|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 20, 2015 15:45:19 GMT -8
[
If there is evidence of real abuse you could call CPS. But call that the nuclear option, and be ready for the fallout.
Dan C Ever been on the receiving end of that action. Not easy. I ran a 22 year old off who was chasing my 16 year old daughter and he turns us in for child neglect because we slept in tents during Tabernacles and had "no food" for the children. Pretty awkward giving a tour of my canning pantry to the local CPS worker and state police. These folks claim to be Christian, then treat them as such. Sharpen them. They may not even know that there is a problem. Rebuke a wise man and he will love you. Jimmie |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 12, 2015 8:36:24 GMT -8
Questions are often answered differently according to the audience.
Ps 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Ps 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
Consider the audience:
John spoke to agents of the Pharisees (the blind). I am not Elijah but then told them “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Isaiah.” In other words, if you know the prophets you would know who he (John) was.
Jesus spoke to the multitudes (the followers of the blind) confirming that John was Elijah. He also spoke to his disciples (the seeing) concerning John and they understood it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 12, 2015 7:06:51 GMT -8
Not to distract from what alon has said, but maybe a more direct answer to your question would be:
According to Isaiah 53:3, the Servant of the LORD (we understand him to be the Messiah) would be “DESPISED and rejected of men.” This passage of prophecy is what Matthew quotes/paraphrases in Matthew 2:23.
In John 1:46, Nathaniel comments, ” “’Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?’” Coupled with other obvious references suggesting that southern Jews (Judeans) looked down upon northern Jews (from Galilee, the province in which Nazareth was located), it seems to be called a Nazarene was considered a put-down. The phrase “he will be called a Nazarene” is equal to “he was despised.”
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 12, 2015 6:06:31 GMT -8
I don't even know what the soncino, artscroll or the Bavli is. However I do have a copy of the Psalms.
Psalm 69: 4 - Those who hate me without reason outnumber the hairs of my head; many are my enemies without cause, those who seek to destroy me. I am forced to restore what I did not steal.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 8, 2015 10:32:09 GMT -8
It is not really all that hard to understand. Consider the typical Christian sacrifice on thanksgiving. The USDA (priest) inspects the turkey or hog for its’ suitability (without blemish) for consumption. Then it is purchased, prepared (burnt), blessed and consumed. Quite simple actually.
Deut 12: 17 Thou mayest not eat within thy gates the tithe of thy corn, or of thy wine, or of thy oil, or the firstlings of thy herds or of thy flock, nor any of thy vows which thou vowest, nor thy freewill offerings, or heave offering of thine hand:18 But thou must eat them before the LORD thy God in the place which the LORD thy God shall choose, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thy manservant, and thy maidservant, and the Levite that is within thy gates: and thou shalt rejoice before the LORD thy God in all that thou puttest thine hands
Deut 14:23 And thou shalt eat before the LORD thy God, in the place which he shall choose to place his name there, the tithe of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the firstlings of thy herds and of thy flocks; that thou mayest learn to fear the LORD thy God always.
For an example of people doing it right and the priest doing it wrong by custom, see I Sammuel 3:12-17.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Jan 7, 2015 10:34:28 GMT -8
offering: A presentation made to a deity as an act of religious worship or sacrifice; oblation
Lev 1:2-3
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.
There is no deliberate mistranslation in acts 24. But someone who has no understanding of the OT could easily be mislead as to what "offering" might mean in the NT.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 29, 2014 16:08:45 GMT -8
[quote author=" alon" source="/post/18299/thread" timestamp="1419736687God didn't change, we did.[/b] Dan C[/font][/quote] If I understand what you are saying, it is similiar to the "IF THEN" statement in programing. IF you eat... THEN you die. Nothing about the program or programer changed, when the fruit was eaten. The program just went to the next step. Jimmie |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 26, 2014 11:02:41 GMT -8
] The Bible doesn't record the names of them all, many are daughters, and they grow up and intermarry, brothers with sisters, nothing wrong with that back then, before the written  was given. Rabbi Ben Avraham If God can add(change) to his law as time goes on, what prevents him from doing away with the law as claimed by the run of the mill christian? Jimmie |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 19, 2014 6:30:05 GMT -8
Maks since to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 18, 2014 6:08:41 GMT -8
But I've also seen where some start listening to or reading someone else who they think sounds more knowledgeable than we here trying to slog our way through to the truth. There's a lot of charismatic charlatans out there who can sound enlightened but lead you into darkness. Dan C
Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
edit: took out the tags cluttering the post- no change to content. Good scriptural reference!
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 16, 2014 10:01:42 GMT -8
I like the approach used in the recording, in which God places limits on the use of wine. It is similar to the LORD placing limits on divorce. Divorce is allowed because of the hardness or men’s hearts. Alon pointed out Deu 14:23-26. Do we see any restrictions placed upon wine in that passage? The first restriction is to do it “before the LORD your God”. In other words, your actions must always be acceptable before the LORD. The second is timing. Wine is allowed during the Lord’s Feast times. This passage speaks of consuming wine only during feasts. Allowable consumption of wine at other times cannot be proven by this passage. The third restriction is your personal desire. If you don’t like wine then don’t drink it. Eli –a gluten- rebuked Hannah because he thought she was drunk during the feast days. So apparently the priests, who were forbidden to consume wine while they ministered the priest office, would monitor the feasters to see that they did not get drunk during the feasts.
I have never understood how Prov. 31:6-7 could be used as a license to drink wine. As Alon points out, it is in the context of a speech given to a king in which the king in enjoined from drinking wine. Now as I understand salvation, we are called to be kings and priests of the LORD not to a state of perishing or bitter distress. So I’m going to leave the wine to those that are in a lost state and conduct myself as a king or priest of the LORD.
And to help with the wine meant grape juice argument. Consider this. It does at times. The English word “wine” is used to translate four Hebrew words. Yayin is only one of the words. At least two of the other words cannot mean intoxicating drink. Do to computer problems, I am without any bible reference tools at this time and cannot show share the revelent words and scripture. I am sure the knowledge of these words and scriptures could be used to support the idea that wine is not always intoxicating.
Jimmie
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 15, 2014 7:05:24 GMT -8
Thank you! It all comes together again in our Yeshua, the picture of His justice and His mercy all in one face; absolutely amazing! Something I knew, but didn't really understand. Amen! |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 15, 2014 7:02:34 GMT -8
Also, regarding how we as Messianic believers observe the , .... maybe we are laying up the unnecessary burdens this time. Are we making it harder for Jewish people to come to Yeshua by picking on the way they do things? If going without cheese on my turkey sandwich makes that the slightest bit easier, than no cheese for me. Maybe that's a trite example, but maybe that's how trite we can sometimes be. I don't know. I am just trying to put myself in their shoes. Jewish people have enough to have to sort through, enough to have to go through, enough to loose for the sake of Yeshua. If keeping a commandment that is not contrary to helps them hold onto their identity and makes their life a little easier, then lets focus on the commandments to love one another and "not to strive over words to no profit, to the ruin of the hearer" . 2 Timothy 2:14. Yes! A fence that I can live with. I can and have restricted my freedoms in order not to offend someone. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 15, 2014 6:13:32 GMT -8
Therefore, by doing his /Law/Commandments we are a reflection/witness of the Lawgiver. Very well said. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Dec 12, 2014 15:12:54 GMT -8
The law is just. Fences just ai'nt. It is plain hard to tell if a fence is ment to keep someone in or someone out. I guess it depends on which side of the fence you are on.
|
|
was given. 
