|
|
Post by jimmie on Nov 30, 2017 15:12:10 GMT -8
Welcome to the forum.
Yes fellowship is difficult. My son has the same issues here in Arkansas. Just have to hang in there and pray for God's will.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 31, 2017 5:15:48 GMT -8
Today, October 31, 2017 is the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther nailing his 95 thesis to the church door in Wittenberg Germany. Ever wonder why he choose October 31, to nail them to the church door. Well there were going to be a lot of people, at the church that day celebrating All Hollow’s Eve or as we call it Halloween. Since about half of his theses were dealing with indulgencies, or the purchasing of oneself or a dead loved one out of purgatory, what a great way to get the word out to the people that the church was stilling from, than when they were there to buy the indulgencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 27, 2017 9:55:30 GMT -8
Next week’s reading schedule: Colossians 2:13-15 (CJB) You were dead because of your sins, that is, because of your “foreskin,” your old nature. But God made you alive along with the Messiah by forgiving you all your sins. He wiped away the bill of charges against us. Because of the regulations, it stood as a testimony against us; but he removed it by nailing it to the execution-stake. Stripping the rulers and authorities of their power, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by means of the stake.
The term being translated “it” here is “autos.” According to Strong’s this can be interpreted in either the singular or the plural. Now the first “it” does seem to be referring to a list of charges, so the singular would be correct. However the subject of the passage does not change, so if it is the list of charges being spoken of that second and third “it” should in fact be “them!” They, plural, meaning the charges are what is on the list, singular. Furthermore, the word translated “them” in the next sentence is the same, “autos.” This to me indicates intentional deceit, if not by Dr. Stern then by the earlier translators he relied on and apparently agreed with. Stern however, seemingly influenced by Christian theology, renders the term “it” all three times, insinuating “it” is the  which was nailed to the execution stake. HaSem’s instructions are nullified so that we won’t sin any more. Makes about as much sense as Yeshua giving the “Law” so He could come and suffer in order to remove the Law; which is what is being said here. author: Daniel Alon Caan Sources: JPS Study TNK, Rabbi Stanley, my father and others Notes: (1) Malach HaBrit- Messenger of the Covenant (Malachi 3:1) (2) “-“ within a name of G-d should be read as an “o” Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. What is the “it” taken out of the way and nailed to the Jesus’ cross? It is the “handwriting of ordinances” which are blotted out. Many conclude that the “handwriting of ordinances” is referring to God’s Laws. This is a result of a lack of knowledge. Let’s see if we can track down what the “handwriting of ordinances” is. First, consider that the “handwriting of ordinances” were nailed to the cross, which according to Matt 27:32, Mark 15:2 and John 19:17 stood on Galgatha or the place of the skull. According to Deut. 12, When Israel came into the land they were to place the curse upon Mount Ebal, which means bald. As in the bald of the head or skull. Deut 27:15-26 contains the curses that were to be announced upon Mount Ebal. The last one is: Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them: and all the people shall say, Amen. So the “handwriting of ordinances” were the curses. Second, consider that the “handwriting of ordinances” have to be against us and are a result of our trespasses against God. Mark 9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part. The same is true of ordinances, if they are not against us they are for us and thus not nailed to the cross. Are there any ordinances that are for us. According to Deut. 12, When Israel came into the land they were to place the blessing upon Mount Gerizim, which means “cut up” bring to mind a covenant which is “cut up”. So absolutely nothing that brings a blessing was nailed to the cross. And what brings the blessing or the curse: Deut 11: 26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; 27 A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: 28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 20, 2017 9:03:31 GMT -8
From the thread “In the Beginning” we learned that man bore the image of the earth and God. His body was formed first then God breathed the spirit into him. From this dual nature of man, we very quickly see man falling into one or the other of the two natures: Flesh and Spirit. Cain the first born falls into the flesh nature while Abel falls into the spirit nature. This pattern is repeated many times through the scripture:
Ishmael Vs. Isaac
Leah Vs. Rachael
Esau Vs. Jacob
Reuben Vs. Yehudah
All of Jacob’s sons Vs. Yosef
Er & Onan Vs. Shelah
Zerah Vs. Peretz
Aaron Vs. Moses
Nadab & Abihu Vs. Eleazar & Ithamar
Generation of Isreal that left Egypt Vs. Generation that entered the promised land
Mahlon through Orpah Vs. Chilion through Ruth
Near Kinsman Vs. Boaz
Eli’s sons Vs. Sammuel
David’s older brothers Vs. David
Saul Vs. David
Adonijah Vs. Solomon
The first Adam Vs. the Second Adam (Jesus) I Cor 15:22&45-49
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 17, 2017 14:18:59 GMT -8
This is also a response to Ben’s thread, on “In the Beginning”. I view the creation story very simply. You might say, I am on the “P” of PaRDeS. The firsts three days God creates the canvas that he will fill on the second three days. Day one, he creates light and darkness and places the sun, moon and stars into them on the fourth day. Day two, he creates the firmament (air) in the mist of the waters and places birds and fish into them on the fifth day. Day three, he creates the land/earth, with the grass and trees, and places animals and man into them on the sixth day. When God said let us make man in our image, he was speaking of Himself and the earth. These are the only two entities that participated in the creation of man. We bare the image of God and earth. The earth supplied the physical material and God supplied the Sprit and the man became a Soul. The trinity concept of God cannot be forced upon this scripture. Nor can the day-age or gap theories, which try to extend the days of creation into long periods of time. If a day is claimed to be 1000 years, the creation story will not work. Adam was created on the six day, and God rested on the 7th day. Adam clearly died after the 7th day. Yet, he was only 930 years old when he died. If a day is a 1000 years, Adam should have been over a 1000 years old when he died because he lived through the entire 7th day or 1000 year period.
The other very simple fact about the creation story is that it sets the stage for God’s dealing with man. After creation, God set rules or laws, for man to follow, and punishes him if he does not follow those laws. After God saved Noah and his family from the flood, he set out laws to be obeyed and declared the punishment for breaking them. After he saved Israel, by bring them out of Egypt, he set out laws to be obeyed and declared the punishment for breaking them. Each time God saved Israel through a Judge, Prophet or King, Israel is reminded that they are to obey God’s Laws or suffer the consequence. And when a sinner is saved, from his sins through God’s grace and not through any efforts of his own, he is faced, with the responsibility to “go and sin no more”. I.e. keep God’s law.
P.S. A note on the word God or Elohim being plural. So is the word Ephraim. Ephraim is not three persons separate and distinct yet one and neither is Elohim. Ephraim means fruits or fruitful. Elohim means powers or powerful. Both are simply a name that shows the character of the person being named.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Sept 28, 2017 7:27:44 GMT -8
Gerrett
Thank you for your comments. You may be right about me applying scripture out of its’ context. But I have always had a problem, with the concept, that being outside of Israel discounts a portion of scripture or somehow changes our responsibility to fulfill the law. For example, were the 2.5 tribes on the west bank exempt, from any portion of the Law, because of their geographical location, being out side of the Promised Land? I find no evidence of that being the case. When David was driven from the common wealth of Israel, he appears to have fulfilled the law, in that he didn’t return the Egyptian slave that he come upon, to his master. Naomi appears to have taught Ruth the ways of God, while in Moab. Daniel refused to eat unclean foods while in Babylon. To my mind, my location does not affect my obligation and/or desire to fulfill God’s law.
I, as you do, live outside of a community of believers. But our respective experience is vastly different. When I see the occasional person on the street, I see a professional panhandler. Someone who is willing to tell me his children are hungry, to get money from me. Then gets mad because I offer to take him to a restaurant, to feed his family, instead of giving him money. Or, the one who got mad because my daughter didn’t give him the receipt for the clothes she bought his children, at the local store. Thus making is more difficult to return the clothes for cash.
That being said, we each must fulfill the law, in our own experience. As alon might say follow the Hallica (spelling?) of our local experience.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Sept 25, 2017 14:05:47 GMT -8
I have difficulty giving as you describe. We are instructed to leave a portion of our fields for gleaning by the poor. If we give a homeless person a granola bar, that they did not have to work for, are we not reinforcing the idea that the homeless person does not have to work. Are we giving a meal against the instruction of he who does not work does not eat, 2 Thess. 3:10? Deut. 15 instructs us to open our hands wide unto the poor. But this giving is in the form of a loan. I.e. the poor person is obliged to pay you back until the year of release comes around. You may not be fully repaid but the important thing is the poor person has skin in the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Aug 9, 2017 15:23:15 GMT -8
Now there are some who will not come under the instruction of any Rabbi or Messianic sect because they want to do it their way. They are their own Rabbi. Frankly, all those I've met where I live that are like this are far from qualified to take that title or make those decisions. But it's their life; they can live it as they please. What I don't understand is there are more of these than there are people who attend shul in this area. Read more: #ixzz4pIr6RYQp" rel="norewrite" target="_blank">theloveofgod.proboards.com/thread/4281/oral-#ixzz4pIr6RYQpWhat may be hard for those people to understand is, just because there are some Rabbis who act like the son's of Eli all do not. You know throw the baby out with the bath water. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Aug 9, 2017 14:54:48 GMT -8
Therefore, surely we can assume if "the Lord says/will.." is used that this is not from our Elohim, who always identified himself by name. I don't quite understand why the use of the term "The LORD", by Christians, is frowned upon by Messianics. When Jews encounter the Personal Name of God in Scriptures, do they not pronounce it “Adonai” or “My LORD.” Christians are just following a tradition of the Jews, though it is through ignorance that they do so. I think, if you follow your guide lines for determining a false prophet, you run the risk of what the followers of Christ did in Mark 9: 38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against us is on our part. 41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jun 8, 2017 14:27:32 GMT -8
God appears to be speaking to the earth in Gen. 1:26, but who is speaking to in Gen. 3:23.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 25, 2017 15:09:35 GMT -8
It is also the day the law was given, as I recall.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 24, 2017 14:14:35 GMT -8
Every thing is back to normal. thanks for the prayers.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 20, 2017 13:04:10 GMT -8
Lighting strike knocked out power and water and damaged my son's truck. A 20-inch sewer line created a giant sink hole, had to go to work. Have a blessed Sabbath and say a prayer for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 15, 2017 4:43:00 GMT -8
King James Bible John 19:11
Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.
International Standard Version
Jesus answered him, "You have no authority over me at all, except what was given to you from above. That's why the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin."
The government has no authority or power that was not given them by God and his Word/Jesus. Here Jesus plainly states that what Pilot (government) was sinning and those who turned him over to the government were sinning. God(Jesus) never gave the government the right to sin.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 12, 2017 15:01:02 GMT -8
The simple answer to picking grain on the Sabbath:
Deuteronomy 23:24-25 When thou comest into thy neighbour's vineyard, then thou mayest eat grapes thy fill at thine own pleasure; but thou shalt not put any in thy vessel.
When you enter your neighbor's standing grain, then you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not wield a sickle in your neighbor's standing grain.
Then there was those who were not given the knowledge of the Kingdom plainly:
Matthew 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given
Luke 8:10 He replied, "The knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, 'Though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'
Certain Pharisees, who where not given the knowledge of the Kingdom, are the ones being addressed in Matt 12:1-8, Mark 2:23-28, and Luke 6:1-5
|
|
which was nailed to the execution stake. HaSem’s instructions are nullified so that we won’t sin any more. Makes about as much sense as Yeshua giving the “Law” so He could come and suffer in order to remove the Law; which is what is being said here.
