S
sparkman
Guest
Simple enough..why don't Judaizers believe it? I bet they think the jailer was instructed on the Torah prior to being saved 
Attachments
Last edited:
What Peter is not saying: "Nobody can keep the law of Moses, so let's just tell the Gentiles that they don't have to keep it except for these 3 commandments."
What Peter is saying: "We don't want to overwhelm the gentiles with the weight of the law, so let's just start them out with these 3, and then they can learn the rest gradually in synogogues since Moses is preached every sabbath."
Make sense?
@Yahshua
Circumcision is clearly identified with the law of Moses by Christ:
John 7:23 [SUP]23 [/SUP]If on the Sabbath a man receives circumcision, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me because on the Sabbath I made a man's whole body well
It was the one-time entry sign as a member of the Old Covenant.
In an earlier post you asserted that it was not part of the law of Moses. Perhaps you feel qualified to correct Jesus on this matter?![]()
So saying The Sabbath was a sign of the "Old Covenant" is false. The Sabbath is a law that's hasn't been put away.
And to say circumcision was a sign of the "Old Covenant" is also false because Christ calls it the greatest commandment of the covenant, which he reaffirms in his "New" Testament.
Deuteronomy 30:6
The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live.
Matthew 22:36-37
"Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"
Jesus replied: "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'
Next, circumcision wasn't a sign of the covenant between "God and Israel". It was a sign of the covenant between "God and Abraham". Completely different covenant than the one made with God and Israel.
The Covenant between God and Abraham was regarding "Abraham's promised seed and the land God promised him".
In addition, notice the relative importance that is being placed on circumcision over the Sabbath. A man was not even able to observe the Sabbath appropriately without being physically circumcised. That is why it was so important to circumcise them. Circumcision clearly too precedence over the Sabbath.
The argument here would be that the Sabbath itself was a ceremonial law, on a lesser level than circumcision. Almost all Christians would agree that physical circumcision is no longer required, so what does that say about the Sabbath?
By the way, I would contend that the identifying mark of a Christian is not the Sabbath, but the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the seal of God's ownership in Scripture, not the Sabbath. The Sabbath did serve as an identifying sign of individuals under the Old Covenant, but not the New Covenant.
I would challenge you to read Sabbath in Christ by Dale Ratzlaff. It clears up many of the fallacies of Judaizers.
Rom 8:9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.
II Cor 1:21-22 21And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, 22and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.[SUP]d[/SUP]
Let me clarify so there's no confusion (and this is why I made a distinction between terms in my post). My emphasis is on the words "Old" and "Covenant". The Sabbath is not sign of the "Old Covenant" (between God and Israel), but a sign of who God's people are and to identify who our God is.
Ezekiel 20:19-20
'I am Yah your God; walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and observe them. 20' Sanctify My Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am Yah your God.'
I think Christ would appreciate me keeping his record as it is exactly laid out for us. I never asserted circumcision wasn't part of God's Law. Note what I said regarding circumcision.
Truly, Circumcision is identified with the law of Moses. But no it wasn't a sign of the Old Covenant (as I take you mean the "old Covenant" as meaning the one established on Mt. Sinai between God and Israel). Circumcision was not...was not...a sign of the covenant made on "Mt. Sinai". It was a sign of the covenant made well over 400 years before Mt. Sinai with Abraham and God ("Abrahamic covenant"), and was *incorporated* into the law of God (called "the law of Moses" by Christ as a reference), because the Israelites were descendants of Abraham and were ALREADY required to follow it.
Genesis 17:9-12
9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.
11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
That's not Christ's point at all with regard to circumcision. He was making a point about the Sabbath because the Pharisees were claiming he was breaking the Sabbath, when he never did. Christ's point was "if a man's body (skin) can be broken during the Sabbath in honor of the Law [Christ's premise being 'such was allowed to be done on the Sabbath'], how can you be mad at me for *restoring* a man's body on the same Holy Day?"
There was one specific person who was allowed to work on the Sabbath, in fact, who was **commanded** to work on the Sabbath. The Priest of God. Just like today pastors, deacons, and church staffs work on Sunday in service to God. The Priest was required to work on the Sabbath. One such work he performed was the circumcision of male children in public ceremony.
What the Pharisees did not recognize in Christ (and his apostles) was that he was - in fact - a Priest of God. And so they challenged him at every turn for his (supposed) violation of the Sabbath when he, and he specifically, could do never do such thing since he was (a) a priest "doing [our father's] work" on his holy day, and (b) required to remain sinless.
Appreciate the challenge and contention. It keeps me sharp. But I rather follow he who is Lord of the Sabbath.
...But I will say this regarding the Holy Spirit being the seal over the Sabbath. Have you ever wondered why the Holy Spirit was given on the same exact High Sabbath as the time when God's Law was given to the people of God at Mt. Sinai (on Pentecost)? The Holy Spirit IS God's law in person ("for we know that the law is spiritual" Romans 7:14). The Holy Spirit would never contradict a commandment shouted out of God's own mouth because he's the one that gave it.
So I have no problem with saying the Holy Spirit is the seal as scripture says (Ephesians 1:13) because that Spirit will ALWAYS direct the believer to being obedient to God's Commandments, not direct them to disobey God.
Test every spirit because there are many counterfeits. Even the elect could be deceived if it were possible.
Questions for Judaizers:
The nation of Israel marched out of Egypt for a month before arriving at the Wilderness of Sin, where God taught them about the Sabbath.If the Sabbath was a moral absolute, why would God march them for a month, with no recorded breaks on the Sabbath?
Questions for Judaizers:
Judaizers commonly claim that God’s law never changes, however, animal sacrifices and physical circumcision are clearly not required anymore.If you claim that God’s law never changes, how do you reconcile the fact that animal sacrifices and physical circumcision are not required anymore?
Question for Judaizers:
Paul said he was convinced that all things were clean in Romans 14:14.Are you more knowledgeable about the Law than Paul was?
Question for Judaizers:
Mark 7:19 says that Christ declared all foods clean.If Christ declared all foods clean, why are you teaching that certain meats are unclean?
Questions for Judaizers:
Priests worked very hard on the Sabbath with animal sacrifices that were required. Isn’t this an example of a contradiction, if one holds that keeping the Sabbath is a moral absolute?
teaching new believers that they need to be circumcised in the flesh to be saved is considered false teaching by the site, admins, mods and owner. if that's truly what you believe i would advise you to move on to next topic, as constant non orthodox teaching will eventually lead to a ban and we dont want to see any banned if possible.
I'm not sure the Holy Spirit would lead someone to name call and label. That's an accusatory spirit...and there's only one accuser of the brethren. Just saying, we need to know what spirit we're of.
Would you requires your children to follow a rule you haven't taught them yet? That's cruel.
I still have a sacrifice for sin that satisfies that law, he's called The Christ. The problem wasn't the law (of sacrifice), it was that the blood of animals could never do the job perfectly to completion like Christ could. And in requirement of that law, he took his blood into heaven to do the job that law required to is fullness.
Regarding *physical* circumcision; just like the temple, its furnishings, animals blood were all shadows (i.e. representative forms of the real version), likewise was *physical* circumcision a shadow (i.e. representative form) of the real version which is "Love God with all you heart and all your soul and all your might" (Deut 30:6 & Romans 2:29). THAT is true circumcision. Circumcision of the heart.
I don't know personally. Maybe? He IS dead resting in peace, while I'm still alive. And Daniel prophesied that knowledge would increase in the end times. God doesn't change and Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. They're still teaching...still winning souls. The harvest is plenty and the laborers are few so nothing's stopping God from downloading further understanding into any new worker for his harvest.
Christ didn't say that. He said "it's what comes OUT of the mouth that makes a man unclean". Such as slandering a person or making false accusations; name calling, etc.
No. It's not a contradiction. Priests are allowed to work on the Sabbath as servants of God. That's articulated in God's law.
Hey Prodigal could you please quote who you're referring to regarding this warning because I haven't read neither Eliwood nor I promoting such a false teaching. But maybe I missed the post you're referring to? There's only been another who's been falsely accusing us of claiming that, when we've clearly said salvation is by faith through grace, and that sanctification is through obedience to God's commandments; that we're justification only through faith in Christ
Circumcision is of the heart like scripture says in Deut 30:6 (when one loves God with their whole being), and like Paul says in Romans 2:29.
Ultimately I hope that the posts are read in detail before such a final action is taken regardless of your decision one way or the other.
Edit (Correction): Salvation is by grace through faith, and that sanctification is through obedience to God's commandments; but that we're justified through faith in Christ.
I'm not sure the Holy Spirit would lead someone to name call and label. That's an accusatory spirit...and there's only one accuser of the brethren. Just saying, we need to know what spirit we're of.
Would you requires your children to follow a rule you haven't taught them yet? That's cruel.
I still have a sacrifice for sin that satisfies that law, he's called The Christ. The problem wasn't the law (of sacrifice), it was that the blood of animals could never do the job perfectly to completion like Christ could. And in requirement of that law, he took his blood into heaven to do the job that law required to is fullness.
Regarding *physical* circumcision; just like the temple, its furnishings, animals blood were all shadows (i.e. representative forms of the real version), likewise was *physical* circumcision a shadow (i.e. representative form) of the real version which is "Love God with all you heart and all your soul and all your might" (Deut 30:6 & Romans 2:29). THAT is true circumcision. Circumcision of the heart.
I don't know personally. Maybe? He IS dead resting in peace, while I'm still alive. And Daniel prophesied that knowledge would increase in the end times. God doesn't change and Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. They're still teaching...still winning souls. The harvest is plenty and the laborers are few so nothing's stopping God from downloading further understanding into any new worker for his harvest.
Christ didn't say that. He said "it's what comes OUT of the mouth that makes a man unclean". Such as slandering a person or making false accusations; name calling, etc.
No. It's not a contradiction. Priests are allowed to work on the Sabbath as servants of God. That's articulated in God's law.
Hey Prodigal could you please quote who you're referring to regarding this warning because I haven't read neither Eliwood nor I promoting such a false teaching. But maybe I missed the post you're referring to? There's only been another who's been falsely accusing us of claiming that, when we've clearly said salvation is by faith through grace, and that sanctification is through obedience to God's commandments; that we're justification only through faith in Christ.
Circumcision is of the heart like scripture says in Deut 30:6 (when one loves God with their whole being), and like Paul says in Romans 2:29.
Ultimately I hope that the posts are read in detail before such a final action is taken regardless of your decision one way or the other.
@Cigarman
That's what's known as "verse plucking". Quoting a random verse from Paul's letters (which Peter warned would be misused by the ignorant and unstable) and making up your own interpretation for it, instead of using the interpretation given.
Here's the scripture you just mentioned:
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Just because Paul mentions "circumcision of the heart" you automatically assume that means we should throw away physical circumcision, even though the scripture says no such thing. That's unstability.
It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. (Luke 16:17)
I'm not sure the Holy Spirit would lead someone to name call and label. That's an accusatory spirit...and there's only one accuser of the brethren. Just saying, we need to know what spirit we're of.
Would you requires your children to follow a rule you haven't taught them yet? That's cruel.
I still have a sacrifice for sin that satisfies that law, he's called The Christ. The problem wasn't the law (of sacrifice), it was that the blood of animals could never do the job perfectly to completion like Christ could. And in requirement of that law, he took his blood into heaven to do the job that law required to is fullness.
Regarding *physical* circumcision; just like the temple, its furnishings, animals blood were all shadows (i.e. representative forms of the real version), likewise was *physical* circumcision a shadow (i.e. representative form) of the real version which is "Love God with all you heart and all your soul and all your might" (Deut 30:6 & Romans 2:29). THAT is true circumcision. Circumcision of the heart.
I don't know personally. Maybe? He IS dead resting in peace, while I'm still alive. And Daniel prophesied that knowledge would increase in the end times. God doesn't change and Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. They're still teaching...still winning souls. The harvest is plenty and the laborers are few so nothing's stopping God from downloading further understanding into any new worker for his harvest.
Christ didn't say that. He said "it's what comes OUT of the mouth that makes a man unclean". Such as slandering a person or making false accusations; name calling, etc.
No. It's not a contradiction. Priests are allowed to work on the Sabbath as servants of God. That's articulated in God's law.
Hey Prodigal could you please quote who you're referring to regarding this warning because I haven't read neither Eliwood nor I promoting such a false teaching. But maybe I missed the post you're referring to? There's only been another who's been falsely accusing us of claiming that, when we've clearly said salvation is by faith through grace, and that sanctification is through obedience to God's commandments; that we're justification only through faith in Christ.
Circumcision is of the heart like scripture says in Deut 30:6 (when one loves God with their whole being), and like Paul says in Romans 2:29.
Ultimately I hope that the posts are read in detail before such a final action is taken regardless of your decision one way or the other.
It's not about Law; it's about Belief in Christ and love.
-JGIG
I agree JGIG. It is about Christ and love. But here's your problem. Like a lot of "christians" nowadays, you're stuck on milk. Accepting christ as your savior is only the beginning of your walk with him. From the point on, you're supposed to grow in knowledge of how Christ lived, and follow his example. So now, it's time to stop sucking on your bottle (figuratively speaking) and move up to solid foods. Try the steak of God's word. Obedience to his commandments.
"This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds." (Hebrews 10:16)
But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! (2 Peter 3:18)
If you're walking in the spirit, the spirit will lead you to follow God's commandments. If you're walking in the flesh, you will be hostile to God, and reject his commandments.
The carnal mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to the law of God, nor can it. (Romans 8:7)
View attachment 120545
He must have abolished love too, since obedience to the law is how you show your love for Him.....
I'm not sure the Holy Spirit would lead someone to name call and label. That's an accusatory spirit...and there's only one accuser of the brethren. Just saying, we need to know what spirit we're of.
Would you requires your children to follow a rule you haven't taught them yet? That's cruel.
I still have a sacrifice for sin that satisfies that law, he's called The Christ. The problem wasn't the law (of sacrifice), it was that the blood of animals could never do the job perfectly to completion like Christ could. And in requirement of that law, he took his blood into heaven to do the job that law required to is fullness.
Regarding *physical* circumcision; just like the temple, its furnishings, animals blood were all shadows (i.e. representative forms of the real version), likewise was *physical* circumcision a shadow (i.e. representative form) of the real version which is "Love God with all you heart and all your soul and all your might" (Deut 30:6 & Romans 2:29). THAT is true circumcision. Circumcision of the heart.
I don't know personally. Maybe? He IS dead resting in peace, while I'm still alive. And Daniel prophesied that knowledge would increase in the end times. God doesn't change and Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. They're still teaching...still winning souls. The harvest is plenty and the laborers are few so nothing's stopping God from downloading further understanding into any new worker for his harvest.
Christ didn't say that. He said "it's what comes OUT of the mouth that makes a man unclean". Such as slandering a person or making false accusations; name calling, etc.
No. It's not a contradiction. Priests are allowed to work on the Sabbath as servants of God. That's articulated in God's law.
Hey Prodigal could you please quote who you're referring to regarding this warning because I haven't read neither Eliwood nor I promoting such a false teaching. But maybe I missed the post you're referring to? There's only been another who's been falsely accusing us of claiming that, when we've clearly said salvation is by faith through grace, and that sanctification is through obedience to God's commandments; that we're justification only through faith in Christ.
Circumcision is of the heart like scripture says in Deut 30:6 (when one loves God with their whole being), and like Paul says in Romans 2:29.
Ultimately I hope that the posts are read in detail before such a final action is taken regardless of your decision one way or the other.
1 Corinthians 6:11Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. [yes *THEY* were...the ones Paul was talking to and had been teaching.]
Romans 15:15-16
But I have written very boldly to you on some points so as to remind you again, because of the grace that was given me from God, to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by [en] the Holy Spirit.
1 Peter 1:1-2 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.
2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification [of] the Spirit and belief of the truth:
Hebrews 10:10
By the which will we are sanctified through [dia] the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
And any good Law 'keeper' will bring up John 17:17 -. . . which makes it sound like it's the Scriptures (word) is how we are sanctified, and Law-keepers narrow that focus to Torah observance, but is that what Jesus was really saying there?
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
What was the Greek word for 'word' that John uses there? 'Graphe', which is the Greek for 'Scriptures?'
Or 'Logos', which is the Greek word that John uses to describe Jesus, the full expression of the Living God?
Logos is the word used there, so it is not by the Scriptures that we are sanctified, but by Christ.
Now check this out:And this:
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. - Rom. 8
Guys, sanctification is not about obedience to the commandments [incorrect. I explain below...], it's about being in Christ.
6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. - Jn. 14
Being in Christ results in Him producing His Fruit in and through us.
The Fruit?
Love and its subsets: joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,gentleness, and self-control.
God's commands after the Cross?
Believe in the One God sent and love one another. (1 Jn. 3)
It's not about Law; it's about Belief in Christ and love.
-JGIG
Tell us why, if you are correct, the Jerusalem Council said otherwise?
Acts 15, NASB
7 After there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brethren *, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles would hear the word of the gospel and believe.
8 "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;
9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.
10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?
11 "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."
12 All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles.
13 After they had stopped speaking, James answered, saying, "Brethren *, listen to me.
14 "Simeon has related how God first concerned Himself about taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name.
15 "With this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written,
16 'AFTER THESE THINGS I will return, AND I WILL REBUILD THE TABERNACLE OF DAVID WHICH HAS FALLEN, AND I WILL REBUILD ITS RUINS, AND I WILL RESTORE IT,
17 SO THAT THE REST OF MANKIND MAY SEEK THE LORD, AND ALL THE GENTILES WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME,'
18 SAYS THE LORD, WHO MAKES THESE THINGS KNOWN FROM LONG AGO.'
19 "Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles,
20 but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.
21 "For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he is read in the synagogues every Sabbath."
Peter said no one among the Jews had ever managed to keep the Law, and we know the Law does not save, but condemns. The Temple has been rebuilt in Christ for the church, not of brick and mortar, but in His flesh and blood which lives. For the Jews a physical Temple in the New Jerusalem will be the fulfillment of prophecy that they have direct access to God just as He promised.
Because they rejected Him at His first visitation, they must wait to see the glory of God, but we have it now. Why would we interfere with that direct access by putting a list of dead, unsaving rules between us and Him? Yes, we obey out of obedience, but we already, as will the Jews in the future, have His law written on our hearts -- not out of compunction, but out of His love for us and our love in return.
I wonder how those who claim that the Torah must be observed by believers handle the three tithes that are required.
The Torah specified three tithes:
1. Tithe to the Levites (Numbers 18), which modern Judaizers consider tithing to the church
2. Festival tithe (Deuteronomy 12:1-19 and 14:22-26) to be used for festival observance
3. Tithe to the needy (Deuteronomy 14:28-29 and 26:12-13) every 3rd and 6th year out a 7 year cycle
So, in essence, 23 1/3% of your income would be allocated for devotional purposes on average each year.
In the Judaizing church I attended, they required tithing on gross income. Assuming your governmental tax rate is 30% and you had a modest family income of 80,000, 23,000 of your income would be allocated to taxes and 17,000 would be allocated to these three tithes. Your remaining disposable income would be about 40,000. Not much for a family.
Some individuals ended up leaving the church just due to financial problems, and for them, leaving the church basically meant forfeiting their eternal life.
By the way, on the few occasions when I heard of families getting "third tithe assistance" due to extreme need, it was doled out very sparingly and not without criticism.
Ironically the church had a great excess of funds in this third tithe fund. At one point, they funded a corporate private jet with these excess funds, which were supposed to be used for the poor and needy. Funny thing is, as a blind Pharisee, even though I knew about this stuff, I justified it somehow by considering it to be God's will.
I also heard a minister complaining once about people in the church driving cars in poor repair and leaving oil on his driveway. I remember getting very disillusioned over that, as I knew the reason they drove such vehicles is due to the fact that they had so little spare income.
Those who claim they keep the law, I wonder if they are aware of this triple tithing system, and if they observe it. I've seen how it works in practical terms. You might not have much of an issue with it if you're living with your parents or you are single with a decent job, but if you have a family and your income isn't high, good luck with that.
By the way, excess festival tithe was required to be remitted to the church, through some "escape clause" they found that "required" it. The church came up with every sort of way of squeezing money out of the membership. And, in addition to tithes, you were expected to budget for offerings, so 30% giving or more would not have been abnormal.
I also knew church members who were so financially strapped that they were not able to help needy family members such as parents, which speaks directly to what Christ said about Corban.