Pioneer
Full Member
Shema and Shemar
Posts: 210
|
Post by Pioneer on Nov 12, 2005 16:59:29 GMT -8
Pioneer wrote: Whether or not hell is real isn't the point. I assume your saying here that you will only serve G-d on your own terms, and not His. YHVH does not have to take pleasure in pouring out His wrath for His wrath to be Scriptural. In fact, it is quite Scriptural. As it is written. Shalom Naild Shalom Naild, either your doctrine is set in concrete and you haven't availed yourself to any of the websites I told you about! I suppose you believe Sodom and Gommoroa are still burning! If your god is going to have a person I failed to visit with the gospel to SPEND an ERERNITY hopping from one hot rock to another, burning up and being reconstituted to burn up again. Be my guest. You can't show me one verse in any part of the Bible that spells that out. You have to go to Christian Commentary to find such garbage. Mal 4:1 ¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. But here is the LIVING WORD of God telling you if you are one of the chosen you will walk on the ashes of the wicked. 2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up. A koshering Eternal flame, death and hades are burned up in unquenchable fire until the El Shaddai says enough, and the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven. How many witnesses do you need to establish a truth? It is the awesome day of the Lord. As Yeshua said on the stake "It is finished." Then a new B'resheet. |
|
|
|
Post by Chizuk Emunah on Nov 12, 2005 17:22:25 GMT -8
Whew! Lot going on here. Time to re-join the discussion. I trust you all had a blessed Shabbat. Here we go: As of yet, no. There are certain of Rav Shaul's letters that I have questioned (ie... Galations), but in reading through all of his letters, one can see that he was  observant. And since I don't believe that he was two-faced, additional study must be done to resolve this apparent contradiction (of which I am still in the process of). How is it walking on dangerous ground? Is it not written in the that all things written or spoken must adhere to it's standard? Why was the Newer Testament written you ask? For that answer, let's go back to the 1st Century. At that time the only Scriptures available to Yeshua and his talmidim were those written in the TaNaK. That was it. The "New Testament" hadn't even been written yet. The TaNaK was the tool they used to spread the message of Moshiach. And it worked! Thousands of people believed. Now fast forward several hundred years to the Nicean Council convened by the Roman Emporer Constantine in 325 CE, keep in mind that the true followers of Yeshua (those that kept and had the testimony of Yeshua) were excluded from this meeting. It was here that the books of the "New Testament" were agreed upon and canonized. Now, on to the root of the matter: If the Newer Testament wasn't canonized for several centuries, what was the importance of writing it in the first place? The answer: 1. To preserve that which was already known and transmitted orally {this applies to the B'sorah Tovot (Good News)} 2. To keep a record of the Ma'aseh Talmidim {this applies to Acts) 3. To address certain issues {this is applicable to a good portion of it, though I believe that certain letters were not intended for use as Scripture} 4. To convey that which was received prophetically {this applies to the Apocalypse} YitzchakWell said achi! |
|
Pioneer
Full Member
Shema and Shemar
Posts: 210
|
Post by Pioneer on Nov 12, 2005 19:40:48 GMT -8
Shalom Messimom, I believe that HaShem's intent for preparing the 'Pit' was indeed for HaSatan and his fallen angels. If one by his belief, deeds, rejection of Yeshua and the "free gift" of salvation, is by definition "lost". Then that person is in bondage or "in league" with HaSatan and his minions. Therefore would he not also face the same fate? "You cannot serve two masters". "He who is not with me is against me". Along this line I am curious Pioneer, how do you reconcile these verses? Luke 16:24-26 He cried and said, 'Father Avraham, have mercy on me, and send El'azar, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue! For I am in anguish in this flame.' "But Avraham said, 'Son, remember that you, in your lifetime, received your good things, and El'azar, in like manner, bad things. But now here he is comforted and you are in anguish. Besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that those who want to pass from here to you are not able, and that none may cross over from there to us.' Rick Rick, Please, you reconcile this as I don't have any source documents for this dissertation! I have no doubt Yeshua had discussed this same event in his youth, His Rabbinical training.(Lu.2:52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man.)Not a unlearned Galilean as some portray. I find no basis for it in Tanack. So if we won't or can't use the "Oral " lets tear out of the NT all those references. If you have a scripture in the Tanack that I have missed, please let me know. Shalom |
|
|
|
Post by Mishkan on Nov 12, 2005 20:28:04 GMT -8
Whew! Lot going on here. Time to re-join the discussion. I trust you all had a blessed Shabbat. Yes, indeed. Quite pleasant. Shavua tov to you, as well. There are certain of Rav Shaul's letters that I have questioned (ie... Galations), but in reading through all of his letters, one can see that he was observant. And since I don't believe that he was two-faced, additional study must be done to resolve this apparent contradiction (of which I am still in the process of). A couple of months ago, I began a bit of investigation into the writings of Philo. I haven't read enough of Philo to be certain, but I have a theory that his writings may provide a key to understanding Hellenistic Judaism sufficiently that we can understand Sha'ul without accusing him of being a Gentile. Nobody ever accused Philo of being anything other than a religious Jew in the diaspora, and yet he also makes extensive use of allegory from the , similar that used by Sha'ul. How is it walking on dangerous ground? Is it not written in the that all things written or spoken must adhere to it's standard? I agree with you on that. Yet, I would hestitate to subscribe to the sort of "dictionary Bible" approach that I often see among Christians. A reductionistic approach that says, "If it isn't in the text, then I won't believe it," isn't always the best approach. Yeshua often introduced ideas from original intent or historical background that were not explicit in the text. Similarly, Sha'ul often brought out ideas that had been introduced by rabbinic commentators. For instance, his citation of Habakkuk 2.4 actually derives from a Talmud passage, Makkot 24. If one reads this passage from the Talmud, the reference in Romans 1.17 takes on a whole new meaning. Now fast forward several hundred years to the Nicean Council convened by the Roman Emporer Constantine in 325 CE, keep in mind that the true followers of Yeshua (those that kept and had the testimony of Yeshua) were excluded from this meeting. It was here that the books of the "New Testament" were agreed upon and canonized. Yes. This introduces a problematic aspect of the events, doesn't it? Do we believe that a Gentile convention had the authority to establish Scripture? And if we do accept the letters as authoritative, do they stand on the same level as Scripture? A couple years ago, I read a collection of the Rambam's letters. It is called The Essential Maimonides, by Avraham Finkel. It is remarkable how similar some of these letters sound to the writings of Sha'ul. Now, nobody considers these letters of Maimonides to be Scripture, yet neither would anybody think of throwing out these valuable contributions to the faith communities of Yemen and other places. I suppose I sound somewhat ambiguous regarding my own stance on Sha'ul. At the end of the day, I regard his writings as perfectly consonant with established rabbinic methodology of his day, and in accordance with the , as understood in the Second Temple era. He does include a half-dozen passages, or so, that have been abused by those who are not familiar with rabbinic interpretive approaches, including Pardes. But that does not diminish the value of his writings for those of us who are more trained in that methodology. So, I accept his letters as authoritative for faith and practice, but I also interpret his words according to the plain meaning of the , and question any interpretation that would violate the words of the . I don't know if these ramblings will help anyone. Just contributing my own two cents. Shalom, Mishkan David |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Nov 13, 2005 4:22:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Firestorm on Nov 13, 2005 6:39:40 GMT -8
 What I'm trying to say here, and apparently doing an abysmal job of it, is that the concept of the Body of Believers is getting lost in the shuffle. I believe that the Body of Believers consists of all those who are truly born again be they Messianic or not. I'm not saying that they're perfect in their understanding; then again, neither are any of us. I know a lot of you are angry at the errors you were taught in some of the churches, but I also have my doubts that God would have held it against you if you'd died before you ever found out what being Messianic was. I think many more believers will die never having heard of the concept even though many of them are staunch allies of Israel. I believe I'll see them in eternity with God because He's not a God who cuts off those who truly seek Him. On a personal level I see the mandate ot the Messianic movement as being (1) to evangelise the children of Israel who don't know Yeshua (2) to build a bridge between Jew and Gentile in Yeshua's name. If we adopt an "us vs. them" fortress mentality towards the churches, all of this is defeated. Christians will merely regard us as cranks and Jews will see us as just one more fractious Christian denomination. It's imperative we show them, by are actions and attitudes that we're about something more. I've received tremendous blessings since I started attending my local Messianic congregation and would wish those blessings on everyone. Not everyone will experience this though and judging them is God's job not mine. (Be ye fishers of men. You catch them. God cleans them.)
|
|
|
|
Post by NaildWithHim on Nov 13, 2005 8:47:31 GMT -8
Pioneer wrote: Whether or not hell is real isn't the point. I assume your saying here that you will only serve G-d on your own terms, and not His. YHVH does not have to take pleasure in pouring out His wrath for His wrath to be Scriptural. In fact, it is quite Scriptural. As it is written. Shalom Naild Shalom Naild, either your doctrine is set in concrete and you haven't availed yourself to any of the websites I told you about! I suppose you believe Sodom and Gommoroa are still burning! If your god is going to have a person I failed to visit with the gospel to SPEND an ERERNITY hopping from one hot rock to another, burning up and being reconstituted to burn up again. Be my guest. You can't show me one verse in any part of the Bible that spells that out. You have to go to Christian Commentary to find such garbage. Mal 4:1 ¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. But here is the LIVING WORD of God telling you if you are one of the chosen you will walk on the ashes of the wicked. 2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up. A koshering Eternal flame, death and hades are burned up in unquenchable fire until the El Shaddai says enough, and the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven. How many witnesses do you need to establish a truth? It is the awesome day of the Lord. As Yeshua said on the stake "It is finished." Then a new B'resheet. Thank you for the Bible lesson Pioneer, but I have not believed in Christianities 'hell' for over 5 years now. So commenting on "My Theology" probably isn't wise since you have not a clue what it consists of. If you will take note, my last post was directed at your comment "I will not serve a god who......", not heaven or hell. The whole point of that post was to try to get you to see you put conditions on serving YHVH that aren't His, but your own. Think about that for awhile. Shalom Naild |
|
|
|
Post by messimom on Nov 13, 2005 9:17:01 GMT -8
Wow Naild you must LOVE confrontation. I think maybe you still contain some bitterness. I was simply trying to help Firestorm understand that it is a big undertaking and a sometimes painful journey when one comes to understand what being a believer is all about. I never said people go around holding grudges. And yes, there is personal responsibility here, after all, we all accepted ours and found our ways right? I'm just also saying that for centuries now the church has controlled people. Many have been studying their little hearts out, but doing it through Chrisian filters, not seeing the truth. I believe it takes YHVH to open one's eyes. I believe that the Ruach is hugely involved in the -observant movement. But for you to come in and tell me and others (such as Firestorm now questioning our SANITY) that its all our faults that we didn't find the truth sooner is kind of rude and like beating a dead horse in my opinion. Each one of us has picked up our torch and ran on our own, that is how we got here. And concerning the "black is white" issue. If that is what is going on here on this message board, then I say knock it the hec* off. This message board is a learning and fellowshipping tool. If someone is crying wolf at every single thing they ever learned in Sunday School, then it should stop. That is not what being observant is about. It is about digging into your own faith and, unfortunately many beliefs are disspelled, and things we thought to be true aren't, but I don't run around calling black white just to "get back at the church" so to speak. Why are you so quick to be offended or counter someone elses statement? You must be a strong A personality.  Shalom messimom |
|
|
|
Post by NaildWithHim on Nov 13, 2005 9:22:52 GMT -8
I believe it is the resposibility of the individual to study to show thyself approved. Shalom, Naild! Good to see you again. Sorry to have lost touch over on the other forum. I entered a very busy, and very difficult, time in my life shortly after signing up over there. I was just invited to join here a few days ago. I hope to stay more consistent, now. Just a tiny quibble about your quotation. "Study to show yourself approved" has nothing to do with book learning. In King Jimmy's English, "study," meant, "Take care," or, "Be diligent." I know many people who make this same mistake. In fact, just about every dispensationalist will misuse this verse in the same way. If Christians call it white then a Messianic will call it black just for spite. Because after all, Christians couldn't possibly have even a morsel of truth. Good grief! I suppose many of us are guilty of this, at times. Of course, some of this is due to the unique experiences of Messianics at the hands of Christian apologists. There are times when we are forced into corners by the Christian teachers—not because we want to be negative, but because they demand the right to shove words into our mouths. And just for the record... yes, I have just had exactly that sort of thing happen to me in a big way within the past week. Shalom, Mishkan David Mishkan?!?! Now there's a blast from the past! LOL How have you been my friend? Hey, I still got your web site up over at STFA. Your welcome to come and post anytime. I think I mave have deleted your account though, because you haven't posted in so long. Please don't take it personal, but I did some "spring cleaning" and deleted those who were no longer posting. So you will just have to take a second to re-register if you want. The "Study to show thyself approved" verse doesn't have to stand. It's all over in the to study G-d's word often. Ever hear of Phylacraties? I'm sure you have. The whole point was that that it is the individuals resposibility to find Biblical truth, not someone to spoon feed it to us. Then when we find they are in error to blame them for our own shortcomings. I see alot of bitterness in Messianic Judaism toeard Christians for this very reason, and it is that bitterness that leads then to reject Christian doctrine whether it's Scriptural or not. See what I'm saying? Shalom Naild |
|
|
|
Post by Mishkan on Nov 13, 2005 10:20:02 GMT -8
Mishkan?!?! Now there's a blast from the past! LOL How have you been my friend? Hey, I still got your web site up over at STFA. Your welcome to come and post anytime. I think I mave have deleted your account though, because you haven't posted in so long. Please don't take it personal, but I did some "spring cleaning" and deleted those who were no longer posting. So you will just have to take a second to re-register if you want. I'm doing well enough. Got some tough times going on with family problems. But "this, too, shall pass". I've been trying to minimize my time online, so while I appreciate your welcome, I don't think I'll be posting over on STFA anytime soon. Thank you for the advertizing, though. My website is still up, and I plan to re-vamp it in the next couple of weeks. The "Study to show thyself approved" verse doesn't have to stand. It's all over in the to study G-d's word often. Ever hear of Phylacraties? I'm sure you have. Oh, I absolutely agree with the need to study. In fact, I have had one person on a Christian forum tearing into me constantly for the past several months, trying to tell me that we, "need to know nothing but Christ, and him crucified". It has been truly annoying. Everytime I spend hours researching a point about Sha'ul's background, and how it impacts the understanding of his writings... and then this person never even interacts with the content, and resorts to accusations like, "So many words... so little Scripture". Oh yes, I know we need to study. It's just that the verse to Timothy doesn't support the idea. We need to find another verse that describes the idea. The whole point was that that it is the individuals resposibility to find Biblical truth, not someone to spoon feed it to us. Well, I certainly agree with this. Then when we find they are in error to blame them for our own shortcomings. I see alot of bitterness in Messianic Judaism toeard Christians for this very reason, and it is that bitterness that leads then to reject Christian doctrine whether it's Scriptural or not. I agree, this can certain occur. There is another aspect of this, though, which I am seeing--especially among the... ahem... more "mature" members of the Messianic Movement. As a community, there is an increasing recognition of the need to reinvestigate all the theological structures that have been bequeathed to us by a church that demonstrably was doing everything in its power to distance itself from its Jewish heritage in the first several hundred years of its existence. It isn't so much a knee-jerk reaction, but a reasoned re-evaluation of their knee-jerk reactions, back in 100-400. I do, indeed. Not everyone is following the route of reasoned response. There is a lot of negativity among, especially, former church members. The sense of betrayal can be a strong motivator. I'd hope we can help direct such people to the facts of history, and show them how to do proper investigation into the Second Temple era beliefs, practices, and culture. That way, they will be able to do their own studies, and develop their views independent of the need for someone to spoon feed them. Shalom, chaver, Mishkan David |
|
Pioneer
Full Member
Shema and Shemar
Posts: 210
|
Post by Pioneer on Nov 13, 2005 14:24:56 GMT -8
Shalom Naild, either your doctrine is set in concrete and you haven't availed yourself to any of the websites I told you about! I suppose you believe Sodom and Gommoroa are still burning! If your god is going to have a person I failed to visit with the gospel to SPEND an ERERNITY hopping from one hot rock to another, burning up and being reconstituted to burn up again. Be my guest. You can't show me one verse in any part of the Bible that spells that out. You have to go to Christian Commentary to find such garbage. Mal 4:1 ¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. 2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. 3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts. But here is the LIVING WORD of God telling you if you are one of the chosen you will walk on the ashes of the wicked. 2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and the works that are upon it will be burned up. A koshering Eternal flame, death and hades are burned up in unquenchable fire until the El Shaddai says enough, and the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven. How many witnesses do you need to establish a truth? It is the awesome day of the Lord. As Yeshua said on the stake "It is finished." Then a new B'resheet. Thank you for the Bible lesson Pioneer, but I have not believed in Christianities 'hell' for over 5 years now. So commenting on "My Theology" probably isn't wise since you have not a clue what it consists of. If you will take note, my last post was directed at your comment "I will not serve a god who......", not heaven or hell. The whole point of that post was to try to get you to see you put conditions on serving YHVH that aren't His, but your own. Think about that for awhile. Shalom Naild Naild I will echo Messiahmom suggesting you either be a little less combative or bridle your fingers in this case. I am sure you have at this point in life you are aware of what happens when you assume. BTW has it been five years since I left STFA? You must read funny, I think most everyone read it right. Saying if the Christian god is so cruel he would condemn someone for my negligence, I would not serve a god of that nature. I ask you, personally, would you serve a god doing this? By choice? Under extreme duress, well maybe. I for one could never be happy with a memory of my mother skipping form hot rock to hot rock. But that's just me. Maybe, I won't go to Christian heaven!? Another BTW, my comments do not have your name on them, they just speak to the idea conveyed. Maybe we all could be more clear in what we write. I thought about it for a long while and I don't get your point. |
|
|
|
Post by NaildWithHim on Nov 13, 2005 18:18:31 GMT -8
You must read funny everyone seemed to undersatnd what you said This is what I said: Whether or not hell is real isn't the point. So stop putting words in my mouth and building straw men as is your custom!! I didn't say one way or another if hell was real, and don't even go to the STFA thing before I make you look like a complete fool! You can't answer my questions staraight so you go down a rabbit trail. Typical! Stop trying to vindicate grandpa and your father who rejected Messiah, old man......maybe you will find truth! LOL You want to sling mud at me, I can play that too! Thew only way you can even keep up with me is to twist my words to your own liking....this has been done since I've I known you. Nothing new under the sun. If your going to quote me I ask you do it in CONTEXT! |
|
Pioneer
Full Member
Shema and Shemar
Posts: 210
|
Post by Pioneer on Nov 13, 2005 20:10:22 GMT -8
Dear Folks on this thread, please accept my appoligy for whatever I said that caused this firey outburst. I am so sorry.
Shalom
|
|
|
|
Post by Mishkan on Nov 13, 2005 23:55:50 GMT -8
If I'm misunderstanding the Covenants please enlighten me. Shalom Naild, I know you asked these questions of Reuel, but I have been experiencing some "Aha moments" lately regarding these things, and would like to share some of my thoughts. I don't claim to be the final arbiter of truth here, but this is what makes sense to me. Let me start with the idea that Hebrews is not the didactic teaching article that most Christians make it out to be. It is more along the lines of an extended sermon, using a variety of techniques to supoort the faith of the audience, but not necessarily teaching literal truths. In Jewish terms, the book consists of several midrashim, a series of vignettes based on a variety of Scripture passages. Stories and teachings based on midrash seek to develop edifying themes from Scripture, but should not be used to develop overly literal constructs of the unseen realm. Essentially, it is my belief that most Christians are busy taking that which is literal in an allegorical sense; and that which is allegorical in a woodenly literal sense. There is no high priest defined in the New Covenant. The terms described in Jeremiah 31 do not include any priesthood, let alone a high priest. There is no reason to think this priesthood will cease. It has been stated to be eternal, and Zechariah 14 talks about a time when the nations will come to Jerusalem for the pilgrimmage festivals. This implies the existence of the Temple, and the Temple priesthood. Since there is no second priesthood, this is a moot question. The Levitical priesthood officiates at many sacrifices and functions other than the Yom Kippur sacrifice. We have to remember that when we discuss the priesthood. There is no reason to think that the Levitical priesthood has been permanently deleted. They only await the restoration of the Temple. There was no "order of Melchizedek", in the sense of the Levitical priesthood. This is an example of a midrashic device based on a single detail--the existence of one priest, known as Melchizedek. All other detail is midrashic speculation. says there was such an individual. There is the contact point with . Psalm 110 compares David with Melchizedek. I believe this to be based on the fact that David consciously modeled himself after the priest/king who led Jerusalem when it was under the rule of the Jebusites. The writer of Hebrews then takes the passage and Psalm 110, and derives a number of comparison points between Melchizedek and the Davidic offspring. But the comparison is not intended to be taken literally. In my opinion, no, there is no reason to reject real revelation in the Messianic Writings. However, in the case of Hebrews, one needs to consider the style of the writing, and interpret it accordingly. There is no new revelation being given—only a series of allegorical midrashim. I realize these ideas are quite off the beaten path. I would like to hear feedback from others regarding this material. |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Nov 14, 2005 3:25:02 GMT -8
An easy reply is John 5:39:
Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life. They are they which testify of Me.
The conclusion, we cannot know Christ and Him crucified without an understanding of the Old Testament Scriptures.
|
|
observant. And since I don't believe that he was two-faced, additional study must be done to resolve this apparent contradiction (of which I am still in the process of).
What I'm trying to say here, and apparently doing an abysmal job of it, is that the concept of the Body of Believers is getting lost in the shuffle. I believe that the Body of Believers consists of all those who are truly born again be they Messianic or not. I'm not saying that they're perfect in their understanding; then again, neither are any of us. 
