Who Were The Jusaizers? Are You One? Do You Know Anybody That Is?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Karraster
  • Start date Start date
  • 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.
Elin said:
chubbena said:
Elin said:
"Which Christ"??? :confused:

There is only one Christ,
the Christ of the Scriptures.
So accept His whole counsel instead of pick and choose what to follow and when others follow His whole counsel do not speak evil of them.
His whole counsel includes the revelation he gave to Paul, which is given in Paul's letters.

Is that his whole counsel to which you are referring?
I guess you know what I'm saying and I know what you are trying to say.
One would not go wrong understanding Paul's letters under the light of Yeshua's teachings.
Keeping in mind that Jesus' revelation given to the apostles was still incomplete, because he had not
yet done his work of the cross, on which the whole gospel is based, and therefore his apostles were not
ready to receive that revelation.

It was some 5-8 years later when Jesus gave his latter revelation to Paul, and this revelation was complete, being given after Jesus finished work of the cross.

So the reality of the matter is that Jesus' former incomplete NT revelation to the apostles is to be understood in the light of Jesus' latter complete revelation to Paul.


One just has to look at early 1st century believers who had not Paul's letters
Paul's letters were circulated among the churches, as is seen in Peter's reference to them (2Pe 3:15-16).

Likewise, Paul taught in some of the provinces of those who were in Jerusalem
(Ac 16:6, 18:23, 19:10, 26) on the day of Pentecost (Ac 2:9-11).

The first-century believers were not without instruction from Paul.
 
Last edited:
All that Messiah taught during His ministry.....was not made null and void because He was crucified. It is idiotic to suggest otherwise. Sheer ignorance. Complete total lack of regard for Messiah and His suffering and death, and Resurrection!

Messiah didn't labor and lay His life down, just to come back and say "nevermind!"

Nevermind?????? what a load of hocky!
 
by Daniel Botkin Reprinted from Gates of Eden 2-3 The Jerusalem Council of Acts

Christians who believe in keeping the 7th-day Sabbath are sometimes called "Judaizers" by their fellow Christians.
While there were (and perhaps still are) real Judaizers, it should be noted that the word Judaizer does not even appear
in the KJV Bible. The first known use of the word Judaizer in the English language did not occur until 1582.

1~ and if one searches for the word in the Scriptures, it will only be found in recent translations of the Bible.
2~True, there were people in New Testament times whom we could correctly refer to as Judaizers. But before accusing a fellow-believer of Judaizing, the accuser should be sure he knows what a Judaizer is. Probably the best description of
Judaizers is in Acts 15:1:

"And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, and said, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you CANNOT BE SAVED." (Emphasis mine)

The main question of the so-called Jerusalem Council was not "How Should Gentiles Behave?" The question was "What Do Gentiles Need To Do In Order To Be Saved?" Some of the believers from Judea said that if the Gentiles wanted to be saved, they had to be circumcised. This meant more than the mere physical removal of the foreskin. Circumcision performed for the purpose of being "saved" meant a full, formal conversion to Judaism, complete with a baptism into Judaism and an embracing of the rabbis' entire Oral Law (probably the law that Peter had in mind when he referred to "a yoke... which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear")
.
3~The Judaizers believed that this conversion process would turn the Gentile believer into a full-fledged Jew, and that without this the Gentile could not be saved. Without a complete, formal conversion to Judaism, the Gentile believer could not become a full-fledged member of the saved Messianic Community, the Judaizers said. Of course the Judaizers were
mistaken. Simon Peter told the Council how the Roman Cornelius and his household of uncircumcised Gentile God-fearers had received the Holy Spirit without formally converting to Judaism
.
4~It was obvious, therefore, that full conversion to Judaism was not a prerequisite to being saved, for God would not fill "unsaved" people with His Holy Spirit. Paul and Barnabas reinforced Peter's argument by "declaring what miracles and
wonders God had wrought among the [uncircumcised] Gentiles by them." James then spoke and gave his judgment:
"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 things contaminated by idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood." Many Christians stop reading at this point and say, These four things are the only parts of the Old Testament Law that Gentiles need to follow. We can ignore the Sabbath because the Sabbath is not specified here for Gentile believers."However, if this were the case, we would also have to conclude that it is permissible for Gentile believers to covet, steal, dishonor their parents, and dabble in the occult, for none of the commandments forbidding
these things are specified here. And to say that commandments against coveting, stealing, etc. appear on other pages of the New Testament is just evading the issue, for there was no "New Testament" book yet in existence to instruct these believers. The New Testament writings were not compiled and canonized until about 150 years later, long after this first generation of believers were in their graves. The only Bible the believers had at the time of the Jerusalem Council was what is now called the Old Testament. Obviously James' words cannot mean that none of the Torah's commands are valid except for these four things, for the writers of the New Testament epistles, when writing years later, constantly quoted from the Torah to instruct Gentile believers. The confusion begins to clear up when the rest of James' statement is read:

"For Moses of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogue every Sabbath day."

What does Moses being read in the synagogue every Sabbath have to do with Gentile believers? On the surface, this closing remark of James seems irrelevant to the topic being discussed, and makes the passage even more confusing. However, if the historical setting is taken into consideration, James' closing remark clears up the confusion and gives meaning to the passage. What is the historical setting? At this point in history, the Gentile believers were still worshipping in the synagogues on the Sabbath, along with the Jewish believers, who were called Nazarenes. Therefore the implication of James' words, if I may take the liberty to paraphrase, is this:

MARCH-APRIL 2OOl GATES OF EDEN PAGE 4 "Begin by instructing the Gentiles about these four things [verse 20]. As they
continue to attend synagogue with us every Sabbath, they will gradually learn the rest of the Torah, and put it into
practice as they leam [verse 21]." Of course James and the others did not foresee the then-future split between church and synagogue. The Apostles expected the Gentiles to continue learning Torah with the Nazarenes every Sabbath in the
synagogues in every city.

The above explanation still leaves one question unanswered, namely, Why did the Apostles specifiy these four particular areas of Torah (things contaminated by idols, fornication, things strangled, and blood)? Some writers and Bible teachers have stated that the Apostles were prescribing the so-called Noahide Laws which the rabbis formulated as the minimum basic requirements for Gentiles to be accepted by God as Gentiles. While the four things listed in Acts 15 bear some
similarity to the Noahide Laws, they are not identical to the Noahide Laws. The Noahide Laws are seven, not four.

5~Why did the Apostles decide to begin the Gentiles' instruction with these four commandments? Why not begin by
teaching them some of the weightier matters of the Torah, such as laws against murder and theft? I believe the answer to that question lies in the fact that even idolatrous Gentiles had civil laws against such things, so they already considered such things wrong. Gentiles did not have civil laws against all forms of sexual immorality, however. On the contrary, sexual immorality was very common and considered quite acceptable by the Gentile culture of that time. Therefore the Apostles wanted to make sure that the Gentiles who were turning to God understood that sexual immorality is wrong. It is interesting that the other three commandments prescribed by the Apostles were dietary restrictions. The
Gentiles were told not to eat: 1) food that had been offered to idols, 2) meat from a strangled animal, and 3) blood. Why begin the instruction of new believers by telling them about dietary laws? That is a rather strange place to start. Or is it?
I believe the Apostles were simply following the teaching pattern that is set forth in Leviticus. Leviticus is the third book of the Torah, but for Jewish children it was always the first book of the Bible that they studied. The first ten chapters of Leviticus detail the duties of the priests as they offered sacrifices in the Tabernacle. At the end of this section, in chapter 10, the priests' duty to the people is stated: "And that you may put a difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean: and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord has spoken unto them by the hand of Moses.' The rest of Leviticus, beginning in chapter 11, contains commandments for daily living, which the priests were to teach the people. What is the very first thing that the Lord tells the priests to teach the people about? The dietary laws, which make up the entire content of chapter 11.

6~Thus the Apostles, consciously or unconsciously, were simply following this pattern of teaching "a difference between holy and unholy and between unclean and clean" by beginning with the dietary laws, and with the expectation that these new members of the Messianic Community would, from Sabbath to Sabbath, eventually be taught "all the statutes which the Lord had spoken by the hand of Moses." "For Moses of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath,day." The historical setting of Acts 15 must not be ignored. There are many parts of
the Bible which can be understood and enjoyed with no knowledge of the historical setting. But if we deliberately divorce a passage such as Acts 15 from its historical setting, we misunderstand and twist the Scriptures to our own ruin. By looking at the passage in its entirety and in its historical setting, we see that the Judaizers were those who insisted that Gentiles needed a full, formal conversion to Judaism in order to be saved. (This was also the problem Paul was dealing with in Galatians.) There may still be Judaizers in existence today, butI am certainly not one of them.
NOTES
1~Webster's 9th New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, MA: Merrian-Webster, 1986), 653. ^al. 2:14, 'Iou5ai£a>,
translated "to live as do the Jews" in KJV; "to judaize"inthe1979KJVII.
3~No Scripture-loving Jew could describe the written Torah as an unbearable yoke. See Psalm 19 and Psalm 119.
4~lt is important to note that "God-fearers" were Gentiles who were already observing Sabbath, feast days, and dietary laws. They were already living what could be described as a "Jewish" lifestyle. They just had not taken the final steps of conversion (i.e., circumcision and baptism) and they were not required to pay the Temple tax or offer sacrifices in the Temple. See Joseph Good, Prophecies in the Book of Esther (Hatikvah Ministries, 1995), 90f and Patrice Fischer,
Modem-Day God-Fearers: A Biblical Role Model For Gentile Participation in Messianic Congregations, an unpublished paper in the author's possession. ^The seven Noahide Laws as formulated by the rabbis consisted of six prohibitions (against theft, murder, sexual immorality, idolatry, blasphemy, and eating a limb torn from a living animal) and one positive precept (establish courts of justice). These seven laws actually provide only an outline for a total of 66 laws that the rabbis came up with for Gentiles. See Aaron Lichtenstein, The Seven Laws of Noah (New York: The Rabbi Jacob Joseph School Press, 1981).
6~lt makes sense that instructions for daily living should begin with things that are very much a part of daily life. Eating is more a part of daily life than almost any other activity. GATES OF EDEN MARCH-APRIL 2OO1PAGE 5

karraster, i do admit(although i may or may not agree),,,that of all of the new verses old law type threads i have seen this thread seems to take the most ingeniousness approach. it is fair,and you seem to at least take a non offensive stance in explanation(so thank you for that),,,

that said though in this approach(i realize it is from a study lesson,as you have stated) and do thank you for being upfront in that it is material from another recearch.,,,but as it seems to point to "historical application",,(that is it stresses to hold to the meaning in the 1st century church/synagog frame of mind),,,,which is fine but,,,

we are not considering that the word of god is going to the gentiles,1st cen.church,,2nd,3rd,ect. and as for the main meat of the article it stresses that the "gentiles" were at first presented 4(acts 15;24-29) things to adhere to and that then afterward the remainder would be taught. that is it presents the notion that the gentiles would be able to go into the synagogs every sabbath and learn from the elder Jews the remainder of the meat of the gospel.

I'm not trying to argue,i really don't like that which is why i go weeks at a time and do not post(when the arguing comes i just bow out).,,,but something very important to all of us is to know the truth(which ever it is we should look at),,that said ,,,

all is well if we take this article and accept that after the conversion of the gentiles to the faith they were to be taught on the sabbath the rest of the finer points,beginning with 4 primary things.,,except and this is my point if the whole nation of Israel,the temple,the synagogs ect. were destroyed in a.d.70 and then there were none left to teach it(i think historical significance is important again),,,

that is gad the almighty stated that the roman empire would completely over-through the Jews,and scatter them into captivity untill the end,,he did do this and we know it from history. so we are faced with an odd manner of thinking as to the meat of the o.p. ,,,,"WHY DOES GOD CONVERT THE GENTILES,BEGIN WITH 4 THINGS,,THEN COMPLETELY REMOVE THE SYNAGOG WHO IS TO TEACH THEM THE REMAINDER,AND SCATTER THEM THROUGHOUT THE EARTH AND REMOVE THEIR ABILITY TO TEACH THE NEWLY CONVERTED GENTILES?",,,

that is,,an article(a very well thought out one),,explains that they(the gentiles) were to learn the remainder afterward,,,but god himself,removed the ability to do so in ad70.,,,so it seems strange to reason that the mind of god was for them to be brought into Judaism,,while god himself is weakening their power to teach it to the gentiles,,,,just a fair question,,,
 
karraster, i do admit(although i may or may not agree),,,that of all of the new verses old law type threads i have seen this thread seems to take the most ingeniousness approach. it is fair,and you seem to at least take a non offensive stance in explanation(so thank you for that),,,

that said though in this approach(i realize it is from a study lesson,as you have stated) and do thank you for being upfront in that it is material from another recearch.,,,but as it seems to point to "historical application",,(that is it stresses to hold to the meaning in the 1st century church/synagog frame of mind),,,,which is fine but,,,

we are not considering that the word of god is going to the gentiles,1st cen.church,,2nd,3rd,ect. and as for the main meat of the article it stresses that the "gentiles" were at first presented 4(acts 15;24-29) things to adhere to and that then afterward the remainder would be taught. that is it presents the notion that the gentiles would be able to go into the synagogs every sabbath and learn from the elder Jews the remainder of the meat of the gospel.

I'm not trying to argue,i really don't like that which is why i go weeks at a time and do not post(when the arguing comes i just bow out).,,,but something very important to all of us is to know the truth(which ever it is we should look at),,that said ,,,

all is well if we take this article and accept that after the conversion of the gentiles to the faith they were to be taught on the sabbath the rest of the finer points,beginning with 4 primary things.,,except and this is my point if the whole nation of Israel,the temple,the synagogs ect. were destroyed in a.d.70 and then there were none left to teach it(i think historical significance is important again),,,

that is gad the almighty stated that the roman empire would completely over-through the Jews,and scatter them into captivity untill the end,,he did do this and we know it from history. so we are faced with an odd manner of thinking as to the meat of the o.p. ,,,,"WHY DOES GOD CONVERT THE GENTILES,BEGIN WITH 4 THINGS,,THEN COMPLETELY REMOVE THE SYNAGOG WHO IS TO TEACH THEM THE REMAINDER,AND SCATTER THEM THROUGHOUT THE EARTH AND REMOVE THEIR ABILITY TO TEACH THE NEWLY CONVERTED GENTILES?",,,

that is,,an article(a very well thought out one),,explains that they(the gentiles) were to learn the remainder afterward,,,but god himself,removed the ability to do so in ad70.,,,so it seems strange to reason that the mind of god was for them to be brought into Judaism,,while god himself is weakening their power to teach it to the gentiles,,,,just a fair question,,,

Thank you for your thoughts about this subject. It was my intentions to bring attention to the meaning of the word "Judaizer". My hope was that those who wielded the word "judaizer" as a weapon, would at least give thought to what the word means!

Messiah kept all the commandments, including the Feasts. His beef was with the Rabbinical laws that were added by men, and are still being added to this very day. What are there now, a thousand? anyhow, there is a difference in the Almighty's Law, and man's law. A mighty big difference. Those who obey Messiah are not Judaizers.
 
Thank you for your thoughts about this subject. It was my intentions to bring attention to the meaning of the word "Judaizer". My hope was that those who wielded the word "judaizer" as a weapon, would at least give thought to what the word means!

Messiah kept all the commandments, including the Feasts. His beef was with the Rabbinical laws that were added by men, and are still being added to this very day. What are there now, a thousand? anyhow, there is a difference in the Almighty's Law, and man's law. A mighty big difference. Those who obey Messiah are not Judaizers.


yes i suppose this is why God himself saw to remove the levites,and establish the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek instead,,,that is if he had not saw to the utter demise of the teachings of the pharasees from ad70 onward the gosphel would have been very confused. that is if the temple in Israel was still standing it would be very confusing as to which path to follow,,,but God by his very verb,took into his own hands in a.d.70 to remove this teaching,,,it is as it seems resurfacing in the end,,,,but we have the works of God to refer to,,,,,
 
yes i suppose this is why God himself saw to remove the levites,and establish the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek instead,,,that is if he had not saw to the utter demise of the teachings of the pharasees from ad70 onward the gosphel would have been very confused. that is if the temple in Israel was still standing it would be very confusing as to which path to follow,,,but God by his very verb,took into his own hands in a.d.70 to remove this teaching,,,it is as it seems resurfacing in the end,,,,but we have the works of God to refer to,,,,,

That is an excellent point about the priesthood. Studying what the Nicolaitans are, the letters to the Churches (Revelations), is eyeopening. They "lord" over the "laity" and that was going on and is still going on today, and in many denominations. Messiah hates them.

We all need to carefully consider the wisdom contained in the Word, all of it, not a verse or two here and there. If we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, we should test everything compared to scripture, and not trust our salvation to any man, or church.
 
woop woop lets rock out that Royal Priesthood!! Being priests forever of the Order of Melchisedek by being yoked to the Messiah....lets love what he loved (righteousness) and hate what he hates (iniquity)....lets proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom as he did BEFORE HE DIED TO SAVE US.

If the Gospel is that Christ died in our stead, tell me, what was he preaching the Gospel of?? All he said about his death was that he would be raised on the third day as the sign of Jonah (which is not what he preached to ALL but what he told the Pharisees- gentiles wouldn't know what it meant). What Jesus preached was understood by all, except for those with a preconceived notion. It was the Gospel of the Kingdom. So tell me, why do we not preach it as he did? It's like the prophets, speaking while God is silent, saying thus saith the Lord. We proclaim peace where there is no peace.

Oh and by the way, I pray this thread was edifying, because ELIN intentionally wasted time that could have been spent on something else in this massive tug of war called life. I can't condemn her, because I have done the same thing. I used to go to sites like this or on AOL back in the day go to christian chat and stir up the people. I used my intelligence to waste the intelligence of others because I was an unwitting PAWN in the enemies hand. I pray the Lord deliver her!

I'm going to shut up now.
Ok....deep breaths....wow my spine cracked, maybe shallow breaths would be better =P
 
woop woop lets rock out that Royal Priesthood!! Being priests forever of the Order of Melchisedek by being yoked to the Messiah....lets love what he loved (righteousness) and hate what he hates (iniquity)....lets proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom as he did BEFORE HE DIED TO SAVE US.

If the Gospel is that Christ died in our stead, tell me, what was he preaching the Gospel of?? All he said about his death was that he would be raised on the third day as the sign of Jonah (which is not what he preached to ALL but what he told the Pharisees- gentiles wouldn't know what it meant). What Jesus preached was understood by all, except for those with a preconceived notion. It was the Gospel of the Kingdom. So tell me, why do we not preach it as he did? It's like the prophets, speaking while God is silent, saying thus saith the Lord. We proclaim peace where there is no peace.

Oh and by the way, I pray this thread was edifying, because ELIN intentionally wasted time that could have been spent on something else in this massive tug of war called life. I can't condemn her, because I have done the same thing. I used to go to sites like this or on AOL back in the day go to christian chat and stir up the people. I used my intelligence to waste the intelligence of others because I was an unwitting PAWN in the enemies hand. I pray the Lord deliver her!

I'm going to shut up now.
Ok....deep breaths....wow my spine cracked, maybe shallow breaths would be better =P

Wonderful to be fired up for our Creator! I love it!

We've been given life, placed in a beautiful world filled with the glory of Him who made it. We are called by Him, the Creator of the universe!! It's to awesome to fathom, but we know it's true. We can sense it with our being, our Creator who speaks to us, ever calling us to return, be closer, walk closer, stay protected from the wolves of the world.

I agree, there is no time to waste. It's reality that people perish every minute. We are entrusted to be Messiah's voice. His hands, His feet. We are told to go out into the world and declare His name, spread His Gospel. That Gospel was the Old Covenant can be renewed, whether anyone wants to believe it or not. That Gospel was the He, Messiah, had come in the flesh. He was our blood sacrifice for sin, and to confess that as true, proclaim His name, accept that by His Grace we can follow Him and keep His commands. If we slip and fall we must get back up, repent, and follow Him. He is always interceding for us with the Father as long as we keep our eyes on Him.

Sabbat Shalom!!
 
It's a story of reconciliation....like a love story.

you have to have all the elements of a story, even the pagans know that a beginning and an end go together.

we forever go our own ways
like, repeat after me
1 1
12 12
123 123
1234 666 oops =)
I mean 1234, my bad =P

Have you guys seen the moon? Is it beautiful where you are? It's so bright outside right now, and where I am is crisp cold air between winter storms. So much beauty just to interact with us. God's like an expressionist painter or something.
 
Keeping in mind that Jesus' revelation given to the apostles was still incomplete, because he had not
yet done his work of the cross, on which the whole gospel is based, and therefore his apostles were not
ready to receive that revelation.

It was some 5-8 years later when Jesus gave his latter revelation to Paul, and this revelation was complete, being given after Jesus finished work of the cross.

So the reality of the matter is that Jesus' former incomplete NT revelation to the apostles is to be understood in the light of Jesus' latter complete revelation to Paul.



Paul's letters were circulated among the churches, as is seen in Peter's reference to them (2Pe 3:15-16).

Likewise, Paul taught in some of the provinces of those who were in Jerusalem
(Ac 16:6, 18:23, 19:10, 26) on the day of Pentecost (Ac 2:9-11).

The first-century believers were not without instruction from Paul.
Revelation might not be but the understanding of the gospel was completed and the teachings of Yeshua were understood.
Matt 28:19-20
Therefore go and make disciples of ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.
Luke 24:46-47
He told them, "this is what is written: the Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to ALL NATIONS, beginning at Jerusalem.

The reality of the matter is, the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost and the apostles were empowered to witness in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and TO THE END OF THE EARTH.

The truth of the matter is, believe in Him who is the author. When in doubt, ask the author, not the interpreter,
 
Elin said:
Keeping in mind that Jesus' revelation given to the apostles was still incomplete, because he had not
yet done his work of the cross, on which the whole gospel is based, and therefore his apostles were not
ready to receive that revelation.

It was some 5-8 years later when Jesus gave his latter revelation to Paul, and this revelation was complete, being given after Jesus finished work of the cross.

So the reality of the matter is that Jesus' former incomplete NT revelation to the apostles is to be understood in the light of Jesus' latter complete revelation to Paul.


Paul's letters were circulated among the churches, as is seen in Peter's reference to them (2Pe 3:15-16).

Likewise, Paul taught in some of the provinces of those who were in Jerusalem
(Ac 16:6, 18:23, 19:10, 26) on the day of Pentecost (Ac 2:9-11).

The first-century believers were not without instruction from Paul
.

Revelation might not be but the understanding of the gospel was completed and the teachings of Yeshua were understood.
Not so.

During his earthly ministry, Christ showed nothing of salvation by faith alone in his atoning sacrifice (Ro 3:25).

And that is the basis and heart of the gospel, in addition to much, much more that he revealed later to Paul.

Understanding of the gospel was nowhere near completed at the end of Christ's earthly ministry.
 
Last edited:
Not so.

During his earthly ministry, Christ showed nothing of salvation by faith alone in his atoning sacrifice (Ro 3:25).

And that is the basis and heart of the gospel, in addition to much, much more that he revealed later to Paul.

Understanding of the gospel was nowhere near completed at the end of Christ's earthly ministry.
I'm glad James is accepted in the Canon and that there's record in Luke 7 which Yeshua concluded: Your faith has saved you, go in peace.

Have faith in Yeshua and Him alone so He may heal you and make you see c.f. Mark 10:52

By the way, even the saints in "OT" understood faith c.f. Heb 11:13
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm glad James is accepted in the Canon and that there's record in Luke 7 which Yeshua concluded: Your faith has saved you, go in peace.

Have faith in Yeshua and Him alone so He may heal you and make you see c.f. Mark 10:52

By the way, even the saints in "OT" understood faith c.f. Heb 11:13
That's good to hear, because I thought you would have opposed Lk 7:50 and Mk 10:52 to Mt 19:17

as they are so often done.

It's really good to see you not setting the Scriptures against themselves.

Thanks!
 
Oh and by the way, I pray this thread was edifying,
because ELIN intentionally wasted time that could have been spent on something else in this massive tug of war called life. I can't condemn her, because I have done the same thing. I used to go to sites like this or on AOL back in the day go to christian chat and stir up the people. I used my intelligence to waste the intelligence of others because I was an unwitting PAWN in the enemies hand. I pray the Lord deliver her!
Perhaps you could edify me by pointing out what you see was a waste of time.
 
That's good to hear, because I thought you would have opposed Lk 7:50 and Mk 10:52 to Mt 19:17

as they are so often done.

It's really good to see you not setting the Scriptures against themselves.

Thanks!
When others follow His whole counsel do not speak evil of them is all I'm asking.
 
Elin, I see you wasting time by repeatedly quoting long passages just to say one dismissive word. Like you need to stamp everything that you see as having been seen by you and now we can move on. It's been a totally one sided debate with people being mostly agreed and you stirring things up by saying things that are either twisting someones words or jumping to conclusions or writing off what was said with one verse plucked out of its context. You seem to have the knowledge of the truth, but you appear to be using your intelligence to detract from what the truth is. You give forceful instructions to obey your chosen method of debate. For no reason other than your own pleasure, and we like brothers and sisters watching you go by the way, have patiently offered correction with scripture. Sure you can SAY that I'm wrong, and you know, this is conjecture, but I'm not going to waste time going back and quoting you 100 times, so I can't prove it, but neither can you prove your good intentions. Good thing this is an internet forum. It's the attitude that is hard to get over.

We see it so much in the world where the enemy takes a sharp stick and says "don't return evil for evil," and then starts poking, mocking with our own laws, poke poke, "are you angry yet? that's a sin you know", poke poke poke, "wanna speak your mind, is that another sin? come again???" poke poke......

It's the enemies favorite game, and he loves to use other people to do it, I know....I was a champion.

I wouldn't have thought this edifying, but you did ask for it...so I hope you aren't too terribly offended.