to expand...

No JR, Peter "cast them in the same group" when he accused them of "TEMPTING GOD" by Placing the same "YOKE" on them that was placed on their fathers that they couldn't bear. All you need to do is look at what the "YOKE" was. Simply study for yourself why God sent the Prophets to them. Why the "fathers" were led astray.

Why is that? Are you saying that all pharisees, no matter that they believed in Christ Jesus or not, are to be cast into the same bucket of our understanding as to their beliefs about the traditions of men?

Click to expand...

If they are trying to place the same "YOKE" on the necks of the Disciples as the Pharisees placed on the fathers that caused them to go astray, then yes. Any man who Transgresses the Commands of God by their own religious tradition, are in the same bucket as the Pharisees who Jesus condemned for such a religious practice. It's called "iniquity". Something those who are truly the Christ's departs from. At least according to the Holy Scriptures.

Look, Peter was corrected by Paul because he too chose to eat separately from the Gentiles. We ALL can make mistakes, right? However, by what authority do you smear that sect of pharisees who recognized Christ Jesus as the Messiah? Yes, they were in error for trying to bind up the Gentile believers under the Law of Moses and circumcision for salvation, but does that relegate them to the pits of ill repute as purveyors of man-made traditions as law simply because their non-followers of Christ Jesus counterparts were followers of the traditions of men?

What say you?

Click to expand...

It's not about what I say, or what you say. According to the Christ of the Bible, it's about EVERY Word of God.

Acts 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Your philosophy doesn't make any sense here. You are claiming that some believing Jews were trying to get the New Converts to obey the Law God gave to Moses, and that Peter taught against the Law God gave Moses, calling it a "Yoke" that the fathers couldn't bear, then turns right around and tells the New Converts to abstain from transgressing 4 of the Laws God gave to Moses, and them tells them Moses is taught every Sabbath. A fact that Gentiles had been coming to know before Act's 15.

Acts 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

What Word's JR? The words of some "believing Jews" that were tempting God by placing a Yoke on the necks of the Disciples that was also placed on the necks of their fathers?? Or were they seeking the true Christ of the Bible who inspired Moses in the first place?

43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Are you preaching that the Word of God was "First" preached to the Jews, then erased? And now some other Word is preached to the Gentiles?

47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

What WORD was that? The Word's "first Preached to the Jews", YES?

Look JR. The Yoke of Bondage that caused the fathers to go astray was not God's Laws that HE gave His people through Moses. You have been convinced it is, but according to Scriptures it wasn't. I simply want to point out what the Pharisees of today will never point out.

I am thankful for the discussion, and it is important in this evil time to speak of these things. I understand your preaching of Acts 15, as I was born into it. But if a person turns away from the "Other voice" in the garden, and looks for himself, it becomes clear that the mainstream preachers of our time, just as the mainstream preachers of their time, got it wrong.

SwordmanJr said:

Dude, you quoted the context items that were the subjects of the discussion placed before the apostles in that meeting, then you deny those two items as the very subjects specifically addressed in the opening of that meeting.

Alright, then perhaps you would show to us what Peter specifically was addressing as inclusive in his "yoke" reference? Only TWO items were addressed as the problem, and there is nothing else mentioned that could be stated as being the yoke Peter was addressing.

Click to expand...

We know that this was Acts 15. I am not willing to erase all that came before this just to agree with modern religious man. We know the Gentiles were asking that the Law and Prophets be taught to them on the Sabbath of God prior to this, and that the Disciples and many Jews were right with them, and approved of this activity. What Laws would they be learning for Moses? The same Laws Jesus said to observe and do, Yes? Peter mentioned what had transpired prior to this time before he mentioned the "Yoke" these "self proclaimed teachers of the law" were tempting God with, that had been placed on their fathers, and them before their conversion.

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

Now you want to ignore everything that transpired between Acts 1 thru 15, including the inspired Word's of Peter Himself. And why? To defend your religious statements? To preserve your own philosophy?

Why would you teach it was "Tempting God" to teach them the Laws He gave Moses in the beginning of the chapter,, but not "tempting God" to require obedience to a few Laws of Moses, then send them to Moses to hear the rest, at the end of the chapter?

For the record, the only thing I am doing differently than you, is I am considering ALL of Peter's, Jesus' and the Christ's Words, and you have chosen to ignore them as if they have no meaning. Peter obviously didn't do this, as he referenced the "Yoke" that burdened their fathers. A Yoke Stephen pointed out before he was stoned for telling the truth.

[Mat 11:29-30 KJV] 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke [is] easy, and my burden is light.

What of Jesus? He instructed that we take up His YOKE, and His saying that it is EASY. Jesus calling His yoke EASY did not seem to Him a negative thing to use that term, but when Peter states that the yoke of the Law of Moses was too burdensome to bear, you start trying to spin the table around to try and put something else before us that simply doesn't match up with the text.

Click to expand...

So answer me this question please, In your philosophy, is it the same Christ speaking in Matthew 11 and it is speaking in Jeremiah?

Jer. 6:16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.

In your philosophy, is this the same Christ who came to earth in the person of Jesus? Is this not the Yoke of Christ?

But what does this same Christ say the men who HE gave this instruction would do with it?

"But they said, We will not walk therein."

So then who do I believe here? Do I believe you who preaches to the whole world that these men "DID" walk in the Ways of this Lord, and it was a Yoke of Bondage they couldn't bear? Or shall I believe the Word's of the Christ who says "walk in My Ways, they are not Burdensome", but religious men said "We will not walk therein", as it is to this day?

What is the agenda behind your religion? Why are you wanting us to believe what is not there? Your preaching is strange in its seeming aim to try and mask over the REAL objects of that meeting, and replace them with things that are not even mentioned. Holy Spirit is not a yoke, the traditions of men are NOT identified as the defining element within the descriptive term Peter used as a yoke, so how do you think you're going to convince anyone of your strange religion of swapping the obvious meaning with something else?

Click to expand...

It's not my fault that you have been convinced in the religious doctrines and traditions of the land. I am following the instructions of the Bible on how to be a brother. You are promoting things which are not true about God and HIS Words and i am trying to show you in the hopes that you might consider ALL of the Word's of God, and not just a verse here or there..

You are furthering ancient religious doctrines of man in your preaching about Acts 15. To come to your belief, men must reject everything that happened in the entire Bible from Gen, where the serpent convinced Eve God was a liar, and that God's Commandments were a burden that causes blindness, to Stephen who laid out perfectly the Yoke of Bondage that was laid on the necks of the fathers;
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.

But all the sudden in Acts 15, You preach all this changed, disappeared. That the "yoke" the fathers couldn't bear was no longer their own stiffnecked, uncircumcised hearts, which the entire Bible sets forth. No, you now preach that it was God's Law that caused their problem. Implying That they were simply innocent victims of an unjust God with unjust Laws.

A popular sentiment in the religions of the land for centuries, but a belief that is contrary to the teaching of the Holy Scriptures.

Intellectual honesty is something we should all practice. If I were to call together a meeting in the adjacent town, and my primary problem statement said that there came men from that town over to mine, demanding that, for us to travel on the roadways between our towns over to theirs, we in my town must drive only DORF brand vehicles, and that they had to be hot pink in color, and there stood up one of the key men in that town's council who asked, "Why place upon the people of that other town a yoke that our fathers and we could not bear?" Is it YOUR contention that it's intellectually honest to try and say that the two key problems being addressed to that other town's council is NOT the requirement for driving only hot pink color DORF brand vehicles on the roadway into their town?

Seriously?

What say you?

Click to expand...

Well I reject the belittling, Godless premise of your analogy. In a society with no Words of God or instructions from God, this analogy might have merit. But in Acts 15, we can all go back and see what the "Yoke" that the father's couldn't bear was. What led them astray, why God sent the Prophets to them.

And it wasn't because God's Law was a burden and Yoke of Bondage to them. That is your judgement of God, not the Christ's.

SwordmanJr said:

It's not about erasing anything. Peter said what he said about the Law of Moses because he knew that by trying to live by that Law was and is a burdensome life compared to the light yoke of Christ Jesus. It's the difference between living by the letter and living by the Spirit.

Click to expand...

That is A popular religious belief no doubt. That the Jesus of the Bible, and the Creator God of the Bible, are two different God's with two different gospels. One Spiritual, and one not. This religious philosophy you promote, that God's instruction is a Yoke of Bondage, was first introduced to mankind by the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

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?

2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

The first thing the serpent did, in this examples God had written for our admonition, was convince Eve that she was already saved. That God was basically a liar when HE gave her the command, and the punishment for rebelling against it.

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (In the day you reject the Commandment) then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Implying, as you do, that obedience to God's Laws causes the burden of blindness.

This same serpent, Paul wrote, disguises itself as "Ministers of Righteousness" which we are told over and over throughout the entire Bible to "Take Heed of".

When I read your post, I saw this ancient religious tradition of men, that God's Laws are the Yoke of Bondage which caused the fall of the COI. While it is true the serpent teaches this, God does not.

Duet. 30:11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

You say God's Laws are impossible to keep, God says they are not. Peter said "We ought to obey God rather than man". Therefore, the reason for the disagreement between us. Do I listen to you, or God. I choose God.

So I replied and tried to show you that the religious belief you promote, that is, God's Laws are so burdensome, so unjust that it is impossible for men to keep them, "Chains" on the soul who would trust God enough to "do them", is an ancient religious tradition of religious men, exposed by the Great and Mighty God of Abraham for all HIS Children to see, in the very beginning of the examples HE had written for our admonition.

So i posted many scriptures which set the stage for Acts 15, which clearly expose your religious doctrine, that God's Laws are the Yoke of Bondage that the COI couldn't bear, as the false teaching it is.

It seems the only way for your philosophy to stand in this case, is to reject many of the scriptures prior to Acts 15.

I think this is a mistake to omit God's word's, even/especially when they bring question to your religious doctrines.

Hey, if you want to live by the letter, then you're free to try it. All have tried and failed.....except One.

Click to expand...

I'm taking about men preaching things about the Christ which are untrue. I never said anything about "living by the letter". My post is about discerning the difference between God's Word's and the religious philosophy of man we are told to "beware of".

Who asked that? Where is that?

Click to expand...

Acts 13:14 But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down.

15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.

16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.

17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with an high arm brought he them out of it.

42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.

43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

I would ask you to tell me what they were learning on those Sabbath days? But you would not answer. They would be learning the "Way of the Lord" which you preach to the world is a "Yoke of Bondage" and "chains" which the fathers couldn't bear.

There is no doubt that we will continue to disagree. But i want to make sure you and those reading along know why.

It's not because I'm following the "Letter" which you would have others believe.

To believe your philosophy I would have to believe the following.

That the Christ, the Rock from which the Children of Israel (COI) drank, had made a covenant with Abraham.

Gen. 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

So this Christ promised to bless Abraham's children. And 430 years later, these COI cried out being in "Bondage". Not to God's Laws, but bondage to Egypt which symbolizes sin.

Ex. 2:23 And it came to pass in process of time, that the king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage.

24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.

25 And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them.

So this God sent them Moses to remind them of HIS "WAY" that Joseph had taught their fathers, but they had forgotten. Then God spent some time showing them His Great Power. Then God asked the COI to "Trust Him" and take the Blood of an Unblemished Lamb and place it on their homes in a specific way. And they did TRUST HIM and do as HE Commanded, so God led them from Egypt in fulfillment of His Promise to Abraham.

Then this same God led them to the Red Sea, and they were seemingly trapped. But Moses told them "Be still and see the salvation of God", once again pleading with the people to trust God. And they did TRUST God, and HE brought them across on dry land as promised.

But if I were to believe the religion you promote, I would have to believe that after these COI trusted God while they were still in Egypt, and then again while at the Red Sea, that this same God rewarded Abraham's Children for their trust in Him, and "had respect unto them" by placing unjust, burdensome Laws that "Chained" them with a Yoke of Bondage worse than the Egypt He just rescued them from.

Then this God commanded that they "keep" these burdensome Laws you preach to the world are impossible for men to "keep", or they would be destroyed in the Wilderness, and when they didn't keep them, He slaughtered them by the thousands.

But even though God slaughtered them and punished them, they just kept on trying to obey Him as He Commanded them through out the Bible. Even in Acts 15 these poor innocent Pharisees were simply trying to obey God as HE instructed them through the Prophets HE sent to them for centuries.

You are free to call this religion the gospel if you like. But it is not true. God's Laws are not impossible for men to keep. The COI were not punished because they trusted God and were simply following HIS instruction.

You are furthering religious doctrines of the land you were born into, that you "CALL" the Gospel of Christ, just as those Pharisees were furthering doctrines of the religions of the land they were born into that they "CALLED" the Law of Moses. You have the same choice they had, that Abraham had, and the Gentiles have. Are you going to listen to the religious philosophy of the religions we were born into? (God's Laws are a Yoke of Bondage) Or will you follow the instructions of the Christ you claim to honor, and "Live by" Every Word of God, as HE instructs? ("Take MY Yoke on you")

1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

SwordmanJr said:

Your religion is chalked full of allowances for gross misrepresentations. I promoted no other God than the One who inspired the words of Peter to be recorded in the context they were spoken, which is in reference to the Law of Moses and circumcision.

Click to expand...

Do you mean these Word's of Peter?

Acts 5:28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

33 When they heard that, they were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them.

I just hope you might take "Every Word" of the Holy Scriptures into account, and not just those words that can be used to prop up this religious doctrine of the land or that.

Your religion seems to have a problem with God's Sovereignty; alleging by implication that He has no right to have given a burden to great to bare, the Law of Moses, to His intended, stiff-necked and idolatrous people who NEEDED that burden to teach them the necessity for love and obedience.

Click to expand...

Paul said the Law and Prophets were written as examples for us, not them as you preach here. So that we would not lust after the things they lusted after. And that these things "happened to them for our admonition", not theirs, as you imply in your religion. So once again I am faced with a choice. Listen to your voice, the "other voice", Or listen to God's Voice. I choose God.

Also, I admit God has the power to be a liar and a deceiver if He chose to be. But I don't believe God is a Liar. So when HE said to HIS People;

Duet. 30:10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, and if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.

11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.

12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

I don't automatically believe God is Lying to them. But the very foundation of the religion you are promoting is based on the belief that God lied to His People. That His Laws are impossible to hear and "do", but He deceived them into believing they were "doable" so they would try and fail, so He could destroy them in the wilderness.

And all based on one sentence from Peter you imply annulled EVERY word he spoke prior to Acts 15. Talking about Pharisees who you somehow believe were teaching obedience to God while Peter was teaching men to reject God's Laws he just told these same people they should obey. Only to send them to Moses on God's Sabbath days. For what? I guess so they could learn about all the lies the God of Abraham told Abraham's Children.

The religious philosophy you are promoting flies in the face of the entire Bible.

But as a purchased servant of HIS, I must try and point out the foolishness of such a teaching, in the hopes you might, at least, look into it.

That you seem to see no value in God doing the writing upon our hearts, by His Sovereign choice that you obviously don't approve of, and of which I really don't care one way or the other if you approve or not, you're just going to have to get over it. God is God, not because you dictate in your own mind how He operates in this world through time, but because He is SOVEREIGN! I'm content with that.

Click to expand...

The Holy spirit of God doesn't write lies about God on the hearts of His People. There is a spirit that does, but it isn't the Holy Spirit. I don't "dictate in my own mind" that God isn't a Liar. The Scriptures say as much.

Titus 1:1 Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;

2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

So once again, I am faced with a choice. Do I believe your religion, whose foundation rests on the belief that God Lied to His People He brought out of Egypt, regarding His Commandments, Laws and Statutes?? Or do I believe this same God "cannot lie", and it is the philosophy of religious man He warned of over and over that is the liar.. I choose the God of the Bible, who I believe didn't lie to His People. You are free to follow the god of your choosing.

Get it? He's God, and nothing and nobody will ever change that. Your misrepresentations of what the word of God says carries no weight whatsoever in relation to the clear language of what's written that any one of us can read.

Jr

Click to expand...

Because I don't believe God lied to His People, I am "misrepresenting His Word"? Because I don't erase the words of Peter that doesn't fit some religious narrative that God's Laws burden the men who strive to walk in them as instructed?

Surely we must consider the possibility that God didn't lie to Eve or to the COI. Even though the "other voice" implies that HE did.

If God isn't a liar, then your entire religious foundation comes crumbling down, as Jesus Himself has tried to show you.

Matt. 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. (Who can not lie)

26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

1 Cor. 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

We will probably continue to disagree JR. But these conversations are prudent and needful in these evilest of times. There is a cost to choosing the Christ of the Bible, over the religions of the land.

I just want you to be careful out there and to consider "Every Word of God" as Jesus Himself Commanded.

Thanks for the discussion.

SwordmanJr said:

What is legalism in this context? Simply this:

Legalism is the corruption of virtue caused by misapplying, inventing or over-exalting commandments, especially those that do not have any practical application under the New Covenant (in Christ Jesus (Yeshua)) period of mankind's history.

Some are bound to argue 2 Tim 3:14-17, where the Law of Moses is a part of ALL scripture. Yes. I agree. Nothing has passed or has been done away with to this very day. However, it still existing as what is written does not meet with its adherence what was written for some.

Click to expand...

indeed it all hinges on the somewhat arbitrary definition one "selects" for the term "legalism".

And as you say - 2 Tim 3 does point to "all scripture" being used for doctrine and correction.

Paul also points out that the unit of Law "where the first commandment with a promise" is the 5th commandment (IE the TEN) is within that larger code of Law - God's Commandments - still applicable to Christians today - Eph 6:1-2. (I notice that this oft repeated Bible detail does not show up here).

Here is the actual "New Covenant" as we find it in actual scripture. (unchanged in the NT as we see in Heb 8:6-12)

Jer 31:31-33
31 “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33 “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

And I think we all agree that the "LAW" of God where the "first commandment with a promise" is the 5th commandment - was well known to Jeremiah and his readers and they would know it was spoken directly by God at Sinai and written by God Himself.

So then it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - to this very day.

As we probably all agree.

"Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4
"what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19