Sabbath?

[Johnnz]

There is no issue with the OT texts, but that's what they belong to - the Old Covenant. We are now under a new covenant. Your citing also fails to recognise the progressive story with the Scriptures - Creation, fall, god interaction with humanity over many centuries, culminating with Jesus. There is one more chapter in that story, Jesus' return and the full restoration of creation. For us today, we are to live out of the penultimate chapter, begun an Pentecost and ending with Jesus' return.

John
NZ

 

[bugkiller]

Where did you use the Tanankh to support your views?

I am a Christian and the Tanankh does not support Christinity. The Tanankh supports Judaism only. Yes I recognize the Tanankh as the OT. So if you wish to throw out or not consider the NT and its covenant (the NC). We can never come to an agreemnt on much except evil. Unfortunately the sabbath does not fall into the evil or righteous catagory in relationship to salvation. Many other laws such regulating things such as food and worship do not as well.

bugkiller

 

[mrs94]

I am a Christian and the Tanankh does not support Christinity. The Tanankh supports Judaism only. Yes I recognize the Tanankh as the OT. So if you wish to throw out or not consider the NT and its covenant (the NC). We can never come to an agreemnt on much except evil. Unfortunately the sabbath does not fall into the evil or righteous catagory in relationship to salvation. Many other laws such regulating things such as food and worship do not as well.

bugkiller

How is it that you cannot use the Tanakh to support "Christianity" but the apostles and disciples used it to show that Messiah had come and how He fulfilled the law? See the contradiction there? When Paul talked to the Bereans, which scriptures do you think they used?

 

[Johnnz]

How is it that you cannot use the Tanakh to support "Christianity" but the apostles and disciples used it to show that Messiah had come and how He fulfilled the law? See the contradiction there? When Paul talked to the Bereans, which scriptures do you think they used?

Even if that is the case what does it mean? Do we also accept a hymn to Zeus and a Greek legend quoted by Paul at Athens as part of the NT message.

John
NZ

 

[mrs94]

Even if that is the case what doe sit mean? Do we also accept a hymn to Zeus and a Greek legend quoted by Paul at Athens as part of the NT message.

John
NZ

Does what you posted here really make any sense to you? You can see what the apostles did. When Paul went off for 3 years to study, what exactly do you think he was studying?

 

[Johnnz]

Does what you posted here really make any sense to you? You can see what the apostles did. When Paul went off for 3 years to study, what exactly do you think he was studying?

The OT which he then developed around his understanding of Jesus and from direct revelation from Jesus himself. Part of that development was Paul the zealous Jew writing that the law was now a past covenant, as its terms were fulfilled in the person of Jesus, abolishing temple, sacrifices, circumcision, even land.

OT does not = OT plus Jesus for Paul. The shadow had been given substance. The New and better had arrived.

John
NZ

 

[bugkiller]

How is it that you cannot use the Tanakh to support "Christianity" but the apostles and disciples used it to show that Messiah had come and how He fulfilled the law? See the contradiction there? When Paul talked to the Bereans, which scriptures do you think they used?

Sure one can use the Tanakh to support Christianity. There is nothing in the Tanakh that addresses Christianity. Christianity did not exist until Christ. Christianity is named after Jesus the Christ. If you want to say Messianic or something similar to get awa from the word Christianity, fine by me. But then I believe one would not be talking about Christianity. They would be talking about Judaism. Yes I know and understand you say that is not so. OK.

Both Jesus and Paul are real headaches for some people. Why do you not want to discuss what they said? You openly admit the Bereans agreed with Paul.

bugkiller

 

[tzadik]

what of the fact the second century Christians wrote about sunday and not 3 century like many have being saying. Since the 3 century Roman empress is made Christianity a offical religion of holiday and mixed many of the holidays together such as Easter. This disprove that theory

I'd prefer to stick to the Scriptures, especially the Scriptures that EVERYONE in the Bible used. <Acts 24:14, 2 Timothy 3:16-18>

 

[tzadik]

I am a Christian and the Tanankh does not support Christianity.

&#8220;I am a Christian and most of the Word of God does not support Christianity&#8221; &#8211; not sure you realize what you just said, so I tried to make it a bit more black and white for ya.

Question: Does Yeshua (Jesus) support 'your' Christianity? Can you show me anywhere in Scripture that He supports a religion that does not heed to the Tanakh or believe that the Torah is no longer applicable?

 

[tzadik]

The OT which he then developed around his understanding of Jesus and from direct revelation from Jesus himself.

I think we&#8217;re all missing something here.
Are we to do, live, talk, walk and be like Messiah? Yes. (Even Paul agrees: 1 Cor. 11:1)

So before we rush to try to interpret anyone else&#8217;s teachings (Paul, Peter, apostles, 2nd century Christians, church fathers, etc.) we need to understand and apply Messiah&#8217;s teachings to our lives.
So the question then is, does Messiah in any way shape or form teach that the Instructions and Guidelines of God are done away with, expired, put away, abolished, invalid, no longer applicable or cancelled????
____
Because last time I checked His last command was to &#8220;teach the world to observe EVERYTHING that I commanded you.&#8221;

 

[tzadik]

Both Jesus and Paul are real headaches for some people. Why do you not want to discuss what they said?

I would love to discuss what Yeshua said. Like I said in the above posts, I would love to see any reference to Yeshua teaching that the Instructions and Guidelines of God are no longer applicable to a believer’s walk.

You openly admit the Bereans agreed with Paul.

Actually, the ONLY reason that the Bereans received Paul’s message was BECAUSE it agreed with the Torah and the Prophets (the only Scriptures available at the time) [Acts 17:11]
Quite interesting to see that Paul himself believed EVERYTHING that was in agreement with the Torah and the Prophets. (Acts 24:14) –No wonder the Bereans agreed with him

 

[Johnnz]

So before we rush to try to interpret anyone else’s teachings (Paul, Peter, apostles, 2nd century Christians, church fathers, etc.) we need to understand and apply Messiah’s teachings to our lives.
So the question then is, does Messiah in any way shape or form teach that the Instructions and Guidelines of God are done away with, expired, put away, abolished, invalid, no longer applicable or cancelled????
____
Because last time I checked His last command was to “teach the world to observe EVERYTHING that I commanded you.”

Jesus, God incarnate, became the perfect sacrifice, thereby abolishing the need for temple and regular sacrificed, He became the scapegoat that we might be free of sin and guilt, He taught that God's kingdom had arrived in Him, and that the Holy Spirit would come and make each believer a temple.

In fulfilling all past requirements and types Jesus rendered their observance redundant, instead replacing them with His own life with us by the Holy Spirit.

John
NZ

 

[bugkiller]

I would love to discuss what Yeshua said. Like I said in the above posts, I would love to see any reference to Yeshua teaching that the Instructions and Guidelines of God are no longer applicable to a believer’s walk.

Actually, the ONLY reason that the Bereans received Paul’s message was BECAUSE it agreed with the Torah and the Prophets (the only Scriptures available at the time) [Acts 17:11]
Quite interesting to see that Paul himself believed EVERYTHING that was in agreement with the Torah and the Prophets. (Acts 24:14) –No wonder the Bereans agreed with him

Maybe I did not get the following posted in this thread.

A favorite - 10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

From the Sermon on the Mount - But I say unto you in verses 22, 28, 32, 34, 39 and 44. Each one of these is immediately quoting the law including the 10 Cs. The word but is an objection and shows difference. It is not used to explain or magnify something. It is used as a disagreement with something. It meand contrary to something.

Now since the Bereans agreed with Paul why do you disagree with him? You said everything Paul said agrees with the Torah and the prophets. I simply do not understand what the problem is.

bugkiller

 

[tzadik]

Jesus, God incarnate, became the perfect sacrifice, thereby abolishing the need for temple and regular sacrificed, He became the scapegoat that we might be free of sin and guilt, He taught that God's kingdom had arrived in Him, and that the Holy Spirit would come and make each believer a temple.

In fulfilling all past requirements and types Jesus rendered their observance redundant, instead replacing them with His own life with us by the Holy Spirit.

John
NZ

Was Paul being redundant? (Acts 21:24)

Have you ever asked yourself why Paul completed his Nazarite vow according to Numbers 6 by offering a sacrifice and paying for the sacrifice of the other men who did the vow?

FYI: the 'it was a transitional period' and paul was just being a chameleon and 'faking it' to win others to Christ theory is completely bogus.

If something is of God, you do it, without caring about men. If it's not of God, you don't do it, for it would be a sin.

 

[tzadik]

Now since the Bereans agreed with Paul why do you disagree with him?

I do not disagree with Paul.
You are misunderstanding me.

Yeshua believed and taught about things that agreed with the Torah and the Prophets. Anything that did not agree with the Torah and the Prophets, Messiah would not teach or believe. (Deuteronomy 13)

Paul believed and taught about things that agreed with the Torah and the Prophets. Therefore anything that He taught must agree with the Torah and the Prophets.

The Bereans believed and received everything that agreed with the Torah and the Prophets. Therefore anything that did not agree with the Torah and the prophets could not be received as truth.

We can also deduce (since there was no "NT" in the "NT" --wasn't canonized until 2nd century at the earliest), that all believers in the Scriptures believed and lived according to the Torah and the Prophets.

Conclusion: any teaching that you are purporting must agree with the Torah and the Prophets. If you say "the Torah of God is no longer applicable in the life of the believer", you must be able to show me this in the Torah and the Prophets. (I'd be more than happy to provide you with hundreds of passages that teach the opposite)

If you somehow interpret Paul to teach that "the Torah is no longer applicable" you are misinterpreting his words (just like Peter said many would) because what we DO know from his own words is that he did not believe in anything that did not agree with the Torah and the prophets. It's a fool proof theory.

 

[Johnnz]

Was Paul being redundant? (Acts 21:24)

Have you ever asked yourself why Paul completed his Nazarite vow according to Numbers 6 by offering a sacrifice and paying for the sacrifice of the other men who did the vow?

FYI: the 'it was a transitional period' and paul was just being a chameleon and 'faking it' to win others to Christ theory is completely bogus.

If something is of God, you do it, without caring about men. If it's not of God, you don't do it, for it would be a sin.

Redundant? Not at all. Paul was prepared to be all things to all men in order to win some. He was prepared fulfil his vow before Jewish leaders to build a bridge of testimony to His loyalty to Yahweh. Paul on other occasions tailored his message to better communicate with a range of people, but always within the wider context of his understanding of how King Jesus has changed everything.

Paul acted similarly with Timothy.
Acts 16:1-3 He came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was a Jewess and a believer, but whose father was a Greek. The brothers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. NIV

Yet, with Titus:
Gal 2:3-5 Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek. [This matter arose] because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you. NIV

John
NZ

 

[tzadik]

Redundant? Not at all. Paul was prepared to be all things to all men in order to win some. He was prepared fulfil his vow before Jewish leaders to build a bridge of testimony to His loyalty to Yahweh.

Actually James clearly tells us WHY Paul did it. It was not at all to &#8216;pretend to be something that he wasn&#8217;t&#8217; but rather SO THAT EVERYONE COULD SEE THAT YOU KEEP THE LAW AND WALK ORDERLY. Pretty straightforward stuff.

 

[Johnnz]

Actually James clearly tells us WHY Paul did it. It was not at all to ‘pretend to be something that he wasn’t’ but rather SO THAT EVERYONE COULD SEE THAT YOU KEEP THE LAW AND WALK ORDERLY. Pretty straightforward stuff.

Please elaborate

John
NZ

 

[tzadik]

Please elaborate

John
NZ

Scripture elaborates better than I ever could: Acts 21

20. And when they heard it they began glorifying God; and they said to him, "You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law;
[[Greek word myriad = tens of thousands. That's tens of thousands of Jewish BELIEVERS who are ALL zealous for the Torah of God]]

21. and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs.
[False testimony]] What's interesting about this verse is that many Christians would jump on board this false accusation bandwagon and say that verse 21 is EXACTLY what Paul was doing, or IS doing even today. Teaching that the Law of God is abolished and no more.

22. "What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come.

23. "Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow;

24. take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law.
[[They'll know that those accusations are indeed false, and everyone will know that Paul walks orderly keeping the Torah of God.
Beautiful.]]

 

[mrs94]

Sure one can use the Tanakh to support Christianity. There is nothing in the Tanakh that addresses Christianity. Christianity did not exist until Christ. Christianity is named after Jesus the Christ. If you want to say Messianic or something similar to get awa from the word Christianity, fine by me. But then I believe one would not be talking about Christianity. They would be talking about Judaism. Yes I know and understand you say that is not so. OK.

Both Jesus and Paul are real headaches for some people. Why do you not want to discuss what they said? You openly admit the Bereans agreed with Paul.

bugkiller

No, I'm saying that per Deut 13, if Paul contradicted the Torah, the Bereans would not have listened to him. Yet, not one of you can use the same scriptures the Bereans used to support what you believe Paul was saying.

I've tried to discuss what Yeshua said, but His Words, somehow, get swept away into some interpretation that is consistent with what you guys think Paul taught. I've discussed Paul's words and then get told that he was doing what he was doing to appease the state....or other nonsense like that.

It's kind of hard to debate when those you are debating aren't interested in truth but only proving their point and making sure they know how to twist words and situations to do that. To which, this is tiring for me....so, I shall decrease and find something more productive to do with my time.....like, actually studying Torah and how Yeshua gospel accounts explained and expounded on that! Besides, I am really excited and have to prepare to begin celebrating Feasts and Festivals that mean something and aren't based on Pagan histories and traditions!

Shalom!