How do you know you follow God?
guardian Snow
Ask yourself this question first, when your responding to people, who
do you quote more, Jesus/Yeshua the Messiah or Saul? If you conduct a
discussion about religion with somebody about the Christian religion,
you’ll always notice the same pattern appearing... One person will say
Jesus said this in Matthew and the respondent will reply but Paul
said.
Pick any topic in the bible from keeping the Sabbath to Baptism or
anything in between and you’ll notice a common thread in all the
conversations.. the disagreements are all between Jesus and Paul’s
words.
Now, if your like me, you were raised to believe that the bible is all
from the same authority and it’s all the inspired word “of God”. I
believed that for the majority of my life and it wasn’t until I looked
at it from outside my own ingrained convictions about “2Ti 3:16 All
scripture is given by inspiration of God” that I realized what the
problem was.
That and the never ending debate I had with a friend of mine.. Randy.
I love the guy and he’s a tried and true faithful follower of the
scriptures.. so don’t think that I’m putting him down. Randy by his
constant disagreement showed me the truth. I’ve always preferred the
voice of the Messiah and clearly understood that we are to keep the
Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments is what brought me to the
truth, just like the Psalm says it will..
Psa 19:7 The Torah of יהוה is perfect, bringing back the being; The
witness of יהוה is trustworthy, making wise the simple;
Let me tell you that that is one of the most important and true
scriptures in the bible!!! But look at what Hebrews says of it:
Heb 7:18 For there is indeed a setting aside of the former command
because of its weakness and unprofitableness,
Now if we know the Ten Commandments are written by the very finger of
Elohim almighty:
Exo 31:18 And when He had ended speaking with him on Mount Sinai, He
gave Mosheh two tablets of the Witness, tablets of stone, written with
the finger of Elohim.
Then how can Hebrews be truth? Something doesn’t add up and we have a
major conflict of scriptures. It’s that very conflict that led me to
look deeper into what Paul was saying. Now my Critics like to point
out that Peter and the other Apostle approved of Paul as an apostle
but the only person that says Paul was an apostle, is Paul.
I know of only one other passage that is frequently misused to assume
Luke says he’s an apostle in Acts.. but Luke never said that and in
fact.. Luke makes a point of showing that Paul claimed to be a god on
numerous occasions and never refuted the men.
Act 28:6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen
down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw
no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a
god.
The Messiah spoke about one that would come showing signs and wonders
and told us several things to “beware of”... including...
Mar 8:15 And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven
of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.
Act 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch …with Herod
the tetrarch, and Saul.
One who would come after him showing “Signs and wonders”…
Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets,
and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were
possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
2Co 12:9 ..that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
2Co 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all
patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.
2Co 12:16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being
crafty, I caught you with guile.
That last verse explains why Paul is so beloved over even the
Messiah. Because he removed the burden placed upon believers to keep
the Commandments of Elohim.
1Co 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not
expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.
If all things are lawful, it’s because there is no law to break by his
account. The law being the Torah of Elohim and the Ten Commandments.
Most Christians will then argue that they keep the Ten Commands when
in fact they don’t keep the Sabbath. The Sabbath ends up being a
topic of my conversation all the time because it is THE SIGN.
Eze 20:20 ‘And set apart My Sabbaths, and they shall be a sign between
Me and you, to know that I am יהוה your Elohim.’
Christians will fight to the death to claim that SUNday is the Sabbath
and disregard the clear teachings of Moses and יהוה in the Exodus.
Did you know that the word Sabbath was removed from the King James
bible on almost every occasion after the death of the Messiah?
(Mar 16:2) (Mar 16:9) (Luk 18:12) (Luk 24:1)
(Joh 20:1) (Joh 20:19) (Act 20:7) (1Co 16:2)
The Roman Catholic Church has worked hard for centuries to suppress
this truth and many, many people along the way fight tooth and nail to
hide the facts but download e-sword, it comes with KJV + Strong’s
numbers… look for yourself and see that I’m telling the truth. The
Sabbath is mentioned in all those passages and has been removed to
justify Sun worshipping. Now if we know that Paul was a Gentile Roman
and only a “Jew by implication” (Gal 2:15) it becomes clear that we
need to disregard his “leaven”.
Go thru this with me, please…
Isa 45:15 Truly You are Ěl, who hide Yourself, O Elohim of Yisra’ĕl,
Saviour!
First, we have to understand that God hid himself because we have
rejected his commandments.
Isa 45:19 “I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth.
I have not said to the seed of Yaʽaqoḇ, ‘Seek Me in vain.’ I am יהוה,
speaking righteousness, declaring matters that are straight.
It is Clear that God is telling us that if we seek him… But… Notice
what he clearly says he doesn’t do… it’s not a secret what he says..
we all have Isaiah and Moses and the Prophets in our bible, so why do
we disregard all those teachings and run to Paul? We claim to follow
Jesus and then say “Paul is the word of God”….
Isa 45:20 “Gather yourselves and come; draw near together, you who
have escaped from the gentiles. No knowledge have they who are lifting
up the wood of their carved image, and pray to a mighty one that does
not save.
The GENTILES have no knowledge… But what knowledge did Paul claim to
teach??
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of
this mystery,
Rom 16:25 …according to the revelation of the mystery,
1Co 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery,
1Co 4:1 and stewards of the mysteries of God.
Dozens of references to the “mystery” religion. What was the false
religion spoken of by John in Revelation?
Rev 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON
THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.
Until you can connect the fact that Paul is in fact part of the
“mystery” religion of the Roman Church, you’ll continue to be enslaved
in the false doctrine of Paul.
The Good News of יהושע Messiah is that we can turn back from our pride
and ““Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest
you receive of her plagues.” The only way we can do that is by true
repentance to Elohim.
Pro 28:19 He who tills his land is satisfied with bread, But he who
pursues vanities is filled with poverty.
Most people will ignore this message and some will spam me or make
false claims.. it’s really up to you. So many people are so heavily
invested into Sun day worship they will refuse to acknowledge the
truth when they see it.
Ecc 1:2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities;
all is vanity.
The end result is you know you follow God when you keep his words and
obey. Not just paying lip service like so many people that claim they
believe and then ignore the clear teachings of Christ by claiming
obedience is only for "Jews".
Mat 16:24 Then יהושע said to His taught ones, “If anyone wishes to
come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his stake, and follow
Me.
Mat 16:25 “For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, and
whoever loses his life for My sake shall find it.
Mat 16:26 “For what is a man profited if he gains all the world, and
loses his own life? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his
life?
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
If he who employs coercion against me could mould me to his purposes
by argument, no doubt he would. He pretends to punish me because his
argument is strong; but he really punishes me because his argument is
weak.
William Godwin
Argument is meant to reveal the truth, not to create it.
Edward de Bono
It is as absurd to argue men, as to torture them, into believing.
John Henry Newman
<Kelly>
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow<snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
>
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>
> (regardless of what you believe)
"Jesus was a follower of Jesus"?
Huh?
NOSPAM
>
> Since Jesus was a follower of Jesus,
Another brilliant gem from the wannabe wordsmith....... thanks,
johnnie!
NOSPAM
<316...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 12, 4:17 pm, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> x-no-archive: yes
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow<snowpheo...@eck.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> Š 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>
>> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>>
>> Since Jesus was a follower of Jesus, and a pre-eminent apostle
>> (regardless of what you believe)
>
>"Jesus was a follower of Jesus"?
>
>Huh?
That be our wrong-way-weatherless spouting off again! :O)
Rod
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
> (regardless of what you believe)
>
Thats a lot like John being a follower of John, eh ?
guardian Snow
>
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
>
> (regardless of what you believe)
>
> teachings of Jesus Christ.
Wow, you really read a lot of that post. I'm impressed you got to the
opening question.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Absence - that common cure of love.
Lord Byron
Robibnikoff
"john w @yahoo.com>" <j<no> wailed:
> Found a typo.
Holy shit!
Now, do you jerk off to your own typos or just those done by others?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
If you can't be a good example....
You'll just have to be a horrible warning.
NOSPAM
>
>
> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
Only to keep your kind IN CHECK, liar-johnnie. You cannot be let loose
on an unsuspecting society.
guardian Snow
> > Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
>
> Only to keep your kind IN CHECK, liar-johnnie. You cannot be let loose
> on an unsuspecting society.
Good to see you posting. I'd love to your opinion on this post that I
made (first post in the thread)... be honest and tell me what you
think.. I can take the truth and I'm sure you'll have no problem being
honest with me. I'd like to understand a little more about what you
think. I have no problem if you don't agree with me... I like to try
and learn what other people think. Be as honest and harsh as you
wish ...
Thanks in advance,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Robibnikoff
duke
wrote:
>Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
Their words are one.
duke, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
guardian Snow
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
> wrote:
>
> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>
> Their words are one.
Gal 2:16 knowing that a man is not declared right by works of Torah,
but through belief in יהושע Messiah, even we have believed in Messiah
יהושע, in order to be declared right by belief in Messiah and not by
works of Torah, because by works of Torah no flesh shall be declared
right.
VS.
Rev 22:12 “And see, I am coming speedily, and My reward is with Me, to
give to each according to his work.
Mat 16:27 “For the Son of Aḏam is going to come in the esteem of His
Father with His messengers, and then He shall reward each according to
his works.
Luk 13:27 “But He shall say, ‘I say to you I do not know you, where
you are from. Depart from Me, all you workers of unrighteousness.’
Joh 3:21 “But the one doing the truth comes to the light, so that his
works are clearly seen, that they have been wrought in Elohim.”
Joh 8:39 They answered and said to Him, “Aḇraham is our father.”1
יהושע said to them, “If you were Aḇraham’s children, you would do the
works of Aḇraham.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
NOSPAM
<snowp...@eck.net.au> wrote:
>
>Good to see you posting. I'd love to your opinion on this post that I
>made (first post in the thread)... be honest and tell me what you
>think.. I can take the truth and I'm sure you'll have no problem being
>honest with me. I'd like to understand a little more about what you
>think. I have no problem if you don't agree with me... I like to try
>and learn what other people think. Be as honest and harsh as you
>wish ...
>
>Thanks in advance,
Sorry, Snow - but I don't have the first post showing on my screen.
Would you please repost it, and then I can most likely give you an
answer, not that I am any authority.
But I'll try to help if I can.
Thanks
Elaine
NOSPAM
>x-no-archive: DISHONORED
>On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:27:23 -0400, NOSPAM <nospam@nospam> wrote:
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
>may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:35:08 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
>>
>>
>>Only to keep your kind IN CHECK,
>
> ^ ^ ^^ ^ guffaw! YOU? Keep ME in check?
>
> roll on the ground, laughing my ASS off.
>
Silence, petulant child, and go to your room. No TV, no playing- and
don't come out until you have permission.
Rod
As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
to starve !
Rod
guardian Snow
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 10:35:45 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
>
Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Carl
>
> As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
> to starve !
What do you have against Barret Hansen?
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
Rod
> x-no-archive: yes
> Š 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>> NOSPAM wrote:
>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:41:52 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> x-no-archive: DISHONORED
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:27:23 -0400, NOSPAM <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:35:08 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
>>>>> Only to keep your kind IN CHECK,
>>>> ^ ^ ^^ ^ guffaw! YOU? Keep ME in check?
>>>>
>>>> roll on the ground, laughing my ASS off.
>>>>
>>> Silence, petulant child, and go to your room. No TV, no playing- and
>>> don't come out until you have permission.
>> As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
>> to starve !
>
> stopped pretending to be "my friend."
>
>
>> Rod
>
I was never pretending. You flamed me for trying to get you to stop
responding to trolling posts, and you kept responding to those posts
in spite of the fact that you know better. You have demonstrated to
me that you enjoy abusing and being abused.
I am not qualified to help you in any manner, and have NO wish to
be a friend to someone with a taste for the seamier side of life.
<Kelly>
> I was never pretending.
Sure you were. You are a big pretender - in fact, the Platters had a
hit with a song of the same name:
"Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender, pretending that I'm doing well.
My need is such, I pretend too much. I'm lonely, but no one can
tell..."
That's you in a nutshell, Rodney.
> You flamed me for trying to get you to stop
> responding to trolling posts, and you kept responding to those posts
> in spite of the fact that you know better.
Projecting.
> You have demonstrated to
> me that you enjoy abusing and being abused.
Projecting.
> I am not qualified to help you in any manner, and have NO wish to
> be a friend to someone with a taste for the seamier side of life.
LOL! That's got to be the quote of the week! ROTFL!!!
Oh, Rodney - if you weren't so pathetic, you'd just be ridiculous.
guardian Snow
> john w <j wrote:
> > x-no-archive: yes
> > On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:06:42 -0500, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
> > may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
> >> NOSPAM wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:41:52 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> x-no-archive: DISHONORED
>
> >>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:27:23 -0400, NOSPAM <nospam@nospam> wrote:
> >>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
> >>>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:35:08 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
> >>>>> Only to keep your kind IN CHECK,
> >>>> ^ ^ ^^ ^ guffaw! YOU? Keep ME in check?
>
> >>>> roll on the ground, laughing my ASS off.
>
> >>> Silence, petulant child, and go to your room. No TV, no playing- and
> >>> don't come out until you have permission.
> >> As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
> >> to starve !
>
> > Well, I see we're back to that part of the cycle where you have
> > stopped pretending to be "my friend."
>
> >> Rod
>
> I was never pretending. You flamed me for trying to get you to stop
> responding to trolling posts, and you kept responding to those posts
> in spite of the fact that you know better. You have demonstrated to
> me that you enjoy abusing and being abused.
>
> I am not qualified to help you in any manner, and have NO wish to
> be a friend to someone with a taste for the seamier side of life.
Thats a very astute observation by you Rod. You might be more
qualified to help him then you know. Don't sell yourself short, you
seem to have many remarkable qualities, like patience and a desire to
do no harm.
If we learn to work together as men of faith.. not just you and me...
I think all of us would be amazed by what is possible. Keep the hope.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
<Kelly>
wrote:
> Thats a very astute observation by you Rod. You might be more
> qualified to help him then you know. Don't sell yourself short, you
> seem to have many remarkable qualities, like patience and a desire to
> do no harm.
"Do no harm"? LOL! Try this one on for size:
"You, I would also like to hug, not for being a friend but for
demonstrating to the world the depths that an asshole like yourself
can sink to. Yes John, I'd like to squeeze you until your fricking
skull explodes and your ribs SNAP!!like twigs on hot summer day !"
--- Jul 30 2007 Rodney Eastman to John Weatherly
Yeah, Rodney's really into "do no harm".
> If we learn to work together as men of faith..
Except Rodney doesn't believe in God or any deity, really.
Rod
A persons actions will define their beliefs.
> Don't sell yourself short, you
> seem to have many remarkable qualities, like patience and a desire to
> do no harm.
>
> If we learn to work together as men of faith.. not just you and me...
> I think all of us would be amazed by what is possible. Keep the hope.
Hope, and love.
<Kelly>
You're so full of it, Rodney (and I don't mean "hope and love").
guardian Snow
I've often found that you don't have to be a believer to be
compassionate. Maybe if more people set an example that he liked, you
might find that he has an interest in faith but is unsure what to
believe. My impression of Rodney is that he's tired of the "faith
without works" crowd that act like self righteous devils and condemn
him for not jumping in the first boat that came along. Nobody wants
to follow a bad example. You should consider that yourself and take
care, be blessed and sorry if I've offended your sensibilities.
Robibnikoff
"john w @yahoo.com>" <j<no> babbled:
>
>
> Well, well, well.
>
> Kelly has finally admitted that she's "The Great Pretender!!"
Oh yeah, every time someone quotes a song, they're pretending to be that
character. Idiot.
Rod
> x-no-archive: yes
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>> john w <j wrote:
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:06:42 -0500, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>> NOSPAM wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:41:52 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> x-no-archive: DISHONORED
>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:27:23 -0400, NOSPAM <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:35:08 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
>>>>>>> Only to keep your kind IN CHECK,
>>>>>> ^ ^ ^^ ^ guffaw! YOU? Keep ME in check?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> roll on the ground, laughing my ASS off.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Silence, petulant child, and go to your room. No TV, no playing- and
>>>>> don't come out until you have permission.
>>>> As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
>>>> to starve !
>>> Well, I see we're back to that part of the cycle where you have
>>> stopped pretending to be "my friend."
>>>
>>>
>>>> Rod
>>
>> I was never pretending.
>
>
>
Your right to believe what you please has not been revoked,
but it has never had any influence on the truth.
Rod
> x-no-archive: yes
>
> You might be more
>> qualified to help him then you know.
>
>
> Don't sell yourself short, you
>> seem to have many remarkable qualities,
>
>
> LOL!! ?This is tooooooo funny!
>
> like patience and a desire to
>> do no harm.
>
> GS is in love!
>
>
>> If we learn to work together as men of faith.. not just you and me...
>
>
> Rodney is not a "man of faith!"
That depends on what is meant by "faith". If being a person of faith
means sharing "your" beliefs, then I'm not. If it means believing
that this type of response would come, yes..I am a person of "some"
faith.
I also believe that what is right will win out in the end,, but what
is right for everyone, not just whats right for a group of selfish
people.
So, "faith" is about belief and trust in "something", not just your
desire to limit it to a belief that benefits you and a few others
that accept it.
guardian Snow
> > Rodney is not a "man of faith!"
>
> That depends on what is meant by "faith". If being a person of faith
> means sharing "your" beliefs, then I'm not. If it means believing
> that this type of response would come, yes..I am a person of "some"
> faith.
>
> I also believe that what is right will win out in the end,, but what
> is right for everyone, not just whats right for a group of selfish
> people.
>
> So, "faith" is about belief and trust in "something", not just your
> desire to limit it to a belief that benefits you and a few others
> that accept it.
Thats a nice thought. It shows compassion Rod. Thanks for showing I
was right about you.
Mat 5:7 “Blessed are the compassionate, because they shall obtain
compassion.
Your on the right road in my opinion and I hope you find that
destination I think your looking for and thanks for sharing your
thoughts.
Take care and be blessed.
guardian Snow
> >> I was never pretending.
>
> > Liar.
>
> Your right to believe what you please has not been revoked,
> but it has never had any influence on the truth.
It is sad that we are not given that same respect in return, isn't
it. Those who run around professing the "faith without works"
doctrine love to speak against me for telling them not to overturn the
truth of the scriptures with snippets of Paul. They go around putting
cut and paste dogma out because they are unable to speak the truth
themselves and more likely are ashamed of the doctrine they are
putting out.
Had they believed, they would not have ignored all the scriptures
outside of the ones that the like that speak to keeping the Ten
Commandments.
Even if you do not share my faith, you can rest in the knowledge that
they are only self righteous and not the righteous of Elohim.
Mat 15:9 ‘But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as teachings the
commands of men.’ ”
They teach the commandments of men and serve only themselves with
endless chatter and disbelief. You on the other hand are at least
honest in your approach to scriptures and have earned my respect Rod.
Mat 21:28 “But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to
the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’
Mat 21:29 “And he answering, said, ‘I do not wish to,’ but afterwards
he repented and went.
Mat 21:30 “And having come to the second, he said similarly. And he
answering, said, ‘I go, master,’ but he did not go.
Mat 21:31 “Which of the two did the desire of the father?” They said
to Him, “The first.” יהושע said to them, “Truly, I say to you that tax
collectors and whores are entering into the reign of Elohim before
you,
Mat 21:32 for Yoḥanan came to you in the way of righteousness, and
you did not believe him, but tax collectors and whores believed him.
And when you saw it, you did not repent afterwards, to believe him.
Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so also the
belief is dead without the works.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
version which you can download for free at
http://www.isr-messianic.org/
duke
<mr_snow...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>On Jul 14, 9:56 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>>
>> Their words are one.
Their words below are one:
Paul: Works of Torah - Jews believed they could earn their way into heaven
based on the number of manmade laws they kept. Paul and Jesus said no. Paul
also said that faith without works is dead faith. James 2:26.
John: the Revelation - See Mat 25:31-46. Love one another as I have loved you.
See, both in dead agreement with each other. You just have to understand the
references.
>Gal 2:16 knowing that a man is not declared right by works of Torah,
>but through belief in ????? Messiah, even we have believed in Messiah
>?????, in order to be declared right by belief in Messiah and not by
>works of Torah, because by works of Torah no flesh shall be declared
>right.
>
>VS.
>
>Rev 22:12 “And see, I am coming speedily, and My reward is with Me, to
>give to each according to his work.
>
>Mat 16:27 “For the Son of Ad?am is going to come in the esteem of His
>Father with His messengers, and then He shall reward each according to
>his works.
>
>Luk 13:27 “But He shall say, ‘I say to you I do not know you, where
>you are from. Depart from Me, all you workers of unrighteousness.’
>
>Joh 3:21 “But the one doing the truth comes to the light, so that his
>works are clearly seen, that they have been wrought in Elohim.”
>
>Joh 8:39 They answered and said to Him, “Ab?raham is our father.”1
>????? said to them, “If you were Ab?raham’s children, you would do the
>works of Ab?raham.
>
>Shalom,
>
> *´¨)
> ¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
>(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
>Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
>smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
>Lord Byron
duke, American-American
Rod
> On Jul 16, 3:22 am, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
>
>>>> I was never pretending.
>>> Liar.
>> Your right to believe what you please has not been revoked,
>> but it has never had any influence on the truth.
>
> It is sad that we are not given that same respect in return, isn't
> it. Those who run around professing the "faith without works"
> doctrine love to speak against me for telling them not to overturn the
> truth of the scriptures with snippets of Paul. They go around putting
> cut and paste dogma out because they are unable to speak the truth
> themselves and more likely are ashamed of the doctrine they are
> putting out.
>
> Had they believed, they would not have ignored all the scriptures
> outside of the ones that the like that speak to keeping the Ten
> Commandments.
>
> Even if you do not share my faith, you can rest in the knowledge that
> they are only self righteous and not the righteous of Elohim.
>
> commands of men.’ â€
> They teach the commandments of men and serve only themselves with
> endless chatter and disbelief. You on the other hand are at least
> honest in your approach to scriptures and have earned my respect Rod.
I haven't known how to react for several days after reading this,
kindness or respect, I don't know either one very well. I'd remain
a stranger to the human race if I could, but my wife won't let me.
Bye Snow.
>
> Mat 21:28 “But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to
> the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’
> Mat 21:29 “And he answering, said, ‘I do not wish to,’ but afterwards
> he repented and went.
> Mat 21:30 “And having come to the second, he said similarly. And he
> answering, said, ‘I go, master,’ but he did not go.
> Mat 21:31 “Which of the two did the desire of the father?†They said
> to Him, “The first.†יהושע said to them, “Truly, I say to you that tax
> collectors and whores are entering into the reign of Elohim before
> you,
> Mat 21:32 for Yoḥanan came to you in the way of righteousness, and
> you did not believe him, but tax collectors and whores believed him.
> And when you saw it, you did not repent afterwards, to believe him.
>
>
> Jas 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so also the
> belief is dead without the works.
>
> Shalom,
>
> *´¨)
> ¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
> (¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
guardian Snow
> > They teach the commandments of men and serve only themselves with
> > endless chatter and disbelief. You on the other hand are at least
> > honest in your approach to scriptures and have earned my respect Rod.
>
> I haven't known how to react for several days after reading this,
> kindness or respect, I don't know either one very well. I'd remain
> a stranger to the human race if I could, but my wife won't let me.
>
> Bye Snow.
She must be an incredible lady. Because we are all created in the
image of our Father, we are called to treat one another as if the one
we speak to is nothing short of a messenger of Elohim. I don't agree
with this but it's one of those pleasant Christian idealisms that is
put forth:
Heb 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some
have entertained angels unawares.
I think if anybody "entertained angels" we would know. The messengers
tend to leave an impression if you meet one.
Take care and thanks for sharing your thoughts. If you have any
questions, feel free to ask away Rod.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
colp
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:44:00 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
>
> >On Jul 14, 9:56 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>
> >> Their words are one.
>
> Their words below are one:
>
> Paul: Works of Torah - Jews believed they could earn their way into heaven
> based on the number of manmade laws they kept.
Straw man. What is important is the divine source of law, rather than
man's contradictory interpretations of that law.
> Paul and Jesus said no. Paul
> also said that faith without works is dead faith. James 2:26.
Why are you quoting James' critique of Pauline doctrine in support of
Paul?
>
> John: the Revelation - See Mat 25:31-46. Love one another as I have loved you.
>
> See, both in dead agreement with each other. You just have to understand the
> references.
In reference to the law, Pauline doctrine is at variance with Yeshua's
teaching
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself.
Galatians 5:14
Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question],
tempting him, and saying,
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Matthew 22:35-40
guardian Snow
Me and Duke have discussed this issue many times now. Duke doesn't
believe in the Torah at all and says that it's nothing but a "faith
statement". I found this an interesting point of view since we all
know that the Messiah quoted the Torah and it's commands on several
occasions.
He has told me that the 6 day creation and the 10 commandments are
both not to be regarded as anything but statements of faith because of
the many conflicts that come in Catholic doctrine.
Maybe he will retract those statements now but that was the
explanation he gave me before when we were discussing the commandments
of Exodus 20 and fish symbols which are widely used in the pagan
Christian church.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Love is the ability and willingness to allow those that you care for
to be what they choose for themselves without any insistence that they
satisfy you.
Wayne Dyer
colp
wrote:
<snip>
> Me and Duke have discussed this issue many times now. Duke doesn't
> believe in the Torah at all and says that it's nothing but a "faith
> statement". I found this an interesting point of view since we all
> know that the Messiah quoted the Torah and it's commands on several
> occasions.
Yeah, I find this behaviour to be quite intriguing. I've seen it in
people that I would describe as reasonably intelligent and good
natured, too.
My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
not have internal consistency.
So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition. That is, Paul was
authorized to collect donations and therefore wasn't acting entirely
outside of the halachic structure.
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do;
but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Matthew 23:1-3
The paradox is highlighted when you get a Pharisee who practices what
he preaches, so to speak. When the scope of the paradox includes
justification by faith alone vs justification by works then it is fair
to say that the system is b0rken.
guardian Snow
Your forgetting my friend, it wasn't the seat of Moses that has been
established forever, it's the throne of David:
2Sa 7:8 “And now, say to My servant Dawiḏ, ‘Thus said יהוה of hosts,
“I took you from the pasture, from following the flock, to be ruler
over My people, over Yisra’ĕl.
...
2Sa 7:13 “He does build a house for My Name, and I shall establish the
throne of his reign forever.
2Sa 7:14 “I am to be his Father, and he is My son. If he does
perversely, I shall reprove him with the rod of men and with the blows
of the sons of men.
2Sa 7:15 “But My kindness does not turn aside from him, as I turned it
aside from Sha’ul, whom I removed from before you.
Forever means forever and it is this throne that the Messiah has come
to sit on. The agreement of the covenant was not a conditional one,
it's a promise that is given and because his is true and righteous, we
continue to build his house in our hearts.
Jer 31:33 “For this is the covenant I shall make with the house of
Yisra’ĕl after those days, declares יהוה: I shall put My Torah in
their inward parts, and write it on their hearts. And I shall be their
Elohim, and they shall be My people.
Jer 31:34 “And no longer shall they teach, each one his neighbour, and
each one his brother, saying, ‘Know יהוה,’ for they shall all know Me,
from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares יהוה. “For I
shall forgive their crookedness, and remember their sin no more.”
Most people wrongly assume they fall under the "New covenant" but when
you clearly read the conditions of this agreement, you realize that
this covenant is granted after we have paid the price for our own
transgression of the only covenant that redeems us, the covenant of
Moses. With that covenant only ONE thing has been made a sign and
still the modern church disreguards it for the sake of keeping MAN'S
TRADITION and not the tradition of the scriptures.
Eze 20:20 ‘And set apart My Sabbaths, and they shall be a sign between
Me and you, to know that I am יהוה your Elohim.’
How shameful is it that the millions of Christians who claim to
believe the bible, REFUSE to acknowledge the Sabbath because of
PRIDE. It's enough to break your heart when you consider just how
little our Father has asked of us to be in HIS HOUSE. He has even
invited STRANGERS and adopted anybody into his family that will come
to the wedding feast of the Lamb of Elohim and still with all that
charity and compassion, they refuse to acknowledge him.
Instead they have tried to make up rules that our father never laid
down and some even want to say they only need to believe in Father to
enter his house but when they come in they spit on his rules. Would
any Father allow strange and lawless child to take over his house?
They play a game of semantics and say, "I believe" but then refuse to
abide in his house and they assume he will forget his own children,
how wrong they are.
Those who are not of the house of Israel and Judah are adopted by
Marriage as sons. Who will be at the feast is up to the son of
Elohim, his Messiah and considering lived as a Hebrew and sits on the
throne of David, don't expect the anti-semitic forum to receive a
great reception.
Mat 22:1 And יהושע responded and spoke to them again by parables and
said,
Mat 22:2 “The reign of the heavens is like a man, a sovereign, who
made a wedding feast for his son,
Mat 22:3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to
the wedding feast. But they would not come.
Mat 22:4 “Again he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Say to those who
are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner. My oxen and fattened
cattle are slaughtered, and all is ready. Come to the wedding feast.”
’
Mat 22:5 “But they disregarded it and went their way – this one to his
field, that one to his trade.
Mat 22:6 “And the rest, having seized his servants, insulted and
killed them.
Mat 22:7 “But when the sovereign heard, he was wroth, and sent out his
soldiers, destroyed those murderers, and set their city on fire.
Mat 22:8 “Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding feast, indeed, is
ready, but those who were invited were not worthy.
Mat 22:9 ‘Therefore go into the street corners, and as many as you
find, invite to the wedding feast.’
Mat 22:10 “And those servants went out into the street corners and
gathered all whom they found, both wicked and good. And the wedding
hall was filled with guests.
Mat 22:11 “And when the sovereign came in to view the guests, he saw
there a man who had not put on a wedding garment,
Mat 22:12 and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here not
having a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless.
Mat 22:13 “Then the sovereign said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and
foot, take him away, and throw him out into the outer darkness – there
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’
Mat 22:14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”1 Footnote:1See
20:16.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
colp
wrote:
So we've got the house, kingdom, and throne of Dawid being established
forever.
But the lawgiver is not permanent. What I'm taking about is the
fulfillment of the law in Jeremiah 31, rather than the end of the
kingdom.
The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between
his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him [shall] the gathering of the
people [be].
Genesis 49:10
<snip 2Sa 7>
>
> Forever means forever and it is this throne that the Messiah has come
> to sit on. The agreement of the covenant was not a conditional one,
> it's a promise that is given and because his is true and righteous, we
> continue to build his house in our hearts.
>
> Jer 31:33 “For this is the covenant I shall make with the house of
> Yisra’ĕl after those days, declares יהוה: I shall put My Torah in
> their inward parts, and write it on their hearts. And I shall be their
> Elohim, and they shall be My people.
> Jer 31:34 “And no longer shall they teach, each one his neighbour, and
> each one his brother, saying, ‘Know יהוה,’ for they shall all know Me,
> from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares יהוה. “For I
> shall forgive their crookedness, and remember their sin no more.”
>
> Most people wrongly assume they fall under the "New covenant" but when
> you clearly read the conditions of this agreement, you realize that
> this covenant is granted after we have paid the price for our own
> transgression of the only covenant that redeems us, the covenant of
> Moses. With that covenant only ONE thing has been made a sign and
> still the modern church disreguards it for the sake of keeping MAN'S
> TRADITION and not the tradition of the scriptures.
The new covenant, like the old one, is between יהוה and the twelve
tribes. The conditions of both were/are the keeping of the Torah, as
far as I can tell. The difference between the two is that the
interpretation of the former is according to tradition, while the
interpretation of the latter is intrinsic. When I quoted Matthew
23:1-3 my intention was to show that the onerous interpretation of the
Pharisees was in keeping with the letter of the Mosaic law, although
not the spirit of the law.
I don't see how there is any difference in the redemptive nature of
the two covenants, since they are based on the same Torah.
I'm not suggesting the the new covenant is an easy option (apart from
the elimination of human tradition). Regarding the parable of the
wedding feast, I'd describe a wedding garment as being works which
were consistent with Torah.
Shalom
guardian Snow
Rev 20:14 And the death and the grave were thrown into the lake of
fire. This is the second death.1 Footnote: 1See 2:11, 20:6, 21:8.
Rev 20:15 And if anyone was not found written in the Book of Life, he
was thrown into the lake of fire.
The new covenant takes effect when we die our physical death and begin
our eternal life which happens the moment you give up the ghost. One
of the wrong concepts that Paul put forward was that we are all
waiting for judgment day but eternal means, without end.
This is demonstrated by this major conflict of Paul vs the Good News
of יהושע Messiah.
Mat 22:32 ‘I am the Elohim of Aḇraham, and the Elohim of Yitsḥaq,
and the Elohim of Yaʽaqoḇ’? Elohim is not the Elohim of the dead, but
of the living.”
Mar 12:24 And יהושע answering, said to them, “Is this not why you go
astray, because you do not know the Scriptures1 nor the power of
Elohim? Footnote: 1Mt. 22:29.
Mar 12:27 “He is not the Elohim of the dead, but Elohim of the living.
You, then, go greatly astray.”
Luk 20:38 “Now He is not the Elohim of the dead, but of the living,
for all live to Him.”
Vs.
Rom 14:9 For unto this Messiah died and rose and lived again, to rule
over both the dead and the living.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Stay committed to your decisions, but stay flexible in your approach.
Tony Robbins
colp
Why should the conditions for perfection of the new covenant be any
different than the conditions for the perfection of the old one? IOW,
why should death be necessary for the perfection of the covenant if
Yeshua was able to keep the old covenant perfectly without involving
death?
Shalom
guardian Snow
Did you not stop to consider that we are already dead?
Gen 2:17 but do not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
for in the day that you eat of it you shall certainly die.”
Mat 10:39 “He who has found his life shall lose it, and he that has
lost his life for My sake shall find it.
That the entire creation was destroyed by that one simple act removing
it from perfection? That everything following after becomes only a
more distorted image of that original that was created in his image?
A copy isn't better then the original and far from actually evolving,
we are really devolving farther from our created state and in
desperate need of restoration.
colp
No, I didn't. YHWH is not the Elahi of the dead, but of the living.
(Matthew 22:32)
I don't have any respect for the dead.
guardian Snow
But your life begins when this one ends. This is not the life we are
meant to have.
Psa 23:4 When I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear
no evil. For You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort
me.
We are not meant to live in the shadow of death. We are waiting for
death to be destroyed.
Rev 20:6 Blessed and set-apart is the one having part in the first
resurrection. The second death possesses no authority over these, but
they shall be priests of Elohim and of Messiah, and shall reign with
Him a thousand years.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Death, so called, is a thing which makes men weep, And yet a third of
life is passed in sleep.
Lord Byron
colp
wrote:<snip>
> > > > > The new covenant takes effect when we die our physical death and begin
> > > > > our eternal life which happens the moment you give up the ghost.
>
> > > > Why should the conditions for perfection of the new covenant be any
> > > > different than the conditions for the perfection of the old one? IOW,
> > > > why should death be necessary for the perfection of the covenant if
> > > > Yeshua was able to keep the old covenant perfectly without involving
> > > > death?
>
> > > > Shalom
>
> > > Did you not stop to consider that we are already dead?
>
> > No, I didn't. YHWH is not the Elahi of the dead, but of the living.
> > (Matthew 22:32)
>
> > I don't have any respect for the dead.
>
> But your life begins when this one ends. This is not the life we are
> meant to have.
I don't buy that. Yeshua said that he was the life, not the
anticipation.
If you are not happy with your life then it's time to change it, not
end it.
guardian Snow
The spirit lives but the flesh is dead because of sin. Eternal life
is in the spirit within us and not the flesh which returns from whence
it came:) Because we do not judge whom the son has chosen, in
humility the Good News was preached to us.
1Pe 4:6 For this reason the Good News was also brought to those who
are dead, so that, whereas they are judged according to men in the
flesh, they might live according to Elohim in the spirit.
Rev 1:5 and from יהושע Messiah, the trustworthy witness, the first-
born from the dead, and the ruler of the sovereigns of the earth. To
Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood,
Rev 1:6 and has made us sovereigns and priests to His Elohim and
Father, to Him be esteem and rule forever and ever. Amĕn.
Luk 20:37 “But that the dead are raised, even Mosheh showed at the
bush when he called יהוה ‘the Elohim of Aḇraham, and the Elohim of
Yitsḥaq, and the Elohim of Yaʽaqoḇ.’
Joh 5:21 “For as the Father raises the dead and makes alive, even so
the Son makes alive whom He wishes.
Rev 3:1 “And to the messenger of the assembly in Sardis write, ‘He
who has the seven Spirits of Elohim and the seven stars, says this, “I
know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are
dead.
Rev 3:2 “Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for
I have not found your works complete before Elohim.
Rev 3:3 “Remember, then, how you have received, and heard. And watch
and repent. If, then, you do not wake up, I shall come upon you as a
thief, and you shall not know at all what hour I come upon you.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
For pleasures past I do not grieve, nor perils gathering near; My
greatest grief is that I leave nothing that claims a tear.
Jonathan Schattke
> Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>
> do you quote more, Jesus/Yeshua the Messiah or Saul? If you conduct a
> discussion about religion with somebody about the Christian religion,
> you’ll always notice the same pattern appearing... One person will say
> Jesus said this in Matthew and the respondent will reply but Paul
> said.
>
> Pick any topic in the bible from keeping the Sabbath to Baptism or
> anything in between and you’ll notice a common thread in all the
> conversations.. the disagreements are all between Jesus and Paul’s
> words.
I think I agree with Peter: Paul's letters are complex and easily
misunderstood.
Rom 3:27 Where, then, is the boasting? It is shut out. By what Torah?
Of works? No, but by the Torah of belief.
Rom 3:28 For we reckon that a man is declared right by belief without
works of Torah.
Rom 3:29 Or is He the Elohim of the Yehuḏim only, and not also of
the gentiles? Yea, of the gentiles also,
Rom 3:30 since it is one Elohim who shall declare right the
circumcised by belief and the uncircumcised through belief.
Rom 3:31 Do we then nullify the Torah through the belief? Let it not
be! On the contrary, we establish the Torah.
Rom 4:1 What, then, shall we say Aḇraham our father, to have found,
according to the flesh?
Rom 4:2 For if Aḇraham was declared right by works, he has ground
for boasting, but not before Elohim.
Rom 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "Aḇraham believed Elohim,
and it was reckoned to him for righteousness."
Rom 4:4 And to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned as a
favour but as a debt.
Rom 4:5 And to him who is not working but believes on Him who is
declaring right the wicked, his belief is reckoned for righteousness,
Rom 4:6 even as Dawiḏ also says of the blessedness of the man to
whom Elohim reckons righteousness without works:
Rom 4:7 "Blessed are those whose lawlessnesses are forgiven, and
whose sins are covered,
Rom 4:8 blessed is the man to whom יהוה shall by no means reckon
sin."
So, when you don't put in a chapter break, you get the full paragraph:
Belief is the key to being considered righteous.
Which, by the way, agrees with Yahushwa. But, the belief must be
backed up with turning from sin; as Paul says:
Gal 5:16 And I say: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not accomplish
the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit
against the flesh. And these are opposed to each other, so that you do
not do what you desire to do.
Gal 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under Torah.
Gal 5:19 And the works of the flesh are well-known, which are these:
adultery , whoring, uncleanness, indecency,
Gal 5:20 idolatry, drug sorcery, hatred, quarrels, jealousies, fits
of rage, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions,
Gal 5:21 envy, murders, drunkenness, wild parties, and the like - of
which I forewarn you, even as I also said before, that those who
practise such as these shall not inherit the reign of Elohim.
....
Gal 6:3 For if anyone thinks himself to be somebody, when he is not,
he deceives himself.
Gal 6:4 But let each one examine his own work, and then he shall have
boasting in himself alone, and not in another.
Gal 6:5 For each one shall bear his own burden.
Gal 6:6 And let him who is instructed in the Word share in all that
is good, with him who is instructing.
Gal 6:7 Do not be led astray: Elohim is not mocked, for whatever a
man sows, that he shall also reap.
Gal 6:8 Because he who sows to his own flesh shall reap corruption
from the flesh, but he who sows to the Spirit shall reap everlasting
life from the Spirit.
Gal 6:9 And let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due season we
shall reap if we do not grow weary.
Gal 6:10 So then, as we have occasion, let us do good to all,
especially to those who are of the household of the belief.
So, those who sin will not inherit the reign of Elohim, according to
Paul.
Just as Yahushwa says.
Paul exhorts us to do good, just as Yahushwa did.
duke
>On Jul 17, 3:37 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:44:00 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
>>
>> <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>> >On Jul 14, 9:56 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>>
>> >> Their words are one.
>>
>> Their words below are one:
>>
>> Paul: Works of Torah - Jews believed they could earn their way into heaven
>> based on the number of manmade laws they kept.
>Straw man. What is important is the divine source of law, rather than
>man's contradictory interpretations of that law.
Nope, it's what Paul is talking about.
>> Paul and Jesus said no. Paul
>> also said that faith without works is dead faith. James 2:26.
>Why are you quoting James' critique of Pauline doctrine in support of
>Paul?
BECAUSE..............this is inspired scripture. That's why it's in the bible.
>> John: the Revelation - See Mat 25:31-46. Love one another as I have loved you.
>> See, both in dead agreement with each other. You just have to understand the
>> references.
>In reference to the law, Pauline doctrine is at variance with Yeshua's
>teaching
No he's not.
>For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
>love thy neighbour as thyself.
>Galatians 5:14
And Jesus took it one step further and said that we are to love one another as
he has loved us. And that's the story of the Cross. John 13:34.
duke
<mr_snow...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>Me and Duke have discussed this issue many times now. Duke doesn't
>believe in the Torah at all and says that it's nothing but a "faith
>statement".
Actually, I don't recall saying such a thing. The Levitical laws are man made
in an effort on how to judge whether one is following the 10 commandments, and
further to set a criteria for judgment.
Paul says these are no more as shown by the new covenant in Heb 8:7-13.
But the new covenant clearly leaves us in a condition of faith, that without our
actions reflective in that faith, is dead faith.
Levi said things like "don't eat pork", and work on the sabbath is defined as
carrying 3 fig leaves 1 mile. God doesn't care about these things, but he well
said that we are judged by the things we do in the flesh.
> I found this an interesting point of view since we all
>know that the Messiah quoted the Torah and it's commands on several
>occasions.
Heb 8 well says that the old covenant is worn out and it's time for a new one.
The new one is written on the hearts of man instead of stone tablets.
>He has told me that the 6 day creation and the 10 commandments are
>both not to be regarded as anything but statements of faith because of
>the many conflicts that come in Catholic doctrine.
Come on, gs. I never said such things.
>Maybe he will retract those statements now but that was the
>explanation he gave me before when we were discussing the commandments
>of Exodus 20 and fish symbols which are widely used in the pagan
>Christian church.
Now I know you have somebody else in mind, not me.
>Shalom,
>
> *´¨)
> ¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
>(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
>
>Love is the ability and willingness to allow those that you care for
>to be what they choose for themselves without any insistence that they
>satisfy you.
>Wayne Dyer
>
>
>Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
>version which you can download for free at
>http://www.isr-messianic.org/
duke, American-American
duke
>My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
>self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
>authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
>can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
>not have internal consistency.
>
>So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
>interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
>the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
>Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition.
Why don't you just become a Christian and listen to Christ?
colp
<snip>
> So, those who sin will not inherit the reign of Elohim, according to
> Paul.
> Just as Yahushwa says.
> Paul exhorts us to do good, just as Yahushwa did.
Yes. What is important is what Paul left out.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself.
Galatians 5:14
Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question],
tempting him, and saying,
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.
colp
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:07:25 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
> >self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
> >authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
> >can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
> >not have internal consistency.
>
> >So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
> >interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
> >the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
> >Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition.
>
> Why don't you just become a Christian and listen to Christ?
Because of the source of Christian belief.
colp
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:50:33 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >On Jul 17, 3:37 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:44:00 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
>
> >> <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> >> >On Jul 14, 9:56 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>
> >> >> Their words are one.
>
> >> Their words below are one:
>
> >> Paul: Works of Torah - Jews believed they could earn their way into heaven
> >> based on the number of manmade laws they kept.
> >Straw man. What is important is the divine source of law, rather than
> >man's contradictory interpretations of that law.
>
> Nope, it's what Paul is talking about.
What Paul talked about is not the full story. You snipped the text
which showed that Paul left out the important part of the message.
>
> >> Paul and Jesus said no. Paul
> >> also said that faith without works is dead faith. James 2:26.
> >Why are you quoting James' critique of Pauline doctrine in support of
> >Paul?
>
> BECAUSE..............this is inspired scripture. That's why it's in the bible.
So James was inspired when he implied that Paul was a vain man in
James 2, right?
>
> >> John: the Revelation - See Mat 25:31-46. Love one another as I have loved you.
> >> See, both in dead agreement with each other. You just have to understand the
> >> references.
> >In reference to the law, Pauline doctrine is at variance with Yeshua's
> >teaching
>
> No he's not.
Your denial is based on your removal of the scripture which shows the
variance.
What you removed was:
Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question],
tempting him, and saying,
Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Matthew 22:35-40
>
> >For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
> >love thy neighbour as thyself.
> >Galatians 5:14
>
> And Jesus took it one step further and said that we are to love one another as
> he has loved us. And that's the story of the Cross. John 13:34.
That is a superficial interpretation of the story. Yeshua opposed
sacrifice, and Hosea 6:6 indicates that YHWH did as well. It makes no
sense for YHWH to allow his son to be tortured to death as part of a
sacrifice that he did not desire.
guardian Snow
Hos 6:6 “For I delight in kindness and not slaughtering, and in the
knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
Delight in one thing more then another does not mean he opposed it. I
delight in chocolate and not vanilla doesn't mean that I appose
vanilla, just that I prefer one more.
I've found that many Christians like to take the summary of Torah
from
Mat 22:36 “Teacher, which is the great command in the Torah?”
They say, See, יהושע said these are the commandments but by
summarizing the Torah, he didn't abolish it. It's like saying Ice
Cream is the greatest desert and then saying that I must hate all the
other deserts and never want them again... Clearly thats not what the
question asked. It only asked which is the great command, not what's
the only commands I need to follow.
Christians manipulate scriptures to read what isn't written so that
they can feel justified teaching the commandments of men, just like
Isaiah prophesied about the many generations that pervert and
scriptures.
This explains why they violate the Sabbath for Sunday worship and bow
before pagan idols like, fish symbols, the cross, statues of Mary or
any image:
Exo 20:4 “You do not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness
of that which is in the heavens above, or which is in the earth
beneath, or which is in the waters under the earth,
Exo 20:5 you do not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, יהוה your
Elohim am a jealous Ěl, visiting the crookedness of the fathers on the
children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me,
Clearly they do not believe in the El of scriptures or they would have
kept his Sabbath and not that devised by the men of church history.
Exo 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to set it apart.
Exo 20:9 “Six days you labour, and shall do all your work,
Exo 20:10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath1 of יהוה your Elohim. You
do not do any work – you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your
male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your
stranger who is within your gates. Footnote: 1There are other
Sabbaths, but this is the weekly Sabbath.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Stay committed to your decisions, but stay flexible in your approach.
Tony Robbins
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
colp
I don't know what translation you're using, but זבח definitely means
sacrifice.
>
> Delight in one thing more then another does not mean he opposed it.
Straw man. I did not say that YHWH opposed it, rather I said that he
did not desire it. Also the text does suggest that he delighted in
sacrifice as you imply. I agree with Rabbi Maimonides that sacrifice
was instituted as an accomodation. I think that the intent was of
promoting mercy, rather than out of any desire or need for sacrifice.
As Yeshua implied, in general people don't understand Hosea 6:6 The
beginnings of sacrifice in the Abrahamic tradition are not auspicious.
And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and,
lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
Genesis 15:12
colp
Eternal life is not the spirit within us. It is an effect of a
behaviour:
But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never
thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of
water springing up into everlasting life.
John 4:14
Ever since I showed the common aspects of the old and new covenants
you have focused on death. Why don't you admit the the new covenant of
Jeremiah 31 is the future of Israel?
Scout Lady
"<Kelly>" <316...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0d6f733a-248f-418c...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...> Sure you were. You are a big pretender - in fact, the Platters had a
> hit with a song of the same name:
>
> "Oh yes, I'm the Great Pretender, pretending that I'm doing well.
> My need is such, I pretend too much. I'm lonely, but no one can
> tell..."
>
Freddie sang it better and was much more entertaining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvWKpDusC6c
guardian Snow
I think the harsh penalties of the Torah are established to discourage
the behavior at the strongest levels.
Deu 4:31 “For יהוה your Elohim is a compassionate Ěl, He does not
forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers
which He swore to them.
But also so that when people were spared from the harshness of that
law, that they would be grateful. It really is the whole Christian
ideal behind the entire faith, that we have earned death but have
received mercy instead. That we were dead in our sin but made whole
again by repentance and turning back from our wickedness.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
colp
wrote:
<snip>
> > > > That is a superficial interpretation of the story. Yeshua opposed
> > > > sacrifice, and Hosea 6:6 indicates that YHWH did as well. It makes no
> > > > sense for YHWH to allow his son to be tortured to death as part of a
> > > > sacrifice that he did not desire.
>
> > > Hos 6:6 “For I delight in kindness and not slaughtering, and in the
> > > knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
>
> > I don't know what translation you're using, but זבח definitely means
> > sacrifice.
>
> > > Delight in one thing more then another does not mean he opposed it.
>
> > Straw man. I did not say that YHWH opposed it, rather I said that he
[edit: I left out "not" in the original text]
> > sacrifice as you imply. I agree with Rabbi Maimonides that sacrifice
> > was instituted as an accomodation. I think that the intent was of
> > promoting mercy, rather than out of any desire or need for sacrifice.
>
> > As Yeshua implied, in general people don't understand Hosea 6:6 The
> > beginnings of sacrifice in the Abrahamic tradition are not auspicious.
>
> > And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and,
> > lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
> > Genesis 15:12
>
> I think the harsh penalties of the Torah are established to discourage
> the behavior at the strongest levels.
What has that go to do with the reason for the institution of
sacrifice within Judaism?
>
> Deu 4:31 “For יהוה your Elohim is a compassionate Ěl, He does not
> forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers
> which He swore to them.
>
> But also so that when people were spared from the harshness of that
> law, that they would be grateful.
That doesn't sound just to me.
> It really is the whole Christian
> ideal behind the entire faith, that we have earned death but have
> received mercy instead. That we were dead in our sin but made whole
> again by repentance and turning back from our wickedness.
There's more to entering the kingdom than complete repentance.
But getting back to the meaning of the crucifixion, I don't see any
argument which supports the idea of vicarious human sacrifice. I mean,
the idea is fundamentally Pauline, and we agree that Paul had a poor
grasp of the truth, right?
What I think the problem is, is that we assume that by cutting Paul
out of the picture no obstacles are left between us and the truth. The
thing is that Paul usually spoke the truth, either completely or in
part, and unless we have a theological model which can account for
what he said, we are not much better off for having abandoned him.
Robibnikoff
"Scout Lady" <scou...@nospam4me.net> wrote in message
news:6eaot4F...@mid.individual.net...
Though he was also gay ;)
Queen was my favorite band growing up <sigh> ;)
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
If you can't be a good example....
You'll just have to be a horrible warning.
guardian Snow
> On Jul 18, 6:52 pm, guardian Snow <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au>
> > > > Hos 6:6 “For I delight in kindness and not slaughtering, and in the
> > > > knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
> > I think the harsh penalties of the Torah are established to discourage
> > the behavior at the strongest levels.
>
> What has that go to do with the reason for the institution of
> sacrifice within Judaism?
The Sin offering would be a constant reminder of the price of our
sin. To be clear,
Gen 9:5 “But only your blood for your lives I require, from the hand
of every beast I require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand
of every man’s brother I require the life of man.
Gen 9:6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood is shed, for in
the image of Elohim has He made man.
Elohim is perfection and to try and understand his Spirit really is
just vanity on our part. The bottom line is that he is El and
righteous. True justice is pure black and white and no in betweens
but because he loved us, rather then destroy the creation, he keeps
his promise and teaches the dead so that they may have life.
1Pe 1:3 Blessed be the Elohim and Father of our Master יהושע Messiah,
who according to His great compassion has caused us to be born again
to a living expectation through the resurrection of יהושע Messiah from
the dead,
So that one day we can be born again
1Pe 1:4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and unfading,
having been kept in the heavens for you,
1Pe 1:5 who are protected by the power of Elohim through belief, for a
deliverance ready to be revealed in the last time,
1Pe 1:6 in which you exult, even though for a little while, if need
be, you have been grieved by manifold trials,
1Pe 1:7 in order that the proving of your belief – much more precious
than gold that perishes, and proven by fire – might be found to result
in praise and respect and esteem at the revelation of יהושע Messiah,
1Pe 1:8 whom having not seen, you love; in whom you exult with
unspeakable and esteemed joy, yet not seeing, but believing,
1Pe 1:9 obtaining the goal of your belief: a deliverance of lives.
And so that which we call life is delivered unto El, that we may live
again.
> > Deu 4:31 “For יהוה your Elohim is a compassionate Ěl, He does not
> > forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers
> > which He swore to them.
>
> > But also so that when people were spared from the harshness of that
> > law, that they would be grateful.
>
> That doesn't sound just to me.
>
> > It really is the whole Christian
> > ideal behind the entire faith, that we have earned death but have
> > received mercy instead. That we were dead in our sin but made whole
> > again by repentance and turning back from our wickedness.
>
> There's more to entering the kingdom than complete repentance.
Repentance is an work of faith.
Mat 21:28 “But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to
the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’
Mat 21:29 “And he answering, said, ‘I do not wish to,’ but afterwards
he repented and went.
Mat 21:30 “And having come to the second, he said similarly. And he
answering, said, ‘I go, master,’ but he did not go.
Mat 21:31 “Which of the two did the desire of the father?” They said
to Him, “The first.” יהושע said to them, “Truly, I say to you that tax
collectors and whores are entering into the reign of Elohim before
you,
Mat 21:32 for Yoḥanan came to you in the way of righteousness, and
you did not believe him, but tax collectors and whores believed him.
And when you saw it, you did not repent afterwards, to believe him.
> But getting back to the meaning of the crucifixion, I don't see any
> argument which supports the idea of vicarious human sacrifice. I mean,
> the idea is fundamentally Pauline, and we agree that Paul had a poor
> grasp of the truth, right?
>
> What I think the problem is, is that we assume that by cutting Paul
> out of the picture no obstacles are left between us and the truth. The
> thing is that Paul usually spoke the truth, either completely or in
> part, and unless we have a theological model which can account for
> what he said, we are not much better off for having abandoned him.
Plenty of examples of people giving up their lives for the sake of the
people are in the Old Testament. How many prophets sent to the people
were stoned for the word?
Mat 5:9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, because they shall be called
sons of Elohim.
Mat 5:10 “Blessed are those persecuted for righteousness’1 sake,
because theirs is the reign of the heavens. Footnote: 11Pet. 3:14.
Mat 5:11 “Blessed are you when they reproach and persecute you, and
falsely say every wicked word against you, for My sake.
Mat 5:12 “Rejoice and be glad, because your reward in the heavens is
great. For in this way they persecuted the prophets who were before
you.
Mat 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt becomes
tasteless, how shall it be seasoned? For it is no longer of any use
but to be thrown out and to be trodden down by men.
Now read that last verse and consider this:
Lev 2:13 ‘And season with salt every offering of your grain offering,
and do not allow the salt of the covenant of your Elohim to be lacking
from your grain offering. With all your offerings you bring salt.
Joh 6:33 “For the bread of Elohim is He who comes down out of the
heaven and gives life to the world.”
Do you see the "Bread of Life" and the grain offering?
Deu 16:2 “And you shall slaughter the Passover to יהוה your Elohim,
from the flock and the herd, in the place where יהוה chooses to put
His Name.
Lev 2:1 ‘And when anyone brings a grain offering to יהוה, his
offering is to be of fine flour. And he shall pour oil on it, and put
frankincense on it,
Lev 2:2 and he shall bring it to the sons of Aharon, the priests, and
he shall take from it his hand filled with fine flour and oil with all
the frankincense. And the priest shall burn it as a remembrance
portion on the altar, an offering made by fire, a sweet fragrance to
יהוה.
Lev 2:3 ‘And the rest of the grain offering is for Aharon and his
sons, most set-apart of the offerings to יהוה by fire.
If you understand his many titles, Lamb of El, Prince of Peace, Bread
of Life
Joh 6:48 “I am the bread of life.
Rev 19:9 And he said to me, “Write, ‘Blessed are those who have been
called to the marriage supper of the Lamb!’ ” And he said to me,
“These are the true words of Elohim.”
Isa 9:6 For a Child shall be born unto us, a Son shall be given unto
us, and the rule is on His shoulder. And His Name is called Wonder,
Counsellor, Strong Ěl, Father of Continuity, Prince of Peace.
Isa 9:7 Of the increase of His rule and peace there is no end, upon
the throne of Dawiḏ and over His reign1, to establish it and sustain
it with right-ruling and with righteousness from now on, even forever.
The ardour of יהוה of hosts does this. Footnote: 1See 16:5, Ps. 2, Ps.
45:6, Mic. 5:2, Lk. 1:32-33.
You understand that his sacrifice was all the sacrifice and the
perfect one. In the end, we must recognize that if we believe the New
Testament Good News of יהושע Messiah, we must recognize this perfect
sacrifice wasn't a human sacrifice at all:
Mat 20:28 even as the Son of Aḏam did not come to be served, but to
serve,1 and to give His life as a ransom for many.” Footnote:1See Mark
10:45 and Isa. 49:1-7.
Isa 49:1 Listen to Me, O coastlands, and hear, you peoples from afar!
יהוה has called Me from the womb, from My mother’s belly He has caused
My Name to be remembered.
Isa 49:2 And He made My mouth like a sharp sword, in the shadow of His
hand He hid Me, and made Me a polished shaft. In His quiver He hid
Me.”
Isa 49:3 And He said to Me, ‘You are My servant, O Yisra’ĕl, in whom I
am adorned.’
Isa 49:4 And I said, ‘I have laboured in vain, I have spent my
strength for emptiness, and in vain. But my right-ruling is with יהוה,
and my work with my Elohim.’ ”
Isa 49:5 And now said יהוה – who formed Me from the womb to be His
Servant, to bring Yaʽaqoḇ back to Him, though Yisra’ĕl is not
gathered to Him, yet I am esteemed in the eyes of יהוה, and My Elohim
has been My strength –
Isa 49:6 and He says, “Shall it be a small matter for You to be My
Servant to raise up the tribes of Yaʽaqoḇ, and to bring back the
preserved ones of Yisra’ĕl? And I shall give You as a light to the
gentiles, to be My deliverance to the ends of the earth!”
Isa 49:7 Thus said יהוה, the Redeemer of Yisra’ĕl, their Set-apart
One, to the despised , to the loathed One of the nation, to the
Servant of rulers, “Sovereigns shall see and arise, rulers also shall
bow themselves, because of יהוה who is steadfast, the Set-apart One of
Yisra’ĕl. And He has chosen You!”
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
And now here is my secret, a very simple secret; it is only with the
heart that one can see rightly, what is essential is invisible to the
eye.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Jonathan Schattke
> As Yeshua implied, in general people don't understand Hosea 6:6 The
> beginnings of sacrifice in the Abrahamic tradition are not auspicious.
>
> And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and,
> lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
> Genesis 15:12
First: the Messiah was quoting Hosea, but Hosea was reiterating:
Pro 21:3 To do righteousness and right-ruling Is more acceptable to
יהוה than a slaughtering.
Which you can only understand if you are considering some things from
Psalms:
Psa 40:6 Slaughtering and meal offering You did not desire; You have
opened my ears; Burnt offering and sin offering You did not ask for.
Psa 51:16 For You do not desire slaughtering, or I would give it; You
do not delight in burnt offering.
Psa 51:17 The slaughterings of Elohim are a broken spirit, A heart
broken and crushed, O Elohim, These You do not despise.
Psa 51:18 Do good in Your good pleasure to Tsiyon; Build the walls of
Yerushalayim.
Psa 51:19 Then You would delight in slaughterings of righteousness,
In burnt offering and complete burnt offering; Then young bulls would
be offered on Your altar.
Psa 141:2 Let my prayer be prepared before You as incense, The
lifting up of my hands as the evening offering.
Ecc 5:1 Guard your steps when you go to the House of Elohim. And draw
near to listen rather than to give the slaughtering of fools, for they
do not know that they do evil.
(this is the start of the stricture to leave your gift at the altar if
your brother has anything against you)
Actually, the first sacrifices in the Bible are Abel and Cain
Gen 4:2 And again, she gave birth to his brother Heḇel. And Heḇel
became a keeper of sheep, but Qayin became a tiller of the ground.
Gen 4:3 And it came to be, in the course of time, that Qayin brought
an offering of the fruit of the ground to יהוה.
Gen 4:4 And Heḇel also brought of the first-born of his flock and of
their fat. And יהוה looked to Heḇel and his offering,
Gen 4:5 but He did not look to Qayin and his offering. And Qayin was
very wroth, and his face fell.
The next is Noah
Gen 8:20 And Noaḥ built an altar to יהוה, and took of every clean
beast and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the
altar.
Offerings are an integral part of showing thanks to the Eternal. But,
there are other ways.
A quick check of the prophecies of the kingdom of heaven will show
that sacrifices will be required of all the earth then.
duke
>On Jul 18, 10:33 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:50:33 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>> >On Jul 17, 3:37 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:44:00 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow
>>
>> >> <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>> >> >On Jul 14, 9:56 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:30:24 -0700 (PDT), guardian Snow <snowpheo...@eck.net.au>
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >Do you follow Jesus or Apostle Paul?
>>
>> >> >> Their words are one.
>>
>> >> Their words below are one:
>>
>> >> Paul: Works of Torah - Jews believed they could earn their way into heaven
>> >> based on the number of manmade laws they kept.
>> >Straw man. What is important is the divine source of law, rather than
>> >man's contradictory interpretations of that law.
>>
>> Nope, it's what Paul is talking about.
>
>What Paul talked about is not the full story. You snipped the text
>which showed that Paul left out the important part of the message.
Paul said one cannot be saved by works. Jesus said one cannot be saved by
works. The works in question are directed at the Levitical laws in which one
could "assure" his entrance (or so he thought) into heaven based on the number
of laws he kept.
>> >> Paul and Jesus said no. Paul
>> >> also said that faith without works is dead faith. James 2:26.
>> >Why are you quoting James' critique of Pauline doctrine in support of
>> >Paul?
>> BECAUSE..............this is inspired scripture. That's why it's in the bible.
>So James was inspired when he implied that Paul was a vain man in
>James 2, right?
Could be.
>> >> John: the Revelation - See Mat 25:31-46. Love one another as I have loved you.
>> >> See, both in dead agreement with each other. You just have to understand the
>> >> references.
>> >In reference to the law, Pauline doctrine is at variance with Yeshua's
>> >teaching
>> No he's not.
>Your denial is based on your removal of the scripture which shows the
>variance.
>What you removed was:
>Then one of them, [which was] a lawyer, asked [him a question],
>tempting him, and saying,
>Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
>Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
>heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
>This is the first and great commandment.
>And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
>thyself.
>On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
>Matthew 22:35-40
Yes, and Jesus gave us a new commandment that we love one another as he has
loved us. Now what is love one another than to do for one another. This is
especially revealed in Mat 25:31-46 and James 2:14-26. Mat 7:21 nails the lid
down.
>> >For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
>> >love thy neighbour as thyself.
>> >Galatians 5:14
>>
>> And Jesus took it one step further and said that we are to love one another as
>> he has loved us. And that's the story of the Cross. John 13:34.
>That is a superficial interpretation of the story. Yeshua opposed
>sacrifice, and Hosea 6:6 indicates that YHWH did as well.
Yet God commanded sacrifice with Abraham - animal sacrifice. It's the sacrifice
of the Passover - unblemished lamb which Jesus became as the new Lamb of God to
be sacrificed on the Cross.
>It makes no
>sense for YHWH to allow his son to be tortured to death as part of a
>sacrifice that he did not desire.
Maybe it will make more sense to you when you understand that God became man in
the person of Jesus Christ to die on the cross for the redemption from sin and
to restore salvation of souls lost thanks to A&E.
But it was not Jesus' death on the cross that meant so much as his obedience to
his Father to do so. "Take this cup from me, not my will but yours, almighty
Father." And then Jesus said "follow me" in obedience.
Jesus never, ever said "worship me"
colp
No, they were offerings rather than sacrifices. Fat of the flock means
abundance rather than sacrificial fat.
> Gen 4:2 And again, she gave birth to his brother Heḇel. And Heḇel
> became a keeper of sheep, but Qayin became a tiller of the ground.
> Gen 4:3 And it came to be, in the course of time, that Qayin brought
> an offering of the fruit of the ground to יהוה.
> Gen 4:4 And Heḇel also brought of the first-born of his flock and of
> their fat. And יהוה looked to Heḇel and his offering,
> Gen 4:5 but He did not look to Qayin and his offering. And Qayin was
> very wroth, and his face fell.
>
> The next is Noah
> Gen 8:20 And Noaḥ built an altar to יהוה, and took of every clean
> beast and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the
> altar.
>
> Offerings are an integral part of showing thanks to the Eternal. But,
> there are other ways.
>
> A quick check of the prophecies of the kingdom of heaven will show
> that sacrifices will be required of all the earth then.
Still, based on your texts these sacrifices are more likely to a
broken spirit or a broken and crushed heart per Psalm 51:17
Such a sacrifice is evident in the prophetic Psalms which are
associated with the crucifixion, Psalms 22 and 69 :
But I [am] a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the
people.
Psalm 22:6
O Elohim, thou knowest my foolishness; and my sins are not hid from
thee.
Psalm 69:5
colp
> Yet God commanded sacrifice with Abraham - animal sacrifice.
No he didn't.
> It's the sacrifice
> of the Passover - unblemished lamb which Jesus became as the new Lamb of God to
> be sacrificed on the Cross.
The prophetic Psalms 22 & 69 (which refer to the crucifixion) don't
refer to anything like an unblemished lamb.
<snip>
colp
wrote:
> On Jul 18, 5:37 pm, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 18, 6:52 pm, guardian Snow <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au>
> > > > > Hos 6:6 “For I delight in kindness and not slaughtering, and in the
> > > > > knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
> > > I think the harsh penalties of the Torah are established to discourage
> > > the behavior at the strongest levels.
>
> > What has that go to do with the reason for the institution of
> > sacrifice within Judaism?
>
> The Sin offering would be a constant reminder of the price of our
> sin.
So if people know the price then the reminder is unnecessary, right?
> To be clear,
>
> Gen 9:5 “But only your blood for your lives I require, from the hand
> of every beast I require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand
> of every man’s brother I require the life of man.
> Gen 9:6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood is shed, for in
> the image of Elohim has He made man.
This is about retribution, not sacrifice. Retribution is part of
justice, while sacrifice is based on an appeal for intervention.
>
> Elohim is perfection and to try and understand his Spirit really is
> just vanity on our part.
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge
Hosea 6:4
> The bottom line is that he is El and
> righteous. True justice is pure black and white and no in betweens
> but because he loved us, rather then destroy the creation, he keeps
> his promise and teaches the dead so that they may have life.
So why do you not wish to understand spirit?
>
> 1Pe 1:3 Blessed be the Elohim and Father of our Master יהושע Messiah,
> who according to His great compassion has caused us to be born again
> to a living expectation through the resurrection of יהושע Messiah from
> the dead,
>
> So that one day we can be born again
Being born again does not involve death. Rather it involves the birth
of a being which has a distinct relationship to the being of the first
birth.
>
> 1Pe 1:4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and unfading,
> having been kept in the heavens for you,
> 1Pe 1:5 who are protected by the power of Elohim through belief, for a
> deliverance ready to be revealed in the last time,
> 1Pe 1:6 in which you exult, even though for a little while, if need
> be, you have been grieved by manifold trials,
> 1Pe 1:7 in order that the proving of your belief – much more precious
> than gold that perishes, and proven by fire – might be found to result
> in praise and respect and esteem at the revelation of יהושע Messiah,
> 1Pe 1:8 whom having not seen, you love; in whom you exult with
> unspeakable and esteemed joy, yet not seeing, but believing,
> 1Pe 1:9 obtaining the goal of your belief: a deliverance of lives.
>
> And so that which we call life is delivered unto El, that we may live
> again.
The crucifixion was not what it appeared to be. The meaning of the
crucifixion was one of the issues which separated into opposing
beliefs during the rejection of Pauline doctrine by the Ebionites.
>
> > > Deu 4:31 “For יהוה your Elohim is a compassionate Ěl, He does not
> > > forsake you, nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers
> > > which He swore to them.
>
> > > But also so that when people were spared from the harshness of that
> > > law, that they would be grateful.
>
> > That doesn't sound just to me.
>
> > > It really is the whole Christian
> > > ideal behind the entire faith, that we have earned death but have
> > > received mercy instead. That we were dead in our sin but made whole
> > > again by repentance and turning back from our wickedness.
>
> > There's more to entering the kingdom than complete repentance.
>
> Repentance is an work of faith.
It is a state of brokenness.
And it repented YHWH that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved
him at his heart.
Genesis 6:6
The prophets didn't go with the intention of losing their lives.
>
> Mat 5:9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, because they shall be called
> sons of Elohim.
> Mat 5:10 “Blessed are those persecuted for righteousness’1 sake,
> because theirs is the reign of the heavens. Footnote: 11Pet. 3:14.
> Mat 5:11 “Blessed are you when they reproach and persecute you, and
> falsely say every wicked word against you, for My sake.
> Mat 5:12 “Rejoice and be glad, because your reward in the heavens is
> great. For in this way they persecuted the prophets who were before
> you.
> Mat 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt becomes
> tasteless, how shall it be seasoned? For it is no longer of any use
> but to be thrown out and to be trodden down by men.
>
> Now read that last verse and consider this:
>
> Lev 2:13 ‘And season with salt every offering of your grain offering,
> and do not allow the salt of the covenant of your Elohim to be lacking
> from your grain offering. With all your offerings you bring salt.
>
> Joh 6:33 “For the bread of Elohim is He who comes down out of the
> heaven and gives life to the world.”
>
> Do you see the "Bread of Life" and the grain offering?
The grain offering was given when an animal sacrifice was unavailable.
Yeshua was not the sacrifice, despite appearances.
> In the end, we must recognize that if we believe the New
> Testament Good News of יהושע Messiah, we must recognize this perfect
> sacrifice wasn't a human sacrifice at all:
That does not follow.
>
> Mat 20:28 even as the Son of Aḏam did not come to be served, but to
> serve,1 and to give His life as a ransom for many.” Footnote:1See Mark
> 10:45 and Isa. 49:1-7.
The wicked [shall be] a ransom (כפר) for the righteous, and the
transgressor (בגד) for the upright.
Proverbs 21:18
Bagad (בגד) means treachery, and kopher (כפר) can mean the price of a
life.
The life that Yeshua lost was his ministry in Israel. It was the
treacherous one who actually died on the cross.
guardian Snow
> >> Nope, it's what Paul is talking about.
>
> >What Paul talked about is not the full story. You snipped the text
> >which showed that Paul left out the important part of the message.
>
> Paul said one cannot be saved by works. Jesus said one cannot be saved by
> works. The works in question are directed at the Levitical laws in which one
> could "assure" his entrance (or so he thought) into heaven based on the number
> of laws he kept.
Kindly give me the quote and context of the alleged statement by the
Messiah. I read the gospels on an almost daily bases and I just can't
remember the Good News of יהושע Messiah stating that righteous works
don't save us. Contrary to what your stating he taught us:
Mat 19:17 And He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good
except One – Elohim. But if you wish to enter into life, guard the
commands.”1 Footnote:1See Lk. 10:28, John 12:50, Rev. 22:14.
Mat 19:18 He said to Him, “Which?” And יהושע said, “ ‘You shall not
murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You
shall not bear false witness,’
Mat 19:19 ‘Respect your father and your mother,’ and ‘You shall love
your neighbour as yourself.’ ”
Mat 19:20 The young man said to Him, “All these I have watched over
from my youth, what do I still lack?”
Mat 19:21 יהושע said to him, “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what
you have and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven.
And come, follow Me.”
I think you have your Messiah's mixed up. I prefer the one that spoke
in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
duke
The worn-out old covenant: written on stone tablets, unblemished lamb
slaughtered, blood spread on the doorpost to ward off physical angel of death.
The new covenant: written on the hearts of man, unblemished lamb slaughtered,
blood spread on the cross post to ward off spiritual angel of death.
Robibnikoff
"john w @yahoo.com>" <j<no> babbled:
>
> One of the more disgusting displays I've seen!
LOL. Considering you're a lover of incest porn, I find that VERY hard to
believe, short bus.
colp
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:36:30 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> Yet God commanded sacrifice with Abraham - animal sacrifice.
>
> >No he didn't.
>
> >> It's the sacrifice
> >> of the Passover - unblemished lamb which Jesus became as the new Lamb of God to
> >> be sacrificed on the Cross.
>
> >The prophetic Psalms 22 & 69 (which refer to the crucifixion) don't
> >refer to anything like an unblemished lamb.
> ><snip>
>
> The worn-out old covenant: written on stone tablets, unblemished lamb
> slaughtered, blood spread on the doorpost to ward off physical angel of death.
The passover itself wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant, although
remembrance of it is.
As a metaphor for the crucifixion, the blood on the doorposts & lintel
does not correspond to Yeshua, who identified himself as the door of
the sheep. (John 10:7)
duke
<mr_snow...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>On Jul 19, 4:32 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> >> Nope, it's what Paul is talking about.
>>
>> >What Paul talked about is not the full story. You snipped the text
>> >which showed that Paul left out the important part of the message.
>> Paul said one cannot be saved by works. Jesus said one cannot be saved by
>> works. The works in question are directed at the Levitical laws in which one
>> could "assure" his entrance (or so he thought) into heaven based on the number
>> of laws he kept.
>Kindly give me the quote and context of the alleged statement by the
>Messiah.
Snow, you look for one single statement in Scripture, rather than the big
picture. John 21:25. The story of our faith is based on a continuous movement
from Genesis to Revelation, and includes continuous activities, history, and
writings to the present day.
Leviticus is a listing of the rules by man (Jewish) to use to allow one to
determine whether one is following the 10 commandments, and also to set the
parameters thereof. WE CANNOT earn our way to salvation.
Yet God told us that our faith is dead if we deny our purpose in the needs of
others. Mat 25:31-46, James 2:14-26, Mat 7:21. By definition, we too are
works/deeds, but in consideration of John 13:34, and not Levi.
> I read the gospels on an almost daily bases and I just can't
>remember the Good News of ????? Messiah stating that righteous works
>don't save us. Contrary to what your stating he taught us:
And the works of the (Levitical) LAW were as I described above. Works of the
heart is a different thing. James 2:26.
We cannot earn our way into heaven by the number of Levi LAWS we keep.
>Mat 19:17 And He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good
>except One – Elohim. But if you wish to enter into life, guard the
>commands.”1 Footnote:1See Lk. 10:28, John 12:50, Rev. 22:14.
>Mat 19:18 He said to Him, “Which?” And ????? said, “ ‘You shall not
>murder,’ ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You
>shall not bear false witness,’
>Mat 19:19 ‘Respect your father and your mother,’ and ‘You shall love
>your neighbour as yourself.’ ”
>Mat 19:20 The young man said to Him, “All these I have watched over
>from my youth, what do I still lack?”
>Mat 19:21 ????? said to him, “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what
>you have and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven.
>And come, follow Me.”
>I think you have your Messiah's mixed up. I prefer the one that spoke
>in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
God also spoke in the Epistles.
duke
That would be one Jesus Christ.
colp
<snip>
> Leviticus is a listing of the rules by man (Jewish) ...
That man was Moses, and his rules were endorsed by Yeshua:
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do;
but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Matthew 22:2-3
colp
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:29:22 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >On Jul 18, 10:44 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:07:25 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >> >My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
> >> >self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
> >> >authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
> >> >can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
> >> >not have internal consistency.
>
> >> >So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
> >> >interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
> >> >the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
> >> >Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition.
>
> >> Why don't you just become a Christian and listen to Christ?
>
> >Because of the source of Christian belief.
>
> That would be one Jesus Christ.
Belief is more than knowing the words of Yeshua. Belief is meaning
arising from interpretation, and in the case of Christianity the
interpretation is generally determined by the Church which in turn is
heavily influenced by Pauline doctrine.
In other words the problem with Christianity is all the baggage that
comes with the orthodox interpretation of the good news of the
kingdom.
To interpret the words of Yeshua without all the doctrinal baggage
involves also learning about the context of his teachings from a
historical and theological perspective.
Scout Lady
"john w @yahoo.com>" <j<no> wrote in message
news:ghi384lm4gt8dtad5...@4ax.com...
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:26:37 -0400, "Scout Lady"
> <scou...@nospam4me.net> wrote:
> Š 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>
>
Whatever you say short bus.
guardian Snow
> >Kindly give me the quote and context of the alleged statement by the
> >Messiah.
>
> Snow, you look for one single statement in Scripture, rather than the big
> picture. John 21:25. The story of our faith is based on a continuous movement
> from Genesis to Revelation, and includes continuous activities, history, and
> writings to the present day.
O.K. How about anything in the gospels or any book outside of Paul
that supports "faith without works". You say no conflict in
scriptures... You say they speak the same message but then you refuse
to give proof because you can't.
Joh 21:25 Now there is much else that יהושע did. If every one of them
were written down, I think that the world itself would not contain the
written books. Amĕn.
Using this passage isn't an excuse to not support your idea from the
actual words of the Messiah. This to me is a confession that you
follow Paul as if he was the Messiah or "God" and he wasn't. The rest
of your post only confirms to me that you ignore anything not written
by Paul and the only thing you believe is "God" are in the works of
Paul.
You really should burn your bible and just get the books of Paul.
It's so old watching people pay lip service to any of the scriptures
that requires you to actually obey Elohim and the Messiah.
Mat 15:7 “Hypocrites! Yeshayahu rightly prophesied about you, saying,
Mat 15:8 ‘This people draw near to Me with their mouth, and respect Me
with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.
Mat 15:9 ‘But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as teachings the
commands of men.’ ”1
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Be thou the rainbow in the storms of life. The evening beam that
smiles the clouds away, and tints tomorrow with prophetic ray.
Lord Byron
Portions of this post have been reprinted from (Scriptures +1998)
version which you can download for free at
http://www.isr-messianic.org/
Rod
> x-no-archive: yes
> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:22:37 -0500, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:04:04 -0500, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
>>> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>> x-no-archive: yes
>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:06:42 -0500, Rod <nos...@noway.net> wrote:
>>>>> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:41:52 -0700, john w <j<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> x-no-archive: DISHONORED
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 13:27:23 -0400, NOSPAM <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>>>>>>>> © 2008 John D Weatherly all rights reserved; no portion of this post
>>>>>>>> may be used anywhere else without written permission of the author.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sadly, Elaine, you seem to follow my every keystroke.
>>>>>>>>> Only to keep your kind IN CHECK,
>>>>>>>> ^ ^ ^^ ^ guffaw! YOU? Keep ME in check?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> roll on the ground, laughing my ASS off.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Silence, petulant child, and go to your room. No TV, no playing- and
>>>>>>> don't come out until you have permission.
>>>>>> As far as I'm concerned you can leave Dr. Demento in his room
>>>>>> to starve !
>>>>> Well, I see we're back to that part of the cycle where you have
>>>>> stopped pretending to be "my friend."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rod
>>>> I was never pretending.
>>> Liar.
>>>
>>>
>> Your right to believe what you please has not been revoked,
>> but it has never had any influence on the truth.
>
> ^ ^ ^ Some would likely call your 2 cents "profound."
>
> I would not.
>
>
No John, I don't suppose you would. I've gotten the
impression though that your idea of profound is a "yes"
answer to one of your emails trying to persuade a female
poster( I have one in mind ) to have sex with you.
duke
>On Jul 20, 12:41 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:29:22 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>> >On Jul 18, 10:44 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:07:25 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>> >> >My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
>> >> >self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
>> >> >authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
>> >> >can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
>> >> >not have internal consistency.
>>
>> >> >So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
>> >> >interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
>> >> >the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
>> >> >Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition.
>>
>> >> Why don't you just become a Christian and listen to Christ?
>>
>> >Because of the source of Christian belief.
>>
>> That would be one Jesus Christ.
>Belief is more than knowing the words of Yeshua. Belief is meaning
>arising from interpretation, and in the case of Christianity the
>interpretation is generally determined by the Church which in turn is
>heavily influenced by Pauline doctrine.
Interpretation of scripture is dangerous and potentially changes the authors
words to ours. We are called to translate, and live accordingly.
>In other words the problem with Christianity is all the baggage that
>comes with the orthodox interpretation of the good news of the
>kingdom.
There's that word "interpretation" again. Just what I said.
>To interpret the words of Yeshua without all the doctrinal baggage
>involves also learning about the context of his teachings from a
>historical and theological perspective.
Context --- Chihuahua. How does one know the context of the Lord's message as
being anything other than what he said?
duke
>On Jul 20, 12:27 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:36:30 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>> ><snip>
>> >> Yet God commanded sacrifice with Abraham - animal sacrifice.
>>
>> >No he didn't.
>>
>> >> It's the sacrifice
>> >> of the Passover - unblemished lamb which Jesus became as the new Lamb of God to
>> >> be sacrificed on the Cross.
>>
>> >The prophetic Psalms 22 & 69 (which refer to the crucifixion) don't
>> >refer to anything like an unblemished lamb.
>> ><snip>
>>
>> The worn-out old covenant: written on stone tablets, unblemished lamb
>> slaughtered, blood spread on the doorpost to ward off physical angel of death.
>The passover itself wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant, although
>remembrance of it is.
And the crucifixion of the new Lamb of God starts the new covenant.
>As a metaphor for the crucifixion, the blood on the doorposts & lintel
>does not correspond to Yeshua, who identified himself as the door of
>the sheep. (John 10:7)
Yes, the way to heaven. It's his human blood shed on the cross that replaces
the animal blood spread on the doorsill. It's his new covenant written on our
hearts replacing the old covenant written on stone tablets.
Jesus never, ever said "worship me".
duke
>On Jul 20, 12:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
><snip>
>> Leviticus is a listing of the rules by man (Jewish) ...
>
>That man was Moses, and his rules were endorsed by Yeshua:
And Jesus said that the old covenant is worn out and needs replacement. Heb
8:7-13.
>Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
>All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do;
>but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
>Matthew 22:2-3
Matthew 22:2-3 (New International Version)
2"The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his
son. 3He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell
them to come, but they refused to come.
There - now we can understand what it says.
duke
<mr_snow...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>On Jul 19, 10:40 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> >Kindly give me the quote and context of the alleged statement by the
>> >Messiah.
>>
>> Snow, you look for one single statement in Scripture, rather than the big
>> picture. John 21:25. The story of our faith is based on a continuous movement
>> from Genesis to Revelation, and includes continuous activities, history, and
>> writings to the present day.
>
>O.K. How about anything in the gospels or any book outside of Paul
>that supports "faith without works". You say no conflict in
>scriptures... You say they speak the same message but then you refuse
>to give proof because you can't.
What are you looking for, gs? One MUST have a knowledge of Levi laws to
understand the reference. That's the danger of reading the bible for one's
self. As individuals, we are 2000 years displaced from the writings and the
historical references.
God gave us one simple command (new) to follow - John 13:34. James 2 - what
good is it to see a man suffering from hunger but give him no food? Such a
person is dead in his faith.
>Joh 21:25 Now there is much else that ????? did. If every one of them
>were written down, I think that the world itself would not contain the
>written books. Am?n.
>Using this passage isn't an excuse to not support your idea from the
>actual words of the Messiah.
All you're telling me is that if it's not in a "gospel", forget it. I can't do
that. Paul's writings as included are considered inspired to the gospel.
The gospels themselves, technically, are not the words of the Lord anyway. They
are in truth recordings of what others said the Lord said, some 10-30-60 years
after his death and resurrection. These documents represent the words of the
beliefs and practices in place at these later dates.
> This to me is a confession that you
>follow Paul as if he was the Messiah or "God" and he wasn't. The rest
>of your post only confirms to me that you ignore anything not written
>by Paul and the only thing you believe is "God" are in the works of
>Paul.
John 13:34, Mat 25:31-46, Mat 28:18-20, Mat 7:21 and many others say it all.
Jesus spoke and Paul passed it on to the expanding Church.
Jesus never said "put me on a pedestal". He said to "follow me in service to
our fellow man. I came to serve and not to be served".
>You really should burn your bible and just get the books of Paul.
>It's so old watching people pay lip service to any of the scriptures
>that requires you to actually obey Elohim and the Messiah.
See above what Elohim said. I really can't see what your confusion is.
lord...@peoplepc.com
"colp" <co...@solder.ath.cx> wrote in message
news:369b1735-6ac8-4027...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 17, 4:36 pm, guardian Snow <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:
> On Jul 17, 1:49 pm, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 17, 2:52 pm, guardian Snow <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 17, 9:07 am, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 17, 10:26 am, guardian Snow <mr_snow_pheo...@yahoo.com.au>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > <snip>
>
> > > > > Me and Duke have discussed this issue many times now. Duke
> > > > > doesn't
> > > > > believe in the Torah at all and says that it's nothing but a
> > > > > "faith
> > > > > statement". I found this an interesting point of view since we
> > > > > all
> > > > > know that the Messiah quoted the Torah and it's commands on
> > > > > several
> > > > > occasions.
>
> > > > Yeah, I find this behaviour to be quite intriguing. I've seen it in
> > > > people that I would describe as reasonably intelligent and good
> > > > natured, too.
>
> > > > My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
> > > > self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of
> > > > apparently
> > > > authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy).
> > > > You
> > > > can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that
> > > > does
> > > > not have internal consistency.
>
> > > > So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
> > > > interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
> > > > the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
> > > > authorized to collect donations and therefore wasn't acting entirely
> > > > outside of the halachic structure.
>
> > > > Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
> > > > Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
> > > > All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and
> > > > do;
> > > > but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
>
> > > > The paradox is highlighted when you get a Pharisee who practices
> > > > what
> > > > he preaches, so to speak. When the scope of the paradox includes
> > > > justification by faith alone vs justification by works then it is
> > > > fair
> > > > to say that the system is b0rken.
>
> > > Your forgetting my friend, it wasn't the seat of Moses that has been
> > > established forever, it's the throne of David:
>
> > So we've got the house, kingdom, and throne of Dawid being established
> > forever.
> > But the lawgiver is not permanent. What I'm taking about is the
> > fulfillment of the law in Jeremiah 31, rather than the end of the
> > kingdom.
>
> > The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between
> > his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him [shall] the gathering of the
> > people [be].
> > Genesis 49:10
>
> > <snip 2Sa 7>
>
> > > Forever means forever and it is this throne that the Messiah has come
> > > to sit on. The agreement of the covenant was not a conditional one,
> > > it's a promise that is given and because his is true and righteous, we
> > > continue to build his house in our hearts.
>
> > > Jer 31:33 "For this is the covenant I shall make with the house of
> > > Yisra'el after those days, declares ????: I shall put My Torah in
> > > their inward parts, and write it on their hearts. And I shall be their
> > > Elohim, and they shall be My people.
> > > Jer 31:34 "And no longer shall they teach, each one his neighbour, and
> > > each one his brother, saying, 'Know ????,' for they shall all know Me,
> > > from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares ????. "For I
> > > shall forgive their crookedness, and remember their sin no more."
>
> > > Most people wrongly assume they fall under the "New covenant" but when
> > > you clearly read the conditions of this agreement, you realize that
> > > this covenant is granted after we have paid the price for our own
> > > transgression of the only covenant that redeems us, the covenant of
> > > Moses. With that covenant only ONE thing has been made a sign and
> > > still the modern church disreguards it for the sake of keeping MAN'S
> > > TRADITION and not the tradition of the scriptures.
>
> > The new covenant, like the old one, is between ???? and the twelve
> > tribes. The conditions of both were/are the keeping of the Torah, as
> > far as I can tell. The difference between the two is that the
> > interpretation of the former is according to tradition, while the
> > interpretation of the latter is intrinsic. When I quoted Matthew
> > 23:1-3 my intention was to show that the onerous interpretation of the
> > Pharisees was in keeping with the letter of the Mosaic law, although
> > not the spirit of the law.
>
> > I don't see how there is any difference in the redemptive nature of
> > the two covenants, since they are based on the same Torah.
>
> > I'm not suggesting the the new covenant is an easy option (apart from
> > the elimination of human tradition). Regarding the parable of the
> > wedding feast, I'd describe a wedding garment as being works which
> > were consistent with Torah.
>
> > Shalom
>
> Rev 20:14 And the death and the grave were thrown into the lake of
> fire. This is the second death.1 Footnote: 1See 2:11, 20:6, 21:8.
> Rev 20:15 And if anyone was not found written in the Book of Life, he
> was thrown into the lake of fire.
>
> The new covenant takes effect when we die our physical death and begin
> our eternal life which happens the moment you give up the ghost.
Why should the conditions for perfection of the new covenant be any
different than the conditions for the perfection of the old one? IOW,
why should death be necessary for the perfection of the covenant if
Yeshua was able to keep the old covenant perfectly without involving
death?
Shalom
This is an easy question to answer. God Himself established in Genisis that
'Sin brings Death'
The Sin was adams, however it was the animal sacrifice that God made to
cover their nakedness
with animal skins that signified the death. Just as later Israel was to
sacrifice at the Temple for their
sins. In order for Sin/death to be beaten it required the death of an
innocent. That first animal
sacrifice mad by God forshadowed the perfected sacrifice of Christ on the
Cross, for all Sin, for all time.
Donot think that Because Christs sacricfice was sufficient, for all sin,
for all time, means you automatically
are 'Saved'. It is still required that you believe that Christ is Gods Son
incarnate, that His death on the
cross was the only acceptable sacrifice for sin and that He is your only
path to salvation and eternal life.
When Christ said that He did not come to do away with the Mosaic Law, but,
to fulfill it. He was saying He came
to remove its power of conviction to death. God knew when He gave the Law
that it could not be followed
by any man. It was meant as a proof to man that he was now imperfect and
incapable of EARNING
Heaven/eternal life/acceptance by God. It was a constant reminder of mans
failure to please God.
The Old sacrifices were a constant reminder of the cost of sin.....death.
Their lives were filled
day to day, week to week, year to year with the death of animals, the reak
of blood and burning
flesh.
The Passover is also a reminder of the requirement for the shedding of
blood for sin.
It was only those houses with shed blood on the mantle and doorposts that
were spared
the death that God sent upon Egypt. If Christ did not die on that cross
then His life meant
nothing. His taking on the cloak of man pointless.
Satan knew this. And he put it into the hearts of Jesus' jailers to beat
Him as brutally as they
could without killing Him. God the Father had given Jesus the authority to
lay His life down
at the time He wanted. Satan tried very hard to force Jesus to give up
before He completely finished
His work on the Cross. Before, He fulfilled every single prophecy that
referred to His Life and Death.
Personnaly, I believe this is what made Jesus sweat blood the night before
because He knew
what Satan was going to put Him through and just how hard it was going to be
to allow
Himself to be beaten/ whipped and abused. Praise be to God, He loved us so
much that He allowed
Satan to do his worst and yet He did ALL that was required to fulfill God
the Fathers will.
Tim
Jonathan Schattke
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 06:06:00 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >On Jul 20, 12:40 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> ><snip>
> >> Leviticus is a listing of the rules by man (Jewish) ...
>
> >That man was Moses, and his rules were endorsed by Yeshua:
>
> And Jesus said that the old covenant is worn out and needs replacement. Heb
> 8:7-13.
Heb 8:10 "Because this is the covenant that I shall make with the
house of Yisra'ĕl after those days, says יהוה, giving My laws in their
mind, and I shall write them on their hearts, and I shall be their
Elohim, and they shall be My people.
Well, now, seems to me that passage says the New Covenant you tout so
highly as being different... is the same laws, written in their hearts
instead of on parchment and stone. Done out of love, instead of fear.
> >Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
> >All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do;
> >but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
> >Matthew 22:2-3
>
> Matthew 22:2-3 (New International Version)
> 2"The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his
> son. 3He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell
> them to come, but they refused to come.
>
> There - now we can understand what it says.
I'm sure he meant Matthew 23
Mat 23:2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on the seat of
Mosheh.
Mat 23:3 "Therefore, whatever they say to you to guard, guard and do.
But do not do according to their works, for they say, and do not do.
Mat 23:4 "For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on
men's shoulders, but with their finger they do not wish to move them.
Which begins one of the most famous condemnations of Talmud and the
traditions of the Elders.
Jonathan Schattke
> On Jul 18, 2:54 am, Jonathan Schattke <wiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > So, those who sin will not inherit the reign of Elohim, according to
> > Paul.
> > Just as Yahushwa says.
> > Paul exhorts us to do good, just as Yahushwa did.
>
> Yes. What is important is what Paul left out.
>
> For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt
> love thy neighbour as thyself.
> Galatians 5:14
>
> tempting him, and saying,
> Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?
> Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
> heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
> This is the first and great commandment.
> And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
> thyself.
> On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
> Matthew 22:35-40
Rom 3:31 Do we then nullify the Torah through the belief? Let it not
be! On the contrary, we establish the Torah.
Love is the start. But the Torah stands for all Israel, and the
Gentiles:
Eph 3:6 The gentiles to be co-heirs, united in the same body, and
partakers together in the promise in Messiah through the Good News,
Eph 3:7 of which I became a servant according to the gift of the
favour of Elohim given to me, according to the working of His power.
Eph 3:8 To me, the very least of all the set-apart ones, this favour
was given, to bring the Good News of the unsearchable riches of
Messiah among the gentiles,
Eph 3:9 and to make all see how this secret is administered, which
for ages past has been hidden in Elohim who created all through יהושע
Messiah,
Eph 3:10 so that now, through the assembly, the many-sided wisdom of
Elohim might be known to the principalities and authorities in the
heavenlies,
Eph 3:11 according to the everlasting purpose which He made in
Messiah יהושע our Master,
Eph 3:12 in whom we have boldness and access, with reliance, through
belief in Him.
If you are united in the same body, then you are part of the same
covenants.
Rom 11:16 Now if the first-fruit is set-apart, the lump is also. And
if the root is set-apart, so are the branches.
Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being
a wild olive tree, have been grafted in among them, and came to share
the root and fatness of the olive tree,
Rom 11:18 do not boast against the branches. And if you boast,
remember: you do not bear the root, but the root bears you!
Rom 11:19 You shall say then, "The branches were broken off that I
might be grafted in."
Rom 11:20 Good! By unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by
belief. Do not be arrogant, but fear.
Rom 11:21 For if Elohim did not spare the natural branches, He might
not spare you either.
Rom 11:22 See then the kindness and sharpness of Elohim: on those who
fell sharpness, but toward you kindness, if you continue in His
kindness, otherwise you also shall be cut off.
Rom 11:23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, shall
be grafted in, for Elohim is able to graft them in again.
Rom 11:24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by
nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree,
how much more shall these who are the natural branches, be grafted
into their own olive tree?
Rom 11:25 For I do not wish you to be ignorant of this secret,
brothers, lest you should be wise in your own estimation, that
hardening in part has come over Yisra'ĕl, until the completeness of
the gentiles has come in.
Rom 11:26 And so all Yisra'ĕl shall be saved, as it has been written,
"The Deliverer shall come out of Tsiyon, and He shall turn away
wickedness from Yaʽaqoḇ,
Rom 11:27 and this is My covenant with them, when I take away their
sins."
Rom 11:28 Truly, as regards the Good News they are enemies for your
sake, but concerning the choice they are beloved for the sake of the
fathers.
Rom 11:29 For the gifts and the calling of Elohim are not to be
repented of.
Rom 11:30 For as you also at one time disobeyed Elohim, but now have
obtained compassion through their disobedience,
Rom 11:31 so also these have now disobeyed, that through the
compassion shown you they also might obtain compassion.
Rom 11:32 For Elohim has shut them all up to disobedience, in order
to have compassion on all.
Rom 11:33 Oh, the depth of riches, and wisdom and knowledge of
Elohim! How unsearchable His judgments and untraceable His ways!
Rom 11:34 "For who has known the mind of יהוה ? Or who has become His
counsellor?"
Rom 11:35 "Or who first gave to Him, and it shall be given back to
him?"
And I'll leave giving a resounding Amen! to Paul's epistle. Despise
not the Israelite, for without Abraham there would be no promise,
without Jacob no Messiah, without David, no King.
colp
> "colp" <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote in message
<snip>
> Why should the conditions for perfection of the new covenant be any
> different than the conditions for the perfection of the old one? IOW,
> why should death be necessary for the perfection of the covenant if
> Yeshua was able to keep the old covenant perfectly without involving
> death?
>
> Shalom
>
Tim wrote:
> This is an easy question to answer.
The context of the question wasn't apparent in my previous post, and
referred to the fact that Yeshua had not died before he perfected the
old covenant, which involved keeping the Mosaic law, rather than the
fact that animal sacrifice is specified in that law, as you appear to
have interpreted the question.
colp
>
> This is an easy question to answer. God Himself established in Genisis that
> 'Sin brings Death'
> The Sin was adams, however it was the animal sacrifice that God made to
> cover their nakedness
> with animal skins that signified the death.
The significance of the animal skins is arbitrary.
> Just as later Israel was to
> sacrifice at the Temple for their
> sins.
No, the reason for it was not the same.
> In order for Sin/death to be beaten it required the death of an
> innocent.
False.
> That first animal
> sacrifice mad by God forshadowed the perfected sacrifice of Christ on the
> Cross, for all Sin, for all time.
False. The crucifixion was not what it appeared to be. The prophetic
Psalms 22 & 69 speak of the shame of the crucified man, which is
incompatible with the Christian idea of a spotless sacrifice. The
alternative interpretation formed along with the schism between James
& Paul, and the conflict between the doctrines was later the
motivation for the Crusades, which curtailed the rising influence of
belief systems which did not incorporate the Pauline interpretation.
colp
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 06:15:24 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >On Jul 20, 12:41 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:29:22 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >> >On Jul 18, 10:44 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:07:25 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >> >> >My current thinking on this is that the Mosaic covenant is no longer
> >> >> >self consistent due to the contradictory interpretations of apparently
> >> >> >authoritative sources (Jeremiah 31 has the cause and the remedy). You
> >> >> >can get pretty much any conclusion you like out of a system that does
> >> >> >not have internal consistency.
>
> >> >> >So, playing the devil's advocate, I'd say that the Pauline
> >> >> >interpretation is supported by fact that lawful authority regarding
> >> >> >the disciples passed from Yeshua to his brother Ya'akob, and from
> >> >> >Ya'akob to Paul in the Pharasaic tradition.
>
> >> >> Why don't you just become a Christian and listen to Christ?
>
> >> >Because of the source of Christian belief.
>
> >> That would be one Jesus Christ.
> >Belief is more than knowing the words of Yeshua. Belief is meaning
> >arising from interpretation, and in the case of Christianity the
> >interpretation is generally determined by the Church which in turn is
> >heavily influenced by Pauline doctrine.
>
> Interpretation of scripture is dangerous and potentially changes the authors
> words to ours.
Yes. Life is not risk free.
> We are called to translate, and live accordingly.
Yet you accept the interpretation of your church, correct? If that
interpretation is dangerous then is not not foolish to accept it
uncritically?
>
> >In other words the problem with Christianity is all the baggage that
> >comes with the orthodox interpretation of the good news of the
> >kingdom.
>
> There's that word "interpretation" again. Just what I said.
>
> >To interpret the words of Yeshua without all the doctrinal baggage
> >involves also learning about the context of his teachings from a
> >historical and theological perspective.
>
> Context --- Chihuahua. How does one know the context of the Lord's message as
> being anything other than what he said?
Context (Wordnet)
1. [n] discourse that surrounds a language unit and helps to
determine its interpretation
2. [n] the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation
or event; "the historical context"
colp
> On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 05:40:41 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >On Jul 20, 12:27 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:36:30 -0700 (PDT), colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote:
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> Yet God commanded sacrifice with Abraham - animal sacrifice.
>
> >> >No he didn't.
>
> >> >> It's the sacrifice
> >> >> of the Passover - unblemished lamb which Jesus became as the new Lamb of God to
> >> >> be sacrificed on the Cross.
>
> >> >The prophetic Psalms 22 & 69 (which refer to the crucifixion) don't
> >> >refer to anything like an unblemished lamb.
> >> ><snip>
>
> >> The worn-out old covenant: written on stone tablets, unblemished lamb
> >> slaughtered, blood spread on the doorpost to ward off physical angel of death.
> >The passover itself wasn't part of the Mosaic covenant, although
> >remembrance of it is.
>
> And the crucifixion of the new Lamb of God starts the new covenant.
False.
>
> >As a metaphor for the crucifixion, the blood on the doorposts & lintel
> >does not correspond to Yeshua, who identified himself as the door of
> >the sheep. (John 10:7)
>
> Yes, the way to heaven.
The door, not the posts.
> It's his human blood shed on the cross that replaces
> the animal blood spread on the doorsill.
False. It wasn't Yeshua's blood on the cross, despite appearances.
For my death, which they think happened, (happened) to them in their
error and blindness, since they nailed their man unto their death. For
their Ennoias did not see me, for they were deaf and blind. But in
doing these things, they condemn themselves. Yes, they saw me; they
punished me. It was another, their father, who drank the gall and the
vinegar; it was not I.
The Second Treatise of the Great Seth
That they said (in boast), 'We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary,
the Messenger of Allah' -- but they killed him not, nor crucified him,
but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are
full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to
follow, for of a surety they killed him not -- nay, Allah raised him
up unto Himself.
The Qur'an, Surah 4:157-158
> It's his new covenant written on our
> hearts replacing the old covenant written on stone tablets.
False. The new covenant is with the twelve tribes, not the gentiles.
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jeremiah 31:31
colp
No, The Torah as the law of Moses and the new covenant is only for the
twelve tribes. But there has always been provision for strangers to
convert & join them.
guardian Snow
> >O.K. How about anything in the gospels or any book outside of Paul
> >that supports "faith without works". You say no conflict in
> >scriptures... You say they speak the same message but then you refuse
> >to give proof because you can't.
>
> What are you looking for, gs? One MUST have a knowledge of Levi laws to
> understand the reference. That's the danger of reading the bible for one's
> self. As individuals, we are 2000 years displaced from the writings and the
> historical references.
The scriptures disagrees with what you say as usual.
Psa 1:1 Blessed is the man who shall not walk in the counsel of the
wrong, And shall not stand in the path of sinners, And shall not sit
in the seat of scoffers,
Psa 1:2 But his delight is in the Torah of יהוה, And he meditates in
His Torah day and night.
Psa 1:3 For he shall be as a tree Planted by the rivers of water, That
yields its fruit in its season, And whose leaf does not wither, And
whatever he does prospers.
The idea that because you fail in one aspect of the Torah and so, you
are a sinner while understandable still doesn't agree even with the
teachings of Paul.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by works of Torah no flesh shall be declared right
before Him, for by the Torah is the knowledge of sin.1 Footnote: 1Ex.
20:20, Rom. 4:15, Rom. 7:7.
Another way of saying that is the Torah defines what is sin. So by
knowing the works of Torah, we learn the desire of our Father in
heaven. To say that because we now know what is defined as sin and we
know that no man is justified by keeping the Torah, doesn't mean that
we disregard the teachings and toss it out. As Paul clearly stated
and you continue to ignore:
Rom 3:31 Do we then nullify the Torah through the belief? Let it not
be! On the contrary, we establish the Torah.1 Footnote: 1See 7:12.
Yet, we see that Christians have no desire to establish even the most
basic sign of the Torah, the Sabbath. The same Sabbath Paul, the
Messiah and every person in the scripture kept. The same Sabbath
quickly disregarded by all of the modern church in favor of papal
authority.
Shalom,
*´¨)
¸.•´ ¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)
(¸.•´ (¸.• (Snow(.¸.•*´¨)
Stay committed to your decisions, but stay flexible in your approach.
Tony Robbins
