Handwritten Dogmas and the Letter which Kills

[Studyman]

The apostolic body of Messiah did write to the Churches......

Act 15:22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

***The Holy Spirit was in the assembly

Ac 15:28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;

***Which letters were decrees (dogmata) to be kept....

Acts 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5 And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

***Again a recalling of this concerning misinformation of what Paul taught.

Act 21:25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.

You are omitting volumes of Scriptures here sir, in your attempt to promote the popular religious philosophy of the RCC and her protestant daughters, that Peter and the disciples of Christ taught the New Converts against God's commandments in Acts 15.

Your own translation, whether KJV, or RSV, or one of my favorites the CLV, when what is actually written is considered, exposes this popular doctrine as from man, and not the Spirit of the Christ. You skip to verse 22 to promote this popular religious philosophy both you and I were taught since our youth. But if a man remembers what the Christ of the Bible taught, as did Peter and the Disciples most certainly did, and you read what is actually written in the first half of the chapter, a different understanding is revealed.

Acts 15: 1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. 3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees "which believed", saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

It's important to note that those who came down from Judea, along with the "Sect of the Pharisees which believed" Jesus was the Messiah, were not part of the Church in Jerusalem who met the Disciples.

It's also important to understand that Peter, just a short time before this occasion spoke these words.

Acts 5: 28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

So Peter was well informed of the religious sects which existed in Jerusalem and elsewhere. And Peter knew the Christ's Word's "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." So he knew the Gentiles who had received the Spirit of Truth from God, had, as Paul teaches both Jew and Gentile, "Repented, Turned to God, and had brought forth works worthy of repentance".

What you are failing to hear, because you and I were both taught not to hear from our youth, are these words of Peter. "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

So lets review where we are at. There are religious Jews, along with the religious "sect of the Pharisees" who possibly "Came in Christ's Name", who were trying to place the "SAME YOKE" that these same religions had tried to place on their Father's Necks.

Now you, and "Many" who come in Christ's Name, would have me believe this Yoke that these religious men had placed on the Necks of their fathers, was God's Commandments, Statutes and Laws. And you site the words of these religious men, believing they were promoting the Law of Moses. But when I seek out the Christ of the bible and hear Him as HE describes the religious philosophy the Pharisees has placed on the necks of the fathers, here is what HE says.

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (Peter would be included in this, Yes?)

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

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say (They promote the Law of Moses), and do not. 4 For they (Pharisees, Not God or Moses) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

You are forgetting that Peter was here and heard and believed these Words of the Christ "of the Bible". Therefore he knew that these religious sects, "profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate" He knew that Jesus exposed them, that they claimed to promote the "Law of Moses", but they taught for doctrines "the commandments of men".

To believe this popular religious philosophy of this world's religions you are promoting, I would have to believe that suddenly, the "Sect of the Pharisees" turned to God in obedience and were trying to convince others to "Yield themselves Servants to obey God, as Paul does in Rom. 6.

I would also have to ignore Peters own words regarding the Yoke these men were promoting, that was the same Yoke they pushed on their fathers in times past. Why would I ignore so much of the Christ's Words? Peter didn't.

He kept the New converts away from the religious sect of the Pharisees which believed, along with their doctrines and "Yoke" they falsely called the Law of Moses, they had also placed on the necks of their fathers,. And what did the Apostles tell them?

15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, (Law of Moses) and from fornication, (Law of Moses) and from things strangled, (Law of Moses) and from blood. (Law of Moses)

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

And of course the Disciples would direct the Gentile converts away from the commandments of men the Religious sect of the Pharisees taught for doctrines, towards Moses, in the exact same way that the Christ had directed the multitudes and His Disciples.

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

After all, Peter heard and believed in the Christ "of the Bible" who also said; "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

 

[daq]

Firstly, we are not talking about "No need for Torah".
And Moses was taught from Ancient times. At least since Cyrus, Artaxerxes. But Gentiles were never taught to keep Levitcal law.


Go to a synagogue today. What do they teach concerning Gentile righteousness? Noachide
First of all The new covenant does not "renew the old. The new covenant makes the first covenant OLD. And as Galatians teaches us there are two covenants, not one. So the first is made old, by the new.


I would say Paul teaches the same Gospel which was preached before to our Father Abraham

No, it is why Peter and the members of the Jewish council did not know about Gentiles in the faith. They were surprised at Cornelious. Having had no idea.

I think we disagree on the details. First it appears we see exactly opposit concerning the Gospels and Pauls teachings. It is quite clear the Apostles did not understand concerning the uncircumcision until much later. Paul received it by revelation.

Because Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all doing that prior to Levitical law. They were not under the Sinai covenant.

I already did. Shadows and patterns.. but Fulfillment is unto Abraham in Christ

Let's do this.
The covenant made with Israel at Sinai/Horeb was not made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Deut 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

Why all then circumcision to the whole of it indebted?
Ga 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

I think this.....
He charged them them with an oath... (because of his jealousy)
Nu 5:21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;

Deut 29:10 Ye stand this day all of you before the LORD your God; your captains of your tribes, your elders, and your officers, with all the men of Israel,
11 Your little ones, your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water:
12 That thou shouldest enter into covenant with the LORD thy God, and into his oath, which the LORD thy God maketh with thee this day:
13 That he may establish thee to day for a people unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.
14 Neither with you only do I make this covenant and this oath;
15 But with him that standeth here with us this day before the LORD our God, and also with him that is not here with us this day:

Just like this
Nu 30:13 Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void.

There are multiple threads explaining why and how you have mistakenly mixed up the covenants and many other things. Several of your comments would take whole threads to explain the reality. We do not understand the Apostolic writings the same anymore than we understand the Torah the same. I suppose we will just have to agree to disagree.

However here is just one example that expounds much of what I have said herein today, but it is first necessary to understand that there is Logos, (reason, reasoning, and the understanding thereof), in these words, and that Logos must be heard: otherwise it is not possible to understand and observe the doctrine which is being taught within the context.

Mark 9:43-50 LSV (Literal Standard Version)
43 And if your hand may cause you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter into life maimed, than having the two hands, to go away into Gehenna, into the fire—the unquenchable—
44 [[where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.]] [Isa 66:24]
45 And if your foot may cause you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter into life lame, than having the two feet to be cast into Gehenna, into the fire—the unquenchable—
46 [[where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.]] [Isa 66:24]
47 And if your eye may cause you to stumble, cast it out; it is better for you to enter into the Kingdom of God one-eyed, than having two eyes, to be cast into the Gehenna of fire—
48 where their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched; [Isa 66:24]
49 for everyone will be salted with fire, and every sacrifice will be salted with salt. [Lev 2:13]
50 The salt [is] good, but if the salt may become saltless, in what will you season [it]? Have in yourselves salt, and have peace in one another."

Leviticus 2:13 is the only place in the Torah where the command to salt every sacrifice is given.
There is no other place you will find this commandment to salt every offering or sacrifice.

Leviticus 2:13 LSV
13 And every offering—your present—you season with salt, and you do not let the salt of the covenant of your God cease from your present; you bring salt near with all your offerings. [Mrk 9:49]

Mark 9:49 LSV
49 for everyone will be salted with fire, and every sacrifice will be salted with salt. [Lev 2:13]

The Master expounds the sacrifices in this passage beginning with the commandment to offer salt with every sacrificial offering or sacrifice: but he teaches not according to what the natural mind of the natural man perceives to be literal-physical animal sacrifices, for the Mark text is plain as day what he is teaching about, that is, cutting off sin from your members in a manner of speech which is borderline apocalyptic so that the reader may know that he speaks of supernal and spiritual things and not physical and natural things of below. Moreover at the same time he also quotes a well know statement from Yeshayah the Prophet, at the very end of that book, and the LXX version of the passage verifies and comfirms precisely what he is speaking about in the Mark 9 passage.

Isaiah 66:24 OG LXX
24 και εξελευσονται και οψονται τα κωλα των ανθρωπων των παραβεβηκοτων εν εμοι ο γαρ σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτησει και το πυρ αυτων ου σβεσθησεται και εσονται εις ορασιν παση σαρκι

κωλα = κωλον = a limb of the body, as if chopped or lopped off (re: Mark 9:43-50).

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments
G2966 κῶλον kolon (kō'-lon) n.
a limb of the body (as if lopped).
[from the base of G2849]

The Master therefore interprets for us this passage from the Prophet by referring the hearer to the commandment to salt every sacrifice in Lev 2:13, proving that he teaches a spiritual and supernal application to the sacrifices. And what therefore does that also tell us? In his testimony he is indeed renewing the covenant, not overturning it or planning for it to be set aside or any part of it to be abolished. It is indeed therefore a renewed covenant because his Testimony has restored the covenant and all its instructions and teachings to their original meanings and intent as they were originally given. There is one very simple little fact that when people ignore it they stumble, and that fact is that the Torah is spiritual, even according to Paul, (Rom 7:14), and to ignore this fact is catastrophic to doctrine.

 

[Yahudim]

It's not that difficult if we rely on God instead of our own intellectual power.

John 16: 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

When we find ourselves doing what know we shouldn't on a regular we can know without a doubt that we are not listening to the HS. We know at that point that we are doubting God's power to deliver us from sin and since we are doubting we can know there is something wrong with our beliefs for what we believe controls our behavior.

It's like you haven't even read my post.

 

[daq]

During the Roman conquest and the subsequent events of that century, we are also aware of the evolution of dogma within the 'believing' community that resulted in the destruction of many popular writings among the 'believers' by those congregation most closely aligned with the ever-changing policies, perspectives and politics of Rome. We have documentation of the brutal excesses of that era too. Both believers and non-believers, parchment and papyrus, were burned. Attitudes and teachings were 'adjusted' to fit the narrative du jour.

We used to have some good discussions about such things in the MJ board. Do you remember the several threads about the Quartodeciman Controversy? There was an author, (I cannot remember his name at this point), who wrote a research book on the subject and posted several threads about it in the MJ board which were very informative.

 

[Yahudim]

We used to have some good discussions about such things in the MJ board. Do you remember the several threads about the Quartodeciman Controversy? There was an author, (I cannot remember his name at this point), who wrote a research book on the subject and posted several threads about it in the MJ board which were very informative.

I am aware of the controversy but do not remember the threads, though I may have even participated. However, I'll do a little digging and see if I can uncover anything. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[HIM]

Perhaps we should ask more often, 'how can we be sure?'

We do.

Not trying to dispute what was said here, despite not being in agreement. That would be foolish and fruitless.

Non Sequitur

And if We may; why would it be fruitless and foolish? Because we won't see what you believe?

Simply trying to impart why many other sects and denominations among the community of believers have adopted entirely different interpretations based on various textual and contextual methodologies.

As if you are the only one who has considered this? Let's not forget to include Messianic Judaism in your thinking...

Jesus said, Behold I leave your house desolate for many reasons. Foremost though they rejected Him. With that being said Why is it they keep wanting to rebuild what God has deemed desolate?

But be that as it may, Who said this first?
Heb 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
Heb 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

Ps 40:6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
Ps 40:7 Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
Ps 40:8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.

Take note verse 5 in Hebrews says he saith.

Who is the He?

That would be Dabid and the Messiah if it is to be understood prophetically.

Then verse 7 in Hebrews it says, then says I.

Who is the I?

Dabid said this originally of himself in Psalm 40. And as said above, if This is to be understood prophetically it is also to be understood as the words of the Messiah.
The thing is that is missed by most is, David indeed said this of himself. And HERE in Hebrews the writer is now speaking in the first person also as Dabid. He as Dabid says, Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

So as Dabid and the writer of Hebrews; we say as in days of ole', we come in the volume of the book it is written of us, to do thy will oh God. For thy Law is in our hearts.


What volume of the book is it written of us? Pentateuch?

If that were the case that would be volumes at the very least and Books. And or Dabid being a man of God would have said Book of the Law. or Law right?

Below in Jeremiah the Lord said, "For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you." For I desired mercy not sacrifice, a Knowledge of me than burnt offerings.

And Why say in Ex. 15, "If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes" if these were not already being said and understood PRIOR to giving of the Book of the Law? If these Commandments and statutes were not understood, then the words in Jeremiah were for not.


Hos 6:6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Jer 7:21 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.
Jer 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
Jer 7:23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.

Exod 15:26 And said, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.

This, according to:
christianitytoday.com (0)
wesleyan.edu (1)
thecompletepilgrim.com (2)
en.wikipedia.org (3)
List of Christian denominations by number of members - Wikipedia

Almost all of these listed above claim to be led by the Spirit. But when the results of their disparate conclusions are considered by others, whether believing or not, many have come to ask, "By which spirit?"

The short version is that Christian denominations by any metric are Big Business. They have a vested interest in their adherents conforming to their particular belief system and traditions. We have all seen congregations split over the color of carpet. How much more so over the color of their dogma?

Not saying any particular belief system is more or less correct than any other. But this is why some have come to the conclusion that scripture and commentary, taken in context, is much more valuable to the seeker than denominations and dogma. Perhaps choosing one's own beliefs first, is a better way of choosing the congregation to which one should belong. But in this world, most people are born into a church before they become 'born again' in Messiah.

Performing certain mental exercises on dogma and beliefs and then asking different questions in different manners, is a great way to see if they may fit any other possibilities. Such as asking if the Messiah, referring to what is 'fulfilled' in this case, was perhaps not Torah (the 'Law'), but what the Prophets prophesied about the Messiah? There were after all, certain expectations of what the Messiah would be like and what He would do during His ministry and reign. Shouldn't that be thoroughly explored to dispel any hint of doubt by the seeker?

One of the things that turned my way of thinking around, was to study Eastern philosophy and how it affects our understanding of verbal and written communications from a Western perspective. Although it is possible that one's conclusions may not be 'earth shattering', however, it may very well be eye-opening. And it provides a starting point to a journey from what a person had always been taught, to what a person would know. Serious discrepancies between what is taught and what is learned should be rectified - and that will never happen in an unquestioning devotion to tradition.

Another source of revelation is to study ancient writing forms and how they were understood from within the cultural context of the people to whom they were originally intended. For instance, look at the differences between the interpretations of ancient writings (including the survival of those writings) to be found between a conquerors' understanding and that of the conquered. This is an ever evolving field of study, but one worthy of our attention.

The victor writes the history. It is widely accepted that this type of dramatic re-interpretation of ancient writings, events and customs occurred with the expansion of many ancient empires. The Hittite, the Assyrian, the Babylonian and the Greek treatment of ancient cultures and their writings is fairly well documented, but not completely understood. So what befell the many-times enslaved sons of Israel in this regard? Were they not similarly corrupted with the adoption of the traditions and practices of their conquerors? Of course they were. Should that not be thoroughly understood before adhereing to a particular set of beliefs and traditions? Absolutely!

At the time of the Roman diaspora, Judean slaves were so plentiful that the average Roman citizen, resident alien or sojourner within that realm, could purchase a 'Jew' for the price of a loaf of bread. For the next two centuries or more, if a Judean, slave or not, was caught possessing Torah scrolls within the Roman Empire, it was a sentence of death by torture. They were often smeared with pitch, affixed to a pole and burned for garden party illumination and entertainment, no matter their beliefs about Messiah.

During the Roman conquest and the subsequent events of that century, we are also aware of the evolution of dogma within the 'believing' community that resulted in the destruction of many popular writings among the 'believers' by those congregation most closely aligned with the ever-changing policies, perspectives and politics of Rome. We have documentation of the brutal excesses of that era too. Both believers and non-believers, parchment and papyrus, were burned. Attitudes and teachings were 'adjusted' to fit the narrative du jour.

This is how we inherit tradition (dogma). Dogma drives teachings. Perhaps certain views deserve another look; like the possibility that what Messiah 'fulfilled' wasn't what has been decided by those that buried every non-acceptable interpretation and tradition under a pile of roasted parchment, people and pigs.

Considering the stakes, being 'sure' isn't enough. It is written that His people perish for lack of knowledge. Shouldn't that be enough to inspire us to keep seeking and testing? Perhaps, metaphorically speaking, putting all the proverbial eggs in one basket should be questioned. That is all I'm saying. But that is yours to decide.

May you be Blessed,

There is much in the quote above that is no more than an assumption about those who do not believe as you. As if the things mentioned were not known or considered.

The first response of yours to one of our posts had no bearing what soever to the post that you responded to. And you said so more or less from the start of the post, but you also implied that you would actually address the post, That you did not do. At least this post addresses some aspect of the one you quoted.


In respect to all you posted is it safe to say that you not believe it is in Him we live move and have our being? And it is He that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure? That He has promised to Put His Spirit in us and give us a new heart? That it is His Spirit that dwells in us and causes us to both will and do His good pleasure? That we are in Christ and He is in us that the world might believe? That this is how the New Covenant, His law is in our hearts and minds, His word in our hearts and mouths is manifested?


Ezek 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Ezek 36:27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Phil 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

1Cor 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

It's like you haven't even read my post.

He read and gave an answer to the following questions and premise

Perhaps we should ask more often, 'how can we be sure?'

Almost all of these listed above claim to be led by the Spirit. But when the results of their disparate conclusions are considered by others, whether believing or not, many have come to ask, "By which spirit?"

Gary shared

It's not that difficult if we rely on God instead of our own intellectual power.

John 16: 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

When we find ourselves doing what know we shouldn't on a regular we can know without a doubt that we are not listening to the HS. We know at that point that we are doubting God's power to deliver us from sin and since we are doubting we can know there is something wrong with our beliefs for what we believe controls our behavior.

 

[HIM]

Bumperty Bump Bump

Nowhere does it say that Yahshua is our Hag Matzot.

The Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. And ye know that He was manifested to take away our sin and in Him is no sin. We are unleavened and also Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us. If we are in the state of unleaveness, our sin being taken away what is the point of the ceremony to purge out the leaven when the reality is the Christ, The text speaks of the leaven of malice and wickedness in context to the fornicator that needs purged for the destruction of the flesh so as to make new lump. A little leaven leavens, affects the whole lump, Church.

I made no such assertion. I we honor YHWH's Passover as he commands; we review the story of that Passover every year; and therefore we know why we honor his Passover.

HAG HAMATZOT is the feast of unleavened bread as you know. The above post that you responded to here shows how Christ fulfilled it. The feast in 1 Corinthians 5:7 is speaking of this not the Passover. Jesus being mentioned as our Passover is being mentioned in passing. The context is the leaveness of sin and how through Christ we are unleavened as a Church. And we are to celebrate (KEEP) this state by keeping it so through Christ unleaveness of sincerty and truth. THIS IS TO BE A CONSTANT STATE IN CHRIST. Not once a year. ​

Questions: How does one honor the first day of YHWH's continual Hag Matzot without the Pesach? How does one ascertain the day the day of Bikkurim (No not Ishtar!), without recognizing the Pesach? How does one recognize the day of Shavuot without establishing the day of Bikkurim?

The reality is Christ and through Him His Church.
Christ our Passover is sacrifice for us. We the church, the Body of Christ are unleavened through Christ who taketh away the leaveness, sin of this world. The first fruits and the ingathering, witnessing and thereby discipling God's children is to not to end unto the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Being anointed through Christ On that day 3000 were brought unto the Lord, And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple (the reality being Christ), and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

None of this answers any of my questions.

It does please read it again. But we will expound. We must enter through the threshold, Christ Jesus our Passover to be of The Household of God. Therein we receive His Spirit, His Law in our hearts and minds, His Word in our our hearts and mouths, This is what happened on Pentecost, the Shavuot that Israel was celebrating in Acts two. They been unleavened by Christ's sacrifice after Passover. For without shedding of blood there is no remission. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience (who we are) vessels for ministry from dead works to serve the living God?

Manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ. Written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new Covenant. New, for His Spirit is in the heart, thereby His Law in the heart and mind, His Word in our mouths. Not as the old on Tables of Stone and parchment. For the letter killeth, but the Spirit Giveth Life.

Through this the first fruits, Bikkurim were offered up. From 12 to 3000. It was never to stop as they continued daily in one accord breaking of bread from house to house having all things common . In this the ingathering did not cease for Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved


Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Acts 2:43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
Acts 2:44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
Acts 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.


Heb 9:21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
2Cor 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Cor 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Cor 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Cor 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

1Cor 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Heb 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

The Passover is not a sin sacrifice. It's the sacrifice of a threshold covenant.

Never said that. Sorry if you misunderstood. Hopefully we will word things better.

So how do you honor any of YHWH's eternal appointed times?

.

In Living through Christ.

 

[HIM]

The phrase, "the Body of Meshiah" is more properly placed at the beginning of verse sixteen.

Not according to grammar and syntax.

How many subjects are in those text daq?

There are four with three clauses. τις translated Anyone in verse 16 which is a clause in and of itself because it contains a subject and a verb. ἅ which is translated Which in verse seventeen. Which sets the context of what the shadows are that are to come. These shadows are meat, drink offerings and new moon and sabbath days mentioned in the previous sentence. ἅ Which whose verb is ἐστιν being makes it a clause. And it is the shadow, which is also a subject whose verb is μελλόντων To Come.

Syntax dictates that the next subject which is σῶμα Body be included in the previous clause to which it is a sentence of by The conjunctive δὲ. This poses an issue for what you are putting forward also. Nowhere is δὲ used in skipping a sentence to compound to one that it is not connect to. It is always used in connection what was just said not previously said.


Col 2:16 Μὴ Not οὖν Therefore τις Anyone ὑμᾶς You κρινέτω Let Judge ἐν In βρώσει Meat ἢ Or ἐν In πόσει Drink, ἢ Or ἐν In μέρει Respect ἑορτῆς Of Feast, ἢ Or νουμηνίας New Moon, ἢ Or σαββάτων· Sabbaths,

The second clause is because it is a complete thought with a subject and a verb
Col 2:17 ἅ Which ἐστιν Are

σκιὰ A Shadow τῶν Of the μελλόντων To Come; τὸ the δὲ but σῶμα Body 'Is' τοῦ Of The Χριστοῦ Christ.

So the shadow which is being spoken of according Colossians is the meat and drink, holy days, new moon and sabbath days. Which are of the Law and by the use of the word therefore in verse 16 are directly connect to the handwriting of the decrees that were temporary and nailed to the cross because they were the judgements that were against and contrary to us when we sinned. Why were they temporary? Because they were a shadow as verse seventeen states which is also connect to verse 14 through the word therefore in verse 16. Because seventeen is part of the same thought through context.. Verse 13 sets the over all premise to that which is mentioned here in that it says we are forgiven through and in Christ. The dogmas that you speak of never had any bearing on anyone in respect to forgiveness and sin. God's Word is what did and does, not man's traditions. So, the whole premise is off from the get.

Speaking of the Law being or having a shadow, What about the context of this verse?

Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

 

[ralliann]

You are omitting volumes of Scriptures here sir, in your attempt to promote the popular religious philosophy of the RCC and her protestant daughters, that Peter and the disciples of Christ taught the New Converts against God's commandments in Acts 15.

Your own translation, whether KJV, or RSV, or one of my favorites the CLV, when what is actually written is considered, exposes this popular doctrine as from man, and not the Spirit of the Christ. You skip to verse 22 to promote this popular religious philosophy both you and I were taught since our youth. But if a man remembers what the Christ of the Bible taught, as did Peter and the Disciples most certainly did, and you read what is actually written in the first half of the chapter, a different understanding is revealed.

Acts 15: 1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. 3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them. 5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees "which believed", saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

It's important to note that those who came down from Judea, along with the "Sect of the Pharisees which believed" Jesus was the Messiah, were not part of the Church in Jerusalem who met the Disciples.

It's also important to understand that Peter, just a short time before this occasion spoke these words.

Acts 5: 28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us. 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

So Peter was well informed of the religious sects which existed in Jerusalem and elsewhere. And Peter knew the Christ's Word's "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." So he knew the Gentiles who had received the Spirit of Truth from God, had, as Paul teaches both Jew and Gentile, "Repented, Turned to God, and had brought forth works worthy of repentance".

What you are failing to hear, because you and I were both taught not to hear from our youth, are these words of Peter. "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

So lets review where we are at. There are religious Jews, along with the religious "sect of the Pharisees" who possibly "Came in Christ's Name", who were trying to place the "SAME YOKE" that these same religions had tried to place on their Father's Necks.

Now you, and "Many" who come in Christ's Name, would have me believe this Yoke that these religious men had placed on the Necks of their fathers, was God's Commandments, Statutes and Laws. And you site the words of these religious men, believing they were promoting the Law of Moses. But when I seek out the Christ of the bible and hear Him as HE describes the religious philosophy the Pharisees has placed on the necks of the fathers, here is what HE says.

Matt. 23: 1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (Peter would be included in this, Yes?)

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

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say (They promote the Law of Moses), and do not. 4 For they (Pharisees, Not God or Moses) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

You are forgetting that Peter was here and heard and believed these Words of the Christ "of the Bible". Therefore he knew that these religious sects, "profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate" He knew that Jesus exposed them, that they claimed to promote the "Law of Moses", but they taught for doctrines "the commandments of men".

To believe this popular religious philosophy of this world's religions you are promoting, I would have to believe that suddenly, the "Sect of the Pharisees" turned to God in obedience and were trying to convince others to "Yield themselves Servants to obey God, as Paul does in Rom. 6.

I would also have to ignore Peters own words regarding the Yoke these men were promoting, that was the same Yoke they pushed on their fathers in times past. Why would I ignore so much of the Christ's Words? Peter didn't.

He kept the New converts away from the religious sect of the Pharisees which believed, along with their doctrines and "Yoke" they falsely called the Law of Moses, they had also placed on the necks of their fathers,. And what did the Apostles tell them?

15 And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, (Law of Moses) and from fornication, (Law of Moses) and from things strangled, (Law of Moses) and from blood. (Law of Moses)

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

And of course the Disciples would direct the Gentile converts away from the commandments of men the Religious sect of the Pharisees taught for doctrines, towards Moses, in the exact same way that the Christ had directed the multitudes and His Disciples.

2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

After all, Peter heard and believed in the Christ "of the Bible" who also said; "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Peter and the rest of the Apostles did not know about the Gentiles being brought in. None of the Church did.

Ac 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Ac 11:1 And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God.
2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
3 Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

Paul again speaks of the events of Acts 15 and 16

1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.
2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:

False brethren
4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
6 But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man’s person for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles
9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Apostolic tradition vs Rabbinic
by mouth or epistle

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

God fearing Gentiles........Apart from the law as taught in the synagogues from the time of Ezra

Act 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
22 Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren:
23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:

God fearers/God fearing Gentiles: From the time of Ezra and Artaxerxes

Ez 7:21 And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree to all the treasurers which are beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily,

The king feared the wrath of God....
23 Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons?
24 Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.

Moses taught in the realm of the king from The time of Ezra.......

25 And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as know the laws of thy God; and teach ye them that know them not.

 

[ralliann]

Bumperty Bump Bump


The Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. And ye know that He was manifested to take away our sin and in Him is no sin. We are unleavened and also Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us. If we are in the state of unleaveness, our sin being taken away what is the point of the ceremony to purge out the leaven when the reality is the Christ, The text speaks of the leaven of malice and wickedness in context to the fornicator that needs purged for the destruction of the flesh so as to make new lump. A little leaven leavens, affects the whole lump, Church.

HAG HAMATZOT is the feast of unleavened bread as you know. The above post that you responded to here shows how Christ fulfilled it. The feast in 1 Corinthians 5:7 is speaking of this not the Passover. ​

The feast of unleavened bread was also called passover by the Jew's.

Jesus being mentioned as our Passover is being mentioned in passing.​

Yes, but in the sense that the Church does have it's Passover. As that is by the Abrahamic covenant.
A MEMORIAL Feast of the fulfillment of Promise in the covenant of Circumcision. Ours is not carnal but spiritual.

The context is the leaveness of sin and how through Christ we are unleavened as a Church. And we are to celebrate (KEEP) this state by keeping it so through Christ unleaveness of sincerty and truth. THIS IS TO BE A CONSTANT STATE IN CHRIST. Not once a year. ​

The memorial feast is once a year though. Circumcision of the heart required.
1cor 11:23 ¶ For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

Keeping this commandment?
1Chr. 16:15 Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations;
16 Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac;
17 And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant,
18 Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance;
In David......

Ps.105:6 O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his chosen.
7 He is the LORD our God: his judgments are in all the earth.
8 ¶ He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations.
9 Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac;
10 And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant:
11 Saying, Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance:

The reality is Christ and through Him His Church.
Christ our Passover is sacrifice for us. We the church, the Body of Christ are unleavened through Christ who taketh away the leaveness, sin of this world. The first fruits and the ingathering, witnessing and thereby discipling God's children is to not to end unto the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Being anointed through Christ On that day 3000 were brought unto the Lord, And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple (the reality being Christ), and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.



It does please read it again. But we will expound. We must enter through the threshold, Christ Jesus our Passover to be of The Household of God. Therein we receive His Spirit, His Law in our hearts and minds, His Word in our our hearts and mouths, This is what happened on Pentecost, the Shavuot that Israel was celebrating in Acts two. They been unleavened by Christ's sacrifice after Passover. For without shedding of blood there is no remission. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience (who we are) vessels for ministry from dead works to serve the living God?

Manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ. Written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart. And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward: Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. Who also hath made us able ministers of the new Covenant. New, for His Spirit is in the heart, thereby His Law in the heart and mind, His Word in our mouths. Not as the old on Tables of Stone and parchment. For the letter killeth, but the Spirit Giveth Life.

Through this the first fruits, Bikkurim were offered up. From 12 to 3000. It was never to stop as they continued daily in one accord breaking of bread from house to house having all things common . In this the ingathering did not cease for Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved


Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Acts 2:43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
Acts 2:44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
Acts 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
Acts 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.


Heb 9:21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
Heb 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
2Cor 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Cor 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Cor 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Cor 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

1Cor 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Heb 4:16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

Heb 3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.




Never said that. Sorry if you misunderstood. Hopefully we will word things better.





In Living through Christ.

Josephus gives us some useful information IMO. He says the Sacrifices for sin ( kid of the goat) ADDED to all the rest (other sacrifices) for intention as a feast for the priests

Lev 6:24 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
25 Speak unto Aaron and to his sons, saying, This is the law of the sin offering: In the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the LORD: it is most holy.
26 The priest that offereth it for sin shall eat it: in the holy place shall it be eaten, in the court of the tabernacle of the congregation.
27 Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy: and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in the holy place.
28 But the earthen vessel wherein it is sodden shall be broken: and if it be sodden in a brasen pot, it shall be both scoured, and rinsed in water.
29 All the males among the priests shall eat thereof: it is most holy.
30 And no sin offering, whereof any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of the congregation to reconcile withal in the holy place, shall be eaten: it shall be burnt in the fire.
1 ¶ Likewise this is the law of the trespass offering: it is most holy.
2 In the place where they kill the burnt offering shall they kill the trespass offering: and the blood thereof shall he sprinkle round about upon the altar.
3 And he shall offer of it all the fat thereof; the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], and the fat that covereth the inwards,
4 And the two kidneys, and the fat that is on them, which is by the flanks, and the caul that is above the liver, with the kidneys, it shall he take away:
5 And the priest shall burn them upon the altar for an offering made by fire unto the LORD: it is a trespass offering.
6 Every male among the priests shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten in the holy place: it is most holy.
7 As the sin offering is, so is the trespass offering: there is one law for them: the priest that maketh atonement therewith shall have it.

1Co 9:13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
1Co 10:18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
Heb 13:10 We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle.

1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

 

[Studyman]

We do.

Non Sequitur

And if We may; why would it be fruitless and foolish? Because we won't see what you believe?

As if you are the only one who has considered this? Let's not forget to include Messianic Judaism in your thinking...

So you agree with his analyses, "Sadly, many decisions regarding the interpretation of scripture, made in both academic and religious circles, are based on cultural norms, funding and/or political narratives as much as anything else", but are pointing out that he doesn't seem eager to include the religious sect he has adopted as being influenced by ancient religious tradition and cultural norms we are all born into.

That could certainly be the case, but how does basically saying "Well you do it too", be an affirmation from the Spirit of God? And in doing so, is the reason not the same, "because he won't see what you believe"?

Perhaps there is a reason from God why you won't see what he believes, and he won't see what you believe.

Gen. 11: 4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Go to, let us (Father and Son, Yes?) go down, and there confound their language, "that they may not understand one another's speech". 8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

How is this not all connected? And didn't the Lord's Christ tell us "Be not ye therefore like unto them".

And now here we are, Pharisees vs Sadducees, MJ's vs Baptist, Catholics vs SDA, on and on and on. Each religious sect unable to see what the other one believes.

Some claiming it was the tradition and Custom of the Lord's Christ to go find a manmade shrine of worship to Pray to God and Sing praises to HIS Name, Which is absolutely not true, according to His Own Teaching.

Another implies in their religious philosophy that God was incapable of preserving His Truth in English Translations of the Bible, and therefore, a man cannot know God unless they learn a different language, and study ancient Jewish traditions from sources outside the Holy Scriptures, in some cases, scrolls which were hidden in caves in the desert, from human eyes for centuries. Where in Scriptures is this God promoted?

In both cases, where do these doctrines come from? Not from the Scriptures, that is for sure. And yet, much of the religious philosophies and interpretations that are promoted by the religious sects who have adopted these doctrines, are founded on these unbiblical principles, or "Leaven" as it were.

I think Yahudim pretty much nails it. ""Sadly, many decisions regarding the interpretation of scripture, made in both academic and religious circles, are based on cultural norms, funding and/or political narratives as much as anything else". But perhaps it is easier to see this behavior in others, than it is ourselves.

Nevertheless, the Spirit of Christ did Inspire and had this written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Ecc. 12: 11 The words of the wise are like goad points, And like imbedded bolts "for the possessors of gathered sayings" They are given by one shepherd."

Matt. 7: 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine (Are these not the Gathered Saying of the One Shepherd?), and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Ecc. 12:12 Yet furthermore, my son, from adding to these, (Gathered Saying from the One Shepherd, Yes?) be warned; Of the making of many scrolls there is no end, And much study is weariness to the flesh."

Matt. 7: 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Ecc. 12: 13 The terminus of the whole matter has been heard: Fear the One, Elohim, and keep His instructions, (Not SDA, not MJ, Not Catholic, not Protestant,) For this is the whole duty of humanity." 14 "For the One, Elohim", shall bring every deed into judgment concerning all that is obscured, Whether good or whether evil."

Therefore, as It is written, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Not ancient Jewish Rabbi's, or the Talmud or scrolls hidden from mankind in caves for centuries. Not Gamaliel, or the council of Nicaea, or Valentinus or Arminius. Not Calvin, Wesley, Russel, Smith Miller or White.

But as the One Elohim had written for our admonition;

Duet. 32: 11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? 14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

And the result is a People, "Zealous for Good Works that "God hath before ordained" that HIS People should walk in them",

A People anchored in One Word, as was EVERY Example of faithful man given us in Scriptures.

1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, 2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; 3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

I don't care about the religious sect of the Pharisees, or Catholics, or MJ's, or SDA or Protestant. These are all just other voices in the Garden God placed us in. I care for my brother Yahudim, Him, Gary K., Hark, Daq and others. It isn't the Scriptures that divide us. In every case, it is the "other voices" of this world God placed us in, who we trust to interpreted the Scriptures for us. In the exact same way Eve also trusted in another voice, who quoted "some" of God's Word.

We have the Oracles of God, we sit in Moses Seat. I advocate that we Trust in the God who inspired them " for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[HIM]

could certainly be the case, but how does basically saying "Well you do it too", be an affirmation from the Spirit of God? And in doing so, is the reason not the same, "because he won't see what you believe"?

It was said to show the box he seen was an issue for all and that even His own sect was within the walls of it. Some make their own box that is as the one he speaks. Yet claim different. The Spirit knows.

 

[Studyman]

Peter and the rest of the Apostles did not know about the Gentiles being brought in. None of the Church did.

Luke 2: 25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. 26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ. 27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law, 28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, 29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: 30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; 32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

The Law and Prophets had always prophesied and taught "One law" shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you..

Lev. 19: 34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Simeon knew and understood this, understanding the Scriptures. Peter was being taught.

Peter, being influenced by the Jews who created a wall of Separation contrary to God's Law, was given a vision by the Christ to show him this error. By the time Acts 15 came around, Peter had been corrected.

14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 "And to this agree the words of the prophets"; as it is written, 16 After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17 That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

As Isaiah also Prophesied;

Is. 53: 6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;

7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

So again, because men omit the Scriptures that don't promote their adopted religious philosophy, they promote another falsehood. By the Time Acts 15 came around, Peter and the apostles understood perfectly, what the Prophets had prophesied before the Exodus even began, and Simeon knew this, before the Christ was even born, as also evidenced by Scriptures.

So it is a falsehood to teach others, that in Acts 15, Peter and the Apostles didn't know what the Prophets had prophesied regarding Gentiles being brought in.

Now I am pretty sure, given past experience, that you do not answer questions asked of you. Most preachers don't. But I would ask one anyway.

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

Regarding the religious sect of the Pharisees in Acts 15, "What Yoke" did they place on the Necks of the Disciples Fathers? Was it God's Laws? Or did they teach for doctrines the Commandments of Men?

I will wait for your answer.

Ez 7:21 And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree to all the treasurers which are beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily,

The king feared the wrath of God....
23 Whatsoever is commanded by the God of heaven, let it be diligently done for the house of the God of heaven: for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons?
24 Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.

Moses taught in the realm of the king from The time of Ezra.......

25 And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as know the laws of thy God; and teach ye them that know them not.

Again, "Many" who come in Christ's Name, omit Words of God.

25 And thou, Ezra, after the wisdom of thy God, that is in thine hand, set magistrates and judges, which may judge all the people that are beyond the river, all such as "know the laws of thy God"; and "teach ye them "that know them not".

26 And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, (Beyond the river) and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death, or to banishment, or to confiscation of goods, or to imprisonment.

This is why I left the religions of this world men have adopted and are now promoting. Men "come in Christ's Name", but they further falsehoods about His Word. I know men are only parroting what someone else has taught them. But seriously, can a man be more wrong about both Acts 15, and Ezra 7. At what point does a man turn to God, away from this world's religious sects.

Ezra was told to Judge those who "knew God's Law" and teach God's Law to those who did not know God's Law. Isn't that what the Apostles did by directing the Gentile converts to the Law of Moses? Which will result in what Ralliann? A people that all know God's Laws. And then what was Ezra tasked to do? He was told to Judge those who do not do the Law of God.

Ecc. 12: 13 The terminus of the whole matter has been heard: Fear the One, Elohim, and keep His instructions, For this is the whole duty of humanity." (Jew and Gentile) 14 For the One, Elohim, shall bring every deed into judgment concerning all that is obscured, Whether good or whether evil."

2 Cor. 5: 9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

 

[Studyman]

It was said to show the box he seen was an issue for all and that even His own sect was within the walls of it. Some make their own box that is as the one he speaks. Yet claim different. The Spirit knows.

Yes, the Spirit knows.

 

[HIM]

Yes, both the spirit, and the Spirit knows.

Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

But if the Spirit is grieved, will we know the difference?

Perhaps at first but then enters the strong delusion that they or possibly we should believe a lie.

But we or they that believe and endures unto the end will be saved. Not drawing back unto perdition but to the saving of the soul. So let's cast not our confidence, are all out spokenness which has such a great reward. For we need of patience, cheerful endurance, that after we have done God's will, we will receive the promise. God is faithful. Not suffering us to be tempted above that we are able to bear. But with the temptation He give us a way to escape. Succoring us in our time of need. Perfecting forever them whom are sanctified. Whereof this perfection the Holy Ghost speaketh. In that God has said, He will put His Law in our hearts and in our minds will write them. In this He has given us things that pertain to the Life and godliness.

 

[Yahudim]

We do.

Non Sequitur

Calling for a review of context, especially the context of a conquering empires' devastating decrees and actions over the course of centuries is hardly a 'Non Sequitur'. I believe this kind of dismissal is called a 'hand-waving fallacy', more suited to a discussion of Star Wars characters than the earnest inquiry into the contextual environment surrounding the evolution of Christian religious dogma.

Reviewing the highly political circumstances of a conquering empire surrounding the murder of the Messiah, destruction of untold numbers of papyrus, people and practices, especially those foundational to religious observance is essential to establish the relevance and veracity of any argument, either pro or con to any personal position to which one might hold. Sweeping such calls for objectivity and transparency under the ornate carpet labeled 'Non Sequitur' speaks volumes, but none to the circumstances offered.

I would remind the gentle reader, my post is a discussion of contextual matters that define the environment in which scriptural matters should be discerned. Again, it is not a debate. It was offered as a discussion. The employment of logical fallacies and out of hand dismissal of the entire discussion should have no place in sound reasoning. This is not a contest to be won or lost. It is an exercise in the pursuit of truth within the context of relevant historical and cultural facts.

Dogma should be the last stop on this train of thought, not the first. Context defines the basis on which factual analysis is borne. That should have been clear to even the most casual of observers.

Blessings in His Name,

 

[HIM]

Calling for a review of context, especially the context of a conquering empires'

The quote below is what it was in reference to. It Has nothing to do with the post you responded to. So that makes it so. Take care.

Not trying to dispute what was said here, despite not being in agreement. That would be foolish and fruitles

Blessings in His Name,

Thank you. May the Lord bless us all in His Way Jesus Christ.

 

[HIM]

I would remind the gentle reader, my post is a discussion of contextual matters that define the environment in which scriptural matters should be discerned. Again, it is not a debate. It was offered as a discussion. The employment of logical fallacies and out of hand dismissal of the entire discussion should have no place in sound reasoning. This is not a contest to be won or lost. It is an exercise in the pursuit of truth within the context of relevant historical and cultural facts.

Except for possibly a few people no one is reading our post at large. But as a reminder unless one actually addresses the points of the post in the post they are responding to, then they are not actually addressing said post for discussion. But posting an agenda that suits themselves and serves no real purpose in the furtherment of the points in the discussion that has already been established.

 

[Yahudim]

Except for possibly a few people no one is reading our post at large. But as a reminder unless one actually addresses the points of the post in the post they are responding to, then they are not actually addressing said post for discussion. But posting an agenda that suits themselves and serves no real purpose in the furtherment of the points in the discussion that has already been established.

So, making the statement, "Not trying to dispute what was said here, despite not being in agreement. That would be foolish and fruitless."; this is the Non Sequitur? Perhaps I misunderstood you. I was simply pointing out that discussing differences in dogma was premature to the examination of centuries of context. Consensus at the point of a sword is dubious at best.

Broad is the way of consensus.

Shalom

 

[daq]

Not according to grammar and syntax.

How many subjects are in those text daq?

There are four with three clauses. τις translated Anyone in verse 16 which is a clause in and of itself because it contains a subject and a verb. ἅ which is translated Which in verse seventeen. Which sets the context of what the shadows are that are to come. These shadows are meat, drink offerings and new moon and sabbath days mentioned in the previous sentence. ἅ Which whose verb is ἐστιν being makes it a clause. And it is the shadow, which is also a subject whose verb is μελλόντων To Come.

Syntax dictates that the next subject which is σῶμα Body be included in the previous clause to which it is a sentence of by The conjunctive δὲ. This poses an issue for what you are putting forward also. Nowhere is δὲ used in skipping a sentence to compound to one that it is not connect to. It is always used in connection what was just said not previously said.


Col 2:16 Μὴ Not οὖν Therefore τις Anyone ὑμᾶς You κρινέτω Let Judge ἐν In βρώσει Meat ἢ Or ἐν In πόσει Drink, ἢ Or ἐν In μέρει Respect ἑορτῆς Of Feast, ἢ Or νουμηνίας New Moon, ἢ Or σαββάτων· Sabbaths,

The second clause is because it is a complete thought with a subject and a verb
Col 2:17 ἅ Which ἐστιν Are

σκιὰ A Shadow τῶν Of the μελλόντων To Come; τὸ the δὲ but σῶμα Body 'Is' τοῦ Of The Χριστοῦ Christ.

So the shadow which is being spoken of according Colossians is the meat and drink, holy days, new moon and sabbath days. Which are of the Law and by the use of the word therefore in verse 16 are directly connect to the handwriting of the decrees that were temporary and nailed to the cross because they were the judgements that were against and contrary to us when we sinned. Why were they temporary? Because they were a shadow as verse seventeen states which is also connect to verse 14 through the word therefore in verse 16. Because seventeen is part of the same thought through context.. Verse 13 sets the over all premise to that which is mentioned here in that it says we are forgiven through and in Christ. The dogmas that you speak of never had any bearing on anyone in respect to forgiveness and sin. God's Word is what did and does, not man's traditions. So, the whole premise is off from the get.

Speaking of the Law being or having a shadow, What about the context of this verse?

Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

It's really not much different than inserting parenthetical brackets into the text.

Further down the same passage in the KJV we find the following, (I spaced the second bracket to keep the forum software from inserting a smiley).

Colossians 2:20-22 KJV
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using; ) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

So without the verse numbers we have the following statement:

Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using; ) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

What the translators are doing is essentially the same thing, for by placing a portion of the text in parenthesis they are signifying that the last portion of the statement is a continuation of the thought at the beginning of the statement.

Thus we can read it in the following manner and it still means the same thing:

Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances after the commandments and doctrines of men, (touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using)?

The portion at the end of the text has been moved to its more appropriate place, at the beginning of the statement, and yet the meaning of the whole has not been changed in any way. In fact I could now remove the brackets and it means the same.

Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances after the commandments and doctrines of men, touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using?

Now therefore please explain how grammar and syntax either allow or disallow the translators to insert parenthetical brackets into the text.