As Do I! Shall we invite the forum to go on record?
You should listen to Karraster MarcR he has only been polite to you and you do seem to be accusing people of things they are not doing alot lately.
As Do I! Shall we invite the forum to go on record?
that person said the pharisees followed the Law, they di not by the Messiah's own words.
To say they did is in direct contradiction of what He said.
The pharisees followed an altered version of the Law OK, but they did not follow His Law.
2 Kings 17:19, “Yehuḏah, also, did not guard the commands of יהוה their Strength, but walked in the laws of Yisra’yl which they made.”
There is a deeper aspect than whether they were following the Law correctly or not:
"If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily salvation should have been by the law."
Fascinating mystery, the enemy would have been better able to keep men in bondage had he not killed the Lord.
(1 Corinthians 2:8) had they understood they would not have crucified the Lord.
By Killing the Lord the old covenant was made void, by the death of the One who made the covenant.
The religious leaders who desired to remain in charge nullified their own covenant with God.
Also now being under the law is an affront to the cross: To say they can fulfil the law, when law is done away with in Christ.
"The law is not made for the righteous man but for the lawless."
"Jesus disarmed rulers and authorities he has made a publics disgrace of them triumphing over them by the cross."
Their love of the law was for advantage, to have a better place for themselves.
you know days change at midnight , right? so, if Christ rose at 1 am sunday morning, it is still sunday.
gb9,
re: "you know days change at midnight , right? so, if Christ rose at 1 am sunday morning, it is still sunday."
What difference does it make if the day changes at midnight or at sundown? Either way, 1 am is still the same calendar day of the week.
There is no requirement to understand the old covenant to be saved, neither to understand the new covenant to be saved.Hello stillness, what makes up the OLD Covenant to you mean? It is important to understand what the OLD covenant is. If you do not understand what makes up the Old Covenant and its purpose you will not understant what the NEW Cvenant is.
There is no requirement to understand the old covenant to be saved, neither to understand the new covenant to be saved.
"Lean not on your understanding but trust in the Lord." this implies that leaning on our understanding can keep us from trusting the Lord.
What the lord told me recently is: Seek first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you."
"The kingdom of God is Righteousness and peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost."
"Let no one turn you away from the simplicity of Christ.'
of course it makes a difference when a day starts ! and we/scripture is not talking about 1am....a lot can happen in the time from sunset.
That is a terrible translation. The Hebrew Matthew has it right, not the KJV. If it did, we would all be under a rabbi, the very thing Jesus taught against!Please provide a better translation. As far as I can tell, most translations are very similar. For the most part, the Pharisees knew and taught the law. But they didn’t practice what they preached.
Or better yet LoveGodForever. How can one know Christ without knowing the Gospel, the New Covenant, Christ the Word.Hello stillness how can you know Christ if you do not know the Word?
Hi shrume,
If you don't know There is no Ancient Hebrew copy. There is an Aramaic; not Hebrew.
Or better yet LoveGodForever. How can one know Christ without knowing the Gospel, the New Covenant, Christ the Word.
Amen brother!!!!Yes they are all the same. Christ is the Word of God and the Word of God is the Gospel
Thank you sir!
Thank you sir!
I am going to probably save your post. I haven't read it the whole way through yet but will.
Question; Is that which Sebastian Münster produced in 1537. From what I gather that is the first edition compiled. Do you know weather he translated it from the Aramaic or Greek? I haven't read that far into it yet. Here is a link for anyone interested. Petersen, Some Observations on a Recent Edition of and Introduction to Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Matthew"
Could you post a English translation of it of Matthew 23:3-11 so I compare it to the Aramaic and Greek. Also I would like to compare to a Hebrew Roots Bible I have a copy of to see if it was derived from this to which you share.It is from the oldest from the 1300s by Shem-Tov ben Isaac Shaprut
Could you post a English translation of it of Matthew 23:3-11 so I compare it to the Aramaic and Greek. Also I would like to compare to a Hebrew Roots Bible I have a copy of to see if it was derived from this to which you share.
Could you post a English translation of it of Matthew 23:3-11 so I compare it to the Aramaic and Greek. Also I would like to compare to a Hebrew Roots Bible I have a copy of to see if it was derived from this to which you share.