swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Why is Paul holding Moses' jockstrap?
What a silly thing to say.

(edit: ftr, I understand what it means..I think trying to compare them in this manner is ridiculous. Moses and Paul were both instruments of God.)

---

Not that agie95, was copying me. But I enjoy that slang phrase from Larry Holmes who was famous heavy weight boxer in 1980s. He got frustrated about being compared to great white boxer Rocky Marciano (retired undefeated 49-0 in the 1950s).

Larrry said "Rocky Marciano couldn't carry my jockstrap"

Agree with your comments. They were both on the same team, both were major instruments of God. If we could be so lucky.

So long as we see the Word of God take flesh in the letter of holy writings in a variety of figures, we have not yet spiritually seen the incorporeal and simple and singular and only Father as in the incorporeal and simple and singular and only Son. As the Scripture says, 'The one who has seen Me has seen the Father' (Jn 14.9), and also, 'I am in the Father and the Father is in Me' (Jn 14.10). It is, therefore, very necessary for a deep knowledge that we first study the veils of the statements regarding the Word and so behold with the naked mind the pure Word as He exists in Himself, who clearly shows the Father in Himself, as far as it is possible for men to grasp. Thus it is necessary that the one who seeks after God in a religious way never holds fast to the letter lest he mistakenly understand things said about God for God Himself. In this case we unwisely are satisfied with the words of Scripture in the place of the Word, and the Word slips out of the mind while we thought by holding onto this garment we could possess the incorporeal Word. In a similar way did the Egyptian woman lay hold not of Joseph but of his clothing, and the men of old who remained permanently in the beauty of visible things and mistakenly worshipped the creature instead of the Creator.

agie95 said:

---

Really? I have the same definition.

Most people look at Galatians 2:14.

But when I saw that they were not walking in line with the truth of the Good News, I said to Peter in front of everyone, "If youbeing a Jewlive like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"

This is most people definition, but it is not a complete thought.

v15-16 - We are Jews by birth and not sinners from among the Gentiles. 16 Yet we know that a person is set right not by deeds based on Torah, but rather through putting trust in Messiah Yeshua. So even we have put our trust in Messiah Yeshua, in order that we might be set right based on trust in Messiah and not by deeds based on Torahbecause no human will be justified by deeds based on Torah.

Paul's definition of judaizer includes forcing works to be justified (i.e. saved). I agree with this definition. My beliefs do not force people to perform works for salvation. We obey God b/c we love Him for that is love per Scripture.

---

The scripture you posted says the exact opposite of your paraphrase of it.

Quote:

---

It is amazing that Christians think Paul is so easy to read, yet Peter who knew Paul personally, said Paul was hard to understand. Yet, believers go on thinking that a simple reading of Paul is all that one should do.

---

How are you sure YOU aren't the one not understanding Paul correctly?

It is your BELIEF that you have the correct interpretation, which manifests itself when you condescendinly accuse those who disagree with you to only have a "simple" reading and understanding of Paul.

Quote:

---

Paul was Jewish, he called himself a Pharisee late in his ministry.

---

Who was his audience when claimed that?

I am certain you can understand why he felt it necessary to establish his credibility.

Quote:

---

He would be least in the kingdom which actually means not in the kingdom.

---

"Least in the kingdom" is still in the kingdom.

tehmackdaddy said:

---

Quote:

---

It is amazing that Christians think Paul is so easy to read, yet Peter who knew Paul personally, said Paul was hard to understand. Yet, believers go on thinking that a simple reading of Paul is all that one should do.

---

How are you sure YOU aren't the one not understanding Paul correctly?

It is your BELIEF that you have the correct interpretation, which manifests itself when you condescendinly accuse those who disagree with you to only have a "simple" reading and understanding of Paul.

Quote:

---

Paul was Jewish, he called himself a Pharisee late in his ministry.

---

Who was his audience when claimed that?

I am certain you can understand why he felt it necessary to establish his credibility.

Quote:

---

He would be least in the kingdom which actually means not in the kingdom.

---

"Least in the kingdom" is still in the kingdom.

---

Peter said Paul was difficult to understand. Yet, so many take an easy reading of the text, with Greek eyes, and conclude on what he says. The reason why I know I am correct is b/c my interpretation is consistent with the Torah and the Prophets. Christians typical reading is inconsistent with the Torah and the Prophets.

If you want to have Scripture that is inconsistent, go ahead. My God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is not inconsistent. He does not change and His word does not change.

Quote:

---

Paul was Jewish, he called himself a Pharisee late in his ministry.

---

Quote:

---

Who was his audience when claimed that?

I am certain you can understand why he felt it necessary to establish his credibility.

---

Sure he is establishing credibility, but are you saying he was lying? He still considered himself a pharisee. He still kept the Shabbat. He still made sacrifices. He still made a Nazarite vow in Acts 18, maybe a second one (may have been the same one) in Acts 21. Paul followed Torah, he considered himself a pharisee.

Quote:

---

"Least in the kingdom" is still in the kingdom.

---

If you read Jewish works...Talmud, etc. You would understand why least in the kingdom does not mean still in the kingdom. These are Hebrew writers who knew the Oral Torah. There are so many concepts and teachings from Yeshua, the disciples, and Paul from the Oral Torah that you would not believe it.

Who is least, whoever annuls one of the least of the commandments and teaches others to do so is least. Why? 1 John 2:3-6 - By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: 6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

How did Yeshua walk? By keeping Torah. Therefore you should.

You should try the group The Torah Is For Today and keep an open mind. Be like a Berean and search the Scriptures for what you believe. Can you find anything about the Messiah and fulfilling the Torah as you believe? Is there anything in the Torah and the Prophets (what the Bereans had as Scripture) that suggests the Torah is no longer after the Messiah? Anything? No, b/c the prophets all taught to come back to Torah! Even the last prophet, Malachi, said in reference to the last days...4:4 remember the laws of Moses!

tehmackda said:

---

The scripture you posted says the exact opposite of your paraphrase of it.

---

You give generalizations and never specifically point out my poorly paraphrased ideas. Please give your analysis.

Both instruments, but we all know Moses was the only prophet to whom God knew face to face.

Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father '?

I am not ranking....I am going by Scripture...

Deut 34:10 - There has not risen again a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom Adonai knew face to face,

"Truly I say to you, among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist! Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

Have you ever thought about why the land Yeshua walked on wasn't holy? At the burning bush, that ground was holy. At Mt Sinai, Moses was asked to take off sandals. Joshua asked to take off sandals. In the Temple, the Priests were barefooted. Yet, with Yeshua, this was never the case...just a thought I have wondered about.

Honest question...and I'm really really not trying to sound sarcastic or anything..

Are you talking about the same priests that conspired to have Christ killed?

Was the ground in Genesis 32:22-31 holy? How about Genesis 18?

The holy ground comment occurs only two places, as you point out. But the appearances of God in the OT are many.

The priests weren't the only ones conspiring to kill Yeshua. Though, the chief priest and other high priests no longer were valid for the job. They were put in that job by the Romans. They no longer were from the correct lines...Aaron and Levites.

I pointed out three places, technically 4 if you include the Temple.

If you look at the Hebrew for Gen 18 and 32 one would see that this was another manifestation. Not the same form as when the ground is holy. English cannot begin to portray was the Hebrew actually says.

...Right...so wouldn't the lack of proper respect be bred from the fact that they were bad at their jobs?

How about the Romans came and took over. Do you think they really considered who was best for the job? I don't think so. God created the job requirements and these men did not fit those requirements. Were there Jews who wanted Yeshua killed absolutely. Yeshua laid down His life though....

You were the one who asked why they didn't show the proper respect as though it was a proof of some sort that the apostles and Lazarus etc didn't have a relationship with God face to face. Christ wept when Lazarus died.. and yet...

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Win At Life said:

---

Aggie4Life02 said:

---

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind, and not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" (referring to things that all perish as they are used)according to human precepts and teachings? These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
Colossians 2:16-23 ESV
http://bible.com/59/col.2.16-23.ESV

---

Colossians is written to Gentiles who just converted from their former pagan ways to this new Jewish based religion. The new Jewish ways made caused them to be criticized by their pagan friends and family. When Paul says not to let them judge you for feasts and Sabbath, he is telling them to keep the feasts and Sabbaths in spite of the judgment they are receiving from their pagan friends and family.

---

That interpretation isn't possible based on the text, since Paul calls the very festivals in question shadows and Christ the substance.

---

Notice it says these are a shadow of the things to come. There are 7 yearly festivals. Yeshua fulfilled 4 of them. What about the other 3? Are those just forgotten? The festivals still act as a shadow...they are a shadow...this is 25 years or so after the death and resurrection. He is not speaking in past tense here.

When believers perform communion that itself is a shadow. It is a remembrance of the work Yeshua did for us....many still observe this despite that it is a shadow.

We cannot miss the reality of the shadow though. The reality is the Messiah! What Win For Life posted is exactly what is meant. It is the only way to read it and be consistent with Scripture.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

You were the one who asked why they didn't show the proper respect as though it was a proof of some sort that the apostles and Lazarus etc didn't have a relationship with God face to face. Christ wept when Lazarus died.. and yet...

---

That is not what I was asking. I truly, have always thought about this and I do not have an answer.

You are fighting what Scripture says. It says that no one was like Moses...no one. You guys are acting as if I am slighting other important people. I am not. Scripture clearly says there will not be another like Moses who speaks with God face to face.

Scripture says since. Not forever. You ignore Christ's words about St John the Baptist.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Scripture says since. Not forever. You ignore Christ's words about St John the Baptist.

---

Not true. For one that is not what the Hebrew says. Two, John the Baptist never spoke with God face to face as Moses did.

And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

or

And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,

Scripture is clear...

agie95 said:

---

Both instruments, but we all know Moses was the only prophet to whom God knew face to face.

---

You don't KNOW that. That's all you can derive from Scripture, and even then you set aside Jesus, who you claim is a manifestation of God. Didn't you claim in the past that the burning bush was also a manifestation because, of course, a bush on earth in this physical universe could not contain God and all His unfathomabilty.

Quote:

---

And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

---

Do you consider Moses to be greater than Jesus? Or, to put it in your terminology, Yeshua?

agie95 said:

---

k2aggie07 said:

---

Scripture says since. Not forever. You ignore Christ's words about St John the Baptist.

---

Not true. For one that is not what the Hebrew says. Two, John the Baptist never spoke with God face to face as Moses did.

And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

or

And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,

Scripture is clear...

---

It is very clear, you are just ignoring both what Jesus said and the understanding of Deuteronomy 34:10 which does NOT state "no one will ever be on par with Moses." It is true up to the point of that writing and doesn't place any restriction on future people or events.

The verses you quote here...

agie95 said:

---

Really? I have the same definition.

Most people look at Galatians 2:14.

But when I saw that they were not walking in line with the truth of the Good News, I said to Peter in front of everyone, "If youbeing a Jewlive like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"

This is most people definition, but it is not a complete thought.

v15-16 - We are Jews by birth and not sinners from among the Gentiles. 16 Yet we know that a person is set right not by deeds based on Torah, but rather through putting trust in Messiah Yeshua. So even we have put our trust in Messiah Yeshua, in order that we might be set right based on trust in Messiah and not by deeds based on Torahbecause no human will be justified by deeds based on Torah.

---

Do not support or coalesce with this...

Quote:

---

Paul's definition of judaizer includes forcing works to be justified (i.e. saved). I agree with this definition. My beliefs do not force people to perform works for salvation. We obey God b/c we love Him for that is love per Scripture.

---

tehmackdaddy said:

---

The verses you quote here...

agie95 said:

---

Really? I have the same definition.

Most people look at Galatians 2:14.

But when I saw that they were not walking in line with the truth of the Good News, I said to Peter in front of everyone, "If youbeing a Jewlive like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?"

This is most people definition, but it is not a complete thought.

v15-16 - We are Jews by birth and not sinners from among the Gentiles. 16 Yet we know that a person is set right not by deeds based on Torah, but rather through putting trust in Messiah Yeshua. So even we have put our trust in Messiah Yeshua, in order that we might be set right based on trust in Messiah and not by deeds based on Torahbecause no human will be justified by deeds based on Torah.

---

Do not support or coalesce with this...

Quote:

---

Paul's definition of judaizer includes forcing works to be justified (i.e. saved). I agree with this definition. My beliefs do not force people to perform works for salvation. We obey God b/c we love Him for that is love per Scripture.

---

---

Galatians 2:14 is the common verse brought up about judaizing. Here is the verse in YLT - But when I saw that they are not walking uprightly to the truth of the good news, I said to Peter before all, `If thou, being a Jew, in the manner of the nations dost live, and not in the manner of the Jews, how the nations dost thou compel to Judaize?

Earlier in Galatians 2, it speaks about those forcing, compelling, Titus to be circumcised. Cue Acts 15, which coincides with Galatians 2.

Acts 15:1 - Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."

Hence, they are saying works saves. Judaizing.

Paul's written response to the Galatians is to speak about justification (salvation). He goes about explaining that one is not saved by deeds based on Torah, but by placing trust in God. The entire book of Galatians is about this one item...justification by faith, not by works.

I disagree...the verses totally supports it.

Disagree...it doesn't matter. The Torah is for Today!!!