GOD'S SABBATH AND THE REAL TRUTH OF COL 2:14-17 WHO DO WE BELIEVE GOD or MAN?

[Studyman]

Only to those who are willfully blind.

41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

It's really remarkable how you twist scripture to your own hurt.

 

[shrume]

But this one verse does not make Void God's definition of Righteousness. At some point these "weak" in the faith will have to grow up.

Don't forget, it was the one strong in the faith that ate everything, and the one weak in the faith who ate only herbs.

Rom 14:
2) For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

You simply do not understand that we are not required to keep the law to be righteous before God.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Don't forget, it was the one strong in the faith that ate everything, and the one weak in the faith who ate only herbs.

Rom 14:
2) For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

You simply do not understand that we are not required to keep the law to be righteous before God.

Seems appropriate

For I witness about them that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For ignoring the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. For Christ [is the] end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Romans 10:2-4​

 

[gb9]

That is your doctrine, but there is little evidence to support it. It may also be that the Apostles believed what Jesus taught them, and they understood all about the "Leaven of the Pharisees" and that they directed them to Moses just as Jesus instructed the Apostles to do.

Matt. 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

So maybe they didn't want to offend the Gentiles, even though there is no evidence to support this teaching. But shouldn't we also consider that maybe they were just following the instructions of the Christ? There is a lot more evidence to support this belief than the other IMO.

Acts 9 - God to Ananias - , speaking of Paul- " this is my choos

 

[gb9]

Acts 9 - God to Ananias - , speaking of Paul- " this is my choos

Acts 9 - God to Ananias - , speaking of Paul- " this is my choos

sorry to all. will attempt to fix this later.

 

[Faith_Like_Paul]

Jesus is the word of God (CORRECT) God's Word WAS, IS, and ALWAYS WILL BE (CORRECT) When Jesus was "working" on the Sabbath....And there is no way to twist this around, work was work, which is why the Pharasees were trying to use the SAME thing to trip Jesus up about working on the Sabbath Day. You know, this legalistic stuff is what Jesus died for, ya know. He died so we didnt feel like we had to judge each other by who celebrates the sabbath or not, or who works on the sabbath or not. Who is or isnt circumsized. We are supposed to have a loving freedom amongst each other in the name of the mighty KING OF OUR SALVATION! Let's live and let live, yet compel each other to love each other, and share our hopes, and our testimonies. If you are working for God, I wanna hear about it. We are the Body of the AUTHOR OF LIFE. We are nothing but servants unto each other, and unto the world that we may compel them to believe in this same Messiah, Jesus Christ. I love you all, and hope that this message given, in inspiration from the beautiful Spirit that dwells in us all, will break some of the bonds we seem to stay under. I am just speaking the truth, and am not looking for an argument, but I am looking to help us all see together through the same scope in a simple way.

 

[trofimus]

Once again, if you read and believe what the Word which became Flesh says the New Covenant is, you will find it differs from the religious teaching of the land and by extension your preaching.

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

No mention of the Word which became Flesh eliminating God's instructions or definition of Holy, unholy, Clean or unclean. Only that the Word which became Flesh will no longer require God's Word to be administered through Levite Priests, Rather, He will write His instructions on our hearts. You are adding things that are not there to support your religious tradition.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Again, no mention that God's Definition of sin is changed or eliminated, only that we will no longer be required to find a Levite Priest and bring a goat to atone for our sins, The Word which became Flesh will forgive us "apart" from the "Works of the Law" as He did for Abraham.

God says there is: Ex. 12:49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

The New Testament teaches the same thing. "there is no Jew or Greek".

God's Priesthood was Temporal, not God's Definition of sin for mankind.

But you don't seem to believe in this Word.

Rom. 2:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

The Biblical truth is that there is not one place in the Bible that teaches Jesus eliminated any of God's Instructions. He became our High Priest, He changed the priesthood and Laws associated with them as Hebrews 7 clearly points out. But He didn't change His Sabbath or His Fathers definition of what was created for food and what was not created for food.

Since I can find no evidence that He did as you and "Many" who come in Christ's name teach, and given all the warnings of people who "come in Christ's name" to deceive, I believe it is prudent to stick with the Word and trust what HE SAYS over the religious traditions of the religions of the land. And it is my experience after 25 years that He is faithful to "manifest Himself" in the manner that He promised.

John 14: 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

So I ask the question; "What if Jesus is right"?

Once again, can you simply and shortly answer these three questions? Just these, without any sauce around it:

a) prove that the Old Covenant from Sinai was given to all people (including me, a Central European) and not just to Abraham´s physical descendants - Israel.

b) prove that the Old Covenant was not temporal till Christ, but meant to be continuously valid even in the New Covenant.

c) do you know about any commandment "do not eat with Gentiles" in the OT?

 

[posthuman]

You only say this because you only believe those Word's of the Christ which can be used to promote your religious traditions.. When it come to your religious traditions, you jump to the side of the Mainstream Preachers of Christ's time which He declared "SAID" they followed the Law of Moses, but as my Savior said many times, they do NOT follow the Laws of Moses. They say and do not do.

nope, i quote Romans 7 and all kinds of other scripture because it's the truth.
not to further some kind of imagined agenda.

Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him.​

(Romans 6:8) ​

this is the truth. in Christ, we have died. i keep reminding us of this because it's the truth, and it's the reason we know we live with Him.
not because of works we do. not because of some righteousness we establish or achieve for ourselves. not because of human will, human exertion or human strength or desire. because of God, who has mercy. because of belief in the Son.

Or do you not know, brothers — for I am speaking to those who know the Law — that the Law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? ​

(Romans 7:1) ​

​

Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to Him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. ​

(Romans 7:4) ​

​

i'm quoting this because it's the gospel -- this is our salvation: that He has died, and raised Himself up, and with Him we also die and shall be raised!
the fact of our death has released us from the Law in order that we may belong to Him -- it's the truth. it's the reason we rejoice, it's the reason we are thankful, it's the reason there is no more condemnation for anyone in Christ, and it's the reason we should therefore not allow anyone to judge us with regard to a feast, a festival, food or drink, or a sabbath -- these things all being shadows of the good thing which was to come: Christ, Him crucified and risen, and us in Him, Him in us: the hope of glory and mystery of godliness revealed.

Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? ​

(Galatians 3:3) ​

​

it's the reason we should put to death in our members all malice and slander, and set your mind on what is above and remains rather than on the flesh and all the things that pass away.
it's the reason you should stop thinking about how much you hate certain people and certain groups, stop acting like such a pharisee yourself, and rejoice in God for what He has done for His people, redeeming them from every curse -- glorifying God rather than spitting at men

 

[lightbearer]

Or, you can post a verse with dietary laws dividing it into three groups...? After you will return.

Don't have to Peter did it in the verse we are looking at.
ὁ G3588 T-NSM
δὲ But G1161 CONJ
Πέτρος Peter G4074 N-NSM
εἶπεν Said, G2036 V-2AAI-3S
Μηδαμῶς In No Wise, G3365 ADV
κύριε Lord; G2962 N-VSM
ὅτι For G3754 CONJ
οὐδέποτε Never G3763 ADV
ἔφαγον Did I Eat G5315 V-2AAI-1S
πᾶν Anything G3956 A-ASN
κοινὸν Common G2839 A-ASN
ἢ Or G2228 PRT
ἀκάθαρτον Unclean. G169 A-ASN
(Act 10:14 TRi)

Let us look at the Greek word ἢ Or G2228 PRT. It is a Disjunctive Particle. It expresses a choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities. They lack any connection; they are exclusive.
From Strong's entry:
G2228
ἤ
ē
ay
A primary particle of distinction between two connected terms;

Couple that with the post to which you responded. Which brings to out attention that GOD never mentions the unclean only the common.

These verses bring to our attention a distinction between the common and unclean. The Common was cleansed not the unclean.

God's answer through the Spirit, "What GOD has cleansed call thou not common."

No mention of cleansing that which is unclean only the common.

So where did Peter get the idea that some of the animals to which he was seeing in the vision were common?

Studyman has the answer to this. The Pharisees had their own set of laws did they not? Mark 7 makes this perfectly clear. That is the chapter to which Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for their man made laws. Here is an interesting read I found today.

https://messianicpublications.com/robert-roy/a-hebraic-perspective-on-peters-vision-acts-10/

 

[trofimus]

Don't have to Peter did it in the verse we are looking at.
ὁ G3588 T-NSM
δὲ But G1161 CONJ
Πέτρος Peter G4074 N-NSM
εἶπεν Said, G2036 V-2AAI-3S
Μηδαμῶς In No Wise, G3365 ADV
κύριε Lord; G2962 N-VSM
ὅτι For G3754 CONJ
οὐδέποτε Never G3763 ADV
ἔφαγον Did I Eat G5315 V-2AAI-1S
πᾶν Anything G3956 A-ASN
κοινὸν Common G2839 A-ASN
ἢ Or G2228 PRT
ἀκάθαρτον Unclean. G169 A-ASN
(Act 10:14 TRi)

Let us look at the Greek word ἢ Or G2228 PRT. It is a Disjunctive Particle. It expresses a choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities. They lack any connection; they are exclusive.
From Strong's entry:
G2228
ἤ
ē
ay
A primary particle of distinction between two connected terms;

Couple that with the post to which you responded. Which brings to out attention that GOD never mentions the unclean only the common.


So where did Peter get the idea that some of the animals to which he was seeing in the vision were common?

Studyman has the answer to this. The Pharisees had their own set of laws did they not? Mark 7 makes this perfectly clear. That is the chapter to which Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for their man made laws. Here is an interesting read I found today.

https://messianicpublications.com/robert-roy/a-hebraic-perspective-on-peters-vision-acts-10/

Do you have any OT division of food into three categories - clean, unclean, common, to prove that Peter´s opinion was biblical and not just from Jewish traditions?

That "common" means "not clean" and is, therefore, a synonym for "unclean", is clear from the response from heaven:
"ἀπεκρίθη δὲ ἐκ δευτέρου φωνὴ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ Ἃ ὁ Θεὸς ἐκαθάρισεν σὺ μὴ κοίνου."

 

[posthuman]

Don't have to Peter did it in the verse we are looking at.
ὁ G3588 T-NSM
δὲ But G1161 CONJ
Πέτρος Peter G4074 N-NSM
εἶπεν Said, G2036 V-2AAI-3S
Μηδαμῶς In No Wise, G3365 ADV
κύριε Lord; G2962 N-VSM
ὅτι For G3754 CONJ
οὐδέποτε Never G3763 ADV
ἔφαγον Did I Eat G5315 V-2AAI-1S
πᾶν Anything G3956 A-ASN
κοινὸν Common G2839 A-ASN
ἢ Or G2228 PRT
ἀκάθαρτον Unclean. G169 A-ASN
(Act 10:14 TRi)

Let us look at the Greek word ἢ Or G2228 PRT. It is a Disjunctive Particle. It expresses a choice between two mutually exclusive possibilities. They lack any connection; they are exclusive.
From Strong's entry:
G2228
ἤ
ē
ay
A primary particle of distinction between two connected terms;

Couple that with the post to which you responded. Which brings to out attention that GOD never mentions the unclean only the common.


So where did Peter get the idea that some of the animals to which he was seeing in the vision were common?

Studyman has the answer to this. The Pharisees had their own set of laws did they not? Mark 7 makes this perfectly clear. That is the chapter to which Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for their man made laws. Here is an interesting read I found today.

https://messianicpublications.com/robert-roy/a-hebraic-perspective-on-peters-vision-acts-10/

Regardless

In the vision Peter was given 3 times by God he was commanded to eat every kind of bird and animal. If you have Peter under the old covenant at all you have God Himself commanding him to break it.

So do you have any other corroborating example of God demanding His servant to do evil?

 

[posthuman]

Regardless

In the vision Peter was given 3 times by God he was commanded to eat every kind of bird and animal. If you have Peter under the old covenant at all you have God Himself commanding him to break it.

So do you have any other corroborating example of God demanding His servant to do evil?

And are you cool with, for the sake of keeping believers in Christ under the Law of Moses, holding an interpretation that makes God evil?

Is this an acceptable trade-off for you?

Thanks

 

[Studyman]

Don't forget, it was the one strong in the faith that ate everything, and the one weak in the faith who ate only herbs.

Rom 14:
2) For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

You simply do not understand that we are not required to keep the law to be righteous before God.

This is a Bible discussion forum. I am speaking about what the Bible teaches, ALL of it, not just the parts that can be used to promote man's religious traditions that Jesus warned of.

The text doesn't say the "Strong" in Faith reject God's Words, break God's Laws. You preach this, the Pope preaches this, "Many" who come in Christ's Name" preach this, but Paul doesn't. Not in this Chapter for the weak in Faith, and not anywhere else.

1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

You imply two things here. #1. That the one is strong in faith. #2. That He lived in disobedience to God's Commandments. The text says neither.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Do you also imply here that the "one" who esteems every day alike is also the "strong" in Faith?

Is that how Jesus manifests Himself to me? I must first reject His Commandment then I will be able to see clearly? Where have I heard that before?

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (Willfully disobey His Word's) then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

I Don't believe this.

 

[gb9]

1st Timothy 4- Paul says- ( paraphrase ) everything God made is good, and nothing is to be rejected if received with thanksgiving.

so, tell us how, in your religion ( not Bible based Christianity, but your " version " of it. your opinion based theology has no credibility ), how everything does not mean everything and nothing does not mean nothing.

 

[Studyman]

Once again, can you simply and shortly answer these three questions? Just these, without any sauce around it:

a) prove that the Old Covenant from Sinai was given to all people (including me, a Central European) and not just to Abraham´s physical descendants - Israel.

b) prove that the Old Covenant was not temporal till Christ, but meant to be continuously valid even in the New Covenant.

c) do you know about any commandment "do not eat with Gentiles" in the OT?

A discussion is a two way deal. You ask questions and I answer to the best of my ability, actually whenever I can I let God answer with His Words, which is what I did on the rely you completely ignored.. You can disagree or agree, that is the decent way to discuss. But to just ignore as if I said nothing, that isn't very nice.

God said His instructions were given to both the Home born "Physical descendants of Abraham", and the Stranger, "every one else". I gave His Word which declares this truth. You are either a physical descendant of Abraham or a stranger, either way God said His instructions were made for you.

Jeremiah 31 is where Jesus, before becoming Flesh, foretold of the New Covenant. I let Him tell you what His New Covenant is. You are free to choose another version which more closely suits your religious traditions if you want. But the answer about what was Temporal was given to you from the Word's of the same Christ you claim to honor.

There is no commandment from God which forbids a Jew from sitting with, talking to, or eating with a Gentile. The Pharisees had created this doctrine and God revealed to Peter that it was a false teaching . As Jesus said about them; "Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men".

 

[shrume]

This is a Bible discussion forum. I am speaking about what the Bible teaches, ALL of it, not just the parts that can be used to promote man's religious traditions that Jesus warned of.

Studyman, I am convinced that you're the one promoting religious traditions.

The text doesn't say the "Strong" in Faith reject God's Words, break God's Laws. You preach this, the Pope preaches this, "Many" who come in Christ's Name" preach this, but Paul doesn't. Not in this Chapter for the weak in Faith, and not anywhere else.

1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

You imply two things here. #1. That the one is strong in faith. #2. That He lived in disobedience to God's Commandments. The text says neither.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Do you also imply here that the "one" who esteems every day alike is also the "strong" in Faith?

Yes, I believe that is what the text implies. We are no longer under the law. Read Galatians, and Romans.

Is that how Jesus manifests Himself to me? I must first reject His Commandment then I will be able to see clearly? Where have I heard that before?

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, (Willfully disobey His Word's) then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

I Don't believe this.

Gen 3:
22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

 

[gb9]

Studyman, I am convinced that you're the one promoting religious traditions.


Yes, I believe that is what the text implies. We are no longer under the law. Read Galatians, and Romans.


Gen 3:
22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

just for you and others who may not know studyman that well- he thinks the Pharisees were Satanists , and the thief on the cross that Christ forgave already knew and accepted Him as Lord, before they were crucified. just so you know .

 

[trofimus]

A discussion is a two way deal. You ask questions and I answer to the best of my ability, actually whenever I can I let God answer with His Words, which is what I did on the rely you completely ignored.. You can disagree or agree, that is the decent way to discuss. But to just ignore as if I said nothing, that isn't very nice.

God said His instructions were given to both the Home born "Physical descendants of Abraham", and the Stranger, "every one else". I gave His Word which declares this truth. You are either a physical descendant of Abraham or a stranger, either way God said His instructions were made for you.

Jeremiah 31 is where Jesus, before becoming Flesh, foretold of the New Covenant. I let Him tell you what His New Covenant is. You are free to choose another version which more closely suits your religious traditions if you want. But the answer about what was Temporal was given to you from the Word's of the same Christ you claim to honor.

There is no commandment from God which forbids a Jew from sitting with, talking to, or eating with a Gentile. The Pharisees had created this doctrine and God revealed to Peter that it was a false teaching . As Jesus said about them; "Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men".

I like and await systematic, short and logically formed posts. For example, if my question is composed of a), b), c), I expect to find a), b), c) in the answer, too. If its lost in long elaborations where I cannot find the answer to my questions, I ignore it.

Our style of communication is not compatible, so let us pause it for a time. I am currently doing many other things so my time must be effective, now.

 

[posthuman]

just for you and others who may not know studyman that well- he thinks the Pharisees were Satanists , and the thief on the cross that Christ forgave already knew and accepted Him as Lord, before they were crucified. just so you know .

An insightful man named Perry Ferrell wrote a song some decades ago, called 'idiots rule'

"you know that man you hate?
You look more like him, every day
Hi-dee-ho
Two good shoes won't save your soul!"

Am sure this is appropos to the situation we find ourselves in, if we'd admit it.