|
|
Post by alon on Jun 9, 2014 18:00:59 GMT -8
Don't laugh, you should have one too! 
Instead of trying to find where I posted the error (if it bugs ya' just feel free to tell me where and I'll correct it), think I'll just post it here and be done. But we're all learning, and mistakes are inevitable. So here's mine to start off what promises to be a VERY long thread:
Somewhere I said that scripture was not meant for everyone in Biblical Hebraic thought. Scrolls and letters were fragile and difficult to reproduce, and so the religious leaders in the synagogues were responsible for readings and interpreting scripture or giving answers. The priests would use the Urim and Thurim, or the stones on the Ephod to give answers to questions. Priests explained scripture or prophets explained God's will. This is true up to the Maccabean Revolt and the establishment of the Pharisees.
What I just learned from reading Joseph Shulam, a Messianic Jewish Rabbi, is that it was the Pharisees who introduced the concept that anyone could interpret scripture for themselves. They still wouldn't have had access to it outside the synagogue, but they could hear it read and make up their own minds what it meant, and how they were to aply it to their lives. Of course, both the descendants of the Pharisees (rabbis of the Common Era) and the catholic church were to turn this on its head again and exercise absolute control on people thoughts and actions. It wasn't until the Protestant Revolution that this idea resurfaced as a major concept.
My own opinion, the dogmatic approach of mainC and their failure to separate themselves completely from Catholicism again turned this idea around to a more control oriented venue, with just the façade of being free to interpret as we see fit. It wasn't until the reintroduction of the Natsarim/Messianics that we again became free to find the truth in scripture.
Main point- it was the Pharisees who introduced the idea that everyone could interpret scripture for themselves. Therefore all scripture was for everyone. Moreover, this idea would have been one of the foundational concepts that made it possible for Messiah to come when He did! God's timing is awesome ...
Dan (ever so humble  you betcha'!) C
edit: found one place I said this, and have referenced back here- theloveofgod.proboards.com/thread/3329/galations-wrong
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jun 17, 2014 16:13:57 GMT -8
When I first came on here, I gave short shrift to writings like the Talmud and the Apocrypha. However due to my ongoing studies and my studies with Rabbi S., I now recognize these and other writings to be very important forms of documentation. In fact, there are many books which are recognized by other denominations and/or sects, and which almost made it into our own cannon. While some had ideas that conflicted with other Scripture, others were simply regarded as redundant by the various organizers of our Bible. Odd they'd take that stance since there are several synoptic books in both the TNK and the B'rit Chadasha in the cannon they did aprove.
I still don't give any of these books the same status as Scripture (as in our own cannon), however I do now recognize them as important for historical and cultural context, good for supplementary instruction in many cases, and in others better and more reliable commentary than our mainC commentators whose writings form the opinions taught in seminaries worldwide. Most, if not all the teachings of Yeshua can be traced straight back to the Mishna! And I had a talk with an ex-RC priest where I asked him about the notable faith of many adherents to that religion. It comes primarily from the study of 1st & 2nd Maccabees!
So I've changed my opinion of secondary texts over the last couple of years, and I'm sure it is reflected in my posts here.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by Questor on Jun 17, 2014 16:42:06 GMT -8
When I first came on here, I gave short shrift to writings like the Talmud and the Apocrypha. However due to my ongoing studies and my studies with Rabbi S., I now recognize these and other writings to be very important forms of documentation. In fact, there are many books which are recognized by other denominations and/or sects, and which almost made it into our own cannon. While some had ideas that conflicted with other Scripture, others were simply regarded as redundant by the various organizers of our Bible. Odd they'd take that stance since there are several synoptic books in both the TNK and the B'rit Chadasha in the cannon they did aprove. I still don't give any of these books the same status as Scripture (as in our own cannon), however I do now recognize them as important for historical and cultural context, good for supplementary instruction in many cases, and in others better and more reliable commentary than our mainC commentators whose writings form the opinions taught in seminaries worldwide. Most, if not all the teachings of Yeshua can be traced straight back to the Mishna! And I had a talk with an ex-RC priest where I asked him about the notable faith of many adherents to that religion. It comes primarily from the study of 1st & 2nd Maccabees! So I've changed my opinion of secondary texts over the last couple of years, and I'm sure it is reflected in my posts here. Dan C
The Apocropha are interesting as a type of wisdom story mixed with history...where historical linkage is even claimed. I particularly like the Book of Tobit, as giving insight into a lot of cultural practices mixed with the spiritual side of life, and showing Judaic knowledge of Angelic and Demon behavior. Another I like is as well as the Book of Susannah, as a referendum on how carefully witnesses must be examined to obtain the truth about any matter, as well as a reminder how the evil inclination within us has to be fought at the highest levels...that not even Kings and Priest and judges are immune from the Temptation to covet something, obsess upon it, and be drawn into wickedness in order to obtain their obsession. |
|
|
|
Post by Questor on Jun 17, 2014 16:45:28 GMT -8
Don't laugh, you should have one too! Instead of trying to find where I posted the error (if it bugs ya' just feel free to tell me where and I'll correct it), think I'll just post it here and be done. But we're all learning, and mistakes are inevitable. So here's mine to start off what promises to be a VERY long thread: Somewhere I said that scripture was not meant for everyone in Biblical Hebraic thought. Scrolls and letters were fragile and difficult to reproduce, and so the religious leaders in the synagogues were responsible for readings and interpreting scripture or giving answers. The priests would use the Urim and Thurim, or the stones on the Ephod to give answers to questions. Priests explained scripture or prophets explained God's will. This is true up to the Maccabean Revolt and the establishment of the Pharisees.
What I just learned from reading Joseph Shulam, a Messianic Jewish Rabbi, is that it was the Pharisees who introduced the concept that anyone could interpret scripture for themselves. They still wouldn't have had access to it outside the synagogue, but they could hear it read and make up their own minds what it meant, and how they were to aply it to their lives. Of course, both the descendants of the Pharisees (rabbis of the Common Era) and the catholic church were to turn this on its head again and exercise absolute control on people thoughts and actions. It wasn't until the Protestant Revolution that this idea resurfaced as a major concept.
My own opinion, the dogmatic approach of mainC and their failure to separate themselves completely from Catholicism again turned this idea around to a more control oriented venue, with just the façade of being free to interpret as we see fit. It wasn't until the reintroduction of the Natsarim/Messianics that we again became free to find the truth in scripture.Main point- it was the Pharisees who introduced the idea that everyone could interpret scripture for themselves. Therefore all scripture was for everyone. Moreover, this idea would have been one of the foundational concepts that made it possible for Messiah to come when He did! God's timing is awesome ... Dan (ever so humble you betcha'!) C edit: found one place I said this, and have referenced back here- theloveofgod.proboards.com/thread/3329/galations-wrong |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jun 18, 2014 21:50:09 GMT -8
It gets even worse- and more complicated. Tonight I asked the rabbi, and it turns out the modern rabbis (of Rabbinical Judaism fame) are NOT the descendants of the Pharisees! The Pharisees were the party of the people in the 1st cen. CE. Most Jews of the time were Pharisees. A huge number of Pharisees were followers of Yeshua, so when Akiva declared Bar Kochba to be the Messiah, they were forced to leave. Many others apparently followed them. Of those who stayed, most were killed in the revolt, so only a small sub-sect was left. Afterwards these went to Yavna. They hated the ones who had left, blaming them for their defeat. Their views became radicalized, and it was from this group the modern rabbis sprung up. So, strictly speaking, todays rabbis are not the descendants of the Pharisees.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jun 21, 2014 0:22:47 GMT -8
Until fairly recently I was under the impression that Christianity is Jewish (I have a book by that title) but that the message was perverted along the way. It’s a common mistake- I’m reading a book right now written by Dr. R. D. E. Showers and he speaks of the history of the church as I once saw it: “As the early believers were forced from Israel they carried the Good News to the lands to which they were dispersed. As they converted more Gentiles, they started to hold more sway than the Jewish believers; and so their beliefs and forms of worship started to infiltrate and finally take over, effectively displacing the Jews.” This is actually just another facet of Replacement Theology called (by me) Displacement Theology. But I believed the roots of the Christian Church were Jewish, nonetheless, and we just needed to get back to those roots.
As I started to move from Hebrew Roots (we all gotta start somewhere) into Messianism, I began to see those roots as rotted, diseased, dieing. I came to the conclusion “our” roots were not essentially Jewish, but pagan. Not a bad bit of deductive reasoning, given what I knew at the time. Since “we” had come out of the Roman Catholic Church, and had never completely (or even mostly) severed ties with their holidays, worship and beliefs, the “Protestant” Church was still pagan. We just needed to get those roots healthy and thriving again and we’d be OK.
Here’s the problem with all that thinking, deducing and believing: the Christian Church has never been Jewish. They never worshiped in a synagogue, never were converted by the Natsarim, who were the descendants of the 1st cen. believers, the Apostles and Yeshua Himself. The catholic (universal, or Christian) church never existed until the 4th cen CE. Irenaeus, Clement, Origen, Tertulian and all the early church fathers were pagans. None were of the Natsarim. In fact, the early church, along with Rome persecuted the Natsarim. Later, as they gained more control under Constantine, and all the way into the next millennium after the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox schism, the “church” (now “churches”) continued to persecute the Natsarim and their Jewish bretherin. In fact, the last we hear of the Natsarim historically is sometime in the 6th cen. CE (though some claim there was a remnant). However the church’s persecution of the Jews, whose roots they supposedly shared, is common knowledge and a stain they will never be able to erase.
Our Protestant fathers were no better. Martin Luther was quoted often by Hitler as justification for the Holocaust, and John Calvin used to have anyone who even the least bit disagreed with his theology hanged. Few others were any more palatable. And none of them after Luther asked the obvious question, “Could there be other things wrong with Catholic theology?” It is like Luther wrote the Protestant Mishna, and everything thereafter was our Gemara; just commentary on Luther’s works. I think I’ve said that here before, and it is for the most part (almost completely) true!
The roots of Christianity are not Jewish; they are pagan, aleph to tav. They are not sick, they are death itself. And we can’t fix it. We can only come out of it; leave it for something better.
Dan C
edit: Christianity is however based on the word of God. So even though much was perverted by too many and often inaccurate translations, twisting of meanings from the church fathers, cherry-picking and compartmentalization taught to adherents; it is still the word of God and the truth is still there. My hope and belief is that there are many "saved" Christians. However they are saved in spite of many of the doctrines they are taught; doctrines that are dangerously wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Questor on Jun 21, 2014 15:21:11 GMT -8
Until fairly recently I was under the impression that Christianity is Jewish (I have a book by that title) but that the message was perverted along the way. It’s a common mistake- I’m reading a book right now written by Dr. R. D. E. Showers and he speaks of the history of the church as I once saw it: “As the early believers were forced from Israel they carried the Good News to the lands to which they were dispersed. As they converted more Gentiles, they started to hold more sway than the Jewish believers; and so their beliefs and forms of worship started to infiltrate and finally take over, effectively displacing the Jews.” This is actually just another facet of Replacement Theology called (by me  ) Displacement Theology. But I believed the roots of the Christian Church were Jewish, nonetheless, and we just needed to get back to those roots. As I started to move from Hebrew Roots (we all gotta start somewhere) into Messianism, I began to see those roots as rotted, diseased, dieing. I came to the conclusion “our” roots were not essentially Jewish, but pagan. Not a bad bit of deductive reasoning, given what I knew at the time. Since “we” had come out of the Roman Catholic Church, and had never completely (or even mostly) severed ties with their holidays, worship and beliefs, the “Protestant” Church was still pagan. We just needed to get those roots healthy and thriving again and we’d be OK. Here’s the problem with all that thinking, deducing and believing: the Christian Church has never been Jewish. They never worshiped in a synagogue, never were converted by the Natsarim, who were the descendants of the 1st cen. believers, the Apostles and Yeshua Himself. The catholic (universal, or Christian) church never existed until the 2nd cen CE. Irenaeus, Clement, Origen, Tertulian and all the early church fathers were pagans. None were of the Natsarim. In fact, the early church, along with Rome persecuted the Natsarim. Later, as they gained more control under Constantine, and all the way into the next millennium after the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox schism, the “church” (now “churches”) continued to persecute the Natsarim and their Jewish bretherin. In fact, the last we hear of the Natsarim historically is sometime in the 6th cen. CE (though some claim there was a remnant). However the church’s persecution of the Jews, whose roots they supposedly shared, is common knowledge and a stain they will never be able to erase. Our Protestant fathers were no better. Martin Luther was quoted often by Hitler as justification for the Holocaust, and John Calvin used to have anyone who even the least bit disagreed with his theology hanged. Few others were any more palatable. And none of them after Luther asked the obvious question, “Could there be other things wrong with Catholic theology?” It is like Luther wrote the Protestant Mishna, and everything thereafter was our Gemara; just commentary on Luther’s works. I think I’ve said that here before, and it is for the most part (almost completely) true! The roots of Christianity are not Jewish; they are pagan, aleph to tav. They are not sick, they are death itself. And we can’t fix it. We can only come out of it; leave it for something better. Dan  C
However, you must distinguish between the churches and the Believers. The Believers that know Yehoshua have a relationship with Him, and walk with the Ruach residing in them, and it is the Ruach that teaches them, and draws them to knowledge and obedience. As you know, I have no fellowship I can meet with, but I have fellow Believers in Yehoshua that keep seeking out more knowledge of what G-d wants of them, and I fellowship very well with them. We talk a lot of G-d together, and learn from one another, and are upheld in our trust in Yehoshua by each other. And when time and inclination allows, they stop in at their churches on an occasional Sunday, and find less and less there. And they turn to preachers on radio and the internet that are teaching end times, and teaching obedience...even if they are not teaching all of the  directly.
Those people that are teaching G-d to those under their leadership teach through the lens of Pauline Christianity, on how to be a Believer, and to do what the Ruach wants you to do. The Brit Chadashah is full of examples of how to live in obedience, even if they are not living in a Jewish manner, and the effective Preachers out there are teaching more than just Grace. They teach how to walk an obedient life in a non-Jewish context. They take advantage of the Grace that G-d has given them in Yehoshua, and teach their listeners how live in the world we live in, and yet become like Yehoshua, even if they do not do all that Yehoshua did as a Jew.
They teach humility, patience, endurance, and kindliness. They teach how to avoid sin as they are aware of it...if it is not in honor of G-d, nor good for man, they teach to avoid it. To reverence G-d, to not murder, kill, steal, or lie, to avoid promiscuous behavior, and to keep their word, to be faithful to G-d, and to their spouses, to raise their children up in the context of the beliefs that they have; to avoid the occult, which is their version of idolatry; and to be kind to animals; to avoid coveting anything, to walk in spiritual purity, and to endlessly seek within the Scriptures for all they should know. They teach gathering together for learning and support of their trust in Yehoshua, and they do not teach it as a Jew would. It is not required that they do.
They avoid teaching as , and teach it as Yehoshua-ness...as Christian behavior...a certain way of living and walking, that if followed, is covering a great deal of where it does not delineate becoming a good Jew living in Israel during Temple times. They are set on finding a way to love G-d with all their mind, heart, and strength, and their neighbor as themselves, but they have no need to become Jewish, and therefore decline it. And because they bear fruit in Yehoshua, they are not interested in the Mosaic Covenant except as the supporting mandate for how they believe, and tend to spend as much time in the Tanakh as they do in the Brit Chadashah. They have their own traditions and rituals that are not pagan...just not Jewish, and because of being Gentile, and under Grace, they see their imperfect walk, and rest in Yehoshua. They do not want to be adopted into a way of life that is not theirs, nor can anyone say that they must become a Jew, and follow all of , in order to be saved. And since a great deal of the is cultural and temple rules, they are not wrong.
I believe that they need to keep the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath on Saturday, and to keep the moedim, but they are not taught this, because of the minimum requirements laid down by the Jerusalem Council. I think they should keep kashrut...and some do. I think they need to be in constant thanksgiving for all that G-d has given them...and most are. I am not a fruit inspector, but those Believers that I keep company with give evidence of good fruit, and that they are one with Yehoshua, and therefore with me, and with you.
And slowly, but surely, they are coming out of the churches, and the pagan traditions. They will never be Jewish, but they walk with G-d.
The churches, on the other hand are edifices to pagan tradition, resting in the idea of being a good person, like Yehoshua was, but are never really told exactly what Yehoshua did in His life...except preach as He taught of the coming of the New Covenant in Himself. The churches see a Yehoshua that was a great preacher, and who spent most of His life just living a normal life...they just don't see that it was within a Jewish context. They are not told much of how Yehoshua spent all the years of His mission in prayer, seeking guidance, and then preaching the message of the kingdom being among mankind, and yet still waking to the same pattern of Jewish life that no one ever talks about. They see no value in the , as they think it is for Jews only, and teach it that way.
Those that say they are Christians, but do not know Yehoshua, for all of their pretense of being Christian by virtue of their membership in one of the MainC churches, and their mild adherence to Noahide Laws are simply not members of the New Covenant.
Those that say they are Jewish, and attend Synagogues that follow teach and follow , but deny Yehoshua are simply not members of the New Covenant either, and need to leave some of the Mishna and Talmud behind just as much as the MainC churches need to leave paganism behind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Questor on Jun 21, 2014 15:31:06 GMT -8
It gets even worse- and more complicated. Tonight I asked the rabbi, and it turns out the modern rabbis (of Rabbinical Judaism fame) are NOT the descendants of the Pharisees! The Pharisees were the party of the people in the 1st cen. CE. Most Jews of the time were Pharisees. A huge number of Pharisees were followers of Yeshua, so when Akiva declared Bar Kochba to be the Messiah, they were forced to leave. Many others apparently followed them. Of those who stayed, most were killed in the revolt, so only a small sub-sect was left. Afterwards these went to Yavna. They hated the ones who had left, blaming them for their defeat. Their views became radicalized, and it was from this group the modern rabbis sprung up. So, strictly speaking, todays rabbis are not the descendants of the Pharisees. Dan C
As soon as the Jews began to curse the Notsri, I think they became followers of the Talmud, and not of .
Fortunately, not every Jew followed them...except in the curse against unbelievers, and I am well aware that there are many Jews who hate their history of the persecution of the Notsri, and early Christians, just as much as they hate the Orthodox Christian Churches that spun out of control, and persecuted the Jews.
Now, if we can merely gather all those that are well intended into Messianic Judaism, where both are welcome, we might really get somewhere! |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jun 21, 2014 16:59:52 GMT -8
..., you must distinguish between the churches and the Believers. The Believers that know Yehoshua have a relationship with Him, and walk with the Ruach residing in them, and it is the Ruach that teaches them, and draws them to knowledge and obedience.
I am pretty far away from the nearest synagogue here as well. I was going to make the trip today, but came under serious attack and didn't make it. Would have been only the second time at a regular Shabbath service there. So I know what you mean. It is frustrating. And as you know I too fellowship with an AoG church here regularly. In fact, I'd say I'm in the top 10% of the faithful there, which is pretty good because that church has a lot of believers who show the fruits of the Spirit in a huge way! But their doctrines are wrong on far too many accounts. And they are guilty of not stressing repentance and obedience enough when dealing with salvation. In fact, I got into a pretty serious argument with one of their senior members over the issue of the importance of repentance. So while I may go there for the fellowship and for some training and edification, I ALWAYS use a lot of discernment; and I do not take communion because they use crackers which have leaven in them- just one example of how you have to watch yourself when with Christian churches.
But they do not walk as Yeshua walked! He was a observant Jew. They see Him as a contemporary Gentile who is more than happy to sit with them as they twist, convolute, distort and lie about the words of Paul so they can go and do whatever they please. This is nothing more than good pagan hermeneutics, as I explained in another thread. You can make a text say whatever you want, there are no absolutes.
But they pervert these concepts beyond recognition. People like one recent poster here with a perverse doctrine of love did not happen in a vacuum. It's what is taught in many, to some degree even most mainC churches today.
Sin is not what they are aware of in their pagan mentality. It is what God said it is. But since we are here, whenever witnessing about Natsar to a CHristian, there is invariably an "oh crap!" moment where they start to understand that you are taking away their excuse before God. Most get angry with you at that point. Their problem is they never had an excuse before God, only in the dark corners of their mind where humans tend to think we can fool God by not looking hard at what He gave us, His Word.
Actually every aspect of their worship, their walk and their observances is rooted in paganism. From their steeples and crosses, their pulpits, their Easter Sunrise services (not to mention Easter itself), every inch and every space on a Christmas tree and a wreath ... we could go on and on. They spiritualize these things and say it is OK because they do it for God. But if we want to do our worship, our feasts, our walk and our halacha for God, then we need to do it as He said, not some pagan pope who never had ANY traceable connection to the early believers or to God.
They don't even keep the few laws they do accept. Very few of them keep "the Lord's Day" holy, even by mainC standards. Many, many of them worship the Cross as an idol. And other than a beach or public pool, the best place to go lust on women is the Sanctuary on Sunday.
As I said, there are many who show evidence of being saved in mainC churches like the one I fellowship with. But too many are sped happily down that wide path to destruction by their doctrines too.
And that thing about not being a fruit inspector- it is a perfect example of how false doctrine is so ingrained into us, it is hard to shake off even after we leave.
1 Corinthians 5:12-13 (ESV) For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
John 7:24 (ESV)"Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”You are told to judge those who profess belief in Yeshua! Otherwise how could you discern who to fellowship with and who not? This is especially true in a movement like Messianism where the enemy is so active in sending false teachers, disruptors, and outright demoniacs into our midst!
They need to hurry tings up a bit; I'm gettin' lonesome here!
Judging who I will fellowship with, or who I might need to counsel or witness to is one thing. I do not as a rule judge anyone's salvation- that is between them and God, and frankly I do not know where that line of demarcation is regarding saved/unsaved status. My only judgment is whether, when and how to talk to someone about Yeshua and/or observance. I "preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching." (2 Tim 4:2) ... except I admit I do have some problems with that "patience" part  !
Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jun 21, 2014 20:32:18 GMT -8
It is a pity that they think they are, and that Rabbi Akiva was merely trying to consolidate the writings of the Jewish faith, rather than riding his own vendetta against anyone who did not agree with him, and his particular sect of Jews. As soon as the Jews began to curse the Notsri, I think they became followers of the Talmud, and not of . Fortunately, not every Jew followed them...except in the curse against unbelievers, and I am well aware that there are many Jews who hate their history of the persecution of the Notsri, and early Christians, just as much as they hate the Orthodox Christian Churches that spun out of control, and persecuted the Jews. Now, if we can merely gather all those that are well intended into Messianic Judaism, where both are welcome, we might really get somewhere!
As for being followers of the Talmud, which I take you to mean they hold the Talmud above , I've heard this occurred after the 2nd-4th cen rabbis wrote down the Mishna so it wouldn't be lost to them in the diaspora. The Mishna explained the , using the same hermeneutical tools we've discussed elsewhere. However they immediately started writing commentary which explained the Mishna (Gemara, which combined gives us the Talmud) and teaching that since this all explained , it was a higher law than . Of course, one would have to be a rabbi, or at least go to a good yeshiva to begin to understand Talmud (which gets pretty wild in places). So they were able to set themselves up as the authority, giving themselves absolute control.
Jews always followed the Mishna/Talmud/Oral Tradition. Just I don't think (and that phrase could always precipitate another "Found Out I Was Wrong" post) it was placed above before this. (So much we hear on biblical history is conflicting. Not surprising I guess, since the enemy is on a mission to deceive and confuse us.)
Gathering the well intended in one place might be fun, just don't let 'em pave any roads, OK? 
Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jul 10, 2014 8:42:31 GMT -8
Not so much found out I was wrong as I've grown, but:
I am now completely divorced from Hebrew Roots and Christianity as far as my belief system goes. I still fellowship with both to an extent, but the more I study the more I find wrong in them; and I get the feeling I've only scratched the surface so far! I used to be hesitant to take on the whole mantle of Judaism (not to be confused with Rabbinical Judaism). I now consider myself a proselyte to Messianic Judaism and all that entails. I find myself more committed to halacha as given by Rabbi S. It is such a huge blessing to sit under his instruction one day most weeks.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jul 18, 2014 20:47:06 GMT -8
Well, this thread's a sure thing to stay at the top.
I didn't think anyone except Yeshua called Adonai "My Father." But as Questor and jimmie pointed out:
This wasn't conclusive, because he's talking about crying out. Still, I had to give some on the issue.
So I guess I win that "argument"- I learned I was wrong ... AGAIN ... but learning is winning in my book, so thanks for the lesson, ya'll.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jul 21, 2014 5:40:03 GMT -8
but learning is winning in my book, so thanks for the lesson, ya'll.
Dan C Mine too. |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Aug 11, 2014 15:10:09 GMT -8
I am, since the retreat, becoming more convinced against breaking Shabbath for expediencies sake. Things like conducting business, purchasing items or doing some (small) work on Shabbath. I am going to move my son the last weekend this month, and will have to work (load his household), as well as possibly eat out on Shabbath. There are extenuating circumstances, and it is a huge mitzvah. Still now I am looking for ways to minimize the things that would break Shabbath. Like convincing my sons we need to bring sandwiches to eat on Saturday - to minimize the financial load because we are going to be eating out while traveling on Sunday. I will also tell them I am prohibited from buying meals on Shabbath, but somehow I doubt this will be as convincing an argument to them. We'll see. I can always eat alone if they want to go out.
I did talk with the Rabbi about the mitzvah and breaking Shabbath to move my son, and he said I was doing the right thing, just not to "overdo" it.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 2, 2014 21:10:00 GMT -8
I am in the process of retying all my tzitzyot using white and blue wool yarn. Tekhelet is blue in Hebrew. The Talmud says that this color came from the chilazon. Some say this is a sea snail because it says so in the newer parts of the Talmud. Problem is sea snails aren’t kosher. This is where we part company with Rabbinical Messianics and Orthodox Jews. They hold Talmud to be equal or even greater than . We can learn a lot from Talmud, but it isn’t .
dictates that nothing treif comes into the presence of G-d. Anything not kosher renders ritual items unclean. Furthermore if the Hebrews could have found enough snails (which are fairly rare) in the wilderness to dye their tzitzyot AND the Temple hangings, it isn’t likely they could have extracted the dye as it is a pretty involved process even today. So why are there people pushing this idea? For money! These snails are not abundant, and it is a difficult process in collecting this ink. So they can charge for it, and it is mostly us Meshiachim who are defrauded by it. Almost all mainstream Jews still wear white tzitzyot, as their Rabbis have not bought into this.
I just wish I’d heard Rabbi S teach on this BEFORE I went out and bought all those snail-strings!
Dan C
|
|
- there are 70 faces to 
you betcha'!) C
) Displacement Theology. But I believed the roots of the Christian Church were Jewish, nonetheless, and we just needed to get back to those roots.
! 
