Ask a "Messianic/Hebrew Rooter" (AMA)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#21
Thank you for the welcome, Dan. I've actually been a member of CC for almost 3 years now. Just haven't been very active. I mostly read threads that interest me.

To answer your question: I don't hold traditions of men as truth or essential. While there are traditions that can be beautiful and have wonderful meaning and can even open doors to spread the gospel it is important that those traditions aren't held as Truth. And any tradition that contradicts scripture or the commandments of God should absolutely be avoided by believers.

In regards to the Sabbath example, the Sabbath is set apart by as a holy day of rest. In scripture it is declared to be a Holy Convocation by God himself, in which believers are to do no work and rest, "be at peace". In Genesis 2 God "rested" from all the work HE had done. That term not only can be interpreted to mean "be at peace" but can also mean "to enjoy that which you have built".

So within the context of "resting" on the Sabbath we are to be at peace, do not work, and enjoy that which we have spent the previous 6 days building, according to scripture.

Thank you for your question.
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#22
I'm not sure what to think of your disrespectful tone in your statement, Yonah.
But you are wrong in your conclusion. While the bible may never use the exact words addressing "explosives in populated areas" the bible clearly addresses murder and shedding innocent blood. See Exodus 20:13, Proverbs 6:16-19, Galatians 5: 19-21, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Revelations 21:8, Revelations 22:15.

Also directly from the Messiah: In Matthew 22:36-40 Yeshua(Jesus) tells us that there 2 "Greatest Commandments" and they are that we should "Love the LORD our GOD with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength and love your neighbor as yourself." He then goes so far as to say that these two commandments are what all commandments hang to. Meaning that the purpose of all commandments of God are to tell you how to either love God or to love your neighbor as yourself.

As would be supported in John 14:15,23 and 1 John 5:3
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
#23
Thank you for the welcome, Dan. I've actually been a member of CC for almost 3 years now. Just haven't been very active. I mostly read threads that interest me.

To answer your question: I don't hold traditions of men as truth or essential. While there are traditions that can be beautiful and have wonderful meaning and can even open doors to spread the gospel it is important that those traditions aren't held as Truth. And any tradition that contradicts scripture or the commandments of God should absolutely be avoided by believers.

In regards to the Sabbath example, the Sabbath is set apart by as a holy day of rest. In scripture it is declared to be a Holy Convocation by God himself, in which believers are to do no work and rest, "be at peace". In Genesis 2 God "rested" from all the work HE had done. That term not only can be interpreted to mean "be at peace" but can also mean "to enjoy that which you have built".

So within the context of "resting" on the Sabbath we are to be at peace, do not work, and enjoy that which we have spent the previous 6 days building, according to scripture.

Thank you for your question.
And if a person decides that for them, hang gliding is peaceful and not work, then it's a perfectly acceptable Sabbath activity.

Do we still agree?
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#24
No, I have not. I encountered the love of the Father through HIS son the Messiah, Yeshua(Jesus) by realizing my sin against HIM and repenting. I love HIM because HE first loved me.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
#25
No, I have not. I encountered the love of the Father through HIS son the Messiah, Yeshua(Jesus) by realizing my sin against HIM and repenting. I love HIM because HE first loved me.
say Redeemed2015,

you may want to click 'reply with quote', then people will know which post you're responding to.
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#26
I mix these terms not that is how I would identify myself, but this is how I could be and have been identified by others. So as to avoid arguing over titles and openly discussing what I believe.

Yeshua(Jesus) is The Way(John 14:6).
Yeshua is the Messiah promised and prophesied in the Old Testament.
There are definitely Orthodox Jews that are still looking for The Messiah that was promised. However, due to either pride or even The Father hardening their hearts due to the traditions of men that are not ordained by The Father. However, there has been a substantial increase in the amount of Jews in Israel as well as all around the world that have had their eyes opened and have accepted Yeshua as Messiah.
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#28
Brother, respectfully, if you or any other individual truly study Galatians you would see that you are misinterpreting the words of Paul. Causing a Paradox due to your own misunderstandings of Paul. Paul never taught that that the Torah(Law) was only for the Jews. How do I know this? Because if he did he would be liar. The Law was not only for the Tribe of Judah, it was for all 12 Tribes of Israel + those who sojourn among them. The Law is not Jewish. The Law is Holy and Righteous and according to Paul in 1 Timothy is good for teaching and training in righteousness.

Galatians proves my beliefs.

In the case of Acts 15, again, you are misunderstanding what is written. Due to what you have been taught previously about the Torah and your false understanding of Paul as well as Peter.

Warning: This will be a long answer in order to address all misunderstandings you and others may have.
Acts 15:19-22 "Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren."


Hmmm. This passage seems to show there are only four rules given to Gentiles coming into the faith. While the Torah wasn't forced on Gentiles all at once, it was understood they would learn it gradually over time, hearing it each week in the synagogues. For that matter, Torah wasn't forced on Israel in a day either -- they too received it over time.

Acts 15:21 "For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day."


Christians generally ignore this verse in the passage because the ramifications are obvious: What has Torah being taught each week in synagogues have to do with Gentile believers? Why is it being mentioned here along with the 'four laws'? Because the Gentiles were to *learn Torah* each week in the synagogues! They are being started off on these four laws so they would have the bare basics to begin fellowshiping with their Jewish brethren and they would learn the rest of Torah each Sabbath at synagogue. Only after pointing out the Gentiles would learn Torah weekly "did it please the apostles and elders" (vs 22) to send this letter out to the various churches.

Acts 15:5-11 "But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"


Rather than isolate one verse alone and build on that, one must look at the whole chapter. Only in proper context will the meaning become clear. 1) What group was demanding conversion by circumcision and Torah observance? 2) How was the "Torah of Moses" defined by the group demanding it? 3) What was the apostle's response to *this particular group*'s demand and why? 4) What does other scripture teach regarding observance for believers (Gentile and Jewish)? Only after answering these questions can one arrive at what this passage is really teaching.

It was understood by all the apostles that God's Torah never changed or was replaced. We know this from the teachings of Yeshua -- heaven and earth will pass away before one yod or stroke from written Torah will (Matt 5:17,18). We also know that Yeshua considered the "traditions of man" not equal to written Torah, in fact, sometimes the oral tradition violated the written Torah (Mark 7:9). The apostles upheld written Torah but frowned on the legalism of oral law. So, who is making the demands in Acts 15:5? The *Pharisees* are. So, Acts 15 is basically dealing with whether Gentiles needed to convert according to Pharisaic tradition; that is, become proselytes to Pharisaic Judaism.

We know Gentiles could be saved without becoming proselytes --- the believing of Cornelius and his family proves this. Cornelius was a God-fearer, a 'ger'/righteous Gentile, one who had believed in the God of Israel but had not actually undergone the conversion rituals to become a proselyte. Now, from a 20th century perspective, circumcision may seem to some as only one law out of many in Torah. But from the 1st century perspective, circumcision was the means of making a proselyte. That is why circumcision is being singled out as a demand apart from its inclusion in the Torah. Torah-observance in general isn't the issue -- conversion is. Notice the Pharisaic complaint wasn't "we demand they eat kosher and keep the Law of Moses" or "we demand they observe the Sabbath and keep the Law of Moses." Both these would be ridiculously redundant since Law of Moses already included both of these individual laws. No, circumcision is singled out not as merely '1 of the 613 laws' but instead as the means of making a proselyte to Pharisaic Judaism.

Circumcision had become a conversion ritual by the Pharisees just as baptism is often misused today as a means of "joining a particular church." If I refuse to be baptised in the Morman church, surely you'd see mine is a rejection of Mormanism -- NOT baptism itself! So the apostles reject this Pharisaic demand that Gentiles undergo the Pharisaic circumcision. Theirs was *not* a rejection of circumcision or Torah, but a rejection instead of Pharisaic conversion rituals. The gospel was being received by Gentiles *without* them becoming proselytes -- so this conversion by circumcision wasn't required. Note that God "made no distinction between us and them" (Acts 15:9) to show G-d was accepting Gentiles *without* them converting first.
"Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" Acts 15:7-11


Now Peter argued against this attempt of the Pharisees to put a yoke on the new believers, a yoke neither they nor their fathers could bear; this yoke is the Pharisaic oral tradition. Yeshua taught:

"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. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." Matt 23:2-4

Note the warning a few verses later:

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves." Matt 23:15


Note that oral tradition is a burden -- man attempts to enslave others; but God's Way is freedom. Yeshua proclaimed:

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach freedom to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord." Luke 4:18,19 (Isaiah 61:1)

Liberty is already defined in Psalm119:

"So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever. And I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts." Ps 119:44,45

Note What God says to His redeemed Israelites:

"I am the LORD your God, which brought you forth out of the land of Egypt, that ye should not be their bondmen; and I have broken the bands of your yoke, and made you go upright." Leviticus 26:13


God didn't give His Torah only to re-enslave Israel. Torah is freedom. Torah is never a burden. It is man's additions to God's laws that are the yoke.

Now let's look at the Pharisaic demand that Gentiles keep the Torah of Moshe. To the Pharisees, the "Torah of Moses" meant both the oral and written law -- they consider both parts 'inspired.' Pharisees would never word that as "We demand they keep Torah of Moses and *also our man-made additions to it*." What group, believing their traditions to be equal to Torah, would disparage their own teachings in this way? So, when the Pharisees say "keep Torah of Moses" they mean written *and* oral parts -- they make no distinction between the two. Yet some argue that because Peter and James didn't point out, case by case, why they were rejecting the demands of the Pharisees, that somehow by their silence they were also discounting written Torah. May it never be! It's far better to realize that Peter and James were rejecting a religious system of the day (Pharisaic Judaism), a belief system that included some things they agreed with (written Torah) and some things they didn't (making proselytes - enforcing oral torah). As a more modern example, I reject the teachings of certain Christian denominations -- but that doesn't mean I reject the Holy Bible too just because these denominations also use it in their teachings. The apostolic rejection of Pharisaic Judaism is NOT a rejection of written Torah.

Acts 15 shows that the early Gentile believers were given four starter laws, and were to learn the rest of Torah each week in the synagogues. Gentile believers were NOT required to formally convert to Pharisaic Judaism because G-d had already accepted them without them becoming proselytes.


The Four Rules

"But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."


"Abstain From Pullution Of Idols And From Fornication"

I tie these two prohibitions together, since Revelation does:

"But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication." Revelation 2:14

"Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because you suffer that woman Jezebel, which call herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols." Revelation 2:20


Let's start with "pollution from idols":

'Pollution' is from the Greek alisgema (from the verb) alisgeo, meaning "to pullute" and denotes "a pollution, contamination." and "all the containing associations connected with idolatry including meats from sacrifices offered to idols." (Vines) But why is such a prohibition necessary, afterall, believers worship G-d -- not idols! Sha'ul writes: "So, then, as to the question of taking food offered to images, we are certain that an image is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one." 1 Corinthians 8:4. Paul is establishing here that the prohibition against meats offered to idols is NOT because an idol has any power -- an idol is nothing. It's because in eating such meats, we witness to others that the idol *does* have some meaning, we basically empower an 'idol.' For this reason, believers don't have to ask if meat being purchased had been offered to an idol - for the question itself would indicate an idol was *something* and could somehow affect the meat being bought. Again, an idol is *nothing*. Paul wasn't incorporating a "don't ask, don't tell" policy as some teach. Paul was really arguing that unless someone else's words condemn the meat, believers should proceed clean-heartedly knowing all things come from G-d alone. Paul concludes with "For this reason, if food is a cause of trouble to my brother, I will give up taking meat for ever, so that I may not be a cause of trouble to my brother." Always remember that the problem with meats offered to idols was that it gave validation to pagan rituals and undermined the fact that G-d alone is sovereign. We should engage in NO activity that sends out a message to the contrary. For example, If I light a candle because my power goes out, fine. If I light a candle and say "Blessed be Ba'al" I have commited idol worship. Let's suppose I lived in a city where a certain color candle was associated with pagan worship -- then I wouldn't purchase or use that color candle even though I know a candle is nothing in and of itself. Candles and meats (or anything) take on the meanings assigned to them, so we should avoid being polluted by idols by not partaking of things given a pagan meaning. In the 1st century that may have meant meats offered to idols, but we can apply this rule to many things. We worship God alone and should "Abstain from all appearance of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:22
"And from fornication"


Fornication is from the Greek word porneia (Strong's 4202). Many assume sexual fornication is meant, but since it's coupled here with idol pollution, I suggest its second meaning was intended, "association of pagan idolatry with doctrines of, professed adherance to, the Christian Faith" (Vines). This definition fits this passage (and others) better and was a known problem among Gentile believers. Paul wrote: "But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain." Gal 4:9-11. Clearly this 'mixing of idols with God's Truth' was a problem among early Gentile believers just as it is today. Many modern church 'holidays' are still tied into idolatry -- Saturnalia/Christmas; Goddess Eastros/Easter; Sun-god/Sunday worship, etc.. Like the 'pollution from idols,' this mixing is validating pagan days, putting them on par with the things of G-d.
"And From Things Strangled, And From Blood"


'Strangled' comes the Greek pniktos (Strong's 4156) and means an improperly killed animal -- "animals killed by strangling, without shedding their blood" (Vines). These animals aren't 'clean/kosher' because they still contain blood. "Only thou shalt not eat the blood thereof; thou shalt pour it upon the ground as water." Deut 15:23 "And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people. Leviticus 17:10 Note this prohibition *includes* Gentiles (strangers). Yet the modern church ignores these rules and doesn't avoid blood -- bloody beef is readily consumed. Think of those rare-done steaks sitting in a pool of blood -- Yuck. (Not that cooking the meat thoroughly so that the blood is less obvious is any better). Meats should be kashered, completely drained of their blood before consuming.

Notice these four prohibitions don't forbid murder, theft, adultery, lying, etc... that's further proof these four rules were never intended to replace the Torah. These four prohibitions specifically address offensive pagan practices the new believers will have to resist. Without immediate adoption of these four rules, the Jewish believers would be forced to not take meals or socialize with their Gentile brethren. I'd call these four rules 'Torah-lite,' or a 'crash course' in learning their new lifestyle. By observing these four laws, the Gentiles could associate with their Jewish brethren *without* undergoing any conversion, yet still have reached an adequate beginner level of cleanliness and observance in G-d's eyes. And, of course, Gentiles would learn the rest of Torah each week in the synagogue and their spiritual growth would gradually increase.
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#29
Thank you for your question.
I fear your question illustrates a predisposed mindset of Dispensationalism, which I would disagree with, theologically and scripturally.

To directly answer your question: The people of God, those called by HIS name, have always been commanded and expected to keep HIS commandments, as is the whole duty of man.

See Leviticus 24:22, Numbers 15: 15-16, Exodus 12:49, Jeremiah 31:30-33, John 14:15,23, Ecclesiastes 12:13, 1 John 2:4-6, 1 Peter 2:21, 1 John 5:3.
 
L

LaurenTM

Guest
#30
the above post, #26, is found VERBATIM

RIGHT HERE

so while the op would seem to want to impress us with all his many many years of study and deep prayer, he just copy/pasted his post

irregardless, the title of the article is Should Gentiles Follow Torah

through manipulation and really really bad exegesis, these folks seek to tell us that Paul did not mean what we think he means

and oh goody...he is here to straighten us all out

......and there you have it, straight from the Torah observant Messianic Judaism

Gentiles cannot and do not become Jewish


 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#31
There are more than 10 commandments, brother.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,783
2,947
113
#32
So you are an expert in Hebrew, and read the Old Testament in Hebrew, and you have a thorough knowledge of Greek, besides grammar and syntax, memorized all the NT Greek words down to 10 frequencies in the New Testament, plus classes and studies in hermeneutics and exegetics?

Because that is what you need to be a scholar! And of course, a thorough understanding of the history of the ancient near east, and New Testament times. Context is vital!

Or did you, as a naive 15 year old somehow decide that you could somehow figure things out by yourself, reinvent the Biblical wheel, and that God would show you all kinds of Biblical Truth that God never showed anyone else!

Because if you think you know more than people who have spent their entire lives studying on a level you could not even imagine, you are delusional!

When I first started taking Hebrew, I attended a Hebrew Roots church. The "rabbi" said they were Messianic Jews, but none of them were Jews, and the pastor got weirder and weirder in what he admitted to believing! My Hebrew professor had us visit a Hebrew synagogue, but Hebrew Roots was not allowed, because they were not Jews. I actually learned about the Jewish culture, and saw their rites and rituals. Those are the rituals which take the place of a genuine relationship with Jesus Christ.

So to repeat what a previous poster asked, "Do you know Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour? Or Hamashiach or whatever you call him?"

As for you teaching us, perhaps you need to do a search about Hebrew Roots threads in this forum, read them, and find out that the majority of us have nothing to learn from you! We rightly rejected HR a long time ago!
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#33
Awkward? No, That is a website of mine I collaborated with others to make.
the above post, #26, is found VERBATIM

RIGHT HERE

so while the op would seem to want to impress us with all his many many years of study and deep prayer, he just copy/pasted his post

irregardless, the title of the article is Should Gentiles Follow Torah

through manipulation and really really bad exegesis, these folks seek to tell us that Paul did not mean what we think he means

and oh goody...he is here to straighten us all out

......and there you have it, straight from the Torah observant Messianic Judaism

Gentiles cannot and do not become Jewish


 
L

LaurenTM

Guest
#34
There are more than 10 commandments, brother.

yes...Jesus gave us two new ones

do you know what they are?

I hope you would know, because they sum up the entire law
 
L

LaurenTM

Guest
#35
Awkward? No, That is a website of mine I collaborated with others to make.

no one said awkward bro...but it is going to get awkward

you simply are here to try and convert

that will not happen
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,688
13,140
113
#36
Wow, your all in on that conspiracy theory. i like your moxy. :cool:

lol yes

fee35c2e984a530a4aeef899baa2f1a4.jpg

you could say it's cultural. ;)

i was actually about to PM him when he only had 2 posts, before that one.. but that 3[SUP]rd[/SUP], and it turns out final post of his was blatant.

interestingly -- that's what this HRM thing is, i think, too -- about being "
all in"
throwing everything into the scripture.

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
the problem with being "
all in" though is that you'd better be sure that the basket you're putting all your eggs into is the right one. and i'm sure these people are convinced in their own minds.
but this fellow says he "
keeps the feasts" - impossible. the Torah specifies that they require sacrifices and some require trips to the temple. these things are no more. he's kidding himself.

and looking at these things -- as i think we've all come to see here lately, at least, those whose eyes are not veiled -- as binding commandments on us as being brought into Christ, is contrary to the gospel. one read-through of the epistle to the Galatians should destroy such notions.

keeping any such customs for the sake of honoring the Lord is beautiful.
teaching such customs as part of the doctrine of the gospel of Christ come in the flesh, died and resurrected is heretical, another gospel.

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
we're all learning what Romans 14 means: accept the weak brother, but "
not to doubtful disputation"
a very unwieldy translation, TBH.
NIV reads "
not to quarreling over disputable matters"

more literally, not to "
discerning reasonings"
see, neither the word "
disputable" nor "doubtful" is actually in the Greek. i had to teach on this a few weeks ago, and was really puzzled over it, so i went and studied it out. and the Lord is faithful to give understanding, when we ask, amen!
it's two words, one which means "
discernment" -- exactly the same as the gift of the spirit -- and the other meaning "reasoning" or "of thoughts" -- the same word used multiple times when the gospels say that Jesus "knew their thoughts" or "knew what was in their hearts"

so what Romans 14 is saying is accept the weak in faith, but not with the idea of discerning ((or passing judgement)) on the reasoning they have in their hearts.

the NIV i think is obviously wrong here, because the examples Paul gives are not "
disputable" - they have definite 'right' answers. there are definite 'right' answers about whether believers, coming from either Judaic or pagan backgrounds, are liable to keep the Mosaic law, too. the KJV is wrong too, for the same reason: these aren't "doubtful" things at all -- but they are things that the Spirit must reveal to a person.

the issue is that passing judgement on what is in a person's heart is only possible and right for God Himself to do. and that by bringing such accusations against someone who, in their mind, is doing a thing for the Lord, we may cause them to stumble ((as illustrated by Paul with the example of meats)) -- and so give place for doubt to grow in their hearts.

i don't think this all means we shouldn't teach right doctrine, not at all -- nor should we avoid having any kind of discussion about what is right and wrong in these things. but what we need to keep ourselves from doing is coercing a person like the OP to stop ceremonially keeping the sabbath, for example, while in his own heart he is not convinced that it is the will of God for him to do so. then, in his heart, he is convicted, and so he sins, doing what is contrary to his own conscience. so Paul says "
each must be fully convinced in his own mind"

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
there's a separate issue at work here too, though -- of Judaizing -- that makes all this HRM stuff tricky.
how do we know when it becomes more than something done to honor God, and becomes "
another gospel" ??

well. that's the hard part haha

[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]
i take it the mods decided with disciplemike it was become heresy. probably what with him pushing all that 119 stuff and refusing correction about it.
i have no idea; i had nothing to do with reporting him ever, at any time. post is the last person to try to get rid of even obvious trolls, except the very worst ones.

but yeah, to me, it was immediately obvious that that "
quest for truth" user was mike. that was discernment, i guess - the Spirit's gift to me in this instance.
i did think "
quest for truth" was an appropriate name, i have to say.
very much in keeping with the whole "
always learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth" theme . . . :p

what are we to learn from the Law?
self-imposed behavior modification? or something more?

-- this is a question that man simply refused to answer, to confess, the whole time he was here. even though the answer is Jesus Christ: the goal, the end of the Law.
 
Last edited:
L

LaurenTM

Guest
#37
quest for truth has been banned...after 3 posts, so you can see where this thread is going

if you check out the site this op is pasting from, you will see how they consistently state that Christians have it all wrong

so, not here to discuss, but here to convert
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,688
13,140
113
#38
quest for truth has been banned...after 3 posts, so you can see where this thread is going

if you check out the site this op is pasting from, you will see how they consistently state that Christians have it all wrong

so, not here to discuss, but here to convert
i love you Lauren

i don't have much time to hang out before i have to leave for work again -- busy time of year for post. but i wanted to make sure i put that in there.

Charlie too. all you people -- my brothers, my sisters. too many to list. none of you are alone!!

warm e-hugs sent your way :)
all your ways
The Way
 

Redeemed2015

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2014
111
14
18
#39
I never claimed in any of my posts to be an expert. I am an obedient servant to my Father. However I have studied both Hebrew and Greek as well as Spanish and Latin. I am not fluent in Greek however with proper resources am still able to study scripture properly. Yes, I read Hebrew. I own a Hebrew copy of the Old Testament. Beside the poinf at no point did I claim to be a scholar, which I address in my introduction. I am however concerned with your thinking that one must have all of the qualifications in order to be qualified to speak on the topic. I was under the biblical impression that God ordains teachers. And I also don't recall Yeshua(Jesus) telling His disciples "Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every living creature, after you graduate with a Masters of Divinity from an accredited Seminary School."And If I recall, Timothy never was required to attend a single hermeneutics or exegetical seminar before being appointed the head of his congregation. After all he is believed to have been between the ages of 15-19 in the writing of Paul in 1 and 2 Timothy. Oh, he being a naive 15 year old thinking he has the knowledge, maturity, or ability to Pastor a congregation, or you know, remember that whole "let no man despise your youth."
So you are an expert in Hebrew, and read the Old Testament in Hebrew, and you have a thorough knowledge of Greek, besides grammar and syntax, memorized all the NT Greek words down to 10 frequencies in the New Testament, plus classes and studies in hermeneutics and exegetics?

Because that is what you need to be a scholar! And of course, a thorough understanding of the history of the ancient near east, and New Testament times. Context is vital!

Or did you, as a naive 15 year old somehow decide that you could somehow figure things out by yourself, reinvent the Biblical wheel, and that God would show you all kinds of Biblical Truth that God never showed anyone else!

Because if you think you know more than people who have spent their entire lives studying on a level you could not even imagine, you are delusional!

When I first started taking Hebrew, I attended a Hebrew Roots church. The "rabbi" said they were Messianic Jews, but none of them were Jews, and the pastor got weirder and weirder in what he admitted to believing! My Hebrew professor had us visit a Hebrew synagogue, but Hebrew Roots was not allowed, because they were not Jews. I actually learned about the Jewish culture, and saw their rites and rituals. Those are the rituals which take the place of a genuine relationship with Jesus Christ.

So to repeat what a previous poster asked, "Do you know Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour? Or Hamashiach or whatever you call him?"

As for you teaching us, perhaps you need to do a search about Hebrew Roots threads in this forum, read them, and find out that the majority of us have nothing to learn from you! We rightly rejected HR a long time ago!
 
L

LaurenTM

Guest
#40
i love you Lauren

i don't have much time to hang out before i have to leave for work again -- busy time of year for post. but i wanted to make sure i put that in there.

Charlie too. all you people -- my brothers, my sisters. too many to list. none of you are alone!!

warm e-hugs sent your way :)
all your ways
The Way
I bust out laughing again

not something I expect to read with my name in it

well....thanks mr post...we all thank you!

Jesus love returned to you and blessings in His Name!