• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Acts 10 Controversy

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Shalom Ten-K,

The following posts were taken from another thread discussing the verse you have just posted:

Why make it so complicated when it is simple?


quot-top-left.gif
Quote:
quot-top-right.gif
quot-top-right-10.gif
because of romans 2:29

But a YAHudite is he who is so inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart in spirit,
not literally, whose praise is not from men but from ELOHIM
quot-bot-left.gif
quot-bot-right.gif




this is a very bad interpretation because it ignores the context. The VERY NEXT 3 sentences say this:



Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision?
Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.
3 What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?




Which gentiles were given circumcision? Which gentiles were entrusted with the oracles of God?

Rav Shaul is obviously making a comparison between jews who believe in Yeshua and those who don't. This has nothing to do with gentiles becoming "spiritual jews". That strange concept can not be found in the Bible anywhere. There is one mention in the book of Galatians of gentiles being ADDED to the "Israel of God" but that is not the same as BECOMING the Israel of God.

If you take an overview of the book of Romans, you will find that it's purpose for being written was because of a schism developing between the jews and gentiles in the congregation at Rome.

The jews were trusting in their heritage and the gentiles were saying that the destruction of Israel was proof that God was finished with them. Isn't it interesting that this problem remained in Rome even after this book is written which tells the gentiles not be arrogant against the jews "lest they also be cut off" ?


and...




quot-top-left.gif
Quote:
quot-top-right.gif
quot-top-right-10.gif
"there is neither Jew nor Greek"...

What does this mean?
quot-bot-left.gif
quot-bot-right.gif


It means that He is not a respector of our "person" We are all equal in regard to race or sex or financial standing.....or any other human measurement.

We are all equal in our status of preference in His sight. This does not mean we have all been chosen for the same role.


and...

I would also like to point out something that is overlooked by so many in Romans 2:28-29

The author (implies in some translations, and states outright in others) that one is not a jew ONLY on the outward (or flesh) but ALSO in the inside (heart). He is speaking of the spiritual jews who have BOTH circumcision of the heart and of the flesh.

It's a difficult sentance structure to follow, but the context of those two verses puts it into perspective so clearly... thank you for pointing that out Yod.

 
Upvote 0
sojeru and simchat,

the simplicity in Christ's love and gifts
are beyond measure. after receiving
the Holy Spirit, His desires for us are
no longer a mystery or a burden, they
become a way of life without question.
a circumcised heart is a heart that
never lacks love and total obedience,
a heart that only serves One with
no exceptions. to no longer have
any doubts about what is required of
you in this life or the next is a shield
of love that no man or spirit can
penetrate, a virtual fortress if you will,
a house made of Love and Life and
Holiness.

may our Lord bless and keep you both
and may you seek and search out
His desires for your lives and loves.

sincerely, joanna
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I think my entire point is that the Gentiles still have the same door open to them as they did in the Tenach (old test).

The 'change' that was made with Y'shua was that the Get (bill of divorce) was broken so that Israel may return united with Judah as the Bride. The door has always been open to the gentiles to become a part of that Bride. But now, the bill of divorce that was written has been cancelled and Israel and Judah are to return to the original marriage covenant (torah) as a beacon of light to the nations.

Shalom,
yafet.
 
Upvote 0

Henaynei

Sh'ma Yisrael, Adonai Echud! Al pi Adonai...
Sep 6, 2003
21,343
1,805
North Carolina - my heart is with Israel ---
✟51,595.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Constitution
simchat_torah said:
I think my entire point is that the Gentiles still have the same door open to them as they did in the Tenach (old test).

The 'change' that was made with Y'shua was that the Get (bill of divorce) was broken so that Israel may return united with Judah as the Bride. The door has always been open to the gentiles to become a part of that Bride. But now, the bill of divorce that was written has been cancelled and Israel and Judah are to return to the original marriage covenant (torah) as a beacon of light to the nations.

Shalom,
yafet.
Original (in my limited experience) and thought provoking........
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
"Hellen"(greek word) Diasporic Jew or Greek? I had promised that I would post my Greek study on the word "Hellen" (I compiled this some time ago), so here it goes:

I've been looking further into the translation of a simple word in the Greek of the NT that makes, dare I say, as big or even BIGGER difference than the translation of nomos!!! The word is "hellen" - typically translated as "gentile" or "Greek". Take a moment to consider the implications of translating this (and related terms) as hellen-JEWS (not the typical hellen-gentiles, as is assumed). If it hasn't hit you yet, let me give you some food for thought:
1) Rather than "Paul, the apostle to the gentiles" we have "Shaul, the one sent to the Hellenized Jews of the dispersion" -- This would be a paradigm-shift that would rock everything!!! And - if this translation is accurate - would demonstrate just how far replacement has been taken!

2) Rather than "gentiles" as the "uncultivated wild olive branch" being "grafted into the culitvated olive branch (for the first time)" we have "Hellenized (dispersed) Israel" being "grafted BACK INTO (regathered/teshuvah/renewed) the olive branch" from which they had become estranged and understandably "wild" in comparison to.

3) Halacha (Oral Torah) was called a "fence" for the Torah by the rabbis. Part of that "fence" meant that faithful Israel needed to stay seperated from "Hellenized Israel" (for example, not eating in their houses like Kepha was condemned for doing by Shaul). When Shaul speaks of the "middle wall of partition" being "broken down" ...are Christians right in saying this refers to the seperation between "Jew" and "gentile"? The Aramaic (from the Peshita) for "middle wall of partition" is the VERY SAME termonology used by the rabbis for - yep, that's right - "fence" (of the Oral Torah!!!). SO... let's put it together. Shaul (submitted to the beit din headed by Ya'chov [James]) was explaining the halachic decision made by the Beit Din HaNetzarim located in Yerushalaim, namely, that Israelites-Tzadikim (righteous Israelites) were NOT to remain seperated from Hellenized-Israelites-Ba'al-Teshuva (Hellenized Israelites who were returning to Torah, but not YET living righteous lives) BECAUSE the previous halachic decision ("fence") had been "abolished in the flesh of Mashiac" BECAUSE Mashiac had come FOR THE VARY REASON of cleansing Israel of her sins and making possible the REGATHERING of the DISPERSED OF ISRAEL. Ahhhhhh... now THAT makes sense in the context.

4) Getting back to Shaul's self-conception... what was it he saw himself as doing? Was he "sent to the gentiles" because the "Jews" had rejected their Messiah? This sets the stage for the obvious conclusion that "gentiles" replaced "Israel after the flesh" because they are the "spiritual Israel" who accepted what the "Jews" forfeited. Here's where a MASSIVE paradigm shifts takes place. "Jews" (in the Gk) is actually "Judeans" (i.e. the Israelites who were NOT in the dispersion, or Judeans who had moved into the dispersion for whatever reason). Let's try out the (correct?) translation and see what happens. Shaul sees the "Judean Israelites" as not (as a whole) accepting their Mashiach. Therefore, Shaul goes to the "Hellenized Jews" in the dispersion, because Yahoshua is the Messiah of ALL Israel (not just the Judeans). After all, the Neviim (prophets) had spoken EXTENSIVELY (nearly all of them!) about the REGATHERING of the dispersed of ISRAEL. The dispersed needed to hear that their redemption had come. Keep in mind that Shaul saw himself as an example of him who's "feet on the mountain brings good news ("gospel")". According to Isaiah (and nearly ALL the other prophets!), who was it that was to receive this "good news"? Was it "gentiles"? Ahhh, NO! It was the dispersed of Israel of course, the "Hellenized Jews". It was good news because Elohim was to regather them and re-establish Israel to make her a "praise in all the earth" and to RENEW the covenant He had made with them. It was good news because Israel - though they had violated the covenant and been scattered to the four corners of the earth - was now to be regathered and re-established. Who was to make this happen? The "son of David" of course - the Messiah. The same one that Shaul was offering. I tried to ask myself the questions that a 1st century faithful Jew would ask. What in the Scriptures would drive Shaul to be so passionate about being "sent to the gentiles"? - I don't see it. On the other hand, what in the Scriptures would drive him to be so passionate about being "sent to the dispersed (Hellenized) of Israel"? - I see nearly ALL of the prophets VERY PASSIONATELY describing this sort of calling!!! I suspect Shaul would be VERY HONORED to call the dispersed of Israel to do teshuvah, but I think he would be VERY CONFUSED if he was asked to go to the "gentiles". Being "sent to the gentiles" makes absolutely no sense according the Scriptures!!! However, being "sent to the dispersed (Hellenized) of Israel" is in fact the ENTIRE THEME of the prophets!!!!!!! And, notice where in fact Shaul goes - the SYNAGOGUES.

5) I could go on, because the possibilities open a NEW PARADIGM for interpretting Shaul, the Netzarim, and the entire foundation of how they saw: themselves, Hellenized Israelites, and gentiles. Just IMMAGINE... Shaul (the one sent to the Hellenized-Jews) writing to SYNAGOGUES in the dispersion, rather than "Paul" (the apostle to the gentiles) writing to "Christian Churches" he "established (from scratch)" throughout the world. Which truly makes sense... I think Shaul was "sent" to the "hellens" alright (the literal Gk), but I think the "hellens" were hellen-JEWS... after all, if we indeed see his letters as written to synagogues (not "churches") then we can see how "Jews" could be the obvious context for which "hellens" he was refering to. There were several "hellens" and some of them were Jews. This is esspecially interesting in Romans 9-11.

I looked up "hellen" in my concordance and greek dictionary, and did some cross-checking for its use in the LXX (this comes in very handy ever since I have been enrolled in my greek classes). I found very quickly another term - "ethnos". This term is usually translated "nation" or "people group". It can mean bloodline, but that specific use is usually the word
"phoo-lay" (used for "tribe" in NT, as in the tribes of Israel). In Isa. 49 (you should look this up) for example, ethnos is translated "gentiles" or "nations". HOWEVER, the context seems to GLARINGLY contradict this translation!!! It seems obvious (to my limited understanding anyway) that it is the dispersed of Israel that is being refered to - look elsewhere from chps 40-55 to see what I mean. Isa 49:1-7 is sometimes called the other "servant's song" because it resembles Isa 53. The "literal meaning" (first level of the so called "four-levels of understanding" - PaRDes as explaned at SANJ) of Isa 53 is obvious - "suffering servant = Israel". The other "levels of understanding" are what's used to point to the Messiah.
Here's the thing. By ALL OTHER wording in Isa 40-55 it seems the dispersed of Israel are who receive the "light in the darkness" and wait for the "justice" (mishpatim) to be delivered to them. HOWEVER (and here's where I think the confusion comes in), it is the "servant" (of YHVH) that brings all these things to the "ethnos" (what's translated as "nations" or "gentiles"). Here's the confusion. The translators ask (I know this because I went to the LXX and the Masoretic Hebrew to translate this myself), "How can 'Israel' be the 'servant' and deliver this 'light' to 'Israel' (as in the dispersed of Israel)???????" That's the question I asked myself in trying to understand these cryptic prophecies. I think other translators have asked these same questions, and have consequently solved this apparent paradox by translating "ethnos" as "nations/gentiles".

HOWEVER, THIS FAILS!!! The context seems to refer to these same "ethnos" people as ISRAEL!!! How can this be??? I asked myself this and pondered...

When I was trying to understand Shaul's writings I was baffled why he contrasted "ethnos" with "Israel". I was also baffled why he contrasted "hellen" with "Israel". These are the two main terms that Christians translators use to prove that their "apostle Paul" was "sent to the gentiles". (By the way, the Greek can also be translated as "amoung the ethnos ["nations"]). I thought to myself, "Isa also seems to contrast "ethnos" with "Israel", but Isa seems to mean this in such a way that "ethnos" is actually the DISPERSED OF ISRAEL!!!

EURRRREEEEEEKKKKKKKKKKKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!


What if Shaul read to prophet Isaiah... What if Shaul understood the "servant" to be Israel-the-faithful-remant... What Shaul also used PaRDes (deeper levels of understanding beyond the literal) to understand a more hidden meaning of this "servant" to ALSO indicate the Messiah... What if Shaul understood the contrast between "Israel" and "ethnos" to be contrasting "Israel-the-faithful-remnant" with "the dispersed of Israel"... What if Shaul used "ethnos" to describe the dispersed of Israel in his letters SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE that term was already used in the LXX to describe the dispersed of Israel, thus making it obvious WHO he was refering to and making it easy to make the conection between his ministry and Isaiah's prophecies... What if this has been OBVIOUS the whole time but Christian translators have only perpetuated the the false dogma (like they have in everything else) and they can't see past the dogma anyway because 1900 years of "scholarship" has blinded people to any other interpretation... Then again, what if I'm wrong...

These questions kept me up last night with books all over my floor. It would all come together if the LXX translation of Isaiah uses "ethnos" (contrasted with Israel) to mean the "dispersed of Israel". If that is so, then there can be no other interpretation to Shaul's letters, PERIOD - case closed. Shaul proved his message using "Scripture" and the Bereans (most likely Greek-speaking-Jews) confirmed his message in the SCRIPTURES - Tanach. Isaiah is by far quoted the most (second only to Devarim, Dt.), and understanding Isa would reveal how Shaul viewed his mission!!! Other quotes he uses are revealing. In Romans he quotes Hosea (speaking for YHVH) in saying (paraphrased) "Those I called 'not-my-people' I will call 'my-people'". This is UNARGUABLY refering to the dispersed of Israel in the book of Hosea, so why should we think Shaul is speaking of someone else in his letter? Did Shaul not know what Scripture meant??? It could be argued that Shaul was using PaRDeS to apply this to "gentiles", but I don't see why if there is a better answer. What if Shaul - following the exact same wording as he found in Isaiah - contrasted "Israel" with "ethnos" to mean contrasting "Israel-the-remnant" with "Israel-the-dispersed-and-captive-in-darkness"....... This makes sense when trying to interpret the beginning of Romans chp 11.

Equally as important, "Jews" needs to be translated literally "Judeans". Further research also needs to be done in how first century Jews used the terms "ethnos" and "hellen". For example, if one Jew is speaking with another Jew about Jews, would he simply say "hellen" to refer to a hellenized short for short... or would need to specify "hellenized Jew" rather than simply say "hellen". For example, even today, if an Orthodox Jew is speaking to another Orthodox Jew about another (non-religious) Jew, and he simply calls him "hellenized" he has no need of specified that he doesn't mean "gentile" but he means "hellenized-Jew". This should not seem odd...

Well, in hopes of good responses, Shalom...

-Yafet.
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Essentially, in my last post I attempted to detail the word "Hellen" in Greek. What people group does it apply to? Once we answer this question we can more accurately see who Sh'aul was sent to. If it means gentiles, then the 'plan of G-d' changed with the birth of the Brit Chadasha. However, if he was sent to various Essenic communities, or to the Diaspora, then HaShem holds open the door to the gentiles that he always held open.

Your thoughts?

shlaom,
yafet
 
Upvote 0

Sephania

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2004
14,036
390
✟16,387.00
I've read this whole thread and found it very interesting. What you have written makes so much more sense. It certainly reconciled the differing times in Acts and the letters where in one place Paul is saying that he is visiting a synagogue and teaching and next he is claiming to be an apostle to the gentiles.
I can see what you mean by the replacement, it happened so much longer than I have thought.

Good work!
 
Upvote 0

Sephania

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2004
14,036
390
✟16,387.00
It is true, the nations have always had it open to them to join themselves to Israel. Moschiah was not promised to the nations but instead would be a light, such as a light house a beacon to draw them to Israel and for Israel to in turn teach them about HaShem. Yeshua did not change that.



The real question is, how to tell the church? ;) :eek:
 
Upvote 0

Sephania

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2004
14,036
390
✟16,387.00
I have been thinking about this some more and trying out other scriptures in this context.

Matthew 9
12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Ezekiel 34
1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
2 Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?
3 Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock.
4 The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them.
5 And they were scattered, because there is no shepherd: and they became meat to all the beasts of the field, when they were scattered.
6 My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill: yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them.
7 Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD;
8 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;
9 Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the LORD;
10 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them.
11 For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out.
12 As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.
13 And I will bring them out from the people, and gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited places of the country.
14 I will feed them in a good pasture, and upon the high mountains of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie in a good fold, and in a fat pasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel.
15 I will feed my flock, and I will cause them to lie down, saith the Lord GOD.
16 I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick: but I will destroy the fat and the strong; I will feed them with judgment.
17 And as for you, O my flock, thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I judge between cattle and cattle, between the rams and the he goats.
18 Seemeth it a small thing unto you to have eaten up the good pasture, but ye must tread down with your feet the residue of your pastures? and to have drunk of the deep waters, but ye must foul the residue with your feet?
19 And as for my flock, they eat that which ye have trodden with your feet; and they drink that which ye have fouled with your feet.
20 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD unto them; Behold, I, even I, will judge between the fat cattle and between the lean cattle.
21 Because ye have thrust with side and with shoulder, and pushed all the diseased with your horns, till ye have scattered them abroad;
22 Therefore will I save my flock, and they shall no more be a prey; and I will judge between cattle and cattle.
23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
24 And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it.
25 And I will make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause the evil beasts to cease out of the land: and they shall dwell safely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods.
26 And I will make them and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will cause the shower to come down in his season; there shall be showers of blessing.
27 And the tree of the field shall yield her fruit, and the earth shall yield her increase, and they shall be safe in their land, and shall know that I am the LORD, when I have broken the bands of their yoke, and delivered them out of the hand of those that served themselves of them.
28 And they shall no more be a prey to the heathen, neither shall the beast of the land devour them; but they shall dwell safely, and none shall make them afraid.
29 And I will raise up for them a plant of renown, and they shall be no more consumed with hunger in the land, neither bear the shame of the heathen any more.
30 Thus shall they know that I the LORD their God am with them, and that they, even the house of Israel, are my people, saith the Lord GOD.
31 And ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, saith the Lord GOD.



Matthew 10
1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;

Matt 15
21 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
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.



Matt: 18
11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.
 
Upvote 0

Charlesinflorida

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2004
503
18
74
Florida, US
Visit site
✟753.00
Faith
Messianic
I am entering this thread because of a referal on March 29th from another thread, to Yafet,

Going bak to your original theory you state:
"Take special note of vs. 8...
They will become like that which they worship. Now turn with me to Romans 1

"18 The wrath of G-d is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness..."

Just a note: in order to suppress the truth, you must first have the truth. So this is speaking of those who have had the truth, but now suppress the truth.

"19 since what may be known about G-d is plain to them, because G-d has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world G-d's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

One way in which we interpret (well, this should be the only way) the Brit Chadasha is by using the Tanach as our dictionary. Interestingly, in the Hebrew Brit Chadasha the word behind "men" in vs. 20 is "adam" not "ish". Adam (man) is ONLY used in reference to Yisra'el, never to refer to gentiles... never.
It is a term soley used for referal to Yisra'el only. "

This seems like slight of hand. You use a scripture in the Tanahk to set up an aguement and make reference to Romans 1, but use a Hebrew version translation which has chosen to use a word for Gentile that proves your point. However we have no original copy of Romans in Hebrew but the Greek only. We must therefore accept the Greek word which does mean Gentile men, former pagans. It seems like you are trying to support the Messianic Israel, hidden Jews idea even if you say that you are not.

Pauls message which is repeated many times in his writings is that the Gentiles "Ethnos" are also chosen by God, based on their trusting faith in Yeshua, and are therefore full members of the covenants of Israel and are welcome and encouraged to begin liing as covenant people in obedience to Torah. See Eph2 for example.The Jerusalem council agred with this and God verified it as well when he gave the Ruach to the Gentiles without their becoming jews first.

In this passage you are working from, these people did not have the Torah and then forgot it. The testimony of Gods existance was in all of nature which is rtestimony of him. That is what the verses say. Take special note of vs. 8...
They will become like that which they worship. Now turn with me to Romans 1

"18 The wrath of G-d is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness..."

Just a note: in order to suppress the truth, you must first have the truth. So this is speaking of those who have had the truth, but now suppress the truth.

"19 since what may be known about G-d is plain to them, because G-d has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world G-d's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

I think that your theory or Avis theory is a little off center and does not make room for the heart of the Gospel which is God would bring in the Gentiles through their faith in his Messiah and make them a part of Israel.

CIF
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
This seems like slight of hand. You use a scripture in the Tanahk to set up an aguement and make reference to Romans 1, but use a Hebrew version translation which has chosen to use a word for Gentile that proves your point. However we have no original copy of Romans in Hebrew but the Greek only. We must therefore accept the Greek word which does mean Gentile men, former pagans. It seems like you are trying to support the Messianic Israel, hidden Jews idea even if you say that you are not.
The Tenach is the basis for all of the Brit Chadasha. To consider any of the Brit Chadasha apart from the Tenach would not only be in err, but it would be creating a new religion. You state "we have no original copy of Romans in Hebrew", However, let me remind you we have no original copy at all... Greek, Hebrew or otherwise. We have remnants of copies in Greek and Aramaic. The Aramaic often reflects that which is Hebrew as well. Beyond that, there are Hebrew copies of these texts, allbeit they are of a later date.

Slight of hand? no.

I would go so far as to state your interpretation of "former pagans" is isogesis, not exogesis. Isogesis is adding your theology to a texts where the meaning is not plain, or flatly stated. No where does it mention these people are/were pagans and now converted. In fact, the most logical argument stands to reason that these are men who previously held the truth... or Jews.

Pauls message which is repeated many times in his writings is that the Gentiles "Ethnos" are also chosen by God, based on their trusting faith in Yeshua, and are therefore full members of the covenants of Israel and are welcome and encouraged to begin liing as covenant people in obedience to Torah.

Sha'ul was sent to the diaspora, or to the 'hellen'. Through the proofs I have laid out in this thread, it shows Sha'ul being sent to the hellenistic Jews, not to pagan gentiles. Halachically, in the first century, these unbelieving Jews were referred to as gentiles (more on gentiles in a moment).

The Jerusalem council agred with this and God verified it as well when he gave the Ruach to the Gentiles without their becoming jews first.
The Jerusalem council evaluated what the "G-d fearers", or new believers were to walk in light of. It was a process... first they were to adhere to the Noachide covenant (ie: refraining from blood, etc) and then they were to attend synagogue on shabbat and learn the rest of Torah. That much is explicitly clear in Acts 15.

In this passage you are working from, these people did not have the Torah and then forgot it. The testimony of Gods existance was in all of nature which is rtestimony of him.
No, I am interpretting it as people who once had the Torah and disavowed walking in light of it. The "testimony" is a Jewish idiom for Torah. fyi...

It seems like you are trying to support the Messianic Israel, hidden Jews idea even if you say that you are not.
Quite hardly. I am in no way in support of British Israelism, Replacement theology, etc. See below:
I think that your theory or Avis theory is a little off center and does not make room for the heart of the Gospel which is God would bring in the Gentiles through their faith in his Messiah and make them a part of Israel.
I believe the same door that was open to the gentiles in the Tenach is still open today. That did not change with the "new testament". The New covenant (or renewed covenant) was one made with Israel and Judah.
Jeremiah 31:31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the L-rd, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah--
No where does this mention the 'new covenant' is being made with the gentiles. This christian idea is totally unfounded in scripture.

In Hosae and Ezekiel G-d delivered the bill of divorce (in hebrew: get) to the disobedient Jews. Y'shua came to reconcile these Jews and renew the Torah covenant (brit Chadasha) with them. This renewing of the vows must take place so that Israel is once again a light to the nations.

Without Israel, the spotless bride (the priest to the nations), there is nothing attracting in the eyes of the gentiles.

Allow me to repeat this: The same door that was open in the tenach is still open to the gentiles today.

This has not changed with the Brit Chadasha. The "heart of the gospel" is to bring back the Jews who have committed adultry and bring them back into covenant with HaShem (renewal of their marriage vows). It has nothing to do with the Gentiles.

Shalom,
yafet
 
Upvote 0

Sephania

Well-Known Member
Jan 7, 2004
14,036
390
✟16,387.00
This brings about the question of Paul going to the synagogue's first ( to the Jew first) and then to the gentiles ( the assimilated of Israel) were among them. How would SHaul determine who they were? They were no longer following Torah, but some things must have remained else why would he word is letters as if they already had some foreknowledge? In turn those of Israel would be the ones bringing forth the Good news to those that had previously been in the dark, and this is where the "other religious practices got in".


Shaul said he was preaching the cross, thus the resurrection, right? Well Yeshua sent out his twelve first and then seventy men ( his own Sanhedrin?) to the lost sheep of Israel, to tell them the kingdom of heaven was at hand. Wouldn't it seem logical that to those whom they healed, raised from the dead, cured of leoprosy and cast out demons from would be the ones that Shaul would go to to "report" on the crucifixtion and resurrection so that they would believe fully? These would be the lost sheep of ISRAEL and from Them would go forth the gospel to the nations.

In Revelation we see a hint that there will be sealed ones from all the tribes ( except Dan) that do what? Are they called to bring the Gospel one last time? Because right after that John sees many, many people dressed in white and is told that they came out of the great tribulation.
 
Upvote 0

simchat_torah

Got Torah?
Feb 23, 2003
7,345
433
47
San Francisco, CA
Visit site
✟9,917.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I am still a bit disturbed by this comment:
It seems like you are trying to support the Messianic Israel, hidden Jews idea even if you say that you are not.


Everything I have purported is purely Judaic. To me, the idea that the "brit chadasha" was for the gentiles is yet another form of replacement theology. The 'church' has taken a role that was distinctly given to Israel and Judah and placed it upon the shoulders of the gentiles...

Jeremiah 31:31 "Behold, the days are coming, says the L-rd, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah--


I do not support replacement theology and never will.
 
Upvote 0

visionary

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.
Site Supporter
Mar 25, 2004
56,978
8,072
✟542,711.44
Gender
Female
Faith
Messianic
Cornelius was actually a part of the dispersed Jews. We can see this through the prophetic language used, through the symbols in the vision, and even through the region he was located within...

Acceptable Jews and not acceptable called gentiles, then rest are known as?????heathens?

Cornelius, a centurian of the band called the Italian was one of those non acceptable jews called gentiles?

Obviously God knew him and Cornelius knew God because they were able to communicate and Cornelius knew who he was talking to "What is it , Lord?" So now the scene is set and Peter must be prepared to greet Cornelius with brotherly love. "what God hath cleansed, that call not thou common."...."While Peter thought on the vision, the spirit said unto him, behold three men seek thee. Arise therefore and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing, for I have sent them."

Is that not the summary of it?

Visionary
 
Upvote 0

Charlesinflorida

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2004
503
18
74
Florida, US
Visit site
✟753.00
Faith
Messianic
Yafet,

You had said that those who feel a drawing to Torah are most likely really Jews and don' know it, which is very much a kin to the teachings of Messianic Israel such as Batya Wooten. Jews who don't even know they are Jews, but now it is being revealed.

You said above that God gave Israel a Get, a divorce in Hosea and Ezekiel. Then would not recalling them to become his bride be a violation of the Toah pattern, that a man shall not remarry a woman whom he has divorced?

I understand your position that the Writings of Paul, or really of the New Testament was addressed to the lost tribes, but is the wording for exogenic consistent in all the New testament writings? When Paul says Gentiles "Ethnos" does he never mean Gentiles, and is refering only to Israel. Why didn't he use more obvious communications then to clearly differentiate between Lost Israel and Gentiles.

Thoughout the Tanahk there are many references to Gentiles "Those who dwell in your Gates" meaning those who adjoin themselves to Israel by choice, are to be included in all of the law and the covenants same as Israel. Noachide attachment of Gentiles sets them in a second class position, which is not from Torah. In fact it was Talmudic and really formed after the decision of Acts 15. In 1st century Judaism there were Jews, including converts, Gentiles, those who were not at all attached to Israel, righteous Gentiles who were part of the outer court and second class, and progressing postylites, who were in process, attending shul, would be circumcised and become Jews. The Gospel does not continue this process of separation of the Gentles as Noachide believers and continuing on the other side of the wall of separation. That wall, which was really doctrine first, and made a physical wall on the foundation of that doctrine, was still standing physically when Paul ministered and said it was torn down by Messiah, so we know that he was refering to the doctrine that makes Gentiles less than Jews in the eyes of God.

Sorry, but it just doesn't mesh with everything in scripture. I agree that Yeshua went only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, the northern Kingdom and those in the south who had fallen away. That he states clearly. But his commission to the disciples were to go into all nations and to make disciples of all men. Not to make disciples of all of the lost sheep of Israel.

CIF
 
Upvote 0

koilias

Ancient Hassid in the making
Aug 16, 2003
988
44
52
Cambridge MA
Visit site
✟1,388.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
A quick and I think relevant note:

Archaeology of ancient synagogues throughout the Diaspora shows that gentiles made up a sizeable proportion of the congregations. A fourth century inscription in Aphrodisias in Asia Minor shows that nearly half of the donors to a Jewish charity were gentiles. Inscription of gentile names are interspersed often among Jewish names in dedicatory inscriptions in ancient synagogues in other places as well. There are numerous clues that gentiles were present in ancient synagogues in droves as late as the fourth-fifth century! Sometimes these gentiles were not fully observant and worshipped other gods, but when they are observant they are called "G-d Fearers" (in the Aphrodisias inscription they are called just that).

The term "G-d Fearers", Yarei Shamayim, is how gentile worshippers of HaShem were normally referred to, in Rabbinic writings as well as in the Brit haHadasha.
 
Upvote 0

Hix

Zionist Jew
Dec 29, 2003
1,421
144
40
✟24,784.00
Faith
Judaism
Politics
UK-Conservative
Charlesinflorida said:
Yafet,
You said above that God gave Israel a Get, a divorce in Hosea and Ezekiel. Then would not recalling them to become his bride be a violation of the Toah pattern, that a man shall not remarry a woman whom he has divorced?

They say, “If a man divorces his wife, and she goes from him and becomes another man’s, may he return to her again?” Would not that land be greatly polluted? But you have played the harlot with many lovers; “Yet return to Me,” says the Lord. (Jeremiah 3:1)

The mercy and compassion of the Almighty is far beyond the scope of man’s comprehension. Whereas normally the betrayed husband would never take back his adulterous wife, our merciful God will forgive His wayward nation. While the transgressed husband would never part with his burning wrath against his estranged wife, Jeremiah points the way to forgiveness, reconciliation, and salvation with the Almighty. In contrast to the enraged husband who would never take back his unfaithful wife, G-d will, upon repentance, compassionately receive his disobedient people.

“Return, O backsliding children,” says the Lord, “for I am married to you. I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion.” (Jeremiah 3:14)

Shalom and G-d bless
~Hix~
 
Upvote 0