Discussion:
Complete Jewish Bible
(too old to reply)
James
2012-01-26 11:02:52 UTC
Permalink
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!

O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
Anathema
2012-01-26 12:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
Welcome to alt.messianic James.
vince garcia
2012-01-26 12:45:40 UTC
Permalink
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?

I ask because you will find at this newsgroup people who worship the
true Christ--the Christ who is fully God and fully man--along with
heretics who deny His deity, teach the apostle Paul was a false teacher,
call Galatians "counterfeit trash," and reject Christian orthodoxy for
Messianic Jewish apostasy.

Just so you can know what some of the people here have said and teach,
I take what God says over what Paul says.....any day of the week. Any
thing Paul says in the New Testament that goes against what has been
said by God in the Old Testament....I believe has been tampered with
by the gentiles
At www.zionministry.com there are two articles....maybe, just maybe
God will use somehting in one of them to enlighten you,
~The Book of Galations - Is This God's Inspired Word~ and
~Why Do You Teach That The Book of Galatians is a Spurious Book~
The book of Galatians is 'counterfeit trash'
Xtians "...believe in the Catholic G-D's of Big Daddy, J.C.
and the Spook".
The covenate given at Siniah was a contract to allow YHWH to do their
thinking for them, and Make the Rules and If they wanted him to be their
G-D this was His (G-D's) Law. they reject the laws of YHWH for their
own rules, therefore they reject YHWH
The G-D I serve is a different G-D than You serve,
Yours was created Years after, my Messiah was
Crucified, and accended unto his Father on High
giving gifts to men.
make Sure your g-ds are not in the bathroom,
when you decide you want to attack Me next.
"but to us their is But One G-D the father, and one
lord Jesus christ, Whom I call yashua the Messiah.
who himself prayed that Men may know THOU ALONE
art the Most High speaking of YHWH.
and the covenate given at Sinia, that YHWH alone would Be My G-D, I keep his
precepts and statutes, and Holy Days.
I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN, and have stated that Over, and Over again, I am a
Messianic Jew,
Qadosh Stephanos: 1) Paul says Messiah justifies the ungodly
Romans 4:5 (KJV)
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him --->that justifieth
the ungodly<---, his faith is counted for righteousness.
2) King Solomon says it is an abomination
Proverbs 17:15 (KJV)
He --->that justifieth the wicked<---, and he that condemneth the
just, even they both are abomination to the LORD.
Jesus wasn't a Jew.
Sam Taylor
2012-01-26 22:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I
believe that the Bible is God's Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian's will disagree),
God's chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the
last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah
both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible "Complete Jewish Bible" by David H. Stern.
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God's
Word!
Post by vince garcia
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
I ask because you will find at this newsgroup people who worship the
true Christ--the Christ who is fully God and fully man--along with
heretics who deny His deity, teach the apostle Paul was a false teacher,
call Galatians "counterfeit trash," and reject Christian orthodoxy for
Messianic Jewish apostasy.
Just so you can know what some of the people here have said and teach,
Post by James
I take what God says over what Paul says.....any day of the week. Any
thing Paul says in the New Testament that goes against what has been
said by God in the Old Testament....I believe has been tampered with
by the gentiles
At www.zionministry.com there are two articles....maybe, just maybe
God will use somehting in one of them to enlighten you,
~The Book of Galations - Is This God's Inspired Word~ and
~Why Do You Teach That The Book of Galatians is a Spurious Book~
The book of Galatians is 'counterfeit trash'
Xtians "...believe in the Catholic G-D's of Big Daddy, J.C.
and the Spook".
The covenate given at Siniah was a contract to allow YHWH to do their
thinking for them, and Make the Rules and If they wanted him to be their
G-D this was His (G-D's) Law. they reject the laws of YHWH for their
own rules, therefore they reject YHWH
Vince,
that is some real creative Snipping, allowing You to Lie about what I said,
your really good at Doublespeech
Propaganda, deception, and Lying, ever thought of
becoming a Republican?
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
The G-D I serve is a different G-D than You serve,
Yours was created Years after, my Messiah was
Crucified, and accended unto his Father on High
giving gifts to men.
make Sure your g-ds are not in the bathroom,
when you decide you want to attack Me next.
"but to us their is But One G-D the father, and one
lord Jesus christ, Whom I call yashua the Messiah.
who himself prayed that Men may know THOU ALONE
art the Most High speaking of YHWH.
and the covenate given at Sinia, that YHWH alone would Be My G-D, I keep his
precepts and statutes, and Holy Days.
I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN, and have stated that Over, and Over again, I am a
Messianic Jew,
Qadosh Stephanos: 1) Paul says Messiah justifies the ungodly
Romans 4:5 (KJV)
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him --->that justifieth
the ungodly<---, his faith is counted for righteousness.
2) King Solomon says it is an abomination
Proverbs 17:15 (KJV)
He --->that justifieth the wicked<---, and he that condemneth the
just, even they both are abomination to the LORD.
Jesus wasn't a Jew.
vince garcia
2012-01-26 23:49:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Taylor
Vince,
that is some real creative Snipping, allowing You to Lie about what I said,
your really good at Doublespeech
Propaganda, deception, and Lying, ever thought of
becoming a Republican?
snipping? They're your own filthy words, from the posts you made to me
or linda personally, you lying, snake-tongued antichrist.

Are you now retracting your statements?
Post by Sam Taylor
The G-D I serve is a different G-D than You serve,
Yours was created Years after, my Messiah was
Crucified, and accended unto his Father on High
giving gifts to men.
yours is the G-ds of Babylon, Egypt,of Medo persia, Greece, and Rome.
mine is the G-D of avraham Yisaak, and Yacob,
make Sure your g-ds are not in the bathroom,
when you decide you want to attack Me next.
You denying you SAID this or that you MEANT this, liar?

You posted it in the ANATHEMA thread Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:03 AM
Post by Sam Taylor
"but to us their is But One G-D the father, and one
lord Jesus christ, Whom I call yashua the Messiah.
who himself prayed that Men may know THOU ALONE
art the Most High speaking of YHWH.
and the covenate given at Sinia, that YHWH alone would Be My G-D, I keep his
precepts and statutes, and Holy Days.
You denying you SAID this or that you MEANT this, liar?
Post by Sam Taylor
I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN, and have stated that Over, and Over again, I am a
Messianic Jew,
You posted the comments above to Linda in the DEAR SAM thread Wed, 18
Jan 2012 13:00

Come on, antichrist--do you deny you made them or that you MEANT them?

Put up or shut up.
Anathema
2012-01-27 06:45:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
you lying, snake-tongued antichrist.
Come on, liar
Come on, liar
Come on, antichrist
And thus, by their friuts.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 12:55:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
you lying, snake-tongued antichrist.
Come on, liar
Come on, liar
Come on, antichrist
And thus, by their friuts.
yes--by his fruits we DO know sam taylor--and YOU...

Deny the deity of Christ and exalt a counterfeit in Hisn place.
Deny he has the same God as "Xtians" do.
Lie repeatedly--and I mean REPEATEDLY--about the history of Chritianity
with no retraction even when shown his error
Misread, misunderstand and misteach the Bible on a daily basis

Then go crying about how he's being lied about, yet every time he's
asked whether he is denying what he said, or denying what he meant if
he's being lied about--HE NEVER RESPONDS WITH ANSWER
Anathema
2012-01-27 13:43:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
And thus, by their friuts.
Deny the deity of Christ and exalt a counterfeit in Hisn place.
The inverse of that equation is also true.
Post by vince garcia
Deny he has the same God as "Xtians" do.
But I do not. You are the one who made that denail
between you and I.
Post by vince garcia
Lie repeatedly--and I mean REPEATEDLY--about the
history of Chritianity with no retraction even when shown
his error
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be classified
as lies since I have not seen you retract or correct them?
Post by vince garcia
Misread, misunderstand and misteach the Bible on a daily basis
Which applies to the vast majority here.
Post by vince garcia
Then go crying about how he's being lied about
Sounds familiar to others.
Rod
2012-01-27 14:12:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
And thus, by their friuts.
Deny the deity of Christ and exalt a counterfeit in Hisn place.
The inverse of that equation is also true.
Post by vince garcia
Deny he has the same God as "Xtians" do.
But I do not. You are the one who made that denail
between you and I.
Post by vince garcia
Lie repeatedly--and I mean REPEATEDLY--about the
history of Chritianity with no retraction even when shown
his error
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be classified
as lies since I have not seen you retract or correct them?
If people here killed one another off as heretics every time there
was a misunderstanding or a difference of belief then there wouldn't
be a soul left to follow Christ or read His teachings.

There are some people in this group that need to cop a chill in
a very bad way before something bad takes place as it did in ACC
years ago.
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Misread, misunderstand and misteach the Bible on a daily basis
Which applies to the vast majority here.
It would be up until you personally find that older texts
actually back up some of what you have learned...
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Then go crying about how he's being lied about
Sounds familiar to others.
And it should. The problems with usenet is that almost every time
the arguments here carry into the outside world. Case in point:
the knights of BAAWA and their cursed leader warlord Steve inciting
atheists on the news groups to hunt down and murder Christians and
members of other religions.
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:21:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be
classified as lies since I have not seen you retract or
correct them?
If people here killed one another off as heretics every
time there was a misunderstanding or a difference of
belief then there wouldn't be a soul left to follow Christ
or read His teachings.
Indubitably. As it is, considering an eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth, I am beginning to wonder if we aren't
all blind and toothless.
Rod
2012-01-27 14:25:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be
classified as lies since I have not seen you retract or
correct them?
If people here killed one another off as heretics every
time there was a misunderstanding or a difference of
belief then there wouldn't be a soul left to follow Christ
or read His teachings.
Indubitably. As it is, considering an eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth, I am beginning to wonder if we aren't
all blind and toothless.
If it helps...I've an appointment for a new set
of dentures June 4th...<smiling big...> a person
doesn't need a dentist to pull teeth, just come to
the Christian news groups, start a fight and get
your teeth knocked out for free !
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
Indubitably. As it is, considering an eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth, I am beginning to wonder if we aren't
all blind and toothless.
If it helps...I've an appointment for a new set
of dentures June 4th...<smiling big...> a person
doesn't need a dentist to pull teeth, just come to
the Christian news groups, start a fight and get
your teeth knocked out for free !
<hearty chuckle>

And if one wears dentures, be sure to remove them
before coming here, lest they need yet another new
set.
Rod
2012-01-27 14:47:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
Indubitably. As it is, considering an eye for an eye and a
tooth for a tooth, I am beginning to wonder if we aren't
all blind and toothless.
If it helps...I've an appointment for a new set
of dentures June 4th...<smiling big...> a person
doesn't need a dentist to pull teeth, just come to
the Christian news groups, start a fight and get
your teeth knocked out for free !
<hearty chuckle>
And if one wears dentures, be sure to remove them
before coming here, lest they need yet another new
set.
Hence the appointment in June...<smiling...>
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:54:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
And if one wears dentures, be sure to remove them
before coming here, lest they need yet another new
set.
Hence the appointment in June...<smiling...>
<hearty chuckle> Hey, can you get me an appointment
also? I am getting a little of gumming my food.
Rod
2012-01-27 15:14:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by Anathema
And if one wears dentures, be sure to remove them
before coming here, lest they need yet another new
set.
Hence the appointment in June...<smiling...>
<hearty chuckle> Hey, can you get me an appointment
also? I am getting a little of gumming my food.
No problem! I'll just get the staple gun and staple our heads together
and tell them at the desk we are siamese twins joined at the ear!
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Anathema
2012-01-27 15:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
<hearty chuckle> Hey, can you get me an appointment
also? I am getting a little of gumming my food.
No problem! I'll just get the staple gun and staple our
heads together and tell them at the desk we are siamese
twins joined at the ear!
<hearty chuckle> That works!
Rod
2012-01-27 15:22:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
<hearty chuckle> Hey, can you get me an appointment
also? I am getting a little of gumming my food.
No problem! I'll just get the staple gun and staple our
heads together and tell them at the desk we are siamese
twins joined at the ear!
<hearty chuckle> That works!
<smiling...>
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
vince garcia
2012-01-27 14:38:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Lie repeatedly--and I mean REPEATEDLY--about the
history of Chritianity with no retraction even when shown
his error
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be classified
as lies since I have not seen you retract or correct them?
there is a difference between a "mistake" and a continuing series of
such "mistakes" which--when the error is pointed out by verifiable
references from history--are never publically acknowledged as mistakes,
but either repeated or else allowed to stand without retraction.

That makes them LIES.
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:43:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Lie repeatedly--and I mean REPEATEDLY--about the
history of Chritianity with no retraction even when shown
his error
I have seen you make mistakes as well. Should they be classified
as lies since I have not seen you retract or correct them?
there is a difference between a "mistake" and a continuing series of
such "mistakes" which--when the error is pointed out by verifiable
references from history--are never publically acknowledged as
mistakes, but either repeated or else allowed to stand without retraction.
That makes them LIES.
Then sadly, as you have judged, so be it.
Anathema
2012-01-27 06:45:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
Post by vince garcia
I ask because you will find at this newsgroup people who
worship the true Christ--the Christ who is fully God and
fully man--along with heretics who deny His deity
And the immediate desire to begin to discredit others.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 11:37:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
Anathema
2012-01-27 13:55:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 14:23:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"

Buddhists have "fruit"



"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.

As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into
Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER
DOCTRINE

Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.

ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:41:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and
wrong gospel.
Actually, I would disagree. IMO, those whose fruit is good,
even though their 'doctrine' is not what some others *think*
it should be shall enter the kingdom ahead of those with
some 'doctrine'. 'Doctrine' does not save.
Post by vince garcia
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went
into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they
teach NO OTHER DOCTRINE
Now, if you only knew beyond the shadow of a doubt
*exactly* what that doctrine was, you might have something.
But as it is, you can not state of a certainty what it was.
Post by vince garcia
Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.
It is a shame that you can not prove what that 'doctrine'
was beyond all shadow of a doubt.
Post by vince garcia
ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
Which can also include yours.
Rod
2012-01-27 14:45:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.

What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.

1Co 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:

1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.

1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.

1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?

1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.


Where as Christ taught the opposite:

Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?

Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Post by vince garcia
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into
Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER
DOCTRINE
Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.
ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
vince garcia
2012-01-27 14:56:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.

Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into
Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER
DOCTRINE
Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.
ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Rod
2012-01-27 15:16:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into
Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER
DOCTRINE
Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.
ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
vince garcia
2012-01-27 15:41:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.

They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.

thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost ebcause they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into
Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach NO OTHER
DOCTRINE
Not any doctrine someone sincerely believes is acceptable.
ALL SORTS OF IT ISN'T!
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Rod
2012-01-27 16:04:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
vince garcia
2012-01-27 23:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
cases:

If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
into your house, neither bid him God speed:
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.

he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
Post by Rod
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
Rod
2012-01-27 23:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
--
"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,
Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
--
Relating to God:

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,

Felicia Goldstein
Professor of Neurology
Emory University
vince garcia
2012-01-27 23:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
Linda Lee
2012-01-28 08:51:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
      And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
      If that is the case then you should know that your words have
      already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
      there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
      what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
      the two.
      What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
      to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
      by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
      to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
1Co 5:10  Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11  But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
1Co 5:12  For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13  But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16  And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17  When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
     Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
     them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
     abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
    But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
    where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
    do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
    But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
    correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
    were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
    opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
   I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
   sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
   and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
   time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
    Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
    and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
    present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
    woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
    is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
    And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
    trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
    it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
    is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
if they're made to be afraid of their spouse:

I Pet. 3:6 "Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement."


1Pe 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also,
who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their
own husbands:
1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement.
1Pe 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to
knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and
as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not
hindered.
vince garcia
2012-01-28 11:56:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Post by Linda Lee
I Pet. 3:6 "Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement."
1Pe 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also,
who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their
1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement.
1Pe 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to
knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and
as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not
hindered.
Linda Lee
2012-01-28 14:25:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
      And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
      If that is the case then you should know that your words have
      already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
      there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
      what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
      the two.
      What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
      to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
      by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
      to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
1Co 5:10  Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11  But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
1Co 5:12  For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13  But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16  And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17  When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
     Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
     them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
     abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
    But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
    where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
    do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
    But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
    correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
    were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
    opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
   I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
   sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
   and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
   time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
    Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
    and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
    present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
    woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
    is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
    And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
    trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
    it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
    is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Post by Linda Lee
I Pet. 3:6  "Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement."
1Pe 3:5  For after this manner in the old time the holy women also,
who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their
1Pe 3:6  Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement.
1Pe 3:7  Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to
knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and
as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not
hindered.
The Bible dealt with the issue in I Pet. 3:6. Unless you take it to
mean the woman who is made to be afraid is free to be 'disobedient',
but still can't get a divorce or remarry.
vince garcia
2012-01-29 11:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Post by Linda Lee
I Pet. 3:6 "Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement."
1Pe 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also,
who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their
1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose
daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any
amazement.
1Pe 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to
knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and
as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not
hindered.
The Bible dealt with the issue in I Pet. 3:6. Unless you take it to
mean the woman who is made to be afraid is free to be 'disobedient',
but still can't get a divorce or remarry.
I don't see fear referring to marriage there, but more for fear of the
things of life
Rod
2012-01-28 16:47:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Well, I'm of the opinion that if a wife holds up her end of the
marriage agreement then it is fine and dandy. The problem begins though
when she starts to rebel and begin bad mouthing the man. An example
would be her not wanting to submit when the man needs sex, or if he
wants more children and she refuses to do so. I mean, that is only
a part of what marriage is about, and an important part. I think if this
starts to take place then the man is entitled to throw her dead butt
on the street without any support, after all she broke the marriage
contract and he can not have heirs. I think that woman should be cut off
from her people.
--
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Jas 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had
offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his
works, and by works was faith made
perfect?

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which
saith, Abraham believed God, and it
was imputed unto him for righteousness:
and he was called the Friend of God.

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is
justified, and not by faith only.
vince garcia
2012-01-29 11:12:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Well, I'm of the opinion that if a wife holds up her end of the
marriage agreement then it is fine and dandy. The problem begins though
when she starts to rebel and begin bad mouthing the man. An example
would be her not wanting to submit when the man needs sex, or if he
wants more children and she refuses to do so. I mean, that is only
a part of what marriage is about, and an important part. I think if this
starts to take place then the man is entitled to throw her dead butt
on the street without any support, after all she broke the marriage
contract and he can not have heirs. I think that woman should be cut off
from her people.
can't see Jesus acting like that, rod...
Rod
2012-01-29 11:50:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Linda Lee
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by Anathema
Post by vince garcia
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
It's fine. But do YOU have the real gospel and real Christ?
Thus, we have the immediate desire to determine if you
are a "true" christian James.
yes--because there are too many tares like you here
So, rather than wait and see what develops, you *immediately*
want to find out and judge according to your doctrine as opposed
to his fruit.
mormons have "fruit"
Buddhists have "fruit"
And you have fruit, we saw some of it in an earlier post.
Post by vince garcia
"Fruit" means NOTHING if you have the wrong Christ and wrong gospel.
If that is the case then you should know that your words have
already judged every person who followed Paul's teachings, because
there is at least one major difference that I am aware of between
what Paul taught and what Christ taught, and no way of reconciling
the two.
What I've been referring to is Christ setting down to teach and
to eat with sinners, publicans, tax collectors and harlots, teaching
by example, while Paul refused to do it and also taught others not
to do so.
he didn't say that, and the verses you quote shows that. He said not to
do that with those who *claim to be brethren*
Post by Rod
1Co 5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with
the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs
go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any
man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an
idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an
one no not to eat.
there you go
Post by Rod
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do
not ye judge them that are within?
1Co 5:13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person.
Mar 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans
and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and
drinketh with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole
have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to
call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
that's the difference--the unrighteous weren't claiming to be ok. They
knew they were sinners.
Paul is talking about hypocrites in the church, and saying to cut them
off
Yes, but they are still sinners and still ill, and Christ told
them the problems and what to do about it, where Paul simply
abandons them.
I don't see it that way. He does not want the Christian to behave in a
manner that leaves the reprobate with the notion that he endorses what
the reprobate is doing.
But yet Christ told them what to do about it and how to correct it,
where Paul leaves their fate to chance without explaining what to
do to correct their behavior.
Post by vince garcia
They're going to hell if they don't repent, and continuing to
"fellowship" with them easily (happens today all the time) causes them
to think they'll be okay, and what they're doing isn't all that bad.
But Christ did the opposite; He told them their errors and how to
correct them, and I don't believe He thought that Paul's concerns
were more important than the persons soul, because He did the
opposite.
We have another witness from John NOT to remain in fellowship in some
If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not
For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
So if you're right, John should affirm to remain in fellowship with this
person and hope to sway him from his error.
he doesn't; he says don't even wish him good day or let him in your
house
I'm glad that I asked then, Thank you. I'd forgotten about having this
sticking point, but one of the posts in this thread brought it to mind
and I was compelled to bring it up. I likely have more, but at the
time I can't think of any of them.
Post by vince garcia
Post by Rod
Post by vince garcia
thera re all sorts of people living in in fornication who mentally
assent to Christ but yet are lost because they will not acknowledge or
repent of their sin
Very true. However, if a person has been married several times
and the finally comes to Christ, does remaining married to the
present spouse make them guilty of fornication ? I know of a
woman who has been married 9 times and presently came to Christ,
is she considered a fornicator, a sinner ?
In my opinion, no. Anything BEFORE conversion is under the blood.
And afterward ? I've seen several remarks about Hebrews ranging from
trash to uninspired, but I've not read any really good opinions on
it. Some have called it the harshest, meanest book of scripture there
is. Personally, the book of James is my favorite.
I'm conservative on the issue--after conversion, remarriage except for
abadonment or adultery is adultery
A woman (or man, I would think) is not required to stay in a marriage
That's an interesting point. The bible does not really deal with an
abuse issue so I can't give an opinion on it.
Well, I'm of the opinion that if a wife holds up her end of the
marriage agreement then it is fine and dandy. The problem begins though
when she starts to rebel and begin bad mouthing the man. An example
would be her not wanting to submit when the man needs sex, or if he
wants more children and she refuses to do so. I mean, that is only
a part of what marriage is about, and an important part. I think if this
starts to take place then the man is entitled to throw her dead butt
on the street without any support, after all she broke the marriage
contract and he can not have heirs. I think that woman should be cut off
from her people.
can't see Jesus acting like that, rod...
Needless to say this post failed to elicit the response
I was fishing for..I'm impressed.
--
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Jas 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had
offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his
works, and by works was faith made
perfect?

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which
saith, Abraham believed God, and it
was imputed unto him for righteousness:
and he was called the Friend of God.

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is
justified, and not by faith only.
gardner
2012-01-26 17:41:16 UTC
Permalink
"James" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:169877.2191.1327575772538.JavaMail.geo-discussion-***@yqia35...
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian
background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe
that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to
the Jews and Gentiles alike!

O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible
“Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!

I use the Complete Jewish Bible daily, and find it a real blessing.

You are absolutely right: Yeshua was (and is) Jewish. All of His apostles
and eatly disciples were Jewish. His teachings were rooted deeply in Torah
and Tanach and cannot be divorced from their sources or from the Jewish
people. To attempt to de-Judiaze (? sp) Yeshua is to de-historicize, and, to
an extent, to de-humanize Him.

It sounds like you have made a great beginning in re-contacting the Hebrew
roots of our Messiah and our Christian faith. May you perservere!! You will
definitely find some support on this ng, along with a chorus of inquisitors,
nay-sayers and kooks who are in various forms of denial and hostility re:
the continuity between what YHWH started in Abraham and will finish in the
New Jerusalem. Actually, you may find this ng a microcosm of "Christian"
history, with its 2 millenia plus of dogma, intransigeance and absolutely
shameful anti-Semitism.

So, is Scotland headed for political independence?

Shalom from Canada,

Jochanan.
Terry Cross
2012-01-26 22:05:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
Does Jesus endorse Kosher? The Temple? Animal sacrifice? The
Talmud? The rabbis? The Sanhedrin? The Mosaic Code? Mosaic
vengeance-based justice? Mosaic stoning? Mosaic divorce? Mosaic
racism? Jewish priesthood?

Given that Jesus discarded all these pillars of Judaism, how can
anyone claim that Jesus was Jewish?

Jesus was a rebel and revolutionary, who by his life and death, tore
the Veil from top to bottom. God is not, and never was, the private
property of the Levites or the Jews.
Post by James
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people.
This is not correct, and neither the preachings of Jesus nor the
lessons of history support that doctrine. Rather, the Jews have been
Post by James
The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
But according to your statements above, Jews and Gentiles are NOT
alike.
Post by James
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
Tear out the Torah, use the Gospel only. Jesus tells us the only
important statement in the whole Torah is love God and love others.
The rest can be discarded.

You should not accept a Jewish interpretation of Christianity until
the Jews accept a Christian interpretation of Judaism.

TCross
Sam Taylor
2012-01-27 01:54:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I
believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.

Does Jesus endorse Kosher? The Temple? Animal sacrifice? The
Talmud? The rabbis? The Sanhedrin? The Mosaic Code? Mosaic
vengeance-based justice? Mosaic stoning? Mosaic divorce? Mosaic
racism? Jewish priesthood?

Given that Jesus discarded all these pillars of Judaism, how can
anyone claim that Jesus was Jewish?

Jesus was a rebel and revolutionary, who by his life and death, tore
the Veil from top to bottom. God is not, and never was, the private
property of the Levites or the Jews.
Post by James
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God
’s chosen people.

This is not correct, and neither the preachings of Jesus nor the
lessons of history support that doctrine. Rather, the Jews have been
Post by James
The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as
witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the
Jews and Gentiles alike!


But according to your statements above, Jews and Gentiles are NOT
alike.
Post by James
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Post by James
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!

Tear out the Torah, use the Gospel only. Jesus tells us the only
important statement in the whole Torah is love God and love others.
The rest can be discarded.

You should not accept a Jewish interpretation of Christianity until
the Jews accept a Christian interpretation of Judaism.

TCross

terry,
what did you say
"You should not accept a Jewish interpretation of Christianity until
the Jews accept a Christian interpretation of Judaism.

are you in fact saying you S
samtole our G-D to build your
Religions on, now to know the truth we should accept the theft, and call it
Holy?
Is that what you are Saying?
your Scriptures are based upon the Torah, not the Talmud,
the Mishnah, nor Gemmerah, nor the Zohar, or the Kaballa, but the Tanaka
including the Torah.
You cannot understand the new testament, without a background in the Tanaka
(the Old testament) and
the Torah (the first Five booksof Scripture)
The Messiah came NOT to build a new Religion,
but to define the Truth of Ours.
yours was built by Constantines Desire for Power,
and created Your Religions by decrees , Creeds, and statements of Men, and
not the Scriptures.
so you believe Men over G-D
is that what You are saying
Sam
Sam Taylor
2012-01-26 22:48:38 UTC
Permalink
"James" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:169877.2191.1327575772538.JavaMail.geo-discussion-***@yqia35...
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian
background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe
that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to
the Jews and Gentiles alike!

O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible
“Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!

Remember the scriptures are the Scriptures, and the notes
are not, they are the thoughts of a Christian, and not
so much as a Messianic Jew.
There is Messianic Christianity, like Jews 4 Jesus, and
Messianic Judaism
THEY ARE NOT THE SAME
A christian believes in the Christian G-d, and or G-ds
Judaism believes in the One True G-D (YHWH) and
he alone is G-d
hear Oh Israel the lord Our G-D is One, not two(2), nor three(3), but One
(1)
vince garcia
2012-01-26 23:09:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian
background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe
that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to
the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible
“Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!
Remember the scriptures are the Scriptures, and the notes
are not, they are the thoughts of a Christian, and not
so much as a Messianic Jew.
That's why his bible and commentary are fundamentally good--he IS a
Christian, and holds to Christian essentials!

It's the judaizing heretics who soil what messianic judaism SHOULD be
Post by James
There is Messianic Christianity, like Jews 4 Jesus, and
Messianic Judaism
THEY ARE NOT THE SAME
And as you have admitted, your god isn't OUR God
Post by James
A christian believes in the Christian G-d, and or G-ds
Judaism believes in the One True G-D (YHWH) and
he alone is G-d
hear Oh Israel the lord Our G-D is One, not two(2), nor three(3), but One
(1)
Sam Taylor
2012-01-26 23:33:32 UTC
Permalink
Dear james,

Whats wrong about vinces theology.
vince believe Jesus is "Eternally Preexistent with the Father.
If that is so Jesus never came into existence,
He believes Jesus is G-D of Very G-d,
now the Term very G-d Means the bigger, the better,
and the most powerful of the Two(2)
as that would make Him G-ds G-D.
now this is very poorly put forth, and is
quite Nonsensical, if You think about It.
So who is Jesus? exactly who the Scripture says He is,
The Only Begotten Son of G-D,
So to explain this Simply the Very G-D gave birth to Him.
as is recorded in John 1:1
In the beginning WAS (past tense) the Word, (logos)
and the Word was WITH (with) G-D, .........AND.........
The Word WAS (was G-D)
Now read it Carefully as "WAS" is a past tense Word
denoting something that "WAS" but is no Longer,
and "WAS....."WITH" meaning He was not G-D but With G-D
the next verse explains that although G-D (speaking of the Father)
was the Creator, and he was the Agent of that Creation,
and NOT the Creator.
So to Simply put it Before anything else was brought Forth,
G-D brought forth His Only Begotten Son, He was NOT a Created Being,
but a Begotten Being.
and they together brought forth all Creation, again the Father being
the
Creator,
While the Son was the Agent of that Creation.
G-D brought forth from what seemed Nothingness, so the Son could
Make that which was Brought forth, and MAKE all that was Made.
now here is where We have the Biggest problem with vinces
theology, that is John 3:16
For G-D so loved the World He "GAVE" His Only Begotten Son.
now this was an eternal gift, not a loan, nor a short term Lease.
that Whomsoever MIGHT believe in him, should not Perish, but Have
Everlasting Life.
Vince does not believe it was an eternal gift, but a Short Term Loan.
BUT just When did G-d give his Son, Vince believes it was at the cross
Making G-D the Killer, not the Jews, or the Romans.
I believe when G-D gave his son was When G-D allowed His son,
to humble himself, and Become Flesh.
Vince of Course does not believe he came in the flesh, but came
Like the Nephelums Hybrid Half Spirit, and Half Man.
He Explains it as "Fully G-D, and Fully Man"
Now You know that that would be contrary to the Nature of both,
Nor can you be Fully one Thing, and Be fully another thing
as that makes no sense at all.
But why did G-D have to Give his Son, it was Sin, not the sin of Eve
as she was deceived, and didn't know she had been deceived until
She gave into the deception, and discovered Her deception.
Adam chose to sin knowing it was sin. and thus that sin had to
have a redeemer.
Her deception G-D could have dealt entirely different, than his sin
a redeemer is a near kinsman, and the basis for the Justice of G-D
is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a Tooth, and thus a Toe for a toe.
AND a Life for a life, the life of a near kinsman, or
someone like Adam the Him. not the Her, just before He chose to Sin
that could be the Only acceptable sacrifice.
Having a G-d for man is exacting to Heavy a price for justice.
Here is the Kicker most fail to see the Gift was eternal
meaning when G-D gave his Son, he never got him back.
G-D got back this second Adam, after WE sacrificed Him for Our sins,
and not G-D.
so this man Jesus Christ could become the mediator between us and G-d
to be an honest mediator He could not have become either G-D, or Man,
but an entirely new Creation, and When we see Him as he really is,
we become like him
jesus said in John 17:3 "that men might know You (YHWH) The Only True G-D.
it might do You good to read John the 17th Chapter
to get it in Context of what He is saying.
Then Read Paul in 1st Corinthians 8: verses 5& 6
Though there be those that are Called g-ds, as there are
g-ds many, and lords many BUT TO US, there is ONE
G-D, and One Lord Jesus Christ.
now read this chapter completely to get in context
this is what most Messianics Believe
We Believe there is But One G-D (YHWH) and One
Mediator between G-D and Man, the MAN Jesus
Christ, whom We call Yashua Messiah.
welcome to Messianic Faith.
Love Sam
Sam
vince garcia
2012-01-26 23:41:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Taylor
Whats wrong about vinces theology.
vince believe Jesus is "Eternally Preexistent with the Father.
If that is so Jesus never came into existence,
He believes Jesus is G-D of Very G-d,
Absolutely I believe Jesus was pre-existent with the Father!

ANY real Christian believes that.

But not Sam Taylor…


To him, that's "HORSE SHIT"
Post by Sam Taylor
Holy horse shit vince,
you believe jesus is "Eternally in the prexistence with G-D"…
Sam Taylor has explicitly denied he is a Chroistian or follows the
Post by Sam Taylor
The G-D I serve is a different G-D than You serve,
Yours was created Years after, my Messiah was
Crucified, and accended unto his Father on High
giving gifts to men.
yours is the G-ds of Babylon, Egypt,of Medo persia, Greece, and Rome.
mine is the G-D of avraham Yisaak, and Yacob,
make Sure your g-ds are not in the bathroom,
when you decide you want to attack Me next.
"but to us their is But One G-D the father, and one
lord Jesus christ, Whom I call yashua the Messiah.
who himself prayed that Men may know THOU ALONE
art the Most High speaking of YHWH.
and the covenate given at Sinia, that YHWH alone would Be My G-D, I keep his
precepts and statutes, and Holy Days.
I AM NOT A CHRISTIAN, and have stated that Over, and Over again, I am a
Messianic Jew,
Xtians believe in the 3 G-ds of Big Daddy, JC, and the Spook
An example of Sam Taylor's TOTAL IGNORANCE OF HISTORY can be seen with
this stupid statement about the Septuagint NOT even being conceived in
the time of Mary.
Post by Sam Taylor
Vince
how did [Mary] do that since the First Septuagent
had not yet been concieved of, and or produced?
mybe She was physic or Somethin?
yup that are it.....She waz Physic!....GOLLY GEEWILIKERS
Sam
It was written 100-300 years before Christ. Sam Taylor posts that it
wasn't yet written when Mary was told she would give birth to Christ


Sam Taylor claims Jesus was probably married BECAUSE HE HAD A BEARD!!!.
Post by Sam Taylor
With the fact the messiah had a beard, that probubly means he was
married.
He has an aberrant view of the way Jews view the Law.
Post by Sam Taylor
Jews are REQUIRED THE ! COMMANDMENTS
(the 10 Commandments)
and Teaching their Children of The Holy Days of YHWH
and HIS STATUTES!
( the Number is 57 not 613)
this is how Orthadox and Conservative, and Reform
can be all Considered JEWS iregardless of KOSHER
and other ways of observance.
To a Jew the Laws of Moses are seperated from the "LAW OF YHWH You
call the 10 Comandments
To us these [the 10] are the Basis of Our morality.
the others are Rules, not Commandments
This was all refuted by true Jew Rob Strom (whom sam called a
"Xtian"!*), who said: "Sam's view doesn't map to either traditional
or Reform Judaism."
Post by Sam Taylor
* When Rob agrees with Your Doctrine of G-D he is INDEED a Xtian! and
NOT A JEW.
He has shown either complete ignorance of Christian history, or else is
a bold faced liar regarding it.
Post by Sam Taylor
there is no reference to Communion being offered other than Passover
until the 6th Century...
the Communion offering was not a weekly "Sunday"
observation in Catholosism until the 6th century, before it was done Yearly
on a Memorial service in Your Easter Pagan Holiday.
Refuted by the first century didache, which even talks about taking
communion every sunday, and gives prayers for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The Didascalia in the 3rd century mentioned it:

"The apostles further appointed: On the first day of the week let there
be service, and the reading of the holy scriptures, and the oblation
[communion], because on the first day of the week [i.e., Sunday] our
Lord rose from the place of the dead, and on the first day of the week
he arose upon the world, and on the first day of the week he ascended up
to heaven, and on the first day of the week he will appear at last with
the angels of heaven" (Didascalia 2 [A.D. 225]).

It was WEEKLY OR DAILY for MANY, MANY years, including the years of the
sources I cited which mention it being taken EVERY SUNDAY! Pope Fabian
in the 200s even made it mandatory to receive communion AT LEAST--get
that, AT LEAST--THREE times a year...not 'ONCE a year and NO MORE' as
you are trying to claim. Even Augustine wrote about daily communion
being up to the individual.

He has shown complete ignorance regarding the greek language and the
Post by Sam Taylor
"Jesus means of Zeus or Nike"
Refuted by citing an article on the actual greek, comparing and showing
photos of ancient greek inscriptions proving this claim to be utterly
false
Post by Sam Taylor
Jews do NOT believe Man has a Soul!
You as a Xtian believe You have an ImortalSoul, and we believe We ARE a
mortal Soul We believe We Jews do Die, You believe You shed Your body
to life Soul Life forever either singing, or Screaming
Refuted by what REAL Jews say about the afterlife, compared to false
"jew," Sam taylor, who says they believe you're dead like a dog once
you're dead


Chabod.org: The soul is liberated from the body and returns closer to
her source than ever before.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/2970/jewish/Do-Jews-Believe-in-an-Afterlife.htm

Answers.com: After a Jew dies his soul goes to heaven where it is judged
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_Jews_believe_in_an_afterlife#ixzz18hiVUYyy

Ask Rabbi Simmons: When a person dies and goes to heaven, the judgment
is not arbitrary and externally imposed.
http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_afterlife.htm

Judaism 101: Traditional Judaism firmly believes that death is not the
end of human existence. There is clear evidence in the Torah of belief
in
existence after death.
http://www.jewfaq.org/olamhaba.htm

Ask Moses: Simply put, yes--but what we believe in might better be
called "life after life." According to Jewish belief, it is only the
body that dies, while the soul lives on into eternity.
http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/614%2C223/Do-Jews-believe-in-an-after-life.html

wiki answers: According to Maimonides, an afterlife continues for the
soul of every human being, a soul now separated from the body in which
it was "housed" during its earthly existence.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_type_of_afterlife_do_Jewish_people_believe_in#ixzz18hkPK4eT

juicy jews: The short answer is YES, we do!
http://juicyjews.com/jewish-religious-questions/do-jews-believe-in-an-afterlife-or-heaven/

Jewish home lifecare: The "classic" Jewish belief is that when we die,
only the body dies, and the soul lives forever with God.
http://www.jewishhome.org/life-with-us/religious-and-spiritual-life-at-jewish-home/jewish-beliefs-and-traditions/death-and-afterlife


MORE SAM TAYLOR LIES...


You claimed that Nazi Skinheads broke into your shop in San Francisco
and beat you and your Jewish customers. (a lie)

You claimed that you filed and won a lawsuit against the American Nazi
Party (a lie quickly revealed by checking the record of lawsuits against
the ANP, which showed NO RECORD of one by a Sam Taylor)


He has been repeatedly exposed as a liar


So when Sam Taylor starts giving a lesson on the Greek langauge and how
that 'proves' essentials of the Christian faith are WRONG...I trust the
readers of his posts will treat it as it deserves to be treated


"You say odd, suspicious things. And odd usually equals evil."
--Linda Lee
Sam Taylor
2012-01-27 00:02:51 UTC
Permalink
James,
G-D is not a Name, it is a title.
when a jew Prays He is Praying to the Name
(ha shem) YHWH, and or YHVH, which
Is the name of the G-D Singular We believe in,
Would you think a christian a Christian if He Prayed to Oden, and or Thor?
of Course not, nor would any Christian.
I believe in the G-D of Judaism.
Christians have many self Imposed concepts
of their G-D and or G-ds.
you have the Unitarians concept, the Oneness concept,
and The trinitarian (3) Concept, or the Nontrinitarian G-D
that differenciates christianity from Judaism.
A christian is a Christian, and believes in christian things.
Those of judaism believe in Judaism, and hold forth
the things of Judaism.
If a Jew by birth adopts the Concept of the Christian
G-ds He can in no way Considered of Judaism.
We don't Inherit our parents faith, that is Our Choice.
To be a Messianic Jew, You hold the Precepts of both
Judaism, and Messianisms.
You do NOT hold Christian Orthadoxy, and Dogma.
There is both Messianic Christianity, and Messianic
Judaism, they are not the same beliefs, nor could they Be
because they both define the Words G-D, and LORD
differently.
Your Bible Uses Titles Like G-D, G-d, and g-d also terms Like LORD,Lord,
and lord.
These are differing Titles.
when most scriptures Use the Term LORD it is
Speaking the Holy Name of YHWH, and or YHVH.
when it uses Lord it is talking about a Judge, a ruler,
or a Government Official.
when it uses lord, it is talking about those under a Lord.
this is important to know in Reading Your New bible.
Judaism is judaism, and holds Judaism as a faith.
so christianianity is christianity and holds the faith
of christianity.
They should not be Confused or mingled, and both faiths
hold there own thinking of Validity, as they Should.
love
sam
Sam Taylor
2012-01-27 00:40:50 UTC
Permalink
James,
above all it is how you define G-D, that defines You,
We messianics Serve our singular G-D through
our Messiah.
we believe that is a personal Relationship to
our one True G-D through His messiah,
not a religious One.
how we define that Messiah also defines us
as Messianic Judaism from Messianic
christianity.
each of us comes to a place to decide whom we serve.
it is that choice We make to serve One True G-D, we may define as YHWH, and
or YHVH, his Holy days,
his Concepts, and his laws.
or those chosen by men.
whom you will to Obey the same is Your G-d.
love
Sam
gardner
2012-01-27 01:20:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Taylor
James,
above all it is how you define G-D, that defines You,
We messianics Serve our singular G-D through
our Messiah.
we believe that is a personal Relationship to
our one True G-D through His messiah,
not a religious One.
how we define that Messiah also defines us
as Messianic Judaism from Messianic
christianity.
each of us comes to a place to decide whom we serve.
it is that choice We make to serve One True G-D, we may define as YHWH, and
or YHVH, his Holy days,
his Concepts, and his laws.
or those chosen by men.
whom you will to Obey the same is Your G-d.
love
Sam
Shalom, Sam -

I agree with you: "We messianics Serve our singular G-D through
Post by Sam Taylor
our Messiah". I would broaden it this way: "We Bible-believing followers
of Yeshua -- Yedudim & goyim alike - serve the One True God [or G-D if
you prefer], YHWH, through Messiah, His Only-Begotten Son".
I thank YHWH for the simplicity and awesomeness of His revelation of
Himself -- both in the written Torah and in our Living Torah and Messiah!!!
Truly - His Law is perfect, refreshing the soul. And His free gift of Yeshua
is perfect, redeeming the soul.

James, if you are reading this, test the spirits. You will hear that YHWH's
self-revelation prior to the coming of Messiah reduces to a single NT verse.

Nonsense! Thankfully, the Complete Jewish Bible, like any version other than
Marcion's, is complete.

Come to think of it -- would YHWH give us even one syllable -- one Yod
even -- that wasn't entirely for our good, and for the proclamation of His
eternal purpose through Yeshua Ha Mashiach?

Be'ahavah,

Jochanan.
Nancy
2012-01-27 01:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
~~~
Nancy

Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)

Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 01:42:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nancy
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
at least you're my favorite heretic, nancy
Nancy
2012-01-27 02:01:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
at least you're my favorite heretic, nancy- Hide quoted text -
~~~
Nancy

God tells me to be patient with ya! 8-)
gardner
2012-01-27 03:06:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!
~~~
Nancy

Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)

Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.


Nancy,

I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.

I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence - 2 or
3 witnesses, at minimum.

BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in using "
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church councils on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.

The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros in on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.

Yours b'Yeshua,

Jochanan.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 03:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s
Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence - 2 or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in using "
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church councils on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros in on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
That's because, unlike nancy and neville, First Fruits of Zion seeks to
pervert the message into something it is not.


To read Galatians and claim it is an endorsement of torah observance for
the gentiles it is written to is sheer idiocy
gardner
2012-01-27 03:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God's Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian's will disagree),
God's
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible "Complete Jewish Bible" by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of
God's
Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence - 2 or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in using "
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church councils on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros in on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
That's because, unlike nancy and neville, First Fruits of Zion seeks to
pervert the message into something it is not.
To read Galatians and claim it is an endorsement of torah observance for
the gentiles it is written to is sheer idiocy
I wouldn't make such a comment about anything I hadn't read - fully and
carefully. But, then again, I'm a follower of Yeshua.

Perhaps you DID read the FFOZ Commentary? ("Love believes all things")

BTW, did I say anything about a blanket "endorsement of Torah observance"?
Just wondering ...

Shalom.


Jochanan.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 03:58:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by gardner
Post by vince garcia
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God's Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian's will disagree),
God's
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible "Complete Jewish Bible" by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of
God's
Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence - 2 or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in using "
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church councils on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros in on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
That's because, unlike nancy and neville, First Fruits of Zion seeks to
pervert the message into something it is not.
To read Galatians and claim it is an endorsement of torah observance for
the gentiles it is written to is sheer idiocy
I wouldn't make such a comment about anything I hadn't read - fully and
carefully. But, then again, I'm a follower of Yeshua.
Perhaps you DID read the FFOZ Commentary? ("Love believes all things")
Shalom.
Jochanan.
I've read messianic revisionist writings on Paul's epistles before,
including galatians, so I really don't need to read something else that
contradicts the clear teaching of the epistle.
Post by gardner
BTW, did I say anything about a blanket "endorsement of Torah observance"?
Just wondering ...
No you did not, but you sound like you're taking the heretical view I've
heard before, which amounts to: "Paul was only criticizing l;egalistic
torah observance; he certainly wanted all believers to keep torah
otherwise"

That's bunk.
gardner
2012-01-27 05:28:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by gardner
Post by vince garcia
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God's Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian's will disagree),
God's
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible "Complete Jewish Bible" by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James
Version),
I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of
God's
Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence -
2
or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in
using
"
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church
councils
on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros
in
on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
That's because, unlike nancy and neville, First Fruits of Zion seeks to
pervert the message into something it is not.
To read Galatians and claim it is an endorsement of torah observance for
the gentiles it is written to is sheer idiocy
I wouldn't make such a comment about anything I hadn't read - fully and
carefully. But, then again, I'm a follower of Yeshua.
Perhaps you DID read the FFOZ Commentary? ("Love believes all things")
Shalom.
Jochanan.
I've read messianic revisionist writings on Paul's epistles before,
including galatians, so I really don't need to read something else that
contradicts the clear teaching of the epistle.
...

Well, there's a loaded word. "Revisionist".

Many would say that the original revisionists were the toadying bishops of
Nicea, who conjured up a dogma about God at the command of Constantine. (You
know - the Sun worshipper). Then another conclave of 'em at Chalcedon
revised the Niceans. Then pretty soon you got a papacy which got to revise
the many earlier revisionists ex cathedra. And so on. Until you get to the
Prots, who took their revisions and counter-revisions into whole new
denominations and sects...

Me, I'll take the Solid Rock. I mean, the One Who stands, and always has
stood, far above the dizzying tides of human/eclesiastical revisionism.

Shalom.

Jochanan.

But
vince garcia
2012-01-27 12:50:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by gardner
Post by vince garcia
Post by gardner
Post by vince garcia
Post by Nancy
Post by James
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a
Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple
I believe that the Bible is God's Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still
Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian's will disagree),
God's
chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last
days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both
to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new
Bible "Complete Jewish Bible" by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue
around, I like this translation (I always use the King James
Version),
I
would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of
God's
Word!
~~~
Nancy
Welcome, James.....I use this Bible sometimes.....8-)
Gotta tell you, I'm the one Vince is talking about in saying I believe
the Book of Galatians is counterfit trash.
Any book that goes against God's Laws, just can not be inspired by the
Holy Spirit.
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence -
2
or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in
using
"
"!! I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church
councils
on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros
in
on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
That's because, unlike nancy and neville, First Fruits of Zion seeks to
pervert the message into something it is not.
To read Galatians and claim it is an endorsement of torah observance for
the gentiles it is written to is sheer idiocy
I wouldn't make such a comment about anything I hadn't read - fully and
carefully. But, then again, I'm a follower of Yeshua.
Perhaps you DID read the FFOZ Commentary? ("Love believes all things")
Shalom.
Jochanan.
I've read messianic revisionist writings on Paul's epistles before,
including galatians, so I really don't need to read something else that
contradicts the clear teaching of the epistle.
...
Well, there's a loaded word. "Revisionist".
Many would say that the original revisionists were the toadying bishops of
Nicea, who conjured up a dogma about God at the command of Constantine. (You
know - the Sun worshipper). Then another conclave of 'em at Chalcedon
revised the Niceans. Then pretty soon you got a papacy which got to revise
the many earlier revisionists ex cathedra. And so on. Until you get to the
Prots, who took their revisions and counter-revisions into whole new
denominations and sects...
Me, I'll take the Solid Rock. I mean, the One Who stands, and always has
stood, far above the dizzying tides of human/eclesiastical revisionism.
And what qualifies you to dismiss orthodoxy for your own contradictory
views?

Does everyone get to make up their own religion based on what THEY think
the bible means, and have assurance they're going to heaven based on
their sincerity and not whether their often-heretical doctrine turns out
to be true or not?

The only thing the messianics here can agree on 100% is to deny the
deity of Christ.

You have sam taylor saying gentiles nned not keep the law but only what
acts 15 says; and you have others saying, "No--they must keep the whole
law"

That's two totally different theological views on a major issue.

One is arguably legalism and the other antinomianism

Does it make no differnece who's right?

Is everyone going to heaven so long as they're sincere?

What do you think?
Anathema
2012-01-27 14:01:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by vince garcia
Post by gardner
Me, I'll take the Solid Rock. I mean, the One Who stands, and
always has stood, far above the dizzying tides of
human/eclesiastical revisionism.
And what qualifies you to dismiss orthodoxy for your own
contradictory views?
Actually Vince, I could ask the same of you. For you actually
hold very little of any "orthodox" position.
Post by vince garcia
Does everyone get to make up their own religion based on
what THEY think the bible means
Some here do, and you excuse them. Yet condemn others.

I don't know, but that's sounding and looking a little...
Post by vince garcia
and have assurance they're going to heaven based on their
sincerity and not whether their often-heretical doctrine turns
out to be true or not?
Vince, the inverse of that it also true.
Post by vince garcia
The only thing the messianics here can agree on 100% is to
deny the deity of Christ.
I have clearly stated that I accept Christ as theos, but not as
ton Theon.
Post by vince garcia
You have sam taylor saying gentiles nned not keep the law
but only what acts 15 says;
Sam is nicer than I.
Post by vince garcia
and you have others saying, "No--they must keep the whole
law"
I have not seen anyone say that. Are you misrepresenting?
Post by vince garcia
One is arguably legalism and the other antinomianism
And yet, you are both legalistic and an antinomian.
Anathema
2012-01-27 06:36:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by gardner
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
While this is not directed at you personally.

I am utterly amazed how those on both sides of the issue
seem to be utterly unable to reconcile Galations.
Nancy
2012-01-27 16:12:56 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 26, 10:06 pm, "gardner" <***@shaw.ca> wrote:
<snip>
Post by gardner
Nancy,
I have wrestled with the book of Galatians for quite awhile.
~~~
Nancy

I've heard many people try to explain Galatians, but it has so many
contardictions in it, they usually fall on there face. 8-) I believe
Paul was a man of God....and he would never, not ever, go against
God's Laws.
....like talking about circumcision in Gal.5. Paul circumcised
Timothy! Does that mean Timothy is cut off from God?!......not 8-)

At www.zionministry.com there are 2 articles about Galatians. Ater
I read them it made sense to me....Paul didn't write Galatians!

PS
Oh, I need to warn you....I'm a bit dyslexia. I tend to mess letters
and numbers up sometimes....and on top of that I can't spell worth a
flip! 8-) I don't use a spell check....I would spend all my time
checking my spelling....you've been warned! 8-)
Post by gardner
I thought Del Tondo made a pretty good argument in "Jesus Words Only" that
ALL of the "Pauline" (TM) letters ought to be discarded, or at least deeply
discounted, b/cs they contradicted Jesus' Gospel teachings. But I realize
that "Paul/Shaul" agreed on some basics with "Peter" (although not with
"James").Perhaps the best approach is via the Torah rule of evidence - 2 or
3 witnesses, at minimum.
BTW, I'm not trying to be a pointy headed seminarian oi anything in using "
"!!   I'm just not sure who wrote what -- & I don't see that very much much
turns on it. I have no particular awe of the opinions of Church councils on
authorship - actually, del Tondo says that the counmcils were divided for
quite awhile on whether "Paul" was canonical or deuterocanonical, or what.
So -- I carry many grains of salt with me.
The purpose of this ramble is to suggest that you get ahold of a Commntary
on Galatians (2011) put out by First Fruits of Zion. The author zeros in on
what "Paul" is driving at in this letter, and concludes the message is
definitely NOT anti-Torah. I can send you particulars if you want.
Yours b'Yeshua,
Jochanan.
Sam Taylor
2012-01-27 03:19:07 UTC
Permalink
James,
do i think christians are lost, or have no chance of
salvation?
the Answer is NO!
we all are like Blind men feeling an Elephant,
and thinking that elephant is G-D.
G-D judges us not by what We know, nor Believe.
he judges by the Thoughts and Intent of Our Hearts.
His spirit draws those HE wills to come into a
Personal relationship to Him through his Son.
I know christians, of all faiths whom have that same relationship, and are
Led by the Spirit of G-D.
Sometimes it is his Will they stay where they are,
Sometimes He leads them to other faiths.
The Mercies of G-D are Limiteless, and beyond Our
Understanding.
You will Meet some Who are like a Catholic Preist
Screaming Latin is the Only Holy Language, and Joins that church within the
church thinking all others are Heratics.
And screaming accusing everybody but those that agree with them.
This group is Inclusive, and many are led, by that Spirit
Who love G-D, and their fellow Man, Others are not.
but You will find most as very Nice indeed, and
some that believe it is there job to accuse, and Twist
the beliefs of others like a Spanish Inquisitor.
It is that Personal relationship, and the Empowerment
of His Spirit that should guide You, before anything else.
Most Here can argue agreeably, as they don't think they are gaining brownie
points, and or Merit Badges.
If You and I can agree that is fine.
But If you and I can both test Our Own beliefs,
in Love, we both benifit even more.
this is not a boxing ring, but a place of Argument,
and debate.
may We always do that out of Love
Again welcome
Sam
Sam Taylor
2012-01-27 05:26:29 UTC
Permalink
to those unfamiliar with Judaic thought, let me
Explain the grace of G-D was not Limited to Judaism.
or think Our G-D did not teach grace he did.
we of Judaism were to live Our lives, Unto
Our one True G-D, as to bless the gentiles.
We Ourselves were to be that blessing to those we met.
we were to not only to love G-D, ourselves, and all
Others we met if they allowed us to do so, as we Love
our G-d, and loved ourselves.
Sam
gardner
2012-01-27 05:31:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Taylor
to those unfamiliar with Judaic thought, let me
Explain the grace of G-D was not Limited to Judaism.
or think Our G-D did not teach grace he did.
we of Judaism were to live Our lives, Unto
Our one True G-D, as to bless the gentiles.
We Ourselves were to be that blessing to those we met.
we were to not only to love G-D, ourselves, and all
Others we met if they allowed us to do so, as we Love
our G-d, and loved ourselves.
Sam
And truly, the Beit YHWH was to be a House of Prayer for all the nations.

And I believe it will be exactly that in the time of New Jerusalem.

Shalom,

Jochanan.
Anathema
2012-01-27 06:40:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anathema
Post by James
I only joined this group today!
Welcome to alt.messianic James.
As I said, welcome to alt.messianic. I do
hope your fire suit is in good working order.

I also notice, the various factions looking to
"show" you which side has the 'truth'.

Use your own judgment and judge wisely.
vince garcia
2012-01-27 14:01:36 UTC
Permalink
I only joined this group today! I live in Scotland and come from a Christian background, so why join a Messianic group? The answer is simple I believe that the Bible is God’s Word, Yeshua/Jesus was and is still Jewish.
The Jewish people were and still are (some Christian’s will disagree), God’s chosen people. The fact that they will be of major importance in the last days as witnesses to the truth that Yeshua/Jesus is the true Messiah both to the Jews and Gentiles alike!
O.K. The reason for this posting is that only yesterday I bought a new Bible “Complete Jewish Bible” by David H. Stern.
Apart from the Hebrew words which will take me sometime to get my tongue around, I like this translation (I always use the King James Version), I would like to find out your views on this and any other translation of God’s Word!
If you'd like to hear a decent preacher with a jewish background and
understanding, who nevertheless cleaves to the essentials of the faith
(unlike the tares), I recommend listeing to david hocking, who has a
daily broadcast

http://www.davidhocking.org/
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...