The Gift that keeps on taking

  • Thread starter Thread starter simplynoone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Read Galatians again. Actually, in the very first chapter you can see that there were disagreements with Paul. Genesis 17 … that token of the covenant between God and Abraham is in the flesh, and it is an everlasting sign. And clearly in that chapter, circumcision was to be for all those who entered into that covenant. Ezekiel 44:9 confirms that this was never abolished. “Thus saith the Lord GOD; No stranger, uncircumcised in heart, nor uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into my sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel.”

The Gentiles were never under the Laws given to the Jewish. If they want to enter into the covenant and they are doing it because their heart has been circumcised, they will not argue the circumcision of the flesh. 👍
How does this contradict what Paul was preaching? the debate was because the Church was beginning to accept the Gentiles into her fold without demanding that they get circumcised, and also because she was preaching a resurrected Jesus as the Messiah, as greater than the Temple itself…
 
How does this contradict what Paul was preaching? the debate was because the Church was beginning to accept the Gentiles into her fold without demanding that they get circumcised, and also because she was preaching a resurrected Jesus as the Messiah, as greater than the Temple itself…
And unlike the Apostles, Saul/Paul was a learned Jew, probably known as such…
 
Elijah was a “messianic” figure in Israel. And the similarities are indeed striking regarding the NT in light of I Kings 18.
Oh, there were MANY figures of the Messiah to come in the Old Testament: the near sacrifice of Isaac on Mount Moriah was a figure of the Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, so was Joseph sold to Ishmaelite merchants as a slave, so was also the tin snake on a staff in the desert (healing those bitten by snakes who would look at it with confidence)… Must I go on?
 
I didn’t add words. Look at the beginning of the prayer … it is for the Son of God, that God would be glorified through him. Who is the Son of God? Exodus 4:22,23

And Isaiah 49:3 says that is through Israel that God would be glorified. Why? Psalm 145, because despite all that many hold against Israel, they know who it is that is their Saviour … God alone!

As for verse 20, this is explained when we see that his testimony is as a witness to the truth that was given via the prophets. Revelation 19:10 … and what was the truth given in the words of the prophets? WORSHIP GOD! And in Hosea 9:11, one of the testimonies of the prophets, God is not a man. Jesus gave witness to this truth in John 4:24. So, I do believe that Jesus was a Jew, one of many, in whom the testimony was established. Isaiah 8:16,20
You did not add words? Then you withdrew some of them, maybe? One thing is certain, you have chosen to ignore and deny the main message of all the New Testament.
Jn 20, 30-31:Jesus performed many other miracles that his disciples saw. Those miracles are not written in this book. but THESE miracles have been written SO THAT YOU WILL BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, THE SON OF GOD, and so that you will have life in His name.
 
You did not add words? Then you withdrew some of them, maybe? One thing is certain, you have chosen to ignore and deny the main message of all the New Testament.
Jn 20, 30-31:Jesus performed many other miracles that his disciples saw. Those miracles are not written in this book. but THESE miracles have been written SO THAT YOU WILL BELIEVE THAT JESUS IS THE MESSIAH, THE SON OF GOD, and so that you will have life in His name.
Therefore I am afraid that we on this forum have to listen to Paul to the Galatians: “If anyone, even one of us or an angel, tells you a Gospel different from the one we preach, let him be anathema!” (Gal. 1, 8)
 
Matthew 8:1-4

A man, being healed of his leprosy, was told by Jesus to go to the priests and present the gift TO THEM as spoken of by Moses. I do believe this to be allegorical and purposely inserted for lesson purposes as well as to see who actually even is paying attention to what is now referred to as the old testament (which Jesus DOES specifically make mention of metaphorically as being better than the new 😉 Luke 5:37-39).

Now… here is the thing, in both exodus and deuteronomy it is commanded to not receive gifts, for they pervert the eyes of righteous judgment. Offerings for the house of God are allowed by the children, but gifts of strangers is a no-no.

Next, in the Laws given by Moses, the only gifts that I can find that are acceptable are those of service. ahem

Most interesting is what is said regarding the gifts given by Abraham. This is found in Genesis 25:1-6

He gave ALL he had to his son Isaac… to the concubines and their children, he gave gifts so as to send them away from his son (in other words, trying to bribe them so they would keep their greedy hands off of what he gave to his son).

The Christians have the memory of Jesus they can worship. Why is it then so many still seek to replace the Jewish? Is it not enough, the New Testament? Why, if you are given this Jewish man, is it not enough? Why insult the Jewish by saying things such as, “when you convert you will then be a completed Jew?” (which I have seen spoken on this board by Catholics as well other Christians, and even in many other places across the internet). Often it is done when a Jew is VERY graciously trying to bring Light to the distorted views held by Christians… they are offering gold and they are being rejected in the most foolish way by those they are bringing Light to.

That is exactly what Abraham was trying to avoid by handing the concubines and their children the gifts… to get them away from his son, born of the woman who was his beloved. The Son, the People, is having to come to you all now to shed Light on the matter because the Christians have not thought the gift given good enough and are busy trying to convert the Jewish to Christianity. At least, this is my perception of what is happening.

Jesus apparently agrees… just read Matthew 15:4-9. Many of those who say such things about the Jewish, that they are only complete when they accept the doctrines of Christianity (though which one is anyone’s guess), will also admit that Jesus was correct when he said “salvation is of the Jews.” … how then is that an acceptable gift according to the Law of Moses? If Catholicism is born from Judaism (as they claim, though in honesty, the two are worlds apart), how is that honoring your parent to disregard the Light that was promised to you (not sacrifice… that was NOT the Light)?

Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought more to Abraham than do those saying they are the replacement of the Jewish, the children of Abraham. That’d be found in Genesis 14.

I am beside myself to figure out how the sacrifice of a Jew along with insulting judgments of the Jewish is actually considered acceptable gifts. Could you imagine someone taking one of your children, sacrificing him/her, and then having them offer that child to you whilst demanding you accept them as one of your own … and then of course, let us not forget that they tell you that you will only be a complete insert father’s last name once you accept your dead child back that they are offering to you?

Insane, no? Or am I wrong… would any one here willingly accept such treatment if your family was the one being treated as the Jewish are being treated? 😊
No, I do not believe it is the only time. In fact, I am curious what you would say of the following passage? John 7:8-10 He says that he is not going to go to this feast because his time to is not yet… and well, he goes anyway… even though he blatantly says he is not going yet. So secretively too …

I would like to see this one explained. 🙂
So you think that you proved that Jesus The Christ defied the Old Testament by telling the healed man to offer a gift, and also that He contradicts Himself by saying "and well, he goes anyway… even though he blatantly says he is not going yet. So secretively too … "

So I guess you think that you proved Christianity is false, and it is obvious that your thread title, “The Gift that keeps on taking” is a reference to Christianity since in your other threads you repeatedly say that Christians should keep their greedy hands away from the Jews inheritance.

You have proved nothing, both your posts were taken out of context, if I feel inclined maybe I will refute them.

But it really does not matter to me that much anymore.

If the Christian religion disappears, then the ATHEISTS or MUSLIMS wil WIN.

Both are preferable than the “collective messiah” of the Jewish people being more special than everyone else. THAT IS THE GREATEST EXAMPLE OF RACISM.

If the Christian Nations become secular, then the Muslim Nations will have the MOST VOTES in the United Nations. Have fun.
 
No, I do not believe it is the only time. In fact, I am curious what you would say of the following passage? John 7:8-10 He says that he is not going to go to this feast because his time to is not yet… and well, he goes anyway… even though he blatantly says he is not going yet. So secretively too …

I would like to see this one explained. 🙂
verse 1 After these things Jesus was walking in Galilee, for He was unwilling to walk in Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill Him.

verses 3-4 His brothers said to Him, "Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing. "For no one does anything in secret when he himself seeks to be known publicly. His unbelieving brothers are mocking Him here; these are is biological brothers as the brothers are unbelieving and telling Him to “show-off” His powers to His disciples in public.

verse 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. This could not mean Christian brothers; they would be believers 👍

It should be obvious as to why He went alone and in secret. He waited for the the feast to really get underway before He went to the temple to teach. Jesus does get the crowd to the point where you try to seize Him, but He vanishes, but “many in the crowd believed in Him” - mission accomplished.
 
So you think that you proved that Jesus The Christ defied the Old Testament by telling the healed man to offer a gift, and also that He contradicts Himself by saying "and well, he goes anyway… even though he blatantly says he is not going yet. So secretively too … "

So I guess you think that you proved Christianity is false, and it is obvious that your thread title, “The Gift that keeps on taking” is a reference to Christianity since in your other threads you repeatedly say that Christians should keep their greedy hands away from the Jews inheritance.

You have proved nothing, both your posts were taken out of context, if I feel inclined maybe I will refute them.

But it really does not matter to me that much anymore.

If the Christian religion disappears, then the ATHEISTS or MUSLIMS wil WIN.

Both are preferable than the “collective messiah” of the Jewish people being more special than everyone else. THAT IS THE GREATEST EXAMPLE OF RACISM.

If the Christian Nations become secular, then the Muslim Nations will have the MOST VOTES in the United Nations. Have fun.
There is so much error in the persons understanding; I’m not even sure where to begin, but if this person is a Jew, then if He were to convert, he would then be a Christian, not a Christian Jew or any other kind of Jew. Christian is Christian. There are only two types of people in the world, Christian and nonChristian.
 
It is not me who is attempting to define God. God is incorporeal and thus when you assign him to the body of a man, you are the one defining Him. I know that the infinite can not be such when given boundaries.
No, simplynoone, none of us in the Church, not even the Apostles nor even saint Paul, has “assigned” God to a human body. Only God can “assign” Himself to a human body.
As for “defining God”, all we can describe of Him are the things God has revealed of Himself to Man.
The things that look new in Christianity were already IMPLICITLY present in the Old Testament. Just as the dogmas of the Church have been defined more precisely on special occasions (very often because of rampant heresies that threatened to be believed at the expense of the true doctrine… the Sons of Israel must have had many similar occasions to define and affirm what God truly teaches in the face of heresies and repeated recriminations.)
 
No, simplynoone, none of us in the Church, not even the Apostles nor even saint Paul, has “assigned” God to a human body. Only God can “assign” Himself to a human body.
As for “defining God”, all we can describe of Him are the things God has revealed of Himself to Man.
The things that look new in Christianity were already IMPLICITLY present in the Old Testament. Just as the dogmas of the Church have been defined more precisely on special occasions (very often because of rampant heresies that threatened to be believed at the expense of the true doctrine… the Sons of Israel must have had many similar occasions to define and affirm what God truly teaches in the face of heresies and repeated recriminations.)
I am sure you never read Essay On The Development Of doctrine In The Catholic Church by John Henry Cardinal Newman… Dogmas don’t just pop up out of the blue!
 
There is so much error in the persons understanding; I’m not even sure where to begin, but if this person is a Jew, then if He were to convert, he would then be a Christian, not a Christian Jew or any other kind of Jew. Christian is Christian. There are only two types of people in the world, Christian and nonChristian.
If you are speaking of simplynoone, it’s she, not he. I too made the same mistake at first. (I even once thought it was a second name used by Y. Ben Masada!!!)
 
(…) verses 3-4 His brothers said to Him, “Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing. For no one does anything in secret when he himself seeks to be known publicly.”
His unbelieving brothers are mocking Him here; these are is biological brothers as the brothers are unbelieving and telling Him to “show-off” His powers to His disciples in public.
verse 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. This could not mean Christian brothers; they would be believers 👍
I used to be told that in those days a “brother” either a brother or a cousin. In Abraham’s time, it could also be said of a nephew!
Also, why did Jesus say: “Behold your mother” to John (who was not Jesus’ brother, for he and his brother James were sons of Zebedee in Bethsaida!) when the custom was to entrust the remaining brothers and sisters of the family to his parents’ care and vice-versa, except where there are no brothers or sisters…
 
My life is in the words of the Tanakh … and the majority of the NT does not testify to what I know. It does not even testify to what Christians know. It is mystical and not based on life that was created by God.
I still haven’t had an explanation of what you exactly mean by “mystical” and by “not based on life that was created by God”…
 
So you think that you proved that Jesus The Christ defied the Old Testament by telling the healed man to offer a gift, and also that He contradicts Himself by saying "and well, he goes anyway… even though he blatantly says he is not going yet. So secretively too … "

So I guess you think that you proved Christianity is false, and it is obvious that your thread title, “The Gift that keeps on taking” is a reference to Christianity since in your other threads you repeatedly say that Christians should keep their greedy hands away from the Jews inheritance.

You have proved nothing, both your posts were taken out of context, if I feel inclined maybe I will refute them.

But it really does not matter to me that much anymore.

If the Christian religion disappears, then the ATHEISTS or MUSLIMS wil WIN.

Both are preferable than the “collective messiah” of the Jewish people being more special than everyone else. THAT IS THE GREATEST EXAMPLE OF RACISM.

If the Christian Nations become secular, then the Muslim Nations will have the MOST VOTES in the United Nations. Have fun.
I wanted to reply to this one first. You are talking about the Jewish People being racist and yet everything you say here is against the Jewish People … wiping them out is what you are basically supporting. I do not advocate wiping out the Christians … only to give them insight as to what the Tanakh actually says and even their own NT. Quit being so ignorant and pay attention to what’s going on. 🙂

In all honesty, if the Jewish People did not exist, Islam and Christianity would not exist either. So really, the two piggy back religions should be more appreciative and attentive to the Jews.
 
How does this contradict what Paul was preaching? the debate was because the Church was beginning to accept the Gentiles into her fold without demanding that they get circumcised, and also because she was preaching a resurrected Jesus as the Messiah, as greater than the Temple itself…
Gentiles were never required, even by the apostles to be circumcised … that is not a requirement to be considered righteous. When it is required is when a Gentile wants to join to the covenant between God and Israel. And man does not resurrect after death … not in the zombie type way so many believe. Is not 2,000 years enough to see this is a fact and that the Tanakh saying such is not lying? :confused:
 
And unlike the Apostles, Saul/Paul was a learned Jew, probably known as such…
And for all the crud Christians throw at the memory of the Pharisees and Scribes, why do you take the word of ONE of them whose views oppose not only Jesus’ but that of the Tanakh as well? Why is THIS the one you are willing to listen to? It is strange to me. He gives you more bonds than he does truth.
 
Oh, there were MANY figures of the Messiah to come in the Old Testament: the near sacrifice of Isaac on Mount Moriah was a figure of the Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, so was Joseph sold to Ishmaelite merchants as a slave, so was also the tin snake on a staff in the desert (healing those bitten by snakes who would look at it with confidence)… Must I go on?
I do not understand how Abraham and Isaac’s situation is considered a picture. GOD WAS SHOWING THAT HE IS NOT LIKE THE OTHER gODS TO USE THE SPECIAL LIFE OF MAN AS A SACRIFICE … he sent an animal instead. Was Jesus an animal? I don’t think so. He was a man … thus, not candidate according to the sacrificial laws to be used as an atonement sacrifice.

Joseph’s life was not physically taken away. 🤷
 
Therefore I am afraid that we on this forum have to listen to Paul to the Galatians: “If anyone, even one of us or an angel, tells you a Gospel different from the one we preach, let him be anathema!” (Gal. 1, 8)
Than you choose the covenant that Paul made for the Christians. I do not have ought with this other than that it is not based on the Tanakh…

The covenant between God and mankind according to the Tanakh is in Genesis 9. That isn’t hard, now is it?
 
verse 1 After these things Jesus was walking in Galilee, for He was unwilling to walk in Judea because the Jews were seeking to kill Him.

verses 3-4 His brothers said to Him, "Leave here and go into Judea, so that Your disciples also may see Your works which You are doing. "For no one does anything in secret when he himself seeks to be known publicly. His unbelieving brothers are mocking Him here; these are is biological brothers as the brothers are unbelieving and telling Him to “show-off” His powers to His disciples in public.

verse 5 For not even His brothers were believing in Him. This could not mean Christian brothers; they would be believers 👍

It should be obvious as to why He went alone and in secret. He waited for the the feast to really get underway before He went to the temple to teach. Jesus does get the crowd to the point where you try to seize Him, but He vanishes, but “many in the crowd believed in Him” - mission accomplished.
How are you sure these are physical brothers? After all in Matthew 12:49, he points to his disciples and says Behold! My mother and my brethren. :confused:
 
There are only two types of people in the world, Christian and nonChristian.
That is like a Muslim saying there are only two types of people in the world … Muslim and non Muslim. It is all a matter of subjective opinion in this line of thinking. Objectively, the world has many different People with different backgrounds. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top