Posted on 05/12/2013 5:55:26 PM PDT by narses
Not 'know'; but READ.
Ignoring the VERY plain words found in Scripture is a poor way to try to win an argument.
Waving those words away with volumes of other words, likewise, is a no show.
Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because "the righteous will live by faith."
Good luck with INSISTING that ONLY Saturday is the 'day' to worship GOD, by using texts that are CLEARLY aimed at the Chosen People - the ones with the Covenant.
Who said anything about being justified by the law?
Yup........kinda makes you wonder what's going through some folks' head............doesn't it......
I see it all the time. It is, in it's essence, the very kernel of 'the big lie'.
Uh... St. Paul did.
...to the church in Galacia.
He called them FOOLS.
Do you think Diego1618 is preaching justification by the law? Because if you do, I know you to be in error.
Roamer.......I don't think they really know much of anything.
[Galatians 2:16-17] 16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 17But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
Here we are first told about "works of the Law". This phrase has been so much misunderstood by Main Streams Christians as they believe the reference is to the Law of Moses. They automatically believe Paul is saying....."disregard Torah!" That's just stupid!
What did Paul say about Peter? Was he not following the Law (Torah) when he separated himself from the Gentiles [Galatians 2:12]? Of course he wasn't. He was merely following the dictates of the "Oral" law, the Talmud. You can search Torah from stem to stern and will not find any reference to separate yourself from Gentiles. Man's law is not Yahweh's Law! But you can constantly see Paul ripping the Talmud........the doctrine from Babylon!
If Main Stream Christianity would pick up their bibles once and a while and actually attempt to understand the Hebrew thought process that is prevalent throughout.....you would see a lot less stupid comments about silly things like this.
No; of course not.
We are veering away from the Sabbath thingy.
There are some in this thread that seem to be VERY emphatic that God must be worshipped on the SABBATH; but there is disagreement over just what IS the 'sabbath' and did anyone actually CHANGE it.
That's point 1.
Point #2 - just who are His people these days? Jews? Gentiles?? Both???
Point three.
Just what DOES God 'require' from 'His people'?
We seem to have tossed all this in a blender and turned it on without installing the lid!
Big mess.
Can we get back to ONE thing at a time?
No, it's part and parcel...
There are some in this thread that seem to be VERY emphatic that God must be worshipped on the SABBATH; [...]
Point of order: Every day is a good day to worship - That ain't exactly it.
The Sabbath is about worship, and about rest, and about family. In it you are not to work, nor your animals, nor anyone in your house. You are not to travel, or do business. It is primarily a celebration of the creative work of the Father, sanctified in Genesis. It starts Friday at sunset, and continues to Saturday at sunset.
[...] but there is disagreement over just what IS the 'sabbath' and did anyone actually CHANGE it.
There is no disagreement. the Sabbath IS Saturday. It always has been Saturday. What the disagreement is about is whether the Roman church had the authority to change it to Sunday, and whether the Protestants are prepared to follow Sola-Scriptura (as is their wont), or to continue to pay homage to Rome - Because you will find no place in the Word where the Sabbath is changed at all.
just who are His people these days? Jews? Gentiles?? Both???
His covenant is made with the House of Judah, and the House of Israel... And the gentiles can be grafted in (which means that the Covenant is for everyone, as has always been the case from the beginning). Of course, all three have to abide by the covenant for it to have effect, and as always, abiding thereby is a personal responsibility first, but with national or group implications as well.
Just what DOES God 'require' from 'His people'?
What is required is to believe upon the Son. He has taken the curses that are ours upon Himself. BUT, we are to emulate him, and to keep the commandments. We are not tied to the Torah by curses any longer... but if we love YHWH, we will keep his commandments... And let's not forget that while Yeshua died to take away the curses, the blessings remain.
Among those commandments is the direct instruction to keep HIS Holy Days and to keep His Sabbath Day.
What is required is to believe upon the Son. He has taken the curses that are ours upon Himself. BUT, we are to emulate him, and to keep the commandments. We are not tied to the Torah by curses any longer... but if we love YHWH, we will keep his commandments... And let's not forget that while Yeshua died to take away the curses, the blessings remain.
Thanks for this great post.........it's too bad the Main Stream Christians cannot understand this concept.
Yep. It is certainly a logical error to me. A guy sees in the OT that the commandments are good and wholesome and eternal... If one suggests that this is the carnal thing in the NT, that is treated so poorly, then YHWH changed (which He does not). Not to mention that the Jews would have ignored anyone coming at them preaching such a thing - They were warned by YHWH that such would come.
And don't be too hard on folks. !!!Tradition!!! is an awful thing. Rome-colored glasses and Greece in their eyes... Makes it hard to see. There but for the grace of YHWH...
thanks for your kind reply.
And if you CAN'T?
Can't or won't? His yoke is not heavy.
Yup.
Yup.
It's unbelievable how this scripture gets twisted. At the Jerusalem Council there was "ONE" issue! We find it in [Acts 15:2]:
"When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question."
The word ZETAMATOS (ζητήματος) is singular and means what it means: a search for an answer; a debate regarding a question
The burden (the yoke) that James agreed to no longer place upon the Gentile converts (verse 19) was.........adult circumcision. That's what the issue was and that's what caused the Council to be convened in the first place:
[Acts 15:1]And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
I'm still amazed as to how the "Church" continues to portray this passage as something entirely different from what it is.
Really? Considering the same 'curch' declared that 'you must be sprinkled with water in order to be saved', I would say it is SOSDD.
What gets me about the Jerusalem Council is that it's conclusion proclaims the fact that all of these gentiles have access to Moses.Everyone seems to forget that part... that they would be expected to learn as they go along...
And btw, I don't know that adult circumcision is even Torah based - Certainly not 'in order to be saved'... But all I have found in the Torah about adult circumcision is a prohibition wrt some ceremonies or temple access, IIRC. I think I have to go back into the talmud/mishna one of these days and figure out what they were pointing to... Because if this example is like every other one that happened under Yeshua, the emphasis is against some tradition.
Yeah!
The 'church' should just IGNORE all them OTHER verses found in Acts 15!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.