A Study of Acts 15 (by 119 Ministries)

[Yahshua]

Well I think I've finally found a sect of Christianity that I identify with. For anyone who needs a label for me, just call me a "119istariansee" I guess (....I tease).

But seriously though, this guy does a really good study on the debate found in Acts 15 regarding Salvation, Obedience to Yah's law and Legalism that I think will really help believers here to understand the judgment that was passed at that council. His illustrated charts really help maintain the context of all parties involved. It's around 40 mins but flows pretty quickly.

Disclaimer: I have only vetted a few of their videos and the group's statement of faith, chief of which states that "salvation is by faith alone".

 

[BenFTW]

I'm nine minutes and twenty seconds in, and so far it is informative, but I disagree with the false dichotomy 119 ministries presents at this point. They state that "one position has to be correct, and the other position has to be wrong" (between the two groups), but in fact both positions are wrong. This is why even the apostles and elders (along with the Holy Spirit) didn't put forth the whole Law of Moses (as a unit) upon the Gentiles but only four specific laws (due to the fact that Moses was preached all the time, it was customary in society, they didn't want to offend, and so on). Probably a number of reasons such as health, and not causing a brother to stumble.

119 is being slick, trying to paint it as that the Pharisees which believed were believers practicing "obedience" as opposed to believers who happened to be Torah observant. The distinction is important, and we must also realize that the Pharisees that believed seemed to think it was necessary to be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses (not for salvation) but I guess, in their minds obedience. Yet, as we continue to read Acts 15 the apostles differ strongly saying in verse 24 that certain men were subverting souls saying that ye must be circumcised and keep the law to which they "gave no such commandment." They end up only giving four laws (as opposed to the hundreds in the Law of Moses).

I will probably continue the video to see where it leads, but the false dichotomy made me want to make a post. It isn't that one is right and the other wrong, but the third party (apostles and elders) were right, in that they corrected both groups.

 

[mailmandan]

I googled 119 ministries and immediately came across this blog that stated problems with this ministry:

HERESY OF 119 MINISTRIES
February 27, 2013By pastormikehoggard
A few of the heresies of 119 Ministries. They are teachers of the Hebrew Roots cult. From their video “What is the Gospel, part 1”

“The message in the instructions of Christ is also taught in the week of unleavened bread. It is to ‘follow me’ or, TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, since he was the Word of God in the flesh, He is saying ‘Live in obedience to the commandments.'”

“We are to walk as He walked, which is the Torah, the law of God.”

“There is no imputing of righteousness on those that do not practice walking in obedience to the commandments.”

“Faithfulness to God means walking in obedience to the commandments…so if the gospel reveals the righteousness of God, then the gospel must be the message of the Scripture which tells us to obey the commandments.” - Red flag!

“The righteousness of God as taught by the Torah is one and the same as the righteousness that Paul preached.”

“The righteousness that was revealed through the law at Mt Sinai, is the righteousness by faith that Paul is speaking of….Righteousness is obtained by faithful obedience to the Creator.”

“Salvation is by faithfulness, obedience to the commandments and life is obtained by obedient fidelity to the Lord.” - Red flag!

These statements were made by twisting, isolating, retranslating, and outright lying about New Testament verses. 119 Ministries truly appear as sheep, but inwardly are ravening wolves. - https://pastormikehoggard.com/2013/02/27/heresy-of-119-ministries/

I watched the video below and heard for myself that Pastor Mike Hoggard made some good points!

The man in the video said - "The commandments are the part of the gospel that is to be obeyed and faithfulness to obeying the commands is the prerequisite to righteousness."

The man in the video also said - "Those who are in Christ are not found righteous because of Christ, but because of obeying the commandments and not just some of the commandments, but all of the commandments."

119 ministries clearly teaches a "different" gospel.

*The gospel is the "good news" of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that BELIEVES.. (Romans 1:16). *To "believe" the gospel is to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation.

On another blog I read - "Biblical truth matters and do not be deceived by these modern day Judaizer/Torah Keepers types like 119 Ministries." Sounds like sound advice to me!

119 ministries mixes the old and new covenants and they also play the same game in salvation as every other false Hebrew Roots type movements of Christendom (including SDA's and Armstrongism). They profess to teach that salvation is by grace through faith (and not works based salvation) but then redefine this in a way that is contrary to the gospel. Even though they deny this, they teach that salvation is by "grace plus law, faith plus works." Their doctrine of salvation is a subtle mixture of law and grace that is a perversion of the gospel (Galatians 1:6-9).

 

[KJV1611]

It’s another works based cult, stay away from it.

 

[JaumeJ]

Unless the faithful learn of Jesus Christ and not from the doctrines of men, they are in a cult.

Name the denomination Jesus Christ teaches, and I will recant. Jesus teaches the faith of Abraham, nothing more, nothing less, although He does elaborate on our understanding at every turn.

 

[Hevosmies]

The 119 ministries is trash. Absolute junk ministry.
Pharisee judaizers. RUN from this.

These guys teach circumcision STILL in the new covenant. They dont know anything. Brother Dan already explained it well!

 

[Adstar]

This is one of the Works salvation leaning Hebrew roots organizations... They are denying the righteousness by believing in the Atonement of the Lord Jesus and have turned back to the vain and destined to fail,, attempting to establish righteousness in the flesh by Law doing...

But such doctrines massage the pride of people who want to achieve things for themselves by their own efforts.. They don't want anyone else to save them.. They want to achieve it by their own and boast before God about their ""wonderful works""..

Matthew 7: KJV
22 "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? {23} And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

 

[Yahshua]

So far the only one who has operated like we are commanded to do - to prove all things - is Ben, as far as I've read. I did skim. Even though I don't agree with your position may Yah bless you Ben. Says a lot. The majority of the rest of you can virtually yell and scream and try to scare other readers away all you like but it won't stop them from considering the study.

To those who need to smear: be mindful what spirit you're operating in.

To all believers: Beware of those who are not willing to reason in the scriptures and prove all things like we're instructed, but who need to smear. Remember there was a group who did that *constantly* to Christ because he challenged their orthodoxy and he called them a "brood of vipers".

But not all of the pharisees were vipers. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea weren't. And also one such pharisee was chief of vipers who became the one the champions of our lord and his name was Paul, who *even continued to identify himself as one* in his letters. (Phillipians 3:5)

So the majority of christianity follows the letters of a self-identified pharisee...which shows that we are to focus on the spirit operating in a person and not shun them because of a name or label or sect.

Likewise, not everyone here are operating in that spirit. But beware of those who are because it's the very same spirit of the ones who killed our Messiah. Those are who you are to stay away from and ignore.

A true student dives into the subject matter like Ben did. Unafraid to put his understanding up to scrutany and ready to give a reply to it according to the hope that is in him.

He's also willing to operate in the rules of this forum and actually be respectful the OP and the topic of the thread: the study of Acts 15 as presented by the video. It's one thing for a thread to branch off into side convos naturally, but it's a gross violation of basic rules here not to even address the topic at the outset. I didn't start a thread about a group but about a subject (then giving the source of that study for full disclosure).

So if you don't want to address the video in the OP, then be respectful and keep silent. Ignore the thread.

----

So I'll reply to you in a little while Ben as I'm on my phone right now, but Yah bless you.

Come let us reason together!

 

[Studyman]

This is one of the Works salvation leaning Hebrew roots organizations... They are denying the righteousness by believing in the Atonement of the Lord Jesus and have turned back to the vain and destined to fail,, attempting to establish righteousness in the flesh by Law doing...

But such doctrines massage the pride of people who want to achieve things for themselves by their own efforts.. They don't want anyone else to save them.. They want to achieve it by their own and boast before God about their ""wonderful works""..

Matthew 7: KJV
22 "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? {23} And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

It seems prudent to point out that the works of these self proclaimed Christians were in "Transgression of God's Commandments" and that is why the Christ rejected them. "Ye that work iniquity", Sin, Transgress God's Commandments. It's right there in the verse.

Everyone has works, to deny this is blindness. The question is, are these works "wrought of God" or are they religious traditions of man. In the case of those in the above verse, their works were not wrought in God, but in the minds of man. Even though they gave the Christ all the credit.

John 3:
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

there were Mainstream Preachers of Christ's time who also had works, but their "works" were the doctrines and traditions of men.

Matt. 15:
7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men (Not God as many who come in Christ's name preach)

The same Lord told those in His Time who transgressed God's commandments by their own religious traditions;

Matt. 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

But of course a religion which convinces folks they are already saved, and therefore no need to "come to the light" to make their "deeds" manifest whether they come from God or man, is in no need of these and other scriptures.

So when the Messiah says "These you should have done, and not left the others undone, it is swept under the rug and omitted from their religion.

So given other scriptures, it seems it wasn't the "wonderful works in Christ's name" that is the reason the Christ rejected them. But His instructions that they "Omitted" from their religion is why, even though they called the Christ their Lord, He rejected them.

So it is true man is mostly too prideful to reject mainstream religious doctrines and traditions. But to those who humble themselves to His Word's and His teaching, over the religious traditions of the land, these are those who He will manifest Himself to.

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 "these you should have done and not left the other undone" is pretty important it seems to the Christ of the Bible.

For a man to humble himself to God's Word's, All of them as the Christ instructs, is not trying to save himself, just the opposite, it is trusting the Christ to save him by "believing" in Him enough to follow His instructions over the religious traditions of men.

There are those who have "come to the light" and doing so has exposed many religious traditions which are not Wrought in God.

And of course, because they have the Love of God in them, they wish to warn their brothers. But as the Scriptures have pointed out since Cain and Abel, God's truth is not well received by religious man.

 

[garee]

I think many forget that there are two kinds of law . One seen the temporal. The other not see, the eternal.

The letter of the law as the words found in the Bible, called the book of the law or the book of prophecy which is after to man . And the law of faith hidden from natural man that gives us the eternal unseen spiritual understanding, in parables or proverbs .The signified or metaphorical language of God.

Right from the beginning of chapter 15 that division is shown . Those who demanded others to circumcise themselves walking after the flesh and not the unseen Spirit of Christ. They where not looking to the law of faith in resect to the eternal but were in respect to that seen the temporal .

Circumcision is a ceremonial law (not a moral law) and like all ceremonial laws as shadows they point ahead to our suffering Savior as our bloody husband, Christ. This was fulfilled at the time of the first century "reformation".

Note … (purple in parenthesis) my added opinon

The Holy Ghost this signifying,(metaphorical language ) that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:Which was a figure( parable, same Greek word) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances,( ceremonial laws) imposed on them until the time of reformation.Hebrews 9:8-10

As Moses was sent (apostle) back to Egypt in respect the sons of God as those that are led by the Spirit of God to be dilerved. Moses must of forgotten or refused to obey the ceremonial law in respect to his own child. And the lord sought to kill Moses. But rather had mercy on him and moved Zipporah who obeyed the Lord.

Again God sent Moses

And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. Exodus4:23

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him.Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son,( their first born) and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision. Exodus4:24-27

The bloody husband was in respect to the Lord in whom she did obey .Not Moses seen.

All of the old testament saints looked ahead to the suffering of Christ beforehand as the time of reformation and the glory that followed .Again all of the ceremonial laws of faith were shadows of the good thing that did come and the glory that followed as promised.... their grave were opened and entered the promised land as the first resurrection. There was nothing to hold them in that temporal place any longer they received the end of their new faith just as us today. We look back to our bloody husband they looked ahead.

Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into1 Peter1:9-12

 

[garee]

But not all of the pharisees were vipers. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea weren't. And also one such pharisee was chief of vipers who became the one the champions of our lord and his name was Paul, who *even continued to identify himself as one* in his letters. (Phillipians 3:5)

So the majority of christianity follows the letters of a self-identified pharisee...which shows that we are to focus on the spirit operating in a person and not shun them because of a name or label or sect

.

Good point. If I could offer, as born again they were distinguished after a new sect called the Nazarene sect. The first sect mentioned of this side of the cross.

Saul who name was changed to Paul just as his sect was changed. He became a leader of his new sect. Who then followed the law of God as it is written and not the "law of the fathers" as oral traditions of men that does make the "law of our Father" in heaven to no effect. Two opposing traditions.

Acts 24:5
For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

In that way no man can serve two teaching masters .Hate the one love the other, or vice versa


Mark 7:13Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[Yahshua]

.

Good point. If I could offer, as born again they were distinguished after a new sect called the Nazarene sect. The first sect mentioned of this side of the cross.

Saul who name was changed to Paul just as his sect was changed. He became a leader of his new sect. Who then followed the law of God as it is written and not the "law of the fathers" as oral traditions of men that does make the "law of our Father" in heaven to no effect. Two opposing traditions.

Acts 24:5
For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:

In that way no man can serve two teaching masters .Hate the one love the other, or vice versa


Mark 7:13Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

With respect garee, it's Christian lore that Saul's name was changed to Paul (Acts 13:9) upon conversion. Man-made tradition has injected that idea into the faith with regard to Paul. His name was always Saul. The text simply says that he was also called Paul, the same way the messiah was also called Christ, Thomas was also called Didymus and John's name was also Mark (as detailed in Acts 15:37). That parenthetical comment was for the reader's benefit to understand to whom the name "Paul" also referred from that point forward. There's no text detailing that Yah or Christ changed his name. In fact, Christ still referred to him as "Saul" when he commanded Ananias to go to him after Christ met with him. So while what you say would be reasonable as a proof/conclusion in relation to Acts 15, it's just not supported by the account.

 

[Yahshua]

I'm nine minutes and twenty seconds in, and so far it is informative, but I disagree with the false dichotomy 119 ministries presents at this point. They state that "one position has to be correct, and the other position has to be wrong" (between the two groups), but in fact both positions are wrong. This is why even the apostles and elders (along with the Holy Spirit) didn't put forth the whole Law of Moses (as a unit) upon the Gentiles but only four specific laws (due to the fact that Moses was preached all the time, it was customary in society, they didn't want to offend, and so on). Probably a number of reasons such as health, and not causing a brother to stumble.

119 is being slick, trying to paint it as that the Pharisees which believed were believers practicing "obedience" as opposed to believers who happened to be Torah observant. The distinction is important, and we must also realize that the Pharisees that believed seemed to think it was necessary to be circumcised and follow the Law of Moses (not for salvation) but I guess, in their minds obedience. Yet, as we continue to read Acts 15 the apostles differ strongly saying in verse 24 that certain men were subverting souls saying that ye must be circumcised and keep the law to which they "gave no such commandment." They end up only giving four laws (as opposed to the hundreds in the Law of Moses).

I will probably continue the video to see where it leads, but the false dichotomy made me want to make a post. It isn't that one is right and the other wrong, but the third party (apostles and elders) were right, in that they corrected both groups.

But Ben a judge in a matter can't then also be a third party to that same matter. That's a conflict of interest both biblically and secularly. We only have the text to establish motives. If this was the transcript of a modern case we can't inject intent beyond what is detailed, said in relation to what the apostles intended. Didn't the elders share the reason behind their final judgment?

In Acts 15:1, these weren't believers as the text later described the sect of Pharisees were in verse 5. So we can conclude two things:

1) These particular pharisees in verse 5 were known by the council

2) These particular pharisees in verse 5 believed in Salvation through Christ

But the group who were "outsiders" were the "certain men". So the concluding letter sent to the gentiles was about those certain men, not about the believing Pharisees and not about Paul & Barnabas.


Acts 15:1
And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.


Acts 15:24 [bracket mine]
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain [men which came down from Judea] which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:


The context of the letter was of "certain men regarding obeying Moses for salvation", not of the sect of Pharisees that stood up. The gentiles wouldn't have known about that group.

----

May I also add that even the council's meeting to decide this matter in Acts 15 was in accordance to the very law given by Moses. These NT believers were obeying the instructions in the law given by Moses on how to settle disputes.

 

[Hevosmies]

So far the only one who has operated like we are commanded to do - to prove all things - is Ben, as far as I've read. I did skim. Even though I don't agree with your position may Yah bless you Ben. Says a lot. The majority of the rest of you can virtually yell and scream and try to scare other readers away all you like but it won't stop them from considering the study.

To those who need to smear: be mindful what spirit you're operating in.

To all believers: Beware of those who are not willing to reason in the scriptures and prove all things like we're instructed, but who need to smear. Remember there was a group who did that *constantly* to Christ because he challenged their orthodoxy and he called them a "brood of vipers".

So if you don't want to address the video in the OP, then be respectful and keep silent. Ignore the thread.

Jesus called them brood of vipers, because they were.

Of course I will not respect 119 junkyard ministry, are you serious? You expect me to respect guys with a false gospel?
If you want to "identify" with that then go ahead, you have been warned, I already KNEW you were identifying with that from your posts in other threads and your fake hebrew name (It didn't exist in biblical times and was made up by people who don't even know hebrew, check genuine hebrew scholars not sacred namers for more info, here is one real scholar).

I find it amazing that gentiles who dont speak hebrew are trying to act like jews, using hebrew slang (poorly pronounced/written obviously) and are trying to hebrewnize everything, yet the genuine Messianic Jews agree with US! They agree with OUR interpretation of Acts 15, they agree with the "orthodoxy" as you so alluded to it. Wonder why that is?
Its because its the PLAIN reading of the text.

I will now address the video in the OP, and wont keep silent:

These guys point out the two groups in the beginning, one unbelievers saying you must be circumcised to be saved, one group of believing pharisees saying you must be circumcised and keep the torah. They then claim the latter group is simply "obedience after coming to faith." But ask these bozos and they will tell you AFTER you have faith, if you dont obey (in this case if you dont keep the TORAH) you will lose your salvation.
So in the end its the SAME as group 1, justification by WORKS of the law of moses.

AND:

Because these guys are deceived, they dont care about what the rest of the new testament teaches. And here is what it teaches about the subject discussed in Acts 15 (which is a transitional book btw):

1Cor 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. [<- How is this possible if they are supposed to keep the torah and get circumcised LATER? DEBUNKED!] Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
1 Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Gal 5:11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased.
Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
Php 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Col 3:11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
Gal 2:3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: [Why didnt Paul tell him to get circumcised later, as the heretics from 119 ministries claim? Why wasnt he keeping the torah?]

They are simply trying to get away with being judaizers by saying, "we dont believe your saved by keeping the torah!!" but then turn around and say "Oh but after you got faith, you got to keep the torah... or else."
H-e-r-e-s-y.
Shut it down boys. Its been DEBUNKED, REFUTED, 1 Corinthians 7:18 refutes this entire video and these fake ministers. Man this subject gets me fired up. I cant wait for Jesus to come back.

 

[Yahshua]

Jesus called them brood of vipers, because they were.

Of course I will not respect 119 junkyard ministry, are you serious? You expect me to respect guys with a false gospel?
If you want to "identify" with that then go ahead, you have been warned, I already KNEW you were identifying with that from your posts in other threads and your fake hebrew name (It didn't exist in biblical times and was made up by people who don't even know hebrew, check genuine hebrew scholars not sacred namers for more info, here is one real scholar).

I find it amazing that gentiles who dont speak hebrew are trying to act like jews, using hebrew slang (poorly pronounced/written obviously) and are trying to hebrewnize everything, yet the genuine Messianic Jews agree with US! They agree with OUR interpretation of Acts 15, they agree with the "orthodoxy" as you so alluded to it. Wonder why that is?
Its because its the PLAIN reading of the text.

I will now address the video in the OP, and wont keep silent:

These guys point out the two groups in the beginning, one unbelievers saying you must be circumcised to be saved, one group of believing pharisees saying you must be circumcised and keep the torah. They then claim the latter group is simply "obedience after coming to faith." But ask these bozos and they will tell you AFTER you have faith, if you dont obey (in this case if you dont keep the TORAH) you will lose your salvation.
So in the end its the SAME as group 1, justification by WORKS of the law of moses.

AND:

Because these guys are deceived, they dont care about what the rest of the new testament teaches. And here is what it teaches about the subject discussed in Acts 15 (which is a transitional book btw):

1Cor 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. [<- How is this possible if they are supposed to keep the torah and get circumcised LATER? DEBUNKED!] Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
1 Cor 7:19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.
Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Gal 5:11 And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased.
Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
Php 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Col 3:11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
Gal 2:3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: [Why didnt Paul tell him to get circumcised later, as the heretics from 119 ministries claim? Why wasnt he keeping the torah?]

They are simply trying to get away with being judaizers by saying, "we dont believe your saved by keeping the torah!!" but then turn around and say "Oh but after you got faith, you got to keep the torah... or else."
H-e-r-e-s-y.
Shut it down boys. Its been DEBUNKED, REFUTED, 1 Corinthians 7:18 refutes this entire video and these fake ministers. Man this subject gets me fired up. I cant wait for Jesus to come back.

I expect you to respect me and the subject of the OP (a study of Acts 15) as per the rules of this website. Either reply to the video's study or reply to the content of Acts 15. You're new here and I'd prefer you to have a long career here.

 

[garee]

With respect garee, it's Christian lore that Saul's name was changed to Paul (Acts 13:9) upon conversion. Man-made tradition has injected that idea into the faith with regard to Paul. His name was always Saul. The text simply says that he was also called Paul, the same way the messiah was also called Christ, Thomas was also called Didymus and John's name was also Mark (as detailed in Acts 15:37). That parenthetical comment was for the reader's benefit to understand to whom the name "Paul" also referred from that point forward. There's no text detailing that Yah or Christ changed his name. In fact, Christ still referred to him as "Saul" when he commanded Ananias to go to him after Christ met with him. So while what you say would be reasonable as a proof/conclusion in relation to Acts 15, it's just not supported by the account.

Thanks, for the reply.With respect as a brother
I was not trying to insinuate that even though there is a difference in the meaning of the word .So its not like Elijah after the Hebrew and Elias after the Greek . Saul means "asked of God", while Paul, means little. Different denominations though. One walked by faith the other by sight. One killed the misperceived competition as in out of sight out of mind. While the other turned their swords into plow shares and offered the gospel as it is written in the law and the prophets.

 

[Hevosmies]

I expect you to respect me and the subject of the OP (a study of Acts 15) as per the rules of this website. Either reply to the video's study or reply to the content of Acts 15. You're new here and I'd prefer you to have a long career here.

but i did reply to the OP and the video: Look i will reply to it it again in a shorter manner:

I posted scripture, read the part that says "I will now address the video in the OP" and continue from then on. Acts is a transitional book, why cant we take a look at the rest of the N.T.? Because it doesnt jive with the 119 ministries doctrine thats why.

But since I was long winded, I can also refute their judaizer heresy by ONE VERSE. Thats short and sweet.

1Cor 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

There. ^How is this possible if they are supposed to keep the torah and get circumcised LATER?

D-e-b-u-n-k-e-d. Next.

 

[posthuman]

But Ben a judge in a matter can't then also be a third party to that same matter.

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who can resist His will?” ​

But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?
(Romans 9:19-20)​

 

[Yahshua]

but i did reply to the OP and the video: Look i will reply to it it again in a shorter manner:

I posted scripture, read the part that says "I will now address the video in the OP" and continue from then on. Acts is a transitional book, why cant we take a look at the rest of the N.T.? Because it doesnt jive with the 119 ministries doctrine thats why.

But since I was long winded, I can also refute their judaizer heresy by ONE VERSE. Thats short and sweet.

1Cor 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

There. ^How is this possible if they are supposed to keep the torah and get circumcised LATER?

D-e-b-u-n-k-e-d. Next.

So far I've read another post about 119 ministries. If the study was conducted by a group call "Johnathan's ministries" I still would've posted it because of the study on Acts 15. Feel free to look at the rest of the NT in a thread you start about "the rest of the NT". OR...stick to the topic of this thread. Speak about Acts 15 in your next post here or about something in the book of Acts related to chapter 15. Last time I'll ask you.

 

[garee]

I find it amazing that gentiles who dont speak hebrew are trying to act like jews, using hebrew slang (poorly pronounced/written obviously) and are trying to hebrewnize everything, yet the genuine Messianic Jews agree with US!

Inward Jew as a Christian, or outward Jew in respect to the flesh ?

It would seem you might be trying to hebrewnize. Those are God's word. He is neither Hebrew or Gentile, male nor female. He used the metaphor brood of viper. It simply means those who bring false prophecy as the poison of asps serpents Serpent to represent the father of lies and not the flesh of a Jew.