Acts 10 Controversy

[simchat_torah]

I have heard a lot about 'renewal services' in Chassidic movements lately. These are meetings that are similar to revival. They have modern music (guitars, drums, etc) with a lot of prayer spontaneously coming forth. Very similar to a charasmatic meeting but without the christian doctrine, etc.

Kinda neat actually.

These are usually on other days of the week besides Shabbat to draw in the "generation X and Y" crowds. Seems like a lot of Jewish adults are enjoying this form of worship.

anywho... i'll let you respond now.

-yafet

 

[visionary]

"(44) THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM,
(45) WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS."

I think the key is in the covenant with them.....and the BIG WHEN... which is when He takes away their sins....which is found in THE DAY OF ATONEMENT fulfillment. This time they will not miss the type meets reality fulfillment. By faith they keep the Day of Atonement, by faith they will be lead to the truth, the reality when it meet with the fulfillment of type. Just as the spring type Passover, they missed the Lamb of God, but this time they will be in the right place, at the right time, with the right heart and mind, for the real experience.

That will be how, and why they are there when Yeshua makes the covenant with them.

 

[muffler dragon]

[/font]
I guess my first question in response would be:
Who is supposed to make who jealous?

Secondly, I would see some of this happening today. It might seem that many of those who have remained faithful to the Torah have become somewhat complacent. However, after the modern messianic movement, and various other newer groups rising who are torah observant, it has inspired the chassidic, orthodox, etc groups who have always been "walking in the light" to do so with passion.

-just an idea-


I know this wasn't exactly the answer you were looking for, or the length of answer, but its something to mull and chew on.

shalom,
yafet

You know what's funny, Yafet, is you are in essence asking me the very question I am asking you. It's a matter of evaluating the word Gentiles again. Does the word in this context come from ethnos, as you have shown in your previous posts? Does it come from an entirely different word?
If it is the same, then you kind of have to ask yourself the following: if we go with the assumption that Sha'ul was the apostle to the Diaspora Jews, then how does their teshuvah (spelling?) make the observant Jews (or Paul's country men above) jealous? That is what I am trying to discern. As I've mentioned to you before, I have no lexicon or anything to break down the terms above, and I was hoping you might be able to take the time and really break this down from a translation stand point for me.
As has been taught to me for such a long time (and yes, my eyes have been opened to the negative ramifications) is the following: this passage is normally taken in the context that G-d reached out to the heathen/pagan nations to draw them in through Y'shua. Through this drawing in and dispensing of His Grace, the Jews are then made jealous and they evaluate turning back to G-d (teshuvah).
I am not advocating my previous education, just looking for answers.

With much love, brother.

Nathan

 

[Shamash Of Yeshua]

It was something she shared with me via email... that privately, if someone comes to her (ie: messianic) and expresses that they feel a burden for Torah, she tells them to search out their heritage.

You can see where her line of thinking is. If Torah is only for the Jew, and these people have a hunger for Torah... then they must have Jewish lineage.

My conclusions are nearly the same as hers, but my justification is different. I do believe that most who search out Torah are of Jewish lineage (my conclusion) but not because "torah is only for the jew" (her justification) but because the Tenach is riddled with so many prophecies about Jews returning unto the Torah in the end times (my justification).

Essentially, her and I both feel that those who turn to torah today are most likely Jewish somewhere in their bloodline. But I think this is so because of prophecy, and she thinks so because Torah isn't for the gentile (in her view).

Shalom,
-Yafet.

My thought on this is that Since those who look to Torah now need to have Jewish blood to move to Israel. I heard that many Kings of countries of the world had Jewish blood or rather that is what my Dad says. And well we have relations who were cousin to a king of Norway.

Blessed is HE who comes in the Name of YHVH. Who came in the Name of HaShem? Yeshua is the First. Then those who look to Yeshua, YHVH's Right Hand, for TRUTH. Another IMPORTANT fact is Ruach of YHVH. Who is filling those who are TRUSTING in YHVH. Yeshua like Yoseph(He was appointed the Title above every name except who? The Pharoah who was considered G-d to the Egyptians and many others. YHVH used this for HIS GOOD) and so Yeshua HaMashiach rules as Adoni, for He is King of Kings, Mighty G-D, Prince of Peace as well as High Priest. And remembering that Yeshua only rules because HaShem's Ruach is ONE with Him and He has obeyed all of what HaShem has told Him to do. And remember we can TOO be One with HaShem as Yeshua is One with HIM. Yeshua was appointed His position by YHVH, Blessed is HIS Name.

Shalom and Shalom,

Tag

P.S. I have to speak when my brain meets my heart and HaShem's Ways. Great posts.

 

[simchat_torah]

I just wanted to be the first to post in MJ since CF came back up.

 

[Travis ll]

I am new here so, I am stumbling my way around these post. Some look to be rather old, so this may be ground covered twice. I did notice something I would like to make note of.
It is would be worth a thought to remember that there was more to Israel that Judah.
It is quite eye opening through all the N.Test to apply the scriptures where it mentions gentiles (a mis-interpretation, noted) to the nations, ethnos of the Northern house of Israel.

The part of Israel that was divorced first.
I am sure you have covered the marriage, divorce and remarriage somewhere. Which explains how God, could make a promise of remarriage to an adulteress and still not break his own adultery laws. Israel would have to be a widow. What kind of God would he be that could die? Yet through Yahshua, we have our, scrafice, redemption, reconcilliation and are now approved for the remarriage provided we keep our lamps trimmed and virginal condition of mind and body.
Christ did come to his own first, Judah. They would have him not. The rest of Israel is the one who will make Judah jealous.
Israel is the only one who has the covenant, before and after. Lost Israel does not know who she is, her way, her paths back is hedged by God.
Heb 8:8- and Jer 31:31- . These scriptures are plain but misunderstood by modern Christianity.

I love some of the research you guys have done here. It did broaden my understanding of Acts.
Gotta go.

 

[simchat_torah]

interesting insights Travis...

Thanks for visiting!
stop back by sometime and tell us a bit about yourself (in the 'mini introductions' thread at the top of this forum)

shalom,
yafet

 

[Sephania]

Yes, I agree! I would like to hear more of your theory fleshed-out.

Now Yafet, that this thread is back up on page one, would you consider taking some of your precious time to answer a non- confrontational query as I posted back in March?

I will take you one of a city and two of a family and bring you back to Zion................Jer3:14

Anyone have any insight to what this means?

I know I basically addressed this to all, but would most like to hear your interpretation or thoughts on this specifically in concert with your premise on Acts 10.

As Zem says, TYIA!

 

[simchat_torah]

hmmm... which post number was that in Zayit? I didn't see it on the first page of this thread.

Also, I am not quite sure what you are asking. That's kinda why I was looking for the post to get the context of the question.

Anywho... shalom!
yafet

 

[Sephania]

Are you "porpoisely" being obtuse? To save you from looking I purposely posted the post I asked about in post 110. Here it is again:

I will take you one of a city and two of a family and bring you back to Zion................Jer3:14
Anyone have any insight to what this means?

Now, according to your theory on Acts 10 and the nations, and the different beasts, do you think this scripture has a similar or related meaning? Or if not just what do you think this scripture is talking about?

Whew, you can be soooo hard to converse with, or is that just a part of your "charm" Oy! Some people can be so exhusting. You could make a mother cry "Uncle"!

 

[simchat_torah]

You had said, "Now Yafet, that this thread is back up on page one," and I thought you meant the quote was on page on of this thread... hahaha.. but I guess you meant this thread was on page one of the forum.

hehe, I wasn't trying to be had to converse with I just misunderstood what you meant. So, no I wasn't purposefully being diffucult!

I'll take a look at the Jeremiah passage here in a sec and get back with ya.

 

[simchat_torah]

Ah... I think I see what is going on here. While Jeremiah 3:14 is quoted above, it is only partially quoted... here is the rest:

14 "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. 15 And I will give you shepherds according to My heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding.

So here the author is referencing what seems to be two camps: the backsliding children and those who are already in Zion. Which, of course, fits perfectly with this thead...

The backslidden children are those of Ephraim, the Jews who remained in the diaspora and followed pagan dieties. The faithful children are the observant jews who continued in the covenant. HaShem will gather them together as one.

The particular verse in question is embedded in a whole call to repentance to those of the diaspora (all of chapter 3). A lot of the allegories parallel Hosae's statements in chp. 1-3 of Hosea.

shalom,
yafet

 

[Sephania]

Yes, I was just focusing on the purposful picking and choosing that HaShem seems to be conveying here, one from a city and two from a family.

Now lots of questions, hope you are willing to continue discussing this.

The "numbers" ( 1 city - 2 family) are prefaced by "for I am married to you." I will have to get my chronological table out but wasn't this written after the "divorce"? ( Jer 3:8) so what do you make of that?

Also one from a city-- one what? Family? , individual? believer?

And two from a family--- tribe? believer?

Just a thought, I have noticed that many who come to faith in Y'shua are the only ones in their families, there are sometimes two, a brother and sister or I have rarely heard of a sister and a sister but by different avenues, and they kept it secret from each other and their parents. But these are of Judah, so you think that he is speaking only of the diaspora and those who don't know their heritage?

I appreciate your insights.

 

[simchat_torah]

The "numbers" ( 1 city - 2 family) are prefaced by "for I am married to you." I will have to get my chronological table out but wasn't this written after the "divorce"? ( Jer 3:8) so what do you make of that?

The divorce was never finalized, the Get had been issued, but was broken by Y'shua.
G-d never divorced Israel.

And two from a family--- tribe? believer?

Two from a family: the family of Abraham... the descendants who are like the stars of the sky.

Also one from a city-- one what? Family? , individual? believer?

One from a city, the City of Zion... the othe member of the family had left the city and was wandering in the wilderness.

so you think that he is speaking only of the diaspora and those who don't know their heritage?

Oh no... maybe you know your heritage, maybe you don't.... but G-d does and that's pretty irrelavant in the scheme of things. I think he is speaking of those who are of the diaspora and not in the 'city of zion'. Some (or most) in the diaspora know who they are and some don't. But I don't think that its speaking to those who know vs. those who don't know. I think its speaking towards those who are still a part of zion vs. those who have decided to wander the wilderness.

Granted, some have been in the wilderness so long they have forgotten who they are. But that is irrelevant as HaShem certainly knows

-yafet

 

[simchat_torah]

I have been pondering another interpretation to the sheet (tallit). Possibly this was representative of a marriage between the exiles and the faithful remnant.... My People and Not My People (as evidenced in Hosea). Now that the peace offering was made (zevach shalamim) the two, who had previously been one united bride, can be betrothed into one being once again.

Of course, this delves highly into Jewish imagery in the Tenach, but I think it is plausible.

 

[simchat_torah]

Its interesting to go back and see the perspective I had shortly before I decided to convert.

 

[visionary]

The divorce was never finalized, the Get had been issued, but was broken by Y'shua.
G-d never divorced Israel.

Two from a family: the family of Abraham... the descendants who are like the stars of the sky.

One from a city, the City of Zion... the othe member of the family had left the city and was wandering in the wilderness.

Oh no... maybe you know your heritage, maybe you don't.... but G-d does and that's pretty irrelavant in the scheme of things. I think he is speaking of those who are of the diaspora and not in the 'city of zion'. Some (or most) in the diaspora know who they are and some don't. But I don't think that its speaking to those who know vs. those who don't know. I think its speaking towards those who are still a part of zion vs. those who have decided to wander the wilderness.

Granted, some have been in the wilderness so long they have forgotten who they are. But that is irrelevant as HaShem certainly knows

-yafet

I am glad you see Him in the picture.

 

[simchat_torah]

heh, of course I don't view Jesus the same as I did... 5+ years ago... But I will say that it was interesting to read through my interpretation of the Acts 10 vision.