Colossians 2:16

[HARK!]

I almost forgot. I found this in my research:

1. Colossians:

In col a great deal is said regarding a false teaching, an insidious theosophist doctrine, the teachers of which were alienating the Christians in Colosse from the gospel, and were disseminating their speculations, which led to the worship of angels in contrast to the worship of Christ, to esoteric exclusiveness wholly opposed to the universality of the gospel, and to an asceticism injurious to Christian freedom, and derogatory to the human body as indwelt by the Holy Ghost. These tenets are identical with the more fully developed Gnosticism of the generation succeeding that of the apostles; and at the root of the Colossian false teaching there lay the same error which the Gnostic mind had no way of meeting, namely, that there could be no connection between the highest spiritual agency, that is God, and gross corporeal matter.

From this theoretical basis arose another error--that as sin is inherent in the material substance of the body, therefore the only way by which perfection can be reached is to punish the body by asceticism, so that through the infliction of pain and the mortification of the flesh the region of pure spirit may be reached, and thus man may be etherealized and become like God.

Much more: Gnosticism - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

This false Pagan syncretistic doctrine is in opposition to the happiness that can be found in celebrating YHWH's Moedim.

 

[DamianWarS]

Colossians 2:16

(CLV) Col 2:16
Let no one, then, be judging you in food or in drink or in the particulars of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,



Colossae is in Southwest Turkey. It's over a 800 mile walk from Jerusalem. There wasn't a strong Jewish presence there, judging the Pagans for eating what Pagans eat, nor drinking what Pagans drink, nor for observing their Pagan holidays.

Let's back up to verse 8.

(CLV) Col 2:8
Beware that no one shall be despoiling you through philosophy and empty seduction, in accord with human tradition, in accord with the elements of the world, and not in accord with Christ,

None of what is bolded has anything to do with following Torah.

Messiah wouldn't be taking part in Pagan holidays. He wouldn't be eating pigs sacrificed to Tammuz. He wouldn't be drinking blood.

Messiah would keep YHWH's appointed times and Sabbaths, even as Paul did, long after Yahshua had ascended.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?

YHWH outlined in Leviticus what was given to us for food.

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

When a believer begins following Paul; as Paul followed Yahshua; as Yahshua followed the Torah; he becomes subjected to pressure from his friends and family, to drag him back into his old ways.

I gave up pork when I was 16. Every time I would visit my grandmother; it was pork, no matter what the meal.
This battle lasted until I was in my mid 30's, after her daughter, my mother, died.

There was resistance when I stopped bringing trees into my home.

(CLV) Jer 10:2
Thus says Yahweh: The way of the nations, do not learn, And by the signs of the heavens, do not be dismayed, Though the nations are being dismayed by them.
(CLV) Jer 10:3
Indeed concerning the statutes of the peoples, it all is vanity, For one cuts it down, a tree from the wildwood, The work of an artificer's hands with an adz;
(CLV) Jer 10:4
With silver and with gold he makes it lovely; With nails and with hammers they fasten it, so that it cannot quaver.

When I stopped celebrating that winter solstice holiday; the resistance continued to intensify.



There is evidence that there was also a strong Gnostic community in Colossae.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?—

(CLV) Col 2:23
which are (having, indeed, an expression of wisdom in a willful ritual and humility and asceticism) not of any value toward the surfeiting of the flesh.

Is this about Gnosticism, or is this about avoiding the abominable? One thing that's clear is that the YHWH's Torah does not fall under the directions and teachings of men.

Let's move to the next verse.

(CLV) Col 2:17
which are a shadow of those things which are impending—yet the body is the Christ's.

Here Paul explains that YHWH's Sabbath, and his Moedim (feasts), are a shadow of what is to come; and that the shadow is of Messiah.

Messiah was executed on Passover, without leaven, to begin the Moed of Unleavened Bread. He was risen on First Fruits. He brought us the Ruach Ha'Kodesh on Pentecost, that the Torah may be written on our hearts.

His first coming was connected with the Spring Moedim. His second coming may be connected to the Fall Moedim.

He will return on the final trump. This may be associated with the Feast of Trumpets. He will judge the world. This may be associated with the Day of Atonement. The Feast of Tabernacles may be associated with the wedding feast.

YHWH's moedim are appointements with the Father, and rehearsals.

Paul was encouraging the new converts not to let their Pagan and Gnostic, friends and family, judge them; as they walked near, in the shadow of Messiah, keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah.

Col 2 also comments on another law found in Torah and this is regarding circumcision. Paul says to the Colossians "In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead." Does Paul here instruct the Colossians to continue to value circumcision in the flesh or spiritual circumcision? Which one is the crux of what God desires? Which one keeps the law?

But how can this be reconciled with what God instructs Moses? Gen 17 tells us circumcision is a sign of the covenant between Moses and God saying in v11 "You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you." but this isn't just for Moses and his family but also his descendants and generations to come (v9). the passage, in fact, was previously more detailed about this in v7 calling it an "everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you". It goes on repeating the importance in 13 and 14 saying "Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." The passage puts undeniably high value on circumcision and is explicit that this is circumcision in the flesh.

And this is the example Paul provides devaluing circumcision of the flesh to emphasize spiritual circumcision and also baptism which holds the same values. He does this as a segue to passages in question saying "therefore do not let anyone judge..."

if you want to interpret the passage in context we must unpack "therefore" so as to know how to unpack what therefore points to.

 

[HARK!]

Col 2 also comments on another law found in Torah and this is regarding circumcision. Paul says to the Colossians "In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead." Does Paul here instruct the Colossians to continue to value circumcision in the flesh or spiritual circumcision? Which one is the crux of what God desires? Which one keeps the law?

That's a false dichotomy; but I don't want to debate that here. I started a thread on the subject here: Circumcision

But how can this be reconciled with what God instructs Moses? Gen 17 tells us circumcision is a sign of the covenant between Moses and God saying in v11 "You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you." but this isn't just for Moses and his family but also his descendants and generations to come (v9). the passage, in fact, was previously more detailed about this in v7 calling it an "everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you". It goes on repeating the importance in 13 and 14 saying "Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant." The passage puts undeniably high value on circumcision and is explicit that this is circumcision in the flesh.

Again, I would be happy to discuss this subject here: Circumcision

And this is the example Paul provides devaluing circumcision of the flesh to emphasize spiritual circumcision and also baptism which holds the same values. He does this as a segue to passages in question saying "there do not let anyone judge..."

That is a few thoughts back, as Paul speaks of dying to our sinful life at baptism. It's more likely that the "therefore" applies to what directly precedes the "therefore." If not, we could theoretically make the latter hinge on whatever we choose.

This was one of the fatal flaws that I used to discuss, as a young teenager, when my mother would let me talk to the Jehovah's Witnesses who would bring their Watchtower magazines to our door. They would leave in frustration; as I would open up my bible, and continue to point out that we can't chop up scripture, and rearrange the pieces, to make it say what we want.

if you want to interpret the passage in context we must unpack "therefore" so as to know how to unpack what therefore points to.

Now let's look at this point in context.

(CLV) Col 2:15
stripping off the sovereignties and authorities, with boldness He makes a show of them, triumphing over them in it.

(CLV) Col 2:16
Let no one, then, be judging you in food or in drink or in the particulars of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,

Verse 15 says that someone has triumphed over those who might have any authority to judge you.

Who might that be?

(CLV) Col 2:10
And you are complete in Him, Who is the Head of every sovereignty and authority,

If we are following Yahshua's example, no one has the authority to judge us. They might attack us. they might even execute us in our walk; but as Yahshua, we don't give them jurisdiction. They have no authority in our Father's Kingdom.

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

 

[Dkh587]

Paul is encouraging the Colossians to not let anybody judge them except for the body of Messiah..


Colossians 2:15-16

Let no man therefore judge you (in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come) but the body of Christ.

Bolding and punctuation added for clarity.

the word “is” is not in the manuscript, which is why the KJV italicizes “is”.

it doesn’t say “the body is of Christ”.

it says “the body of Christ”

we are instructed to judge within the body of Messiah.

the Colossians were sabbath keepers, and were being pestered and judged by outsiders of the body of Messiah, hence “let no man judge you but the body of Messiah”

 

[HARK!]

Paul is encouraging the Colossians to not let anybody judge them except for the body of Messiah..


Colossians 2:15-16


Bolding and punctuation added for clarity.

the word “is” is not in the manuscript, which is why the KJV italicizes “is”.

it doesn’t say “the body is of Christ”.

it says “the body of Christ”

we are instructed to judge within the body of Messiah.

the Colossians were sabbath keepers, and were being pestered and judged by outsiders of the body of Messiah, hence “let no man judge you but the body of Messiah”

Very interesting. The CLV uses the word "yet" for Gll61; yet the KJV most often translates this word as "but."

The KJV translates Strong's G1161 in the following manner: but (1,237x), and (934x), now (166x), then (132x), also (18x), yet (16x), yea (13x), so (13x), moreover (13x), nevertheless (11x), for (4x), even (3x), miscellaneous (10x), not translated (300x).

G1161 - de - Strong's Greek Lexicon (KJV)


....and yes, the CLV adds the word "is;" although they do acknowledge that they are adding it.

The rendering you presented is far more accurate.

 

[Scott Husted]

Colossians 2:16

(CLV) Col 2:16
Let no one, then, be judging you in food or in drink or in the particulars of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,



Colossae is in Southwest Turkey. It's over a 800 mile walk from Jerusalem. There wasn't a strong Jewish presence there, judging the Pagans for eating what Pagans eat, nor drinking what Pagans drink, nor for observing their Pagan holidays.

Let's back up to verse 8.

(CLV) Col 2:8
Beware that no one shall be despoiling you through philosophy and empty seduction, in accord with human tradition, in accord with the elements of the world, and not in accord with Christ,

None of what is bolded has anything to do with following Torah.

Messiah wouldn't be taking part in Pagan holidays. He wouldn't be eating pigs sacrificed to Tammuz. He wouldn't be drinking blood.

Messiah would keep YHWH's appointed times and Sabbaths, even as Paul did, long after Yahshua had ascended.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?

YHWH outlined in Leviticus what was given to us for food.

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

When a believer begins following Paul; as Paul followed Yahshua; as Yahshua followed the Torah; he becomes subjected to pressure from his friends and family, to drag him back into his old ways.

I gave up pork when I was 16. Every time I would visit my grandmother; it was pork, no matter what the meal.
This battle lasted until I was in my mid 30's, after her daughter, my mother, died.

There was resistance when I stopped bringing trees into my home.

(CLV) Jer 10:2
Thus says Yahweh: The way of the nations, do not learn, And by the signs of the heavens, do not be dismayed, Though the nations are being dismayed by them.
(CLV) Jer 10:3
Indeed concerning the statutes of the peoples, it all is vanity, For one cuts it down, a tree from the wildwood, The work of an artificer's hands with an adz;
(CLV) Jer 10:4
With silver and with gold he makes it lovely; With nails and with hammers they fasten it, so that it cannot quaver.

When I stopped celebrating that winter solstice holiday; the resistance continued to intensify.



There is evidence that there was also a strong Gnostic community in Colossae.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?—

(CLV) Col 2:23
which are (having, indeed, an expression of wisdom in a willful ritual and humility and asceticism) not of any value toward the surfeiting of the flesh.

Is this about Gnosticism, or is this about avoiding the abominable? One thing that's clear is that the YHWH's Torah does not fall under the directions and teachings of men.

Let's move to the next verse.

(CLV) Col 2:17
which are a shadow of those things which are impending—yet the body is the Christ's.

Here Paul explains that YHWH's Sabbath, and his Moedim (feasts), are a shadow of what is to come; and that the shadow is of Messiah.

Messiah was executed on Passover, without leaven, to begin the Moed of Unleavened Bread. He was risen on First Fruits. He brought us the Ruach Ha'Kodesh on Pentecost, that the Torah may be written on our hearts.

His first coming was connected with the Spring Moedim. His second coming may be connected to the Fall Moedim.

He will return on the final trump. This may be associated with the Feast of Trumpets. He will judge the world. This may be associated with the Day of Atonement. The Feast of Tabernacles may be associated with the wedding feast.

YHWH's moedim are appointements with the Father, and rehearsals.

Paul was encouraging the new converts not to let their Pagan and Gnostic, friends and family, judge them; as they walked near, in the shadow of Messiah, keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah.

I'm curious ... do you believe if you do not keep the law as you have been laying it out that you are not as most christains deem, saved?

 

[Der Alte]

I almost forgot. I found this in my research:
1. Colossians:
In col a great deal is said regarding a false teaching, an insidious theosophist doctrine, the teachers of which were alienating the Christians in Colosse from the gospel, and were disseminating their speculations, which led to the worship of angels in contrast to the worship of Christ, to esoteric exclusiveness wholly opposed to the universality of the gospel, and to an asceticism injurious to Christian freedom, and derogatory to the human body as indwelt by the Holy Ghost. These tenets are identical with the more fully developed Gnosticism of the generation succeeding that of the apostles; and at the root of the Colossian false teaching there lay the same error which the Gnostic mind had no way of meeting, namely, that there could be no connection between the highest spiritual agency, that is God, and gross corporeal matter.
From this theoretical basis arose another error--that as sin is inherent in the material substance of the body, therefore the only way by which perfection can be reached is to punish the body by asceticism, so that through the infliction of pain and the mortification of the flesh the region of pure spirit may be reached, and thus man may be etherealized and become like God.
Much more: Gnosticism - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
This false Pagan syncretistic doctrine is in opposition to the happiness that can be found in celebrating YHWH's Moedim.

Nonsense. This article says absolutely nothing about celebrating YHWH's moedim.

 

[Minister Monardo]

Colossians 3:
1 If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.
2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth.
3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.
Question:
If someone commits to the mandate that Paul lays out here in the opening to chapter 3, need they contend at all with the mix of religious, philosophical and cultic practices of the first century that Paul is dealing with here? Don't we have enough to deal with in modern heresies, and sciences so called?

If the purpose of the OP is to support the claim that Paul is encouraging converts from the nations to keep the Law of Moses, then a different question comes up.
Is the body of Christ supposed to bring forth a new priesthood? Did the Law of Moses apply to the house of Jacob equally as to the Levites, or did they have a different mandate? Did they have an inheritance in Jacob, or was the Lord their inheritance? Did they not have unique statutes, such as who they could marry, and when they could come in unto a dead body?
Only a priest, a son of Aaron, could offer the Lord's incense. When Uzziah tried it, the leprosy broke out on his forehead.

Deuteronomy 24:
8 Take heed in an outbreak of leprosy, that you carefully observe and do according to all that the priests, the Levites, shall teach you; just as I commanded them, so you shall be careful to do.
9 Remember what the Lord your God did to Miriam on the way when you came out of Egypt!

Does the priesthood follow the law, or do they establish the law? Who is sufficient to teach the church
the difference? Let them do so, for the law is good, if it is used lawfully.

 

[HARK!]

Nonsense. This article says absolutely nothing about celebrating YHWH's moedim.

I didn't say that it did; did I? I was merely pointing out that the Gnostic asceticism that was rampant at Colossea is an antithesis to YHWH's Moedim.

 

[Junia]

Colossians 2:16

(CLV) Col 2:16
Let no one, then, be judging you in food or in drink or in the particulars of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,



Colossae is in Southwest Turkey. It's over a 800 mile walk from Jerusalem. There wasn't a strong Jewish presence there, judging the Pagans for eating what Pagans eat, nor drinking what Pagans drink, nor for observing their Pagan holidays.

Let's back up to verse 8.

(CLV) Col 2:8
Beware that no one shall be despoiling you through philosophy and empty seduction, in accord with human tradition, in accord with the elements of the world, and not in accord with Christ,

None of what is bolded has anything to do with following Torah.

Messiah wouldn't be taking part in Pagan holidays. He wouldn't be eating pigs sacrificed to Tammuz. He wouldn't be drinking blood.

Messiah would keep YHWH's appointed times and Sabbaths, even as Paul did, long after Yahshua had ascended.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?

YHWH outlined in Leviticus what was given to us for food.

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

When a believer begins following Paul; as Paul followed Yahshua; as Yahshua followed the Torah; he becomes subjected to pressure from his friends and family, to drag him back into his old ways.

I gave up pork when I was 16. Every time I would visit my grandmother; it was pork, no matter what the meal.
This battle lasted until I was in my mid 30's, after her daughter, my mother, died.

There was resistance when I stopped bringing trees into my home.

(CLV) Jer 10:2
Thus says Yahweh: The way of the nations, do not learn, And by the signs of the heavens, do not be dismayed, Though the nations are being dismayed by them.
(CLV) Jer 10:3
Indeed concerning the statutes of the peoples, it all is vanity, For one cuts it down, a tree from the wildwood, The work of an artificer's hands with an adz;
(CLV) Jer 10:4
With silver and with gold he makes it lovely; With nails and with hammers they fasten it, so that it cannot quaver.

When I stopped celebrating that winter solstice holiday; the resistance continued to intensify.



There is evidence that there was also a strong Gnostic community in Colossae.

(CLV) Col 2:21
"You should not be touching, nor yet tasting, nor yet coming into contact,"

(CLV) Col 2:22
(which things are all for corruption from use), in accord with the directions and teachings of men?—

(CLV) Col 2:23
which are (having, indeed, an expression of wisdom in a willful ritual and humility and asceticism) not of any value toward the surfeiting of the flesh.

Is this about Gnosticism, or is this about avoiding the abominable? One thing that's clear is that the YHWH's Torah does not fall under the directions and teachings of men.

Let's move to the next verse.

(CLV) Col 2:17
which are a shadow of those things which are impending—yet the body is the Christ's.

Here Paul explains that YHWH's Sabbath, and his Moedim (feasts), are a shadow of what is to come; and that the shadow is of Messiah.

Messiah was executed on Passover, without leaven, to begin the Moed of Unleavened Bread. He was risen on First Fruits. He brought us the Ruach Ha'Kodesh on Pentecost, that the Torah may be written on our hearts.

His first coming was connected with the Spring Moedim. His second coming may be connected to the Fall Moedim.

He will return on the final trump. This may be associated with the Feast of Trumpets. He will judge the world. This may be associated with the Day of Atonement. The Feast of Tabernacles may be associated with the wedding feast.

YHWH's moedim are appointements with the Father, and rehearsals.

Paul was encouraging the new converts not to let their Pagan and Gnostic, friends and family, judge them; as they walked near, in the shadow of Messiah, keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah.

yes, that i show i understood this passage. The Jewish believers faced criticicism from the Gentile believers for still following their Jewish customs- Paul is saying not to judge as these things are a shadow of what is to come. there are Christians who keep Torah, and those who do not. But we are one in Christ, so we not to judge one another.

 

[Junia]

What does the scripture say?



He didn't have to It's a matter of fact. I already presented the millstone verse. It's another metaphor, which proves my point.



How is that?



What back ground? What's your point?



Does it have to be a disciple? Why isn't the Masters word good enough?

(CLV) Lk 16:17
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of the law to fall.



It only takes one to read it every Shabbat.

(CLV) Ac 15:21
For Moses, from ancient generations, city by city, has those who are heralding him, being read on every sabbath in the synagogues."



They had their letter, supposedly from Paul.



Why do you persist in asserting that they didn't have the TaNaK? Talk about speculation...

"They had their letter, supposedly from Paul"

???? of course, Paul wrote it. who else could have written it?

 

[Der Alte]

Previously Posted this thread.
The average person did not have copies of the scriptures because they had to be handwritten which was very time consuming therefore very expensive,
You cannot show me one verse where former pagan Christians regularly attended synagogues.

Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus.XXXVIII.
The 43 apostles ordained, that “we should not judge any one in respect to meat or drink, or in regard to a feast day, or the new moons, or the sabbaths.” (Col_2:16) Whence then these contentions? whence these schisms? We keep the feast, but in the leaven of malice and wickedness, cutting in pieces the Church of God; and we preserve what belongs to its exterior, that we may cast away these better things, faith and love. We have heard from the prophetic words that these feasts and fasts are displeasing to the Lord. (Isa_1:14)

Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. Book XI.
12.And since he knew that those who have a loftier conception of what things are pure and what impure according to the law, turning aside from the distinction about the use of things pure and impure, and superstition, I think, in respect of things being different, become indifferent to the use of meats,31 and on this account are condemned by the Jews as transgressors of law, he said therefore, somewhere, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink,” etc., (Col_2:16) teaching us that the things according to the letter are a shadow, but that the true thoughts of the law which are stored up in them are the good things to come, in which one may find what are the pure spiritual meats of the soul, and what are the impure foods in false and contradictory words which injure the man who is nourished in them, “For the law had a shadow of the good things to come.” (Heb_10:1)​

The operative word.

Is this response supposed to mean something? What I quoted was a historical record of the faith and practice of the early church.

 

[Der Alte]

Amen!
and of course --
Acts 17:1 they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.” 4 And some of them were persuaded; and a great multitude of the devout Greeks, and not a few of the leading women, joined Paul and Silas.

Is this supposed to mean that uncircumcised gentile Christians attended synagogues with Torah observant Jews?
Wrong! If "devout Greeks" were Christians Paul would not have to reason "with them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ." The devout Greeks could only be Jewish proselytes NOT Christians.
Jesus did not say that His followers would attend synagogues with Jews.

Matthew 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Matthew 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
Mark 13:9 But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.
Luke 12:11 And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:
Luke 21:12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.
John 16:2 They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.​

 

[BobRyan]

I posted this

(CLV) Ac 18:4
Now he argued in the synagogue on every Sabbath and persuaded both Jews and Greeks

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.

(CLV) Ac 17:17
Indeed, then, he argued in the synagogue with the Jews and with the (ones being) reverent, and in the market on every day with those happening along.

Amen!

and of course --

Acts 17:1 they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.” 4 And some of them were persuaded; and a great multitude of the devout Greeks, and not a few of the leading women, joined Paul and Silas.

No wonder then we see GENTILES asking for "more gospel preaching" to be presented on "The NEXT Sabbath" Acts 13

42 So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. 43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.
44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord. 45 But when the Jews saw the crowds

Is this supposed to mean that uncircumcised gentile Christians attended synagogues with Torah observant Jews?

Yes - they called them "God-fearing proselytes" as we see in the case above.

Wrong! If "devout Greeks" were Christians Paul would not have to reason "with them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ." The devout Greeks could only be Jewish proselytes NOT Christians.

skipping a few details there...

Those God-fearing proselytes were not asking for "more gospel " AFTER not having heard and accepting it - but rather AFTER hearing it and accepting .

No wonder then we see GENTILES asking for "more gospel preaching" to be presented on "The NEXT Sabbath" Acts 13

42 So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath. 43 Now when the meeting of the synagogue had broken up, many of the Jews and of the God-fearing proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were urging them to continue in the grace of God.
44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord. 45 But when the Jews saw the crowds

 

[HARK!]

I'm curious ... do you believe if you do not keep the law as you have been laying it out that you are not as most christains deem, saved?

I'm not sure I completely understand your question; but the law doesn't save us. However, if we believe in YHWH; we will follow his instructions. Adam disobeyed YHWH; because he didn't believe in YHWH. As a result, Adam died. This message has been the same from the beginning.

 

[HARK!]

Is this response supposed to mean something? What I quoted was a historical record of the faith and practice of the early church.

Yes. I don't subscribe to ascetic commentary.

Origen of Alexandria[a] (c. 184 – c. 253),[5] also known as Origen Adamantius,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen#cite_note-9 was an early Christian scholar, ascetic,[8]

Origen - Wikipedia

 

[Scott Husted]

I'm not sure I completely understand your question; but the law doesn't save us. However, if we believe in YHWH; we will follow his instructions. Adam disobeyed YHWH; because he didn't believe in YHWH. As a result, Adam died. This message has been the same from the beginning.

It doesn't say Adam didn't believe in him? Innocence in one form is tantamount to ignorance. God knew that life is found only in himself which is inclusive of his soul, or how he thinks, sees ... is ...

 

[DamianWarS]

That is a few thoughts back, as Paul speaks of dying to our sinful life at baptism. It's more likely that the "therefore" applies to what directly precedes the "therefore." If not, we could theoretically make the latter hinge on whatever we choose.

This was one of the fatal flaws that I used to discuss, as a young teenager, when my mother would let me talk to the Jehovah's Witnesses who would bring their Watchtower magazines to our door. They would leave in frustration; as I would open up my bible, and continue to point out that we can't chop up scripture, and rearrange the pieces, to make it say what we want.

So because you say this isn't valid it means it's not valid? "A few thoughts back" apparently means it doesn't contribute to a few thoughts forward. This is called censorship. If you don't think it has application you can't just say I don't want to talk about it and pretent everyone falls in line. This is an open forum and there is nothing unreasonable to say a remark from Paul "a few thoughts back" doesn't contribute to the overall point he is building to.

Here are the few thoughts you sweep under the rug starting with v8 which you deem worthy to quote in the OP yet cut the verses out in the middle because it's "a few thoughts back" too far for you.

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority; and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.

Therefore....

See that first bolded text. That's only part of a sentence... yeah it's a large sentence. It seamlessly moves right into baptism from circumcision to express the same point, then right back into circumcision again. If baptism is the point so is circumcision. If you want to discuss a topic, be ready to discuss the context and if you want to disqualify the context, be ready to give just reason why it is not the context and not just "because I said so"

 

[Blade]

"keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah." no..not even close to what the holy Spirit was saying. Its what you personally believe. Left that part out . If that was what He was saying He would have said it.

Thank you though

 

[HARK!]

"keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah." no..not even close to what the holy Spirit was saying. Its what you personally believe. Left that part out . If that was what He was saying He would have said it.

Thank you though

But Paul did say that...

(CLV) 1Co 11:1
Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ.

...and Paul is not the Ruach Ha'Kodesh.

Do you not believe that Yahshua was keeping in stride with YHWH's perfect Torah?