Very Well Said. Big Amen. Understanding this will avoid us from the pitfalls of Hyper Legalism and Hyper Licentiousness. The Grace of God in the context of the Law of Christ brings balance and right order to everything.
Hello Mr Solberg, I’m a very big fan of your work. I spend hours on your channel daily learning how to understand Torahism. I have a small channel and I’ve found myself attracting Black Hebrew Israelites and somehow debating them about theology. Keep up the good work and may God reward you greatly in the Kingdom to come. Hopefully someday we can cross paths and I can hear more of your wisdom. Shalom
So amazing work you’re doing. It helped me again to understand the differences about the law of God and Jesus vs. Moses. Thank you so much and God bless you🙏🏻😊
Hebrews 8:7-13 Do not be lead astray. 7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said b : “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. 9It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. 10This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 11No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” c 13By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear
Hebrews 8:11No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. *So, Christ knew that we didn’t need to teach anyone about god, and yet he goes ahead and sends people out to teach the gospel anyway? Wouldn’t it make more sense then to wait until after the gospel commission is finished to introduce the New Covenant so that it doesn’t clash with the gospel commission?*
@@user-vi9od3ue7d if you believe Solburg's teaching it won't bring you blessing but curses because you would be disobeying God's words, most of what he is saying is the opposite of what God commands
Thanks for your encouragement and the law is perfect. Unfortunately, many misuse the law and lack true understanding of what the purpose of the law is. Be well Grace & Peace
Look, I agree with the professor not here to debate with you. If you want to keep the law then keep it. I’m not knocking you. According to your interpretation of the scripture will I go to hell and loose my salvation? The answer would be No. why according to your thinking you would have to reconcile that with Mathew 5:19 which would be flawed on your own interpretation. Now so we are clear on who Christ is look at Colossians 1:15 then if that’s fact what about the laws in chapter 2,3 and 4 So what the professor said is correct about Gods Laws. So why debate, get circumcised if you feel led too. Keep the sabbath if you feel led to do so. It doesn’t tell me I have to follow those Laws.
I have to wonder how many grown men going into HR ( Torahism) have gotten circumcised. Because it’s pretty easy to tout that law since it has usually been done as a baby…
"The law of Liberty" in James 2:12-13 is also stated in such a way as being distinctly different law than the law of Moses. And it must be this law of Christ, because James says we will be judged by it - he tells us Christians to act appropriately because of it - and that we can get mercilessness because of it "So speak, and so act, as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." The 2nd sentence describes the rules of the law - mercilessness begets merciless judgement; and the inverse is true as well. This is identical to the Parable of The Unforgiving Servant. A man came to Christ for forgiveness of a huge debt; then he was merciless to a fellow servant - so Jesus revoked that man's forgiveness and made him pay himself - payment extracted by torturers. That is merciless judgement to the merciless, as James puts it - and he says we Christians should speak and act as those who will be judged by this. So this law of Liberty/Freedom, which Paul similarly mentions in Galatians 5:13-14 is for us to love, inspired by the grace of Christ. The gift of grace is not to be taken for granted, but rather it must shape our lives, and of course that's facilitated by God working in us - and procured by the instrument of faith
@@jacobsilverberg1329 A man forgiven of his sins(massive debt amount in the parable) , has that forgiveness revoked and has to pay it by torturers now. So yes. The debt was covered/forgiven - and him being forgiven is the reason he was expected to forgive, Jesus says..Then he had to pay himself, so the forgiveness was revoked. Torturers extracting the payment makes it even more clear what this is alluding to. And this is a consistent teaching, considering James said this as well - James 2:12-13 Christians are warned of the law of liberty, in which he says = mercilessness begets merciless judgement. He then goes on to say Abraham had a living faith after he was originally justified and this is necessary for us. Paul warns Christians of needing to *continue* on living by the Spirit as well, to go to Heaven " Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.8 For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not ." Verse 8 Paul says he that sows to the Spirit reaps everlasting life; then verse 9 says let us not be weary, in due season we will "reap if we faint not". The topic is reaping everlasting life; Paul says this will happen "if we faint not" in sowing to the Spirit. The forgiven man in the parable fell back into sin; which we all have to fight....
@@deesteven Well, it's a difficult passage to be sure. I am willing to accept whatever is truth, and truth is proved by its ability to reconcile contradiction, the first of which that comes to mind is John 6:47: _"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life."_ The verb "has" is present indicative active. It is not a meritoriously dependent future, as if to say; he who believes will or may have life eternal. Revocable immortality is mortality, thus Jesus would be a liar if immortality were granted, then revoked, because it was never granted in the first place if it could be revoked. Any life vulnerable to death is mortal. I'm' not convinced that the size of the debt is relevant. Probably the disparity is a hyperbole used for illustration. A couple verses back in your James citation: _"For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all."_ (10) The least infraction regardless of size from our perspective is disqualifying. So, if you could loose your salvation you would loose your salvation where such is dependent upon your conduct, absent the covering of Christ. "The forgiven man in the parable fell back into sin; which we all have to fight...." And loose, without exception! We are genetically bound to Adamic sin. We are only unlocked from it by Christ's pardon, and that is only realized at the last trump, when corruption is finally clothed by the incorruptible. "He then goes on to say Abraham had a living faith after he was originally justified..." I noted the reference to justification. There is another occurrence in 1 Cor. 6:10,11: _"...nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such WERE some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you WERE JUSTIFIED in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God"_ Justification is the not guilty verdict, the full pardon. Were the Corinthians pardoned because of their cessation from sin? Heavens no! Their sin is the reason for which the letter was penned. Verse 8: _"No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren!"_ Present active sin, yet they WERE, past tense, justified by a full pardon and they WERE those things recorded in the vice list while actively practicing those same sins upon receipt of Paul's letter. They are not guilty in the eyes of the Lord as a result of their belief. The good works Paul and others call the believer to should be our response to the debt forgiven. Even so, salvation can not be predicated upon those works. If it is, no man will ever enter the kingdom. If kingdom entry depends upon the forgiveness of our debtors, I venture to say, no man will enter. Even the outward display of release from debt is nugatory when the heart desires justice.
@@deesteven Regarding the passage itself: "Torturers extracting the payment makes it even more clear what this is alluding to." Verse 35: _"So My heavenly Father also will do to you..."_ is applied to this statement about the tormentor / jailer. The statement is that the unforgiving servant is sent to prison "until" the debt is paid. And what after that? Because until is a terminus event. The second death, the (lake of fire) is irreparable, there will be no terminal event to cause release. So, the text could not be in reference to hell as insinuated. I failed to follow through on a point from 1 Cor. 6, those believers who, justified in the past and upon belief, practiced sin. One of those sins addressed by Paul was the believers suing one another for unpaid debt: _"Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?"_ (7b) This too is named in the vice list, those things which they once were but _" ...were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."_ while in current practice. The Corinthians were forgiven a Madoff sized debt only to in-turn sue their own brothers for lesser sums. Yet all the while and in so doing, they were justified in the eyes of the Lord. Then as shown, Matthew 18:21-35 can not be referring to the cancellation of salvation.
@@jacobsilverberg1329 The size of the debt is relevant to cement the point that sins are the debt that the 1st man is forgiven of. It's a much larger amount of money than what this man then fails to forgive his fellow servant. It is a part of Jesus' point - the man was forgiven by the King of a huge amount of things, but then this man fails to forgive his brother of much less..that hammers home how wrong it is for us who are forgiven by God to not forgive each other ...That helps make Jesus' point to Peter, considering Peter asking how much he must forgive his brother - Jesus' reasoning of why Peter must forgive his brother is that Jesus forgave him of so much - the responsibility is on a man forgiven by Christ, then he's sent to the torturers to pay without that forgiveness anymore. The covering/forgiveness of the payment is gone, so the man now has to pay, and the payment is extracted by torturers. This man lost his forgiveness. Forgiveness is fundamental to salvation - it's simply equated with salvation many times in the New Testament. The tenants of the parable are super clear - forgiven of massive debt by Jesus , then needs to pay himself, by torturers. That is as straight forward as someone could ask loss of salvation to be spelled out. Regarding the passages in the New Testament that say we have eternal life when we believe; we do - we're forgiven, cleansed, and have right standing with God when we believe... but remember, so many calls to believe have the call to repent too. If God says our immortality is dependent upon something, then it is just like any other gift, able to be revoked. A gift that has the quality of lasting forever; if the gift is revoked, the quality is revoked. The Devil was an angel, angels by design, are designed to worship God forever.. That's quality was revoked from the devil and his angels, they were stripped of an eternal quality. God doesn't have the bounds where he can tell us we have a gift and it can't be revoked - especially if he spells out how it can be revoked, we have to concede to the warnings.. Also, the New Testament says eternal life is in Christ - and then the New Testament warns of being cut-off from Christ/God in John 15 and Romans 11 - our eternality is dependent on connection to them, so if we cease to be connected, we cease to benefit from them. Regarding the Corinthians, the 2nd epistle tells us a lot regarding their salvation They weren't safe in their salvation, Paul says. 2nd Corinthians 7:9-10, Paul says he's glad he made them repentant by his 1st letter, because this repentance leads to salvation " **I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God** , so that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. **For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation** , but the sorrow of the world produces death." They already believed, so this isn't the Free Grace idea of repenting from unbelief; the fact is they were in sin, that was clear from the 1st letter, and that is what Paul is happy they repented from and tells them this repentance leads to salvation. Paul telling them they were justified in 1 Corinthians 6, had a lot of statement around it, that say they need to continue in holiness to stay justified (1 Cor 9:10-10:11, 1 Cor 5:5, 1 Cor 11:32) and this passage in 2 Corinthians 7 clearly states that repentance for them leads to salvation. 2 Corinthians 5:19-21, through 2 Cor 6:3 also speaks of salvific reconciliation and Paul begs them to be reconciled - because of the sin they were in..Read the end of 2 Cor 5:18-21, through 2 Cor 7:10. Paul also says God being a Father to us is conditioned upon us being separate from the world, in 2 Cor 6:16-20 through 2 Cor 7:1, 8 verses later Paul reiterates that their repentance is necessary for salvation
I just love what you teach, one of the saddest things I see, is like Tovia singer when he tries to knock the Christian church. He does like the Hebrew roots movement for the reason that it brings in a lot of converts to Judaism. How sad that it takes the weak to deny Christ.
If Christ was and is the only one not to have sinned. If we’ve all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. How does it make sense to put a requirement to keep the law….we are all doomed! Here’s a question to 7th day Sabbath keepers. Do you keep Numbers 28:9-10? Then on the sabbath day two male lambs one year old without defect, and two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a grain offering, and its drink offering: 10‘This is the burnt offering of every sabbath in addition to the continual burnt offering and its drink offering. I don’t know one Sabbath keeper that does. Do we send our wife away during their monthly cycle? What about heading to Jerusalem three times a year as directed in the law to gather for feasts?Seriously pick and choose what law to keep. You can’t find two Hebrew Israelite camps that agree on the Passover observance Full Moon, Sliver? Come on people Think about it.
@@chucklanger7510 we are not under the levitical priesthood.. we're under The Melchizedek priesthood which is the more perfect covenant... So you're telling me it makes sense for you to live lawless because you think the last is too hard?? You think it makes sense that Yahusha died a brutal death for you to just sin away thinking nothing of repentance... That makes sense to you? Regardless the renewed covenant tells is to follow his commands and they should be written on your heart if you have the Ruach Ha' Qodesh feeling inside you... I do love the straw man arguments...
@@gene4231 Psalm 19:7. The Law ( Torah ) of YHVH is PERFECT..restoring the soul Vs 11 Moreover, by them , Thy servant is warned; in KEEPING THEM, there is GREAT REWARD..Got Torah Got Truth
Galatian 3:19 makes it clear the law had a shelf life and and expiration date, The law was given because of transgression , "until the coming of The Seed"!!!!!
Now study the part in Hebrews where Paul clearly teaches that he was referring to the temple rites, NOT the 10 Commandments. Amateur bible readers tend to believe that every time Paul mentions a law, he is referring to the Torah as a whole or the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments were not given because of trangressions. Lev. 1 starts with the offering laws following the golden calf incident. This is what Paul is talking about!
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Amateur Bible readers claim Paul was the author of Hebrews. Since you are an expert can you define your use of the word 'Torah'
@salpezzino7803 those who don't follow the word call others amateurs. Why do you respond like this and put on full display for all to see that you don't follow christ yet seek to teach the word?..
@salpezzino7803 ephesians 2:14-18 LET ALL BARE WITNESS!! This is why you shouldn't insult others if you claim christ. It is in this person's inability yo show.fruits of the spirit I an attempt to attack another that showed they do not follow. It is their statement that shows they haven't read the word. They claim it is ignorance to assume paul wrote Hebrews. The simlle.fact.is that even if he did not. The entirety of the letter agrees well with the rest of the word. Ephesians 2:14-18 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit This is not the only example. I implore you not to continue this and instead to read the bible sir
a lot Hebrew Israelites would use "Law of God" to refer to the Law of Moses, and once they establish that, they'd twist the meaning of the passages you covered. I remember going down this line of reasoning so many times w them haha. I think something to clarify--in case someone misinterprets--is that in Paul's stating his freedom from the law, he's not commanding all Jews who find Christ to stop being Jewish, which is the worry of many (see 1 Cor 7:18-20 & Acts 21:17-26) but rather by being led by the Spirit he lives like Gentiles to win them to Christ. Christ is someone you can find while being under the law of Moses or without the law Moses (see Rom 3:21 & 3:31 they're two ways of saying the same thing). That's why someone who is currently doing what the law says can say "I count is as garbage for Christ's sake".
That’s your interpretation of the gospel. Look at acts 15. Don’t cause someone to loose their faith because they don’t see it your way. A personal relationship with God is prayer, fasting, and loving him with every part of your being. If works could have saved us we wouldn’t need the cross. Sometimes we just have to lay on the alter, die to ourselves. Stay in our lane ( our ministry) and follow Christ. It’s not our job to look with a magnifying glass for tares amongst the wheat. It’s our God to personally surrender to Christ and make him Lord of our lives.
What teaches us Morality? Torah, Who Taoght US how to by pass Mans religions, to properly apply said knowlage? Messiah. Who is that Perfect Man we are to follow? Messiah. Now go!! Follow HIM!
Actually, we in the UK,via King Alfred,1500 years ago adopted ten commandments,incl Sabbath, when crime,violence,theft, drunkenness became the norm here. Guess what? It worked..Praise GOD 🙏..We then brought that with the Gospel to you in the USA a few hundred years ago . You adopted it too .However whats worrying ,as seen with this group, there is a new era of teaching not seen , heard,taught, implemented in world Christianity before, that Sabbath ,ten commandments should be excluded from Christianity 😮..All cos the Hebrew roots, SDA, other Christian Torah keepers keep them too.. Yet it's Christianity since Jesus days that has kept Sabbath and ten commandments..
that is a Lie. Torah can teach morality, how did that work out? You Cultists really know nothing - Romans 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
@Mikhael1964 I believe the Nazeritic Mesionic peoples of the 1st century was the Persecuted. Only a small remnant escaped the Occupiers religion take-over. And for that reason , I will not call myself a christian. A religion that did away with feasts Sabbiths and put a man's Authority on part with god. )Popes( and the proven degrees of that abominations in 321ad. I forget what my initial point was for your Comment...
@Mikhael1964 Oh yes. Of One believes in Messiah and see thee wisdom in Totah, then I would can you brother. If One believes in lawless Jesus and defile Fathers Torah and teaches against it, I will can One the deciever! For that is the 119 test the Bereans Did.
Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord (Isaiah 30:8-9) Becoming as one doesn't mean acting like them, but rather putting yourself in their shoes. In order to win them, you have to understand them first. The law of God = the law of Moses. It all comes down to understanding 'under the law'. We are no longer under the law (we pay with our own lives, this is what we deserve), but under grace (Jesus pays with His life, we don't deserve it, but receive it anyway = grace). You ask questions to the HRM a lot to try a point them to a mistake. Now I have a question to you: If Jesus not keep the entire law of Moses, would His sacrifice be acceptable to pay for our sins?
Hello FOJ! The Law of God/Christ is how we will be judged. You should watch this video. I think you might find it interesting and maybe even helpful. Blessings, RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots The law of Christ is the same 10 commandments he handed down at creation into the hearts of humanity which allowed them to know right from wrong, and then eventually engraved into stone. Christ taught the keeping of the commandments through a changed heart through faith in him. The Commandments are a reflection of our lives to show us our sin so we go to Christ for cleansing. Christians always say we are not under the law anymore, however, we are not under the condemnation of the law. It is the commandments that will stand as our condemnation or exoneration to the likeness of Christ. I've also heard people say we can't keep the commandments as Christ kept them, however, if Satan is powerful enough to tempt us to sin ( break God's laws ) then Christ jas to be been more powerful to keep us from breaking them. Any Christian who says we can't keep the commandments but claims the power of Christ over their life doesn't truly have faith that he can keep them from sin ( breaking God's Laws ). In doing this, they make their devil more powerful than their God. My Jesus saves to the utter most, if Satan can tempt us to sin, then Christ can most assuredly keep us from sin. It is the commandments that will be the standard of which we are held accountable because the perfection of them in Christ was our example.
@@TheBiblicalRoots No true Christian on the face of the planet would say we shouldn't strive to be like Christ through sanctification. Those who say we should strive to be like Christ, but in the same breath say it's impossible don't have the form of faith they think they have. Is perfection through Christ and the Holy Spirit possible? Yes. Will we obtain that perfection in our lifetime? That's an individual case because each person has their own relationship with Christ, and those who may reach that state will never know it because they will not be self-minded but only oriented to Christ. Because of this self has been removed from the equation, and Christ has taken its place in the heart bringing perfect obedience to him.
@@TheBiblicalRoots It's also the reason Jesus stated the greatest 2 commandments in Matthew 22:36-40 Love God and love others. On these two commands hang the whole law and the prophets. Both these commands embody the 10 as a whole, when we love God with all our heart, mind, strength, and life the first 4 are made perfect in us, and when we have obtained this kind of love for God love for our fellow humanity is perfected for them. This brings completion of the entire law into our lives fulfilling within us the likeness and character of Christ. This is what most Christians don't understand due to religious leaders who teach through tradition instead of scripture.
it certainly is. However Not the law of works - Romans 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.
The curse of the law is death or condemnation, being under the curse is to be judicially condemned, to be under grace is to be judicially approved. Under the jurisdiction of the law is the requirement to keep his commandments, where being under the law is one who is condemned, so Paul can talk to those such as in Hebrews that have relied on sin and sacrifice for atonement. Those truly lead by the Spirit cannot sin, thus complying with both the law of God and Christ. Romans is written in the 3 laws, of God, of Moses and of Christ. Galatians is written in the 3 laws. God's law from the beginning was the obedience of faith. No longer under the law due to repentance, and atonement of past sins, therefore no longer in condemnation as they are in Christ.
@@TheBiblicalRoots Rob that is a general epistle, and the context to 1 John 1:10 is 1 John 1:6 & 8, those who walk in darkness, and say they have no sin. The who walk in darkness are sinning, but if they say they have no sin they lie, but if any man sin Jesus can forgive them to the forbearance of the Father. "My little children, these I write that ye sin not", little children have had past sins forgiven in baptism, as 1 John 2:12. That is why I have my Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity', because misreading of the NT ALWAYS allows sin.
hmm well.. The law of christ(prophesied in the 1st test. ISA 53 1:6) is to bear one another burdens(Gal 6:2) as Paul stated he did... "to the weak I became weak" THATS THE LAW OF CHRIST.. it's not a specific list of laws lol. Also under the law = not believing in Yah so if you believe in Yah(which is a TORAH commands) and live like so, you're NOT under the law! so Paul being around ppl under the law means UNBELIEVING PPL. the 2 great commandments are from the TORAH the law of god/Moses Deuteronomy 6:4-9 LEV 19:17-18 lastly in REV END TIMES! it says TWICE gods ppl will be the ones who have faith in Yah and KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS! I'll stop there lol, so much more I can say but all love.. remember ppl, think like the FEW not like the MANY (Matt 7:13-14)
@@cheryliaquinta707 correct… Deut. 6:4-9 and Lev. 19:17-18 are the 2 great commandments stated in the O.T. They are not new though, you can’t add or take away from the law.
Regarding 40:51 “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak” according to the context is that to new Christians that were still immature he didn’t behave as a lot more knowledgeable and much more mature in Christ, pointing out each little thing they were doing wrong. But instead ignored certain things, prioritizing his battles in order that the more important things, they would listen to him and follow his leadership. He believed that going all in on them, would simply elicit a defensive response that would distance them and ultimately hurt their growth instead of feed it. So though he could feed them meat, he gave them milk and drank milk with them.
this sounds like All In - Galatians 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
No need to 'unpack' when Christianity predates and supersedes Israel and The Law. Christians aren't obligated to the Law because their promise came before the Law. (Gal. 3) The Law of Faith applies to the Christian as it did to the first Christian i.e., Abraham. (Jn. 8:56-58; Romans 3:27; 4; Gal. 5:6)
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
@andrewhodkinson1 7 hours ago Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. *Ah, the cure to the heart like an adamant stone from Zechariah 7. It would be nice if more Christians specialized in that propheticmatter-especially as it is extended in Ezekiel 18. Because if God were to walk into most Christian churches and teach the fullness of this doctrine, they would call him a blasphemer and attempt to crucify him for the clarification he gives in this passage from chapter 18 which demonstrates that man is actually required to turn from sin in order to create a new heart and spirit in himself, because our works really do matter to our salvation. Eze 18:27 Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. What a slap to the face of those who hate the law and say our works do not matter to our salvation. Did they ever pause to ask god if he agrees with their assessment though? Because the book god asks Isaiah to write in Isaiah 30 suggests that God is not fooled by the rebellion being taught by his people against his law, his prophets and which is ultimately an agenda seeking to cause the Most High to cease from before them. Eze 18:28 Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Eze 18:29 Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? In otherwards, God’s people have been attacking him and fighting him on this the entire time. And this time he is putting his foot down and letting them know their reasoning was wrong as to how the plan of salvation actually works. Because their stony heart in Zechariah 7 was their refusal to hear his law and the words he sent by his Spirit through the prophets which teaches very differently what man should do than what modern Christians typically teach the plan of salvation to be with all their grace entitlement drunkenness. Eze 18:30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. How dare God expect that of them. Who does he think he is, the judge or something? Doesn’t he know Paul said they were saved by grace and not of works instead? You would think people would have realized something was wrong with Paul the moment he admits to having a “messenger of Satan” in 2Cor 12:7 just one chapter after telling us not to marvel because Satan’s ministers are transformed into ministers of righteousness. But, most Christians would rather follow a man with a messenger of Satan than God. Maybe that is why Christ warned us in Matthew 7 that broad is the way to destruction and few there be who actually find the gate to life. Eze 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Oh, you don’t get a new heart or a new spirit until you cast away all your transgressions. So much for thinking grace entitlements are an adequate substitute for honestly working on our character and learning how to be righteous. It’s like when Christ told the Pharisees the importance of needing to also clean the inside of the cup, because they were like whited sepulchres full of dead men’s bones on the inside, rather than learning how to obey god from the heart.*
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. Funny, it turns out that god actually takes notice of genuine obedience. If only more Christian pastors were honest enough to teach these things to their congregations, but maybe that is why God is getting rid of the pastors in Jeremiah 23 and replacing them with better shepherds at Christ’s coming.
Hi Rob ..the GOSPEL Is about a KINGDOM..the KINGDOM has a KING and a LAW..YHVH followed the TORAH when He used His fingers to write on the stone tablets as required by the KING of ISRAEL…when you state that God gave the Law to Moses …then it’s eternal because He is eternal..Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheBiblicalRoots Paul tells us that the SAME GOSPEL was preached to those in the wilderness…so if the Gospel you preach is different than the gospel Moses preached in the wilderness you are preaching a different gospel…the first-born were saved by the blood of the Lamb but it was disobedience ( not following Torah ) that kept them out of the kingdom…Got Torah Got Truth
Hi SGYT. I agree the Law of Moses is actually God's law. But in 1 Cor. 9:19-23, Paul refers to them as two different things. He says he is under one but not the other. That's what makes this passage so interesting! RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Shalom It technically does not say that, no where in this passage does it even mention Moses. Paul like Messiah teaches against Judaism and the traditions of the elders, so I would submit to you that if there something he's not under it would be that, the oral laws and traditions while being under the law of God, which we both agree is the same thing as the law of Moses 💯❤️📖⚔️
@@TheBiblicalRoots Paul did no such thing. The message Paul is clearly conveying is that he was able to relate to ppl who rejected Gods' laws without rejecting Gods laws himself. The parenthetical statement "(without being without law toward God)" makes that very clear.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Correct there are 3 different type of people in that scenario one that is under God's laws 1 that is under the law of Judaism and another 1 who rejects God's law 💯❤️📖⚔️
@@seekingGODs-YHWHsTruth144K That's what makes this passage so interesting! Paul says he three things all at the same time: 1. *Not* under the law of Moses 2. Under the law of God 3. Under the law of Christ RLS
Hi Rob..1 Corinthians 9:20,21..the word Moses..you’ve added…not in scripture..the MESSIAH is GOD.. Paul is comparing the LAW of GOD and MESSIAH which is exactly the same and that he is under , to a law which he is not under…he is free from the law of the flesh …claiming freedom in the MESSIAH by rejecting His Law is what leads to slavery of the flesh…Sunday or Saturday or swine or Christmas or Easter…the MESSIAH never told anyone to celebrate His Birthday because He is eternal and biologically does not have an earthly father…Got Torah Got Truth
Hi Harry. you're right that Paul simply refers to it as the law (nomos) in this passage. And respectfully, this "law of the flesh" that you're trying to add to the text makes no sense. First of all, the phrase "law of the flesh" is not used anywhere in the Bible. And second, the context of Chapter 9 makes it glaringly obvious Paul is referring to the old covenant law. That's not even in question. Shalom! RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Israel is no different than any other nation …the NT is full of examples where men ( flesh ) added their own laws …man made religion was the law Paul was free from…it was the perfect Law of freedom, the light that lights up the path we should go down ( the Mosaic Law came out of God’s mouth ) that Paul was preaching…a GOOD GOD can only give GOOD INSTRUCTIONS..why people would want to reject them and follow the teachings of men ( flesh ) is beyond my understanding .. Got Torah Got Truth
Why does no one put new wine in old wineskins (Matthew 9:17)? new wine into old wineskins ANSWER One day, the disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples fast like we do and the Pharisees do?” (Matthew 9:14, NLT). The Lord’s response included this parable: “No one puts new wine into old wineskins. For the old skins would burst from the pressure, spilling the wine and ruining the skins. New wine is stored in new wineskins so that both are preserved” (Matthew 9:17, NLT). Jesus often taught with parables, using illustrations from everyday life to reveal spiritual truths. He did this so people could hear the truth without rejecting it, even if they couldn’t yet grasp the parables’ deeper meaning (see Mark 4:11-12; Luke 8:9-10). Before He introduced the concept of putting new wine in old wineskins, Jesus made a similar point using another familiar analogy: “Who would patch old clothing with new cloth? For the new patch would shrink and rip away from the old cloth, leaving an even bigger tear than before” (Matthew 9:16, NLT). The problem with patching an old, pre-shrunk garment with a new, unshrunk cloth is something most of us can relate to even today. New fabrics that have never been washed or run through a dryer tend to shrink. Mending old clothing with an unshrunk piece of material would cause the new patch to pull away from the old in the wash, ruining the garment. The problem with putting new wine in old wineskins is similar. As wine ages, it ferments, releasing gases that pressurize an airtight container. In Jesus’ day, wineskins were leather pouches used for storing and fermenting wine. A new wineskin’s fresh, supple leather could expand and stretch as the wine fermented. But old leather from a previously used wineskin would have already been stretched to its capacity. Putting new wine into old wineskins would cause the leather to crack, burst, and be ruined. The parables reveal this truth: if we fail to understand that something new is needed, two valuable items-clothing and wineskins-risk ruin. But what does this have to do with the original question about fasting? What deeper message was Jesus conveying through these illustrations? Through the parables, Jesus emphasized that He was doing something new-inaugurating a new covenant relationship between God and His people. John’s disciples were Jews. They were still following the rules of Judaism and living under the obligations of the Old Covenant, with its ceremonial rituals and religious regulations, including fasting on certain days (see Leviticus 16:29-31; 23:32; Luke 18:12). Jesus asked John’s disciples, “Do wedding guests mourn while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. But someday the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast” (Matthew 9:15, NLT). Jesus had come to establish a new era. Now was a time for joy in the presence of the bridegroom. The disciples of Jesus would mourn and fast later. But while He was here among them, they would celebrate the forgiveness, fellowship, freedom, and new direction that His coming had ushered in. In other words, Jesus’ parables said, “Out with the old way of thinking and doing things, and in with the new.” If the Jews did not adjust their rigid religious mindset, they would experience a loss much like that of the ruined garments and wineskins. The problem with putting new wine in old wineskins is that the old skins of the law cannot contain the new wine of the gospel. The Jewish followers of John would have to expand their view of God’s provision of mercy and grace to include Christ’s sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin, not just for Israel but for the whole world (Matthew 26:28; John 1:29; Hebrews 9:23-26; 10:14; 1 Corinthians 11:25). They would need to understand that salvation comes by grace through faith and not works (John 3:16-18; Ephesians 2:5, 8-9); that the need for temple sacrifices had ended (Hebrews 7:26-27; 10:1-18); and that, through the coming of the Holy Spirit, all believers of all races on earth are God’s temple (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19) and His own beloved children (John 1:12; 1 John 3:1). This new reality was tough for the Jews to accept-including those who became Christians after the death and resurrection of Jesus (see Acts 10:1-11:18). Though strict and inflexible as an old wineskin, the Old Covenant of the law was solid, familiar and comforting to the Jews who resisted embracing the New Covenant. But Jesus had no intention of putting a patch on the old garment of Judaism. By ushering in a totally new covenant, Jesus didn’t try to fix up or even throw out the law, but rather to fulfill all of it (Matthew 5:17-18). No mere human can keep the law perfectly as God requires (Matthew 5:20, 48; Exodus 32:33; James 2:10). Only Jesus Christ, the spotless Lamb of God could (and did) perfectly fulfill the law’s requirements (John 8:46; Hebrews 4:15; 10:12). So as comforting as having the law was for Jews, it was a heavy burden that no one could bear (Acts 15:10). The gospel of Jesus-the good news-represents the New Covenant of salvation by grace through faith, not works, obtained for us by the blood of Christ (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 10:29). John’s disciples were fasting as an act of religious piety. Such actions may have been appropriate under a legalistic, works-based system, but they are no longer needed under the covenant of grace (Romans 3:20-24; 5:20; John 1:16-17; Galatians 2:16; 5:4). Just as we can’t put new wine in old wineskins or patch up old garments with new, unshrunk cloth, we can’t mix the law with grace. The old, lifeless religious rituals are done, and we have a new life of freedom in Jesus. Our faith is ruined if it’s based on dead works instead of on the saving grace of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:11-28). Taken from got questions.org
I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone say, "That's a misinterpretation - it doesn't say that in the KJV OR NKJV," because that's what my father said. (About being Paul being under the law @ 22:40)
With all do respect, and since I do not know from what camp or platform you are speaking from…. I’m well aware of the differences in Priesthoods. What puzzles me is how you lump or insinuate being lawless. I spent over 10 years sitting under Brother Buie at the IOG Riverdale. I observe the Sabbath as often as my schedule allows it as I am a first responder in my industry. Feast day understood but not always observed. But I display daily the Fruits of the Spirit, I wholeheartedly display the Golden Rule of treating others as I would like them to treat me. Feeding those who might be hungry, providing to those who are needy, prison ministry, giving of my time in fellowship and council are a few way I display my love of God and people. You truly don’t need to put Christ’s death into this conversation or lawlessness either. My guess is perhaps you assumed I lacked understanding which is furthest from the truth. With that being said I have come to a clearer view, understanding and awareness of scripture. I no longer fellowship with Israel weekly, no longer part of that camp. I appreciate your efforts in dialogue but your a bit off base in your tone and assumption my belief, understanding and practice in my faith walk. Be well and please refrain from continuing this dialogue unless it is edifying verses judging or assuming without knowing one’s position. Grace & Peace
The main purpose of Rob’s channel is to inform people that they can observe the laws given to Moses at Mt. Sinai if they wish, but are not required to, especially since Gentiles were never under these laws. Christians are NOT “lawless” as many Torah observant like to use to condemn them. The thrust of the issue is :circumcision, kosher eating, Saturday sabbath, and the Jewish feasts. No one is lawless for not observing these. Spirit filled Christians know what sin is. You sound like a very solid Christian man.
you don't have the Fruit of the Spirit and be under the law at the same time. You sound like you have been bending your elbow. Do worry about the Feasts you cant keep them as God Commanded anyway I agree Torah Keepers are the True Lawless Ones. Shalom
"Under the Law of God? Or the Law of Moses?" - plot twists Moses law came from God himself Every single one. Check out Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers , and Deuteronomy I know I know ...but "Paul said..."
The covenant is not the law, it's an agreement or contract that contains the law or instructions for keeping it, the new covenant has better promises but contains the same law that was called perfect - Psalms 19:7.
What do we do with 1 Cor. 5:8? Where it appears that Paul is instructing these Gentiles to get the leaven (sexual immorality) out of their camp (church) so that they can celebrate Passover without malice and wickedness.
Hi, Paul. Paul isn't preaching the observance of a literal Torah Pesach (Passover). He says "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed" (v. 7). He's drawing a parallel. The Jews in Egypt were delivered from death by the application of the blood of the lamb, after which they ate the Passover supper. And one of God's requirements for that feast was that no yeast (leaven) be found anywhere in their dwellings. In 1 Cor. 5, Paul uses leaven as a picture of sin and says now that "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed" (v. 7), the church must purge itself of “old leaven”-the things that belong to the “old life” before we trusted Christ, namely sin. He says we must also get rid of malice and wickedness (there was a lot of hard feelings between members of the Corinthian church) and replace them with sincerity and truth. As a "loaf of bread" (1 Cor. 10:17), the local church must be as pure as possible. Blessings, RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots NASB “ Let us therefore celebrate the feast “ Paul leaves NO DOUBT by this statement that he is preaching a literal TORAH PESACH. Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 The theme of 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 [the ENTIRE chapter!] is sexual immortality within the Church at Corinth, from verse 1 (It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and sexual immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, namely, that someone has his father’s wife) all the way to the last verse 13 (But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE EVIL PERSON FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.) It is not about a requirement to celebrate Pesach, nor any other feast, which aren't even mentioned. When Paul refers to Passover in verse 7, (Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed), he is encouraging believers to be unleavened, i.e. without the sin of sexual immorality, the theme of the entire chapter. Or perhaps Paul has one theme for 12 of the 13 verses, but suddenly digresses in verse 8 (Therefore let’s celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth) to preach Passover observance. BTW, I do observe Passover, but not because of 1 Corinthians 5:8. Got context got truth.
Defenders of Saul, excuse me, Paul, exalt his teachings above those of Jesus, because they love darkness rather than light. Jesus came not to destroy the law and the prophets etc. Jesus says he kept his father's commandments which is the law. You keep the word of Paul, I rather, will keep the word of Jesus, who is the WORD
When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow." But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek." It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too. This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law.
Hi D4! Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him. Shalom, RLS
Paul didn't disagree with Jesus on the premise that God's laws must be obeyed by the Christian. The problem is that this channel, like so many other "Christians", don't just preach another Jesus and another gospel. They go so far as to even preach another Paul, a lawless Paul that disagreed with the Messiah's doctrines.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 trash talk from a Cultist. Torah Keepers are only Lawless, they Hate Jesus and His New Covenant Gospel. You do realize Paul was speaking to Judaizers when he wrote - Galatians 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. How do Bible experts know? Paul brought the issue with him down to Jerusalem -- Acts 15:5 5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.” what was the PROBLEM? ***“It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses*** These same Judaizers persecuted Paul and the Church Those in the 'Hebrew/Jewish Roots' kneel to Ba'al David Wilber is that you?
I've often asked Torahists how could Paul say he was "NOT under law" (IC9.20) while at the same time saying "NOT WITHOUT the law" (1C9.21). I still haven't got an answer from any of them. 28:03 The "law of God" in the law of Christ is spoken of by Paul in R8.7. R8.7 Because that the mindedness of the flesh (in the law of failance/Death vs. 2) is enmity toward God, for it (the mindedness) does not subordinate itself to THE LAW OF GOD (in Christ 1C9.21); for it (the mindedness) is not even able." The truth is that a constant mindedness of the law of Moses, according to "the law of the FLESHY inner-aims, is a mindedness of the flesh.
@The Revelation Deception..1 Corinthians 9:20 “ NOT under law “ is NOT In ALL translations such as King James, Aramaic, Literal Standard Version, Webster’s , World English, Young’s… 1Corinthians 9:21..” NOT WITHOUT the Law “: it actually says “ to those who are without the law”…it’s referring to Gentiles who are without the Mosaic Law…that is why the word law here is strong’s 459 as in LAWLESS, WITHOUT LAW , WICKED..Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheRevelationDeception just sayin. You migjt be blasphem-ing thy Holy Spirit. For This spirt is of Finding Torah. And applying to the fleshy Heart. Ezekiel 11 19-20 And I will give them one HEART, and a "NEW SPIRIT" I will put within them. I will remove the HEART of stone from their flesh and give them a HEART of flesh, that they may walk in "my statutes" and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my "PEOPLES", and I will be their YAH/God. Praise YAH!
@@harryabrahams2770 btw. If you 2 Peter Pauls writtings your are being decieved. Torahless aka lawlessness IS sin! " now go and Sin no.more" Got Torah, Got Truth!
Historically speaking ,hear in England UK, Christianity came to our shores in second century AD ,over 1800 years ago..But it took a while to get fully established.That came after Augustine visit to our country.. And when it did, the first thing they did was implement the ten commandments as Civil Law.One of the reasons for doing this was to stop the high amount of criminality ,drunkenness etc . Guess what ? It worked.. Praise GOD 🙏... Not only that but we were taught by those early Christians to keep Sabbath Holy,and as a day of rest. Guess what? The result we/ England,UK prospered immensely..World leaders in inventions,a world empire , financially strong, prosperity in abundance. etc.. We weren't the only ones keeping ten commandments. The whole of Christianity did..We even brought Christianity and ten commandments to you a few hundred years ago in USA . You kept them too, incl Sabbath .. Even though most of your Churches like ours keep Sabbath, there is a brand new teaching growing in USA with people like this group , that the Sabbath should not be kept by Christians, nor the Ten commandments per se.. You think keeping Sabbath and ten commandments are a heretical Hebrew roots/Torahism/SDA. issue only..But it's not .The whole of Christianity has kept Sabbath and ten commandments fr 2000 years.. as I said above . You in USA are setting a dangerous precedent with this new age teaching of yours to get rid of Sabbath /10 commandments..GOD will not be happy with you USA if these teachings ,preaching continues,become affective, and a reality .....That's fr sure...😢... By all means expose, reject HR, SDA, Torahism amongst/within Christianity ..But Sabbath ,ten commandments must remain Christian.. As they always have since Christ Jesus ..Praise GOD 🙏
I cant believe I agree with you - Rob teaches this heresy = "Even though most of your Churches like ours keep Sabbath, there is a brand new teaching growing in USA with people like this group , that the Sabbath should not be kept by Christians, nor the Ten commandments per se" The Lord's Day is the Christian Sabbath
@@salpezzino7803 Thank you Sir..GOD bless🙏.. I think our differences were over OSAS. However in the last few weeks I have come across some some Biblical scripture evidence that has changed my beliefs on this..As well as Scriptural evidence (84 verses,many from Jesus that I wrongly Interpreted).. Also,it has come to my attention that the Ante Nicean Church fathers,incl many students of the apostles (pre 325AD) whose ten volume series I have studied fr many years now, shows they talked a lot about a salvific journey/perseverance/staying in the faith,danger of turning away from Christ, after being born again. I found no direct evidence of OSAS amongst those letters at all. Which if it was true they most certainly would have been talking about.. Yet they mentioned the opposite..These are direct letters, from students of Paul,Peter etc.. More evidence,the video Mr Solberg did on OSAS.And I came across a book that shows the greek word for "faith" ; "Pistis", had different meanings in there culture than we do in our culture..Eg Allegiance, Loyalty, Obedience . Interesting but not read it all yet.. GOD BLESS🙏..
Thanks, Mikhael! (I assume you're referring to Augustine of Canterbury, not Augustine of Hippo!) I've mentioned this many times and I want to repeat it again here because it's important: I do not believe that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant to Christians today. Not at all! Only that they are to be kept under the New Covenant, not the Old. (And honestly, the primary difference between the two is the nature of the Sabbath rest: the specific day and prohibited activities, and the punishment for not keeping it). This is not a position I made up on my own. I arrived at it after a deep study of the commandments in the NT. I'm certainly not perfect and I don't know everything. But I do my best to teach what Scripture says and not what I wish it said. "Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ" (Col. 2:16-17) Blessings, Rob
Hi Sal. I know what you mean when you say "The Lord's Day is the Christian Sabbath." And for the record, I not only see no problem with Christians taking their day of rest on Sunday, that's the I day I take my own rest! That said, I think it's important to note that what you said is not a biblical statement, but rather a statement of Church tradition. I say that because the Bible nowhere (a.) changes the Sabbath to Sunday, nor (b.) commands Christians to gather or rest on Sunday. Blessings, Rob
So, you claim Peter is saying the idea of circumcision is unbiblical because Peter felt it was a burden even the Israelites could not bear. And yet, in the very next chapter of Acts 16:1-3 we find Paul actively engaging in the now unbiblical act of circumcising Timothy? Should we also use Galatians 5 to argue that christ now profits Timothy nothing? What about Paul himself, seeing he was circumcised too???
Okay, I see where you're missing the mark, Corey. No one claimed that circumcision was "now unbiblical." It was never banned or prohibited. Rather, it ceased to be an _obligation._ For Christians, circumcision is permitted but not required. This is why Paul could circumcise Timothy for cultural reasons in Acts 16 so that they could preach the gospel in and among the Jews. However, even though circumcision was a requirement under the old covenant law, we know that Paul did not view circumcision as a _requirement_ for following Jesus because of what he wrote in Gal. 2 and 5, 1 Cor. 7, and because of the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. Blessings, RLS
@TheBiblicalRoots 8 hours ago Okay, I see where you're missing the mark, Corey. No one claimed that circumcision was "now unbiblical." *correct, circumcisionis quite Biblical.* It was never banned or prohibited. *correct as far as God is concerned, not necessarily so correct as far as man was concerned.* Rather, it ceased to be an obligation *You haven’t anywhere quoted god as claiming at any time that it ceased to be an obligation.* For Christians, circumcision is permitted but not required. *According to you and other men, but show us where God says that is actually the case. Because God says he will later get upset at his priests for not circumcising the strangers who come in among them in the Davidic kingdom of Ezekiel 44, suggesting God isn’t necessarily on board with this highly questionable position of the first church council. And did Paul really believe it was permitted if he is threatening people in Galatians 5 by arguing that if a man is circumcised, christ profits him nothing? Because paul’s comments about Moses and circumcision ended up becoming quite a problem in Acts 21.* This is why Paul could circumcise Timothy for cultural reasons in Acts 16 so that they could preach the gospel in and among the Jews. *The problem is that Paul argues in Galatians 5 that if a man is circumcised, Christ prophets him nothing. The man in this case is timothy. If Christ then profits Timothy something despite his being circumcised, then Paul is clearly fibbing in Galatians 5.* However, even though circumcision was a requirement under the old covenant law, we know that Paul did not view circumcision as a requirement for following Jesus because of what he wrote in Gal. 2 and 5, 1 Cor. 7, *But, where did Jesus say it wasn’t a requirement? I don’t see any statement from Jesus anywhere disputing either the Mosaic validity of circumcision, nor the much earlier Abrahamic validity of circumcision to support Paul’s view on the matter.* and because of the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. *Well, that decision potentially brings everyone who was involved in that under God’s warning in Isaiah 8:20, seeing how far they deviated from the law and the testimony there. And it is evident the decision reached there was not going to be permanent by any stretch of the imagination, because god is requiring the strangers/gentiles in Ezekiel 44 to be circumcised in heart and flesh before they will be allowed to enter the future temple of the Davidic kingdom. Plus, it is trivial to find God punishing people for failing to keep laws/requirements not mentioned in the four provisions concluded in Acts 15. Case in point, the punishment of the unprofitable servant and the punishment of the goats in Matthew 25. Those are just a couple of obvious examples. If you like, I could be far more exhaustive though.*
Was circumcising one of the 10 commandments? No. However no one has kept all of the ten commandments, let alone all of the Mosaic Law and the Prophets except Jesus. When Jesus stated to the pharisees that they placed heavy burdens on the people that they couldn’t even keep, Jesus was referring to their fixation on the letter of the law while they completely were oblivious to or outright ignoring the heart of the law. The Mosaic Law and the Prophet was and is impossible to keep, reason why Jesus had to fulfill it for us and pay the consequences of our not being able to even keep God’s Eternal Law. The Old Testament Law was used to show God’s holiness, to reveal to us our sinfulness and to point to Christ. But, after Christ, who went above and beyond, not just fulfilling all of the Mosaic law and the prophets, He is our new standard. We are under a New Covenant. In the Ten if you committed adultery you sinned, while in the New Covenant of Grace, Christ showed us that if you even look at someone with lust in your heart, you sinned of adultery. That the Ten said not to murder, but under the New Covenant anyone who is angry with a brother or sister is already guilty. That it’s not just by your actions that you sin, but by your very heart, intentions, desires. In OT law we were not to bear false witness of our neighbor and under the New Covenant we are to love our enemies. The law shows us we can’t be justified by our own merits, that we fail miserably and depend wholeheartedly on Christ. Which under Christ’s law, it does so even more. Our righteousness comes from Christ. And under the New Covenant, God’s ordinances are written in our new heart, not in a stone or paper; and they are directed by the Holy Spirit. Rom.3.20-31 For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are. 21But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago. 22We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are. 2Cor.3. He (God) has qualified us [making us sufficient] as ministers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not of the letter [of a written code] but of the Spirit; for the letter [of the Law] kills [by revealing sin and demanding obedience], but the Spirit gives life. In fact, in the Ten Commandments they were to make rest in the Sabbath from works and make it Holy, yet in the New Covenant Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath is in who we rest in, instead of a day and it is He who is Holy and who the OT Sabbath forshadowed. The OT Sabbath forshadowed, pointed to, represented the rest that we have, under The New Covenant, everyday and eternally in Christ our Sabbath, who IS Holy and through Him we are made Holy everyday and eternally.
Jesus came and established a New Covenant in which ALL of the law is summed up in two commandments: love God above all things and love others as yourself; which we fail at also. Reason why we depend on Christ’s righteousness In the Old Covenant, God dealt with the Israelites as a separate religious people to himself by the covenant of the Law of the Lord. But with His own from among the entire world, God deals with the world by the covenant of Grace. In John 4, he opened to us a new form of worship that is beyond religious rites which is the worship of the Spirit and Truth. This is liberal worship in which we are not subject to the ordinance of religious law of old worship, but to grace and Spirit through faith to God, which is Christ the Lord of the Church. It is man that keeps making law exceedingly above Grace, even in the grace dispensation. Many sadly see more of Moses in their brains and legalistic belief than of the Holy Spirit in our souls. And that's the reason so many are stuck with Law and far from the Grace in Christ, in their teaching and living of the gospel. Paul also said, in Galatians, that the Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. He also said in Colossians that Christ nailed the law that was against us to the cross....taking it away. Romans 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another-to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God Colossians 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths Romans 3:20-21, 28 "BUT NOW the righteousness of God WITHOUT THE LAW is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; ... Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. " The law of liberty is the law of love. James 2.12 Speak and act [consistently] as people who are going to be judged by the law of liberty. 13For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; but [to the one who has shown mercy] mercy triumphs [victoriously] over judgment. 2Cor.3. He (God) has qualified us [making us sufficient] as ministers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not of the letter [of a written code] but of the Spirit; for the letter [of the Law] kills [by revealing sin and demanding obedience], but the Spirit gives life. Gal.4.14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one saying, that is, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Rom.9.-30-32 Even though the Gentiles were not trying to follow God’s standards, they were made right with God. And it was by faith that this took place. 31But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. 32Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path. Hosea 2:11 “11 And I will put an end to all her mirth, her feasts, her new moons, her Sabbaths, and all her appointed feasts.” Rom.10.3-4 For they (Israel) don’t understand God’s way of making people right with himself. Refusing to accept God’s way, they cling to their own way of getting right with God by trying to keep the law. 4FOR CHRIST HAS ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE LAW WAS GIVEN. As a result, ALL WHO BELIEVE IN HIM ARE MADE RIGHT WITH GOD. Rom.13.9 The commandments, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet (have an evil desire), and any other commandment, are summed up in the single command, You shall love your neighbor as [you do] yourself. 10 Love does no wrong to one’s neighbor [it never hurts anybody]. Therefore love meets all the requirements and is the fulfilling of the Law. her mirth to cease, Her feast days, Her New Moons, Her Sabbaths- All her appointed feasts.” Romans 3:20-21, 28 "BUT NOW the righteousness of God WITHOUT THE LAW is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; ... Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."
Check out Galatians 3:15-39 The Purpose of the Law 15Brothers, let me put this in human terms. Even a human covenant, once it is ratified, cannot be canceled or amended. 16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many, but “and to your seed,” meaning One, who is Christ. 17What I mean is this: The law that came 430 years later does not revoke the covenant previously established by God, so as to nullify the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God freely granted it to Abraham through a promise. 19Why then was the law given? It was added because of transgressions, until the arrival of the seed to whom the promise referred. It was administered through angels by a mediator. 20A mediator is unnecessary, however, for only one party; but God is one. 21Is the law, then, opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come from the law. 22But the Scripture pronounces all things confined by sin, so that by faith in Jesus Christ the promise might be given to those who believe. 23Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. Sons through Faith in Christ 26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.
Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
"Permitted but not required" - alright, what is one to do with Roman's 2:26-28. Seems here, there is great emphasis on keeping God's Law. So much so that Gentiles who keep the Law will judge Jew''s that do not keep it.
Hi, Paul. These verses come from a larger passage (vv. 17-29) where Paul continues to show that Jews are not justified by having the law. He points out their hypocrisy as he describes them teaching others but not themselves and breaking the very law that they boast in (Rom 2:21-23). Using circumcision as an example, Paul argues that being Jewish is of value only if one keeps the law; obedience and action are more important than ethnicity (vv. 25-29). RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Romans 2, Paul defines what a Jew truly is, You quoted the scripture and miss what Paul was saying - He redefined being a Jew. Romans 2: 28 A man is not a Jew because he is one outwardly, nor is circumcision only outward and physical. 29No, a man is a Jew because he is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise does not come from men, but from God. A true Jew, is heir of the promises made to the fathers. I am the True Israel, I am a Child of the Promise. "Permitted but not required" is not in the Bible and flies in the face of - James 2:10 - Galatians 5:3 - Deuteronomy 27:26 When you say it is Permitted you are causing Believers to Sin and will be held accountable Elijah can now make animal sacrifices, if he sees fit, "Permitted but not required"
@TheBiblicalRoots I can see that. I also could see - just having the Law/the written code , means nothing does nothing if you don't do it. Just like a Gym membership. If you don't go to the gym and workout, you don't get stronger.
@salpezzino7803 Do you mean Romans? Which comes right before Corinthians. Why does Paul say in 1Cor. 9:21b "But I do not ignore the Law of God;" NLT Paul also uses the Law in 1 Cor. 9:7-10 to express how the Law of God/Moses says a minister who plants seed and works hard should also hope/expect to be fed or supported by those who benefit from his ministry. Thus the Law of Moses reference about nuzzling an Ox
@elijahirvin5911 8 hours ago How do you pick and chose what laws you keep unbelievable.you throw out Sabbath but keep tithe *Easy, if it benefits God, they toss it out. If it benefits their own pocket, they want to preserve it at all costs.
Hello Elijah! I don't get to pick and choose. The Word of God is my authority. I do my best to understand what the Bible teaches. And for the record I have not "thrown out" the Sabbath (I keep my own day of rest) and I do not teach tithing, but rather the importance of giving generously from a cheerful heart. And I don't teach this because it's what I've "chosen," but because it's what I believe the NT teaches. Blessings, RLS
@@salpezzino7803 @salpezzino7803 5 hours ago @coreybray9834 Easy? So how do you know what benefits God? To you it had to do with material things? *If that is what god asks of us in certain instances is material things, then obviously he thinks it benefits him and his cause if we comply, right? Because there are many occasions where God has asked for material things from his people in the Scriptures. Or, do you believe it benefits god and his cause more when we refuse to comply and disobey him instead? Because Christ seems to think that man shall live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God in Matthew 4:4. Paul, however, seems to believe that we are no longer under the law in Romans 6:14. But, Paul conveniently fails to mention that the law contains many of God’s words that Christ formerly said man shall live by back in Matthew 4:4, for example, God is the one speaking the ten commandments according to Exodus 20:1. So, does it benefit god when christ says one thing and paul teaches Christ’s followers to head in a completely different direction than Christ who is actually the Good Shepherd of John 10 is trying to lead us? Because Christ was pretty explicitly certain in the gospels that a man cannot serve two masters like that which might help to explain why those who are actually sealed in Revelation 14 follow the lamb wheresoever he goes, not Paul or his messenger of Satan in 2Cor 12:7, not that too many Christians take the time to discern the difference. But, I would imagine that those who benefit God end up standing on the sea of glass in Revelation 15 singng the song of Moses and the Lamb, refusing to join Paul in his endless attacks on Moses and Christ’s doctrine, because they realize that Moses and Christ are the two prophets of the Messianic prophecy of Deuteronomy 18 and that the true gospel is not trying to get rid of Moses or the law God gave through him.
However, the context must surely include the interpretaion of Scripture within the overall context of the one true Church, the Church which is authorised to teach by our Lord Himself...?
You're using circular reasoning by having Paul answer his own viewpoint. Thus let a matter be established by two or three witness. But I will disregard. 1. The laws of God/Moses/Christ are the same. The covenant doesn't change the laws, it incorporates the law into the blessings and curses of the covenant. Thus in Jeremiah and Hebrews we see the Laws being in their Heart which is also said in Deuteronomy 10:16, This is why you see Noah knowing what animals are clean and unclean But if you take this approach then you also see that both covenants (Old and New) where for the House of Israel and House of Judah, but it is still based on what is written in the law of Moses Aka the written Law of God. 2. Even in verse 21 you see with the being like the gentiles he was no outside the law of God (implying being under the law of God). It would be like ministering to a drug dealer and relating to them while not taking drugs. 3. The law of Christ is summed up with love the lord God and your neighbor. But do you love God if you, for example eat something that he finds abominable/disgusting. Would you eat a roach in front of you're love one if they found it unbearable to watch? Again meaning the law is still in effect. Peace and blessing to you my brother in Christ.
The law of Moses and the law of Christ are not the same. God tells us so - Paul brought an issue that was plaguing the Church to Jerusalem - Acts 15:5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.” ==== So No Your Cult is a Cult of Liars and Lawless False teachers. And you are no brother of mine, we have different fathers, your father is the Father of Lies - Peace
Even thy elect will be Decieved. The Decievers Job "sin one of man" trlls(edit) tells us, is to get Man Not to follow Thy Fathers Instructions. Wisdom is TORAH.
@johnmann8659 is all babble/baby speak John, to a person that doesn't understand the Milk. (Infant Nourishment) Simple Put ALL we need to do is Berean test Everything, 119 test. If you do not know the definition of Thy Words in sert Word here----- let's pick this One "Richous" it is Given DUET 6 25 how can you use it to make any TRUE revalation. Remeber all the deciever does is make US question Father Instructions. Sin One Of Man! All Praise to Thy Father! Give thanks for the Messiah! Halalu-YAH
The error of mainstream Christianity, God's laws don't apply but a mans does? Romans 2:14-15 show the Gentiles by nature do that which is contained in the law, showing the law written on their hearts, but the law doesn't apply? The things given in Acts 15 and 21 are taken straight from the law, but the law doesn't apply? The misuse(as we see here) of Romans 14:20 and 1 Timothy 4:1-4(though not listed) can imply something not good. Are Gentiles graffed in among the Jews? If so then the use of Exodus 31 and Colossians 2 don't apply here. Though Paul was a teacher of the Gentiles, he never taught against God's law.
@@Wisdoms_Inheritance Luke writes Paul is a chosen instrument to the gentiles (Acts 9:15-16). Peter says Paul’s writings are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Why do you reject Luke and Peter also?
@@johnmann8659 I don't recall saying Paul's writings aren't good, he wrote according to the wisdom given to him, I did say he didn't teach against the law, there are contradictions in this video as it would be when trying to say the law came to an end when Christ said different.
The Old Covenant law given through Moses according to the order of Aaron in Judaism - Hebrews 7:11; Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 5:43; Matthew 22:39. #Good The New Covenant law of Christ that came by Jesus according to the order of Melchizedek in Christianity - Hebrews 7:12; Matthew 5:44; John 13:34; John 15:12; Galatians 5:22; 1 Corinthians 13. #Better Jeremiah 31:31-34; Luke 5:36-39.
The question is how do Christians introduce the New Covenant back at the cross, when the New Covenant explicitly teaches that under that covenant we won’t need to teach every man his neighbor to know the Lord, for we shall all know him. That doesn’t make sense to apply the New Covenant back then, because Christ was opposing that part of the New Covenant by sending his followers out to preach the gospel of God and his kingdom to all nations in Matthew 28 because very few people know who God was around the globe back then. Consequently, the New Covenant would seem to fit better at some point after the gospel commission reaches an ending point.
@@coreybray9834 Hebrews 9:16 For where there is a covenant, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a covenant is valid only when people are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. (NASB)
@@coreybray9834 When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow." But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek." It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too. This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law.
@@kimartist @kimartist 3 hours ago @coreybray9834 When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow.” But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek." *It sounds like an interesting story until you try to apply the New covenant at the same time as the gospel commission of Matthew 28. Jeremiah 31:31-34 would make the gospel commission completely a waste of time and irrelevant, because one of the stated provisions of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is that we will no longer need to teach others to know God, because we will all know him from the least unto the greatest. The implication being that the New Covenant comes much later at some point after the gospel of the kingdom is finished being taken to the world. In fact, some might argue that the old covenant is for the Old Earth and the New covenant is for the New Earth when god makes all things NEW in Revelation 21:1-5. So, what if the New Covenant is oriented more with respect to the death, resurrection and ascention of the two prophets of Revelation 11, rather than at the cross? Then the covenant Christ is authoring is actually the Old Covenant, and what the Jews did prior to Christ’s death were simply being taught how to reherse the matter through a system of types and figures until the Old covenant became instituted as a result of Christ’s death on Passover. Which is why God’s people entered into a covenant with him after the Passover and the Exodus in Egypt. In like manner, Isaiah speaks of the death of Christ in Isaiah 53, the initial rise of Christianity in Isaiah 54, the fulfillment of the other nation that would take the kingdom away from the Jews in Matthew 21 being called in by Isaiah 55 and the strangers/gentiles coming in receiving the Sabbath and covenant offer of God in Isaiah 56. Now, as for the New Covenant, I assure you, there will not be sinning like there is today under the New Covenant. If Christians were to sin under the New Covenant like they do today with the law of God written in their heart, their heart would be in perpetual condemnation of them. So, what if God waits to explain the problem of the heart like an adamant stone in Zechariah 7 as a future fulfillment, like unfolding such an insight closer to our day, and he starts preparing us by removing our stony heart in Ezekiel 11 and 36, by teaching us how to create in us a New Heart and New Spirit as god goes into detail about in Ezekiel 18, preparing us for a future time in the New Earth when he actually writes his law in our new heart in Jeremiah 31:31-34???* It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too. *Sure, this is why Isaac was taken up on the mount by Abraham to be sacrificed to serve as a type pointing forward to the death of Christ. It’s also why John is weeping in Revelation 5, because the scroll in the hands of the Father is a will with seven seals as testaments and wills were sealed in ancient times with seven witnesses. But, this was the unsealing of the Old Covenant going on which is not fulfilled in its completion until all seven seals are opened. But, in the future the time comes in Daniel 7 where christ receives his Father’s kingdom, but when does Christ’s Father die to comply with the law as you discuss above before the kingdom is passed to his heir, namely Christ his Son???* This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law. *Not in this case, because Christ represents the Passover in Egypt, the people who came out of Egypt entered the Old Covenant after the fact. This is why christ preserves every jot and tittle of the Old Covenant’s law until heaven and earth passes away in Matthew 5:18 and Revelation 21:1.*
@@coreybray9834 Truly, the New Covenant began and became valid at the shed blood and one time death of the Lord Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:16-17). Luke 22:20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup, which is poured out for you, is the new covenant in My blood." (NASB) 1 Corinthians 11:25 In the same way He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” (NASB) Hebrews 9:18 Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you [Exodus 24:8].” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. (NASB) But many do not believe the truth (Hebrews 3). Have a good one in Old Testament Judaism w/ the Law given through Moses and your Levitical priesthood according to the order of Aaron (Hebrews 7:11).
Hi Rod..are you aware of how often you add the word Moses after the word law to justify your theology when the word MOSES is not in the text…adding to scripture to mislead …not good..Got Torah Got Truth
Hi Harry. The context of Chapter 9 makes it glaringly obvious Paul is referring to the old covenant law, aka the Law of Moses. What other law could he be referring to? (FYI There is no "law of the flesh" mentioned in Scripture.) RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots not obvious at all…every civilization has laws that do not come from the creator..they come from man ( flesh ) ..Israel was no different…this is why Yehoshua said to the educated religious leaders of the day that the devil was their father…had they been teaching the Law of Moses which came from God as you stated He never would have made that statement…Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheBiblicalRoots what is obvious…1 Corinthians 20…every time the word Law is used it is 3551..the Mosaic Law, Pentateuch…which all makes sense since Paul is talking about Jews…this is where it gets INTERESTING…the King James Version and others record Paul saying he is under that Law….other versions add that Paul saying he is not under that Law ( usually in brackets ) which makes me suspicious that this is added later… Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheBiblicalRoots in verse 20 Paul is talking about Jews… in verse 21 he is talking about gentiles since he uses the word law 459 …without law, lawless, wicked…so in this context it’s “ glaringly obvious “ that he is NOT talking about the Law of Moses ….verses 20 and 21 Paul is stating that in dealing with Jew or Gentile he uses a different approach…” though NOT being without the Law of God ( Mosaic Law )..Got Torah Got Truth .
What law would Jeremiah have understood as the law of God that will be written on our hearts? There was no problem with the law, God says he found fault with the people, not his law. But God found fault with the people and said: “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah, Hebrews 8:8. The promise of the new covenant is to have that law written on our hearts so that we cannot disobey it.
You have presented Hebrews 8:8, which quotes Jeremiah 31:31. The very next verse, Hebrews 8:9 (Jeremiah 31:32) says "not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord." Not like. Not like. What does 'not like' mean here?
@dancingzolins6782 What is the only thing different about the covenant mentioned? Not the law. It's the resurrection, the new heart with the law written on it. The inability to disobey God's law. God fixes the fault he found with them by fixing men, not his perfect law.
I will NEVER understand why you promote lawlessness... You use cherry picked scriptures to try to prove your point that lawlessness is acceptable... Do you really believe that Mashiach died so you could be lawless? You're using Paul to contradict Mashiach Yahusha... He keep the law he kept the Shabbat he kept the feasts and expected his followers to do the same... He even clarified the law and made it more strict.. murder isn't the sin hate is the sin... Adultery isn't the sin.. Just thinking about lust is... He can't to show what the law was meant to do and your teaching the opposite and saying it's optional... Please read the Old covenant... The renewed covenant didn't negate the old it changed who or high priest is and welcomed the other nations..
@yahuahsmaidservant Luke writes that Paul was a chosen instrument to the gentiles (Acts 9:15-16). Peter writes that Paul’s writings are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). The Torah’s commandments are not required for Christians. Acts 15:5-20 Acts 21:25 Romans 14:20 Colossians 2:16-17-> Exodus 31:16-17 Romans 2:14
@YahuahsMaidServant 3 hours ago I will NEVER understand why you promote lawlessness... *It’s rather easy why he does this! He does it because Isaiah 30, in that book god asks Isaiah to write, God clarifies that men like him want the Most High to cease from before them. Because in Zechariah 7 they have a heart like an adamant stone because they refuse to hear the law and the words God sent by his spirit through the prophets. And in Ezekiel 18, he doesn’t want to turn from this folly and create in himself a new heart and a new spirit like God teaches us to do, because in Ezekiel 11 and 36, he does not want to exchange his stony heart for a new heart. Instead, he wants to worship Paul, a man who admits openly to having a “messenger of Satan” in 2Cor 12:7 just one chapter after telling us not to marvel because Satan’s ministers are transformed into ministers of righteousness. Paul blurted out late in his career in Acts 23:6 that he was still a Pharisee, and Christ in Matthew 16 warned us to beware the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, because in Matthew 23:13 they didn’t want to enter the kingdom of God, but they instead in Matthew 23:15 seek to turn their procelites into twice the child of hell than themselves. So, when people do not take these warnings of Yeshua seriously, Pharisees like Paul really do turn them into twice the child of hell than themselves by turning them against Fathr Yah and his law. But, Father Yah said he would send in false prophets and suchin Deuteronomy 13 to test to see if we really love him, and Paul has been that test and source of most of the problems within Christianity today. Take away Paul, and 99% of the arguments against God and his law go away immediately. Take away Paul and more people would follow the Good Shepherd of John 10, and realizeYeshua was the other prophet like Moses in Deuteronomy 18, not another prophet diametrically opposed to Moses like so many try to turn things upside down to be. But, those who realize these two prophets are in agreement and that the law and gospel are a unified message: these will get the victory over the Beast, its image, its mark and the number of its name. And when they stand on the sea of glass in Revelation 15 they will sing the song of Moses and the lamb (the two prophets of Deuteronomy 18), not the song of Paul and his Messenger of Satan from 2Cor 12:7. Because from the moment Paul said we are no longer under the law, Paul brought himself under the judgment of God in Isaiah 8:20, proving there was no light in him for speaking against the law and testimony like that. Because God’s people are those God seeks to bind up the testimony and seal his law among his disciples in Isaiah 8:16. Because in Deuteronomy 6 that is what is bound to the right hand in forehead, where in Revelation 14 the mark of the beast is what ends up in the right hand and foreheads of those who come out from under the sealing protection of God’s law instead. And so guys like this that turn people away from the law and seal of god, they are the wolves in sheep’s clothing we were told would come and to watch out for.* You use cherry picked scriptures to try to prove your point that lawlessness is acceptable... Do you really believe that Mashiach died so you could be lawless? *Yes, guys like him basically do, because paul told them in romans 6:14 that they were no longer under the law, but under grace, and grace is a free gift according to Paul in romans 5, and that grace and works do not mix in Paul’s doctrine in Romans 11:6, because if you are circumcised and return to keeping the law to be justified in Galatians 5, Paul is sure you are fallen from grace, because his idea of justification in Romans 4:5 is one of faith without works intended to justify the UNGODLY which is really the same as the lawless if you think about it. However, James 2:14-19 argues that paul’s brand of faith without works is dead faith and a doctrine the devils practice-suggesting James likely was aware of Paul’s messenger of Satan in 2cor 12:7. So that is why Paul says you are saved by grace and not of works in Ephesians 2:8-9. But, Yeshua comes back in Revelation 2 to these same Ephesians and warns them to repent and DO THE FIRST WORKS, else he will remove their candlestick, the exact opposite of what Paul is teaching when he tells the Ephesians “not of works” from earlier. The church of ephesus basically rejected Paul, and Paul admits that all of Asia departed from him in his second letter to Timothy, meaning all 7 churches of the Roman province of Asia mentioned in Revelation 1-3 departed from Paul. But, the Savior praises the church of Ephesus in Revelation 2 for trying those who say they are apostles and are not, but are found to be liars. Yeshua never claimed Paul was an apostle, Paul called himself an apostle though, but his inability to get rid of his messenger of Satan in 2Cor 12:7-10 gives him away that he is not a true apostle, because in Luke 9:1, Yeshua gave all his true apostles power over all devils, not just a few, so Paul should have easily gotten rid of his messenger of Satan if he were a true apostle. But, he was more like one of those Pharisees Christ identified as being of their father the devil in John 8:44. It turns out Revelation 21 also exposes Paul is not a true apostle, because prophecy only recognizes twelve apostles of the Lamb whose names make it on the foundations of the New Jerusalem. And Peter in Acts 1 also tosses a stumblingblock in Paul’s way of being an apostle, because when they picked a replacement for Judas in Acts 1, it was only because there was a prophetic psalm allowing it, and an apostle had to be someone who had witnessed the entire ministry of Christ from the beginning, and Paul in 1Corrinthians 15 admits to being late to that particular party, being one born out of due season by his own admission. But, the real reason why there can only be twelve apostles is because christ said in Matthew 19 that there are only twelve thrones for his twelve apostles to sit on in the regeneration as these will judge the tribes of Israel. So, Paul gave rise to a lot of people claiming to be apostles like he was doing, but where he got the idea that there were more than twelve legitimate apostles after Acts 1 is anyone’s guess.*
You're using Paul to contradict Mashiach Yahusha... He keep the law he kept the Shabbat he kept the feasts and expected his followers to do the same... *Yes, Paul is always used to contradict yeshua. That has always been by design. Unfortunately, Paul couldn’t keep his own conversion story straight. Luke writes down his conversion story, but Luke wasn’t actually there to confirm what happened. But, the most dubious detail of Paul’s conversion is his claim that Yeshua came back to convert him. If Yeshua came the second time, Revelation 1:7 declares that every eye would se him and that clearly did not happen. And Paul didn’t say he saw Yeshua, but a bright light. Again, Paul admits in 2Cor 11 that Satan comes as an angel of light and such. And in the accounts of his conversion in Acts 9 and 22 what the light tells him to do does not agree with what the light tells him to do when he completely changes his story in Acts 26. It suremakes one wonder why Paul has two very different conversion stories. It is as if he desperately rewrites the version in Acts 26 to avoid mentioning the role of Ananias. Was this because the Ananias of Daniel 9 and 22 wasn’t really a prophet at all, but was really the man who eventually became the High Priest named Ananias in Acts 23 who was not happy to see Paul just prior to Paul’s blurting out he was still a Pharisee, calling is conversion away from Phariseeism into serious question??? Was Paul worried that if he implicated the High Priest in his original murderous scandle that the king would be livid and get rid of both of them?* He even clarified the law and made it more strict.. murder isn't the sin hate is the sin... Adultery isn't the sin.. Just thinking about lust is... He can't to show what the law was meant to do and your teaching the opposite and saying it's optional... *Well, that’s because he thinks we are under the New Covenant. And gracers never actually read the New Covenant to learn God is writing is law in our heart, not tossing his law out. If god writes is law in our heart, then how could Paul possibly say we are no longer under the law in Romans 6:14? That would be pattently wrong. We would be under the law to such a tight and intimate degree that if we sinned under that covenant our own heart would condemn us. But, there is a serious problem of trying to introduce the New Covenant back at the cross as these guys do, because one of the provisions of the New covenant is we won’t be teaching others anymore to know God, because everyone will already know him. And that provision of the New covenant would directly conflict with the gospel commission of Matthew 28 where Yeshua sends us out to teach all nations about God and the gospel of his kingdom. So, the Old covenant was not ready to vanish away as the author of Hebrews 8:13 suggests, because the Angel of the Lord in Judges 2:1 promises he would never break his covenant.* The New Covenant doesn’t really come into play until after the gospel commission is over and we have passed into the New Earth. Otherwise, the fact that there is no son and moon in Revelation 21 would trigger a condition in Jeremiah 31 under the New covenant that would cause israel to cease as a nation before God. So, God has to wait until after the sun and moon are restored before he can introduce the New covenant of Jeremiah 31. This is why christ preserves every jot and tittle of the Old Covenant giving us the prophetic sign of heaven and earth passing away in Matthew 5:18, not the cross, and then comes back to John in Revelation 21:1 to show when heaven and earth actually passes away. So, anyone thinking we are not under the Old Covenant, but have passed under the New Covenant, is not paying attention to the prophetic signs.* Please read the Old covenant... The renewed covenant didn't negate the old it changed who or high priest is and welcomed the other nations.. *Just wait until he learns that in Ezekiel 44 he is going to have to be circumcised in heart and flesh or God won’t allow him to enter the future sanctuary. Because he is sold on the idea that Act’s 15’s not requiring the circumcision of Gentiles is a done deal. And there again, notice that Peter doesn’t speak of grace as an alternative until after he meets and is involved in disputes with Paul and the other Pharisees playing both sides of the fence. If that wasn’t a plot to seriously damage the gospel message on the part of Paul and the other Pharisees, I don’t know what was. Yeshua never claims man is saved by grace like that at any time. Peter and james should have listened to Yeshua to beware the doctrine of the Pharisees in Matthew 16. Why were Pharisees even allowed to have a say in shaping church policy under the first church council when Yeshua never got along with the Pharisees or their doctrine???
Hello YMS! I very specifically spoke to that exact issue. So, respectfully, if you think I am promoting lawlessness, you either (a.) did not watch the entire video, or (b.) did not understand the teaching, (c.) are operating under a pre-determined agenda and willfully ignoring evidence to the contrary, or (d.) lying. I'm going to assume the answer is B and suggest you take another listen at how I explained that we are not under the old covenant law, but we are under the Law of God/Christ. Shalom, RLS
@@coreybray9834 I can't tell if you're agreeing? I didn't puff up Paul but I also don't deny his letters... I think the problem most people have is exactly what Peter says in his second epistle... That people who are either corrupt or lack understanding will try to use "beloved brother Saul" incorrectly as they have the prophets... Paul absolutely does not contradict any part of scripture... He uses the prophets to instruct and confirm the things he says... At no time does Paul claim we should abandon the law and the ways of Yahuah... On the contrary he's teaching to follow ALL that was before. He explains the new covenant difference of the priesthood we are under. Truthunedited.com explains it so much better than I ever could you should check it out anyone who believes that Paul/Saul promoted lawlessness should check it out
Law of God Or the Law of Moses--Mr.RL...this is more of a "Seventh day Adventist" view point that can easily be debunked. They are used they are the same thing Example... Jos 24:26,did Joshua add a command to the 10???Neh 8:1 -Neh 8:8,Neh 8:18
Okay, I'll bite Estill. In 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, Paul says he is *not* under one law, but he *is* under another. How do you account for the distinction he makes? RLS
Religions are babble. Twists and turns, that's why the path is narrow. Got Torah, Got Truth! Got Messiah, it's the same Truth. They are Echad. Elohiem! With HAYWAY sitting on Top! Most High! Halalu-YAH!
I noticed in the discussion with sean griffin u Had no interest, giving your opinion of acts 21. You mentioned that there should be a disconnect if somebody is doing animal sacrifices after the cross, yet when acts 21 was brought up, You Said yes, many of the Followers of Christ are partaking in this. Yet you steered clear of way of even discussing, or giving your reason for this. Because it contradicts your understanding.
Did not Paul circumcise Timothy as an expediency, with no design of associating the ritual with salvation? Why not same in Acts 21? Paul would have no intent whatsoever of substituting an animal for the precious sacrifice of the Lamb of God. So, 1 Corinthians 9 answers Sean the Satanic Cultist and Acts 21. Side note, in Acts 21 James repeats the decision from God and the Apostles only requiring 4 restrictions for the Gentiles.
@@salpezzino7803 Paul. Circumcised. Timothy, because circumcision isn’t eternal command and Paul keeps the law.. that’s why he goes and does a vow To prove that, the accusations are not true, that he is teaching against the law and circumcision
@@indo3052 you are in error. Timothy was half Jew and was needed to give the Gospel in Jewish synagogues. Galatians 2:1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek That scripture also shows your error, Paul didn't keep the Commanded Annual Pilgrimage Feasts
So you acknowledge that we were under the law of Moses before faith came (Gal 3:23) yet you claim gentiles have never had to follow the law of Moses. What a nice contradiction. How about instead of misinterpreting scripture, we just do what Jesus did. Be imitators of Paul and Christ (1 Cor 11:1)
The bulk of Galatians 3 deals with the promises to Abraham and the role and relevance of the Law of Moses. Paul addressed his letter to the churches of Galatia (located in what is now Turkey). At the time, the province of Galatia was under Roman rule, and included the regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, and Pamphylia. All four are mentioned in the NT. Phrygia and Pamphylia are mentioned in Acts 2:10. It is reasonable to believe that among the 3000 saved in Acts 2 were some Jewish Phrygians and Pamphylians who returned to Galatia and were part of the early church. Other Jewish Galatians may have joined the church as a result of Paul's missionary work. Either way, "we were held captive under the law" does not imply nor prove that Gentiles ever had to follow the Law of Moses. Paul may have been simply referring to himself and his fellow Jews, and those Gentiles who CHOSE to follow the Law of Moses, ie proselytes to Judaism.
@@dancingzolins6782 Right, so you have to use eisegesis to narrow the scope of the epistle to the Galatians down to only Paul and a few jewish proselytizing. Not valid.
@cadewillcox1432 Perhaps eisegesis is what you are using to claim that Galatians 3:23 proves Gentiles were always obligated to follow the Law of Moses. "Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed." Can you provide additional verses that support Gentiles being obligated to follow the Law of Moses?
@dancingzolins6782 Why was Nineveh destroyed? Why were the Canaanites destroyed? Why were the gentiles given 4 commands out of the law of Moses in Acts 15? Why did Paul, who always led by example, observe the law of Moses in the book of Acts? (Feasts, sabbaths, sacrifices, vows, etc...) You have the position of trying to defend Why you should not act the same way Christ did. That's a position I would think it's unwise to take.
I think it's entirely possible that your idea of "sin" isn't reflected in Torah at all. You have a habit of referring to any action that doesn't align with commands from God as "sin". Torah doesn't do this. You impose things on the text that just aren't there As an example.. Adam was given a command not to eat from a particular tree (incidentally eve was not told). The text NEVER says they sinned. Yet you and other followers of Paul seem to miss this entirely. In the very next chapter we are first introduced to the word "sin". However this is in regards to something that was never commanded You should probably learn the word for "sin" and begin trying to actually read the tanakh in hebrew so you aren't just making things up that support your preconceptions
I hear you, T.! And I'm sure you would agree that a particular word doesn't need to be found in a passage for the concept to exist there. It's the old adage for writers: "show don't tell." For example, Genesis 3 describes blatant disobedience of God's command followed by punishment. We don't need to see the literal word חטא to know this was sin. R.
@@TheBiblicalRoots your method of interpretation allows you to make things mean whatever you need them to mean Try reading what the authors are saying on their own terms
When your Satanic Cult teaches that you must interpret the NT with the OT you see things as Satan wants you to- Us Christians have the help of the Holy Spirit This answers your question Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-
@@tbishop4961 You're not kidding, T! Understanding what the original authors were trying to communicate is the struggle of every serious biblical scholar. And further, if we truly believe that Scripture is the Word of God (which I do), we're also faced with task of harmonizing the authors. Because even though, as created beings, we can never fully understand our uncreated, eternal God, He has revealed enough about Himself for us to know that He is not capricious or illogical and, therefore, would not contradict Himself. Shalom, RLS
If Moses was elected by The Father to present His law -- it is from The Father. If Moses was apostate he delivered his own law. Truth -- Moses was a messenger from God presenting God's law. If Paul deviated from Christ teaching he would be apostate -- he did not. Peter was also falsely represented in this video as denouncing "Hebrew roots" when in reality he warned that Paul's genius would be misunderstood by people who fail to understand the scriptures Paul read before his writings.
Paul did everything he could to deviate people from following the Torah presenting the crucifixion of Christ as being sufficient for being saved, and on top of it, he’s the only writer who speaks of his own authority that people take as the word of God, though he literally announces before the texts that he’s speaking in his own name. Paul was a murderer and called himself a Jew, he never saw God face to face, and his message corrupts people from following the Law of Moses. “Christians” eat pork, meat and cheese together and other animals though God warned against it which leads to health issues, they don’t respect the sabbath, they don’t observe the feasts, they don’t get circumcised and overall they simply act like hypocrites who shave the corners of their beard : they take whatever law they like and discard others like people who do whatever they want at the end of the day, regardless of the evil they cause to both themselves and others, and that’s why I do not include myself in any movement, I don’t call myself a Christian neither, nor a Protestant, nor a Catholic, nor any other thing, because we were not called to distinguish ourselves and have personal views about the word of God. Jesus was obligated to follow the Law, that’s what proved that he was doing the devines work and gave him the powers he had, but he called everyone with intelligence to understand that the law of Moses was made as the design and rules of this world and life from the beginning to the end, and that not a single stroke of the pen from the law shall be erased, that includes everything written in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and the prophets. When you read the New Testament from Paul’s writings it’s like you’re done away with everything written in what is called the Law and the prophets. The truth is that Paul wanted to make himself higher than everybody else with ego, that’s what the apostles were seeking, making a name for themselves, like Peter who asked Jesus to tell “who’s the greatest amongst them” egoistically and full of misunderstandings. God doesn’t call nor speak to anyone for nothing, he does so to rectify things and if you’re taking heed to your Bible and that you truly have the fear of God in you it’s because you know you messed up, that things are not going right and good and your life, and that you’re trying to make things better - well, the law is what makes things better for the one who listens, the belief in Jesus alone cannot save you, at the end of times we were warned we will face judgment, that record will be opened, and that according to our works we will be judged. What works if not those regarding the Law ? Is God defined by any other thing but by the Law ? Isn’t the Law separating things inbetween what’s good and evil ? And isn’t the Law the ultimate expression of authority to debate a matter as to establish the truth ? The Law is superior to theologies and beliefs, they prove God is true and that he’s not fooling around giving commands for nothing - it’s for peoples well being most and foremost, against the doing of evil second. People don’t get diseased out of nothing, people don’t die because the wind said so, it’s because not following the rules makes us stumble and for this reason we are to carefully study the Law and understand everything about it. Paul’s work is meaningless in not emphasising on the Law that’s why I’m completely split regarding his writing, and even suspect the Catholic Church to have invented things that they attributed to Paul for means of power in a lot of ways. I consider some of his writing, but not everything, simply because he speaks of things he understands himself like philosophically at times instead of having a message from God like all the prophets or the apostles did by recounting the words and story of Jesus as was done in the style of Genesis. We are called to have a discerning mind most and foremost, and to work towards bettering ourselves thanks to the Law.
In 1Cor 9 you claim Paul has made a strong case for his right to receive a paycheck, but Paul’s claiming he has such a right is not well developed in your presentation at all. And no serious Bible student would confuse Paul’s claim as being on the level of a commandment from God. As for paul changing his hat depending on the audience he is approaching, you quoted him as doing that, but then you try to make excuses that he isn’t doing it. That’s just assert and deny logic at its finest. Then you shamelessly try to portray Paul as some great man dedicated to the cause, but I thought paul didn’t believe our works amounted to a darn thing in romans 4:1-5, because we might have whereof to glory, but not before god???? And what if someone uses their freedom to indulge the flesh? If they can’t do that, then they aren’t as free as they are being mislead to believe, but then the fre gift of grace Paul posits in Romans 5 has all kinds of strings attached and isn’t nearly as free of a gift as he claimd it to be. Then you speak about paul as a servant like Christ. Okay, but Christ in Matthew 5:17 came to fulfil the law as the basis for the servitude he was carrying out, so if Paul is trying to be a servant like christ out of love, then he is trying to fulfill the law like Christ came to do and is being roped back in by the law of Moses whether he realizes it or not. Everyone eventually runs into this problem when they get a whiff of love, because running away from the law of Moses is to run away from its love foundation contained in the two great love commandments. This is why people who initially join Paul in coming out from under the law might enjoy the taste of freedom and spiritual anarchy for a while, but the moment they start adopting the belief that love matters, there is no where to run but right back to the Mosaic law which contains the two great love commandments Christ quoted from the law in the gospels and based his gospel message around.Consequently, love is not going to lead to the kind of grace Paul is pitching. If you claim to love God and your fellow man, and you do no works to show it, you are nothing but a liar. And once you become aware of that, Christ is then going to introduce you to the impact of the last two parables of Matthew 25 where those who do no works end up screwed beyond belief. The unprofitable servant is cast into outer darkness, because he did no works like those who did the works of increasing their talents. The goats of matthew 25 did no works, and they were cast into the firey furnace prepared for Satan and his angels, sending the message that you better get off your but and do good works that benefit others, or you will not be saved. Because those last two parables of Christ are just the two great commandments from the Mosaic law in disguise. The parable of the talents is do you love your master (God) and if so why are you seeking to be a disobedient, unprofitable servant. And do you love your fellow man, then why are you like the goats not willing to lift a finger to help your neighbors in need? Once that cat is out of the bag, ideas like Paul was expressing in romans 4:1-5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 simply don’t work. Because justification and salvation without works, is a loveless justification and loveless salvation born of dead faith according to James 2:14-17 that is no different from what the devils believe in verse 19. Love will always compel you to get off your butt and do what is right as defined by the law and prophets. That is why the Savior says that if they will not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead. Christ’s message can’t reach those who are running from Moses and the Prophets, because Christ is the one who rose from the dead trying to persuade us. But, without a firm attachment to Moses and the Prophets, we simply won’t have ears to hear or eyes to see. And this is why Paul’s telling people they are no longer under the law is so dangerous in Romans 6:14, because god is sure there is no lightin him for speaking contrary to the law and testimony in Isaiah 8:20, because those who stray from the law are driven into darkness in verse 22, not to the light.
Thanks for that breakdown, Corey. Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him. So I would respectfully suggest you reconsider your view of Paul. Also, I made a pretty strong case in this video that the Law of Moses is no longer in effect, and I stand by that as a biblically accurate. Jesus did not come to point us back to Moses. Moses pointed us to Jesus (Deut. 18:15). Jesus told the Pharisees "You search the [Jewish] Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40) Shalom, RLS
But ,,,, But Moses didn’t give the Isreal Hebraic Nation ( Gods Sabbath ) …. Gods sabbath was from the beginning at creation. . The Sabbatarian is ( God ) … The sabbath has nothing to do with Moses creating it , because Moses didn’t create the sabbath rest . The sabbath is a chosen day from god the father , Jesus kept it , he did the works of the ( FATHER ) while in and during the sabbath . What kind of WORKs ? Did Jesus do while on the sabbath ? Works of The Faith , What are these permissions of works while on the sabbath ? .. Jesus said I kept my father’s commandments…. What are the Fathers commandments? ? The father’s commandments are the same that Jesus kept and taught . He taught that others should teach them , Do Them , Practice Them . . Now the sabbath is not binding to anyone,,,, However ( if ) you love Jesus , and claim to FOLLOW Jesus ? What day did Jesus keep ? ? Paul said follow me As I Follow Christ …. Now Paul followed Christ who is The Way ! The Truth ! And The LIFE ! ! What was and still is The Way ? ? I tell you that The WAY is Narrow … Following Jesus and the Apostles WAY and or Ways , they rested on The Sabbath , they preached on the sabbath, they healed on the sabbath , they did the works of the Faith while on , in and during the sabbath . . People have a problem with ( Gods Sabbath ) ….. you don’t have to keep it ( if ) you don’t love God and His Sabbath , then you don’t have to keep it for observance.
ANYTHING that detracts from Christ as the all sufficient source of our salvation or righteousness or holiness in God's eyes.... is anathema (is that the right word?) at the very least its a hindrance at the most it leads to apostacy
I rely on nothing more than Christ and Christ crucified His perfect sacrifice frees me I live in freedom His name "yeshua" literally means "YHVH saves" I'm saved saved from my sin, my weakness, my foolishness God the Father sees yeshua instead of me I am free to be me, uninhindered by my sin weakness and foolishness led by the Spirit which I pray for everyday
@@SDsc0rch beutiful words. But is the l Heart far from HIM? , if and a repeat If you don't learn to walk and Talk as the New Rebirth claims. That is the Missing of the Mark! Technically we are NOT saved until judgement Day. And the Heavens and earth has NOT.passed away. Because of this, we should know "what" we are to be judge on, at Judgement Day. Remember, alls it took to get us in our silly flesh, was a whispering in THY Ear, questioning YHVH s instructuins. I pray you seek Fathers Light, as Messiah has instructed US to do.
@@6969smurfy not saved until Judgement Day? Sean is that you? I was Saved the day I was Born Again. Those waiting until Judgement day will be surprised.... too late
Who is the greater authority? Paul or God ? Make your mind up. The Law of Moses stands since the beginning of time until the last day, it is the ultimate expression of God and what proves whether something is good or evil. Shave the corners of your beard if you like, take whatever law you think you like and sin endlessly on the other hand, but just remember the Law stands, and your own records will be put in front of the Law in the day of judgment. For Paul to say he was righteous under the law should trigger you instantly, because he claimed to have been sinless though as a soldier he made people get killed. This debate is proof you people worship Paul and see him as the authority though he’s clearly writing from his own hand and ego, something not seen ever before in all the OT and the prophets or the gospels. Paul is the most dangerous of all the writers of the Bible. Jesus warned us against the “leaven” of the Pharisees for a reason, it’s because they twist things philosophically to fit their own agendas. In other terms, Paul justifies his every deed by claiming to have served others in teaching about Christ, but constantly talks about himself in his letters as to make him pious in the eyes of all. There is no other writer in the entire Bible that gives me doubts other than Paul, he was all for the fame trying to wash away his murders by “serving” others, more like serving himself by making himself be some sort of priest and better authority than anyone else, as if he alone owned the gospels and the keys of the truth. The Torah is greater than Paul’s writings who only seem to fit the hypocrites. The Law is not meant to be a burden, it is meant for our well being, there is nothing superstitious about eating clean animals and seeing others as impure who can infect you and make you diseased, or not sleeping with your own sister or family member, or washing yourself everyday, or not mixing meat and dairy together so has to have an inflamed belly and subsequent diseases etc Remember what Jesus said about the Pharisees whom Paul says he is/was, especially coming from a “Hebrew of Hebrews” as if it gave him better authority or status or justification of righteousness. A benjamite, like king Saul, like pretty much every son of Jacob : treacherous. One might as well read Micah the prophet to hear what God said about Jacob and how he’s not unseeing the evil that he carried in his heart, nor what his descendants do, and if Micah chapter 2 & 3 are not talking about current day Israel I don’t know what else will give you eyes to see and ears to hear.
Hi Paul! Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). No one is "worshipping" Paul. But to reject him is to reject Jesus who sent him. Shalom, RLS
1. How can the Law of Moses, in your words, "stand since the beginning of time"? Did Moses and the Israelites already have the Law of Moses before Moses went up the mountain to receive it? 2. Where does it say, in your words, "not mixing meat and dairy together so as to have an inflamed belly and subsequent diseases"? Where does it even say "not mixing meat and dairy"?
Hi Elijah. I agree the Law of Moses is actually God's law. But in 1 Cor. 9:19-23, Paul refers to them as two different things: he is under one but not the other. That's what makes this passage so interesting! RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots see he is back, nothing you said before sunk in. I destroyed his and his false teachers lie about Acts 15:21 on this thread somewhere. Jesus would have added to your comment "You Fool" lets see if he comes back and falsely teaches that Gentiles need to go to a Jewish synagogue to learn the law or Moses. Or what other vomit Satan taught him. A little leaven leavens the whole lump --------------- the Leaven are Judaizers, 1st century and Today's
Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
![Eminem - Like My Shit [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vx_IMvFkrfA/mqdefault.jpg)
Very Well Said. Big Amen.
Understanding this will avoid us from the pitfalls of Hyper Legalism and Hyper Licentiousness. The Grace of God in the context of the Law of Christ brings balance and right order to everything.
Hello Mr Solberg, I’m a very big fan of your work. I spend hours on your channel daily learning how to understand Torahism. I have a small channel and I’ve found myself attracting Black Hebrew Israelites and somehow debating them about theology. Keep up the good work and may God reward you greatly in the Kingdom to come. Hopefully someday we can cross paths and I can hear more of your wisdom. Shalom
Bless you, brother!
RLS
Thank you Dr. Solberg. You are well studied and contextually accurate. I learn so much from you and appreciate the time and effort you put in.
What a professional and high quality teaching!
So amazing work you’re doing. It helped me again to understand the differences about the law of God and Jesus vs. Moses. Thank you so much and God bless you🙏🏻😊
Hebrews 8:7-13 Do not be lead astray.
7For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said b :
“The days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
9It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
10This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.” c
13By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear
@@FollowChristNotMan the law was not the problem law perfect Psalms 19-7. Hebrew 8-8 people were the problem
@elijahirvin5911 that's what I just said though. Not sure what you're correcting?
@elijahirvin5911 the covenant was broken because of said people as the verse says?...
@elijahirvin5911 the covenant was ended because of the peoppe breaking it.
Hebrews 8:11No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
*So, Christ knew that we didn’t need to teach anyone about god, and yet he goes ahead and sends people out to teach the gospel anyway? Wouldn’t it make more sense then to wait until after the gospel commission is finished to introduce the New Covenant so that it doesn’t clash with the gospel commission?*
Great lesson, brother. May God bless your ministry greatly!
Excellent and comprehensive 👍👍💕
PRAISE YAH FIRMLY!
WORSHIP YAH HUMBLY
GIVE THANKS FOR THE MESSIAH
HALALU-YAH
Blessings, Thank you for sharing it’s a big blessing for myself .
@@user-vi9od3ue7d if you believe Solburg's teaching it won't bring you blessing but curses because you would be disobeying God's words, most of what he is saying is the opposite of what God commands
Thank you
Thanks for your encouragement and the law is perfect. Unfortunately, many misuse the law and lack true understanding of what the purpose of the law is. Be well Grace & Peace
EXCELLENT
thank you sir for this solid teaching : )
Look, I agree with the professor not here to debate with you. If you want to keep the law then keep it. I’m not knocking you.
According to your interpretation of the scripture will I go to hell and loose my salvation? The answer would be No. why according to your thinking you would have to reconcile that with Mathew 5:19 which would be flawed on your own interpretation.
Now so we are clear on who Christ is look at Colossians 1:15 then if that’s fact what about the laws in chapter 2,3 and 4
So what the professor said is correct about Gods Laws.
So why debate, get circumcised if you feel led too. Keep the sabbath if you feel led to do so.
It doesn’t tell me I have to follow those Laws.
I have to wonder how many grown men going into HR ( Torahism) have gotten circumcised. Because it’s pretty easy to tout that law since it has usually been done as a baby…
" AMEN IN OUR ONLY LORD THE RESURRECTED JESUS CHRIST NAME AMEN. "
"The law of Liberty" in James 2:12-13 is also stated in such a way as being distinctly different law than the law of Moses. And it must be this law of Christ, because James says we will be judged by it - he tells us Christians to act appropriately because of it - and that we can get mercilessness because of it
"So speak, and so act, as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment."
The 2nd sentence describes the rules of the law - mercilessness begets merciless judgement; and the inverse is true as well. This is identical to the Parable of The Unforgiving Servant. A man came to Christ for forgiveness of a huge debt; then he was merciless to a fellow servant - so Jesus revoked that man's forgiveness and made him pay himself - payment extracted by torturers. That is merciless judgement to the merciless, as James puts it - and he says we Christians should speak and act as those who will be judged by this. So this law of Liberty/Freedom, which Paul similarly mentions in Galatians 5:13-14 is for us to love, inspired by the grace of Christ. The gift of grace is not to be taken for granted, but rather it must shape our lives, and of course that's facilitated by God working in us - and procured by the instrument of faith
Do you think Jesus is telling us through the parable that our salvation is canceled if we have not forgiven our debtors?
@@jacobsilverberg1329 A man forgiven of his sins(massive debt amount in the parable) , has that forgiveness revoked and has to pay it by torturers now. So yes. The debt was covered/forgiven - and him being forgiven is the reason he was expected to forgive, Jesus says..Then he had to pay himself, so the forgiveness was revoked. Torturers extracting the payment makes it even more clear what this is alluding to.
And this is a consistent teaching, considering James said this as well - James 2:12-13 Christians are warned of the law of liberty, in which he says = mercilessness begets merciless judgement. He then goes on to say Abraham had a living faith after he was originally justified and this is necessary for us.
Paul warns Christians of needing to *continue* on living by the Spirit as well, to go to Heaven
" Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.8 For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not ."
Verse 8 Paul says he that sows to the Spirit reaps everlasting life; then verse 9 says let us not be weary, in due season we will "reap if we faint not". The topic is reaping everlasting life; Paul says this will happen "if we faint not" in sowing to the Spirit.
The forgiven man in the parable fell back into sin; which we all have to fight....
@@deesteven Well, it's a difficult passage to be sure. I am willing to accept whatever is truth, and truth is proved by its ability to reconcile contradiction, the first of which that comes to mind is John 6:47: _"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life."_ The verb "has" is present indicative active. It is not a meritoriously dependent future, as if to say; he who believes will or may have life eternal. Revocable immortality is mortality, thus Jesus would be a liar if immortality were granted, then revoked, because it was never granted in the first place if it could be revoked. Any life vulnerable to death is mortal.
I'm' not convinced that the size of the debt is relevant. Probably the disparity is a hyperbole used for illustration. A couple verses back in your James citation: _"For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all."_ (10) The least infraction regardless of size from our perspective is disqualifying. So, if you could loose your salvation you would loose your salvation where such is dependent upon your conduct, absent the covering of Christ.
"The forgiven man in the parable fell back into sin; which we all have to fight...." And loose, without exception! We are genetically bound to Adamic sin. We are only unlocked from it by Christ's pardon, and that is only realized at the last trump, when corruption is finally clothed by the incorruptible.
"He then goes on to say Abraham had a living faith after he was originally justified..." I noted the reference to justification. There is another occurrence in 1 Cor. 6:10,11: _"...nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such WERE some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you WERE JUSTIFIED in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God"_ Justification is the not guilty verdict, the full pardon. Were the Corinthians pardoned because of their cessation from sin? Heavens no! Their sin is the reason for which the letter was penned. Verse 8: _"No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren!"_ Present active sin, yet they WERE, past tense, justified by a full pardon and they WERE those things recorded in the vice list while actively practicing those same sins upon receipt of Paul's letter. They are not guilty in the eyes of the Lord as a result of their belief.
The good works Paul and others call the believer to should be our response to the debt forgiven. Even so, salvation can not be predicated upon those works. If it is, no man will ever enter the kingdom. If kingdom entry depends upon the forgiveness of our debtors, I venture to say, no man will enter. Even the outward display of release from debt is nugatory when the heart desires justice.
@@deesteven Regarding the passage itself: "Torturers extracting the payment makes it even more clear what this is alluding to." Verse 35: _"So My heavenly Father also will do to you..."_ is applied to this statement about the tormentor / jailer. The statement is that the unforgiving servant is sent to prison "until" the debt is paid. And what after that? Because until is a terminus event. The second death, the (lake of fire) is irreparable, there will be no terminal event to cause release. So, the text could not be in reference to hell as insinuated.
I failed to follow through on a point from 1 Cor. 6, those believers who, justified in the past and upon belief, practiced sin. One of those sins addressed by Paul was the believers suing one another for unpaid debt: _"Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?"_ (7b) This too is named in the vice list, those things which they once were but _" ...were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."_ while in current practice. The Corinthians were forgiven a Madoff sized debt only to in-turn sue their own brothers for lesser sums. Yet all the while and in so doing, they were justified in the eyes of the Lord.
Then as shown, Matthew 18:21-35 can not be referring to the cancellation of salvation.
@@jacobsilverberg1329 The size of the debt is relevant to cement the point that sins are the debt that the 1st man is forgiven of. It's a much larger amount of money than what this man then fails to forgive his fellow servant. It is a part of Jesus' point - the man was forgiven by the King of a huge amount of things, but then this man fails to forgive his brother of much less..that hammers home how wrong it is for us who are forgiven by God to not forgive each other ...That helps make Jesus' point to Peter, considering Peter asking how much he must forgive his brother - Jesus' reasoning of why Peter must forgive his brother is that Jesus forgave him of so much - the responsibility is on a man forgiven by Christ, then he's sent to the torturers to pay without that forgiveness anymore.
The covering/forgiveness of the payment is gone, so the man now has to pay, and the payment is extracted by torturers. This man lost his forgiveness. Forgiveness is fundamental to salvation - it's simply equated with salvation many times in the New Testament. The tenants of the parable are super clear - forgiven of massive debt by Jesus , then needs to pay himself, by torturers. That is as straight forward as someone could ask loss of salvation to be spelled out.
Regarding the passages in the New Testament that say we have eternal life when we believe; we do - we're forgiven, cleansed, and have right standing with God when we believe... but remember, so many calls to believe have the call to repent too. If God says our immortality is dependent upon something, then it is just like any other gift, able to be revoked. A gift that has the quality of lasting forever; if the gift is revoked, the quality is revoked. The Devil was an angel, angels by design, are designed to worship God forever.. That's quality was revoked from the devil and his angels, they were stripped of an eternal quality. God doesn't have the bounds where he can tell us we have a gift and it can't be revoked - especially if he spells out how it can be revoked, we have to concede to the warnings.. Also, the New Testament says eternal life is in Christ - and then the New Testament warns of being cut-off from Christ/God in John 15 and Romans 11 - our eternality is dependent on connection to them, so if we cease to be connected, we cease to benefit from them.
Regarding the Corinthians, the 2nd epistle tells us a lot regarding their salvation
They weren't safe in their salvation, Paul says. 2nd Corinthians 7:9-10, Paul says he's glad he made them repentant by his 1st letter, because this repentance leads to salvation
" **I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God** , so that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. **For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation** , but the sorrow of the world produces death."
They already believed, so this isn't the Free Grace idea of repenting from unbelief; the fact is they were in sin, that was clear from the 1st letter, and that is what Paul is happy they repented from and tells them this repentance leads to salvation. Paul telling them they were justified in 1 Corinthians 6, had a lot of statement around it, that say they need to continue in holiness to stay justified (1 Cor 9:10-10:11, 1 Cor 5:5, 1 Cor 11:32) and this passage in 2 Corinthians 7 clearly states that repentance for them leads to salvation. 2 Corinthians 5:19-21, through 2 Cor 6:3 also speaks of salvific reconciliation and Paul begs them to be reconciled - because of the sin they were in..Read the end of 2 Cor 5:18-21, through 2 Cor 7:10. Paul also says God being a Father to us is conditioned upon us being separate from the world, in 2 Cor 6:16-20 through 2 Cor 7:1, 8 verses later Paul reiterates that their repentance is necessary for salvation
I just love what you teach, one of the saddest things I see, is like Tovia singer when he tries to knock the Christian church. He does like the Hebrew roots movement for the reason that it brings in a lot of converts to Judaism. How sad that it takes the weak to deny Christ.
You made this very clear - thank you!
If Christ was and is the only one not to have sinned.
If we’ve all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
How does it make sense to put a requirement to keep the law….we are all doomed!
Here’s a question to 7th day Sabbath keepers. Do you keep Numbers 28:9-10? Then on the sabbath day two male lambs one year old without defect, and two-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a grain offering, and its drink offering: 10‘This is the burnt offering of every sabbath in addition to the continual burnt offering and its drink offering. I don’t know one Sabbath keeper that does.
Do we send our wife away during their monthly cycle?
What about heading to Jerusalem three times a year as directed in the law to gather for feasts?Seriously pick and choose what law to keep.
You can’t find two Hebrew Israelite camps that agree on the Passover observance Full Moon, Sliver? Come on people Think about it.
@@chucklanger7510 the law isn't that hard... Try it... It can be done... Yahusha was taking about the oral traditions of men... The LAW IS PERFECT
@@YahuahsMaidServantNowhere does it say the law is perfect. On the contrary.
@@chucklanger7510 we are not under the levitical priesthood.. we're under The Melchizedek priesthood which is the more perfect covenant... So you're telling me it makes sense for you to live lawless because you think the last is too hard?? You think it makes sense that Yahusha died a brutal death for you to just sin away thinking nothing of repentance... That makes sense to you? Regardless the renewed covenant tells is to follow his commands and they should be written on your heart if you have the Ruach Ha' Qodesh feeling inside you... I do love the straw man arguments...
@@gene4231 Psalm 19:7. The Law ( Torah ) of YHVH is PERFECT..restoring the soul
Vs 11 Moreover, by them , Thy servant is warned; in KEEPING THEM, there is GREAT REWARD..Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770Yes, the law of God is perfect. The law of Moses is not.
Galatian 3:19 makes it clear the law had a shelf life and and expiration date, The law was given because of transgression , "until the coming of The Seed"!!!!!
Now study the part in Hebrews where Paul clearly teaches that he was referring to the temple rites, NOT the 10 Commandments. Amateur bible readers tend to believe that every time Paul mentions a law, he is referring to the Torah as a whole or the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments were not given because of trangressions. Lev. 1 starts with the offering laws following the golden calf incident. This is what Paul is talking about!
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Amateur Bible readers claim Paul was the author of Hebrews. Since you are an expert can you define your use of the word 'Torah'
@salpezzino7803 those who don't follow the word call others amateurs.
Why do you respond like this and put on full display for all to see that you don't follow christ yet seek to teach the word?..
@salpezzino7803 ephesians 2:14-18
LET ALL BARE WITNESS!!
This is why you shouldn't insult others if you claim christ.
It is in this person's inability yo show.fruits of the spirit I an attempt to attack another that showed they do not follow.
It is their statement that shows they haven't read the word. They claim it is ignorance to assume paul wrote Hebrews.
The simlle.fact.is that even if he did not. The entirety of the letter agrees well with the rest of the word.
Ephesians 2:14-18
14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit
This is not the only example.
I implore you not to continue this and instead to read the bible sir
Thanks!
Thank you, Dee!
Blessings,
RLS
Freedom in a country is attached to laws people keep to maintain morality(nature of God)-- so best law would be God's
And that's what we did on the UK 1500 years ago via King Alfred ...It worked..Praise GOD 🙏
a lot Hebrew Israelites would use "Law of God" to refer to the Law of Moses, and once they establish that, they'd twist the meaning of the passages you covered. I remember going down this line of reasoning so many times w them haha.
I think something to clarify--in case someone misinterprets--is that in Paul's stating his freedom from the law, he's not commanding all Jews who find Christ to stop being Jewish, which is the worry of many (see 1 Cor 7:18-20 & Acts 21:17-26) but rather by being led by the Spirit he lives like Gentiles to win them to Christ. Christ is someone you can find while being under the law of Moses or without the law Moses (see Rom 3:21 & 3:31 they're two ways of saying the same thing). That's why someone who is currently doing what the law says can say "I count is as garbage for Christ's sake".
There is only one Church, one body of Christ
Jesus said, "There will be one flock, one shepherd" (John 10:16),
RLS
And it's Catholic...for both Jews and Gentiles alike
@@danocinneide1885 I hope you don't mean the RCC, for they have a horrendous history with the Jews.
That’s your interpretation of the gospel. Look at acts 15.
Don’t cause someone to loose their faith because they don’t see it your way. A personal relationship with God is prayer, fasting, and loving him with every part of your being. If works could have saved us we wouldn’t need the cross. Sometimes we just have to lay on the alter, die to ourselves. Stay in our lane ( our ministry) and follow Christ. It’s not our job to look with a magnifying glass for tares amongst the wheat. It’s our God to personally surrender to Christ and make him Lord of our lives.
What teaches us Morality? Torah,
Who Taoght US how to by pass Mans religions, to properly apply said knowlage?
Messiah.
Who is that Perfect Man we are to follow?
Messiah.
Now go!! Follow HIM!
Actually, we in the UK,via King Alfred,1500 years ago adopted ten commandments,incl Sabbath, when crime,violence,theft, drunkenness became the norm here. Guess what? It worked..Praise GOD 🙏..We then brought that with the Gospel to you in the USA a few hundred years ago . You adopted it too .However whats worrying ,as seen with this group, there is a new era of teaching not seen , heard,taught, implemented in world Christianity before, that Sabbath ,ten commandments should be excluded from Christianity 😮..All cos the Hebrew roots, SDA, other Christian Torah keepers keep them too.. Yet it's Christianity since Jesus days that has kept Sabbath and ten commandments..
that is a Lie. Torah can teach morality, how did that work out? You Cultists really know nothing -
Romans 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them 16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
@Mikhael1964 I believe the Nazeritic Mesionic peoples of the 1st century was the Persecuted. Only a small remnant escaped the Occupiers religion take-over. And for that reason , I will not call myself a christian. A religion that did away with feasts Sabbiths and put a man's Authority on part with god. )Popes( and the proven degrees of that abominations in 321ad.
I forget what my initial point was for your Comment...
@Mikhael1964 Oh yes. Of One believes in Messiah and see thee wisdom in Totah, then I would can you brother. If One believes in lawless Jesus and defile Fathers Torah and teaches against it, I will can One the deciever! For that is the 119 test the Bereans Did.
@@6969smurfy Christians cant be Lawless - Torah Keepers are the True Lawless Ones
Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever:
That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord (Isaiah 30:8-9)
Becoming as one doesn't mean acting like them, but rather putting yourself in their shoes. In order to win them, you have to understand them first.
The law of God = the law of Moses.
It all comes down to understanding 'under the law'. We are no longer under the law (we pay with our own lives, this is what we deserve), but under grace (Jesus pays with His life, we don't deserve it, but receive it anyway = grace).
You ask questions to the HRM a lot to try a point them to a mistake. Now I have a question to you:
If Jesus not keep the entire law of Moses, would His sacrifice be acceptable to pay for our sins?
Answer me this, If the Law isn't still in place, then by what standard or laws does God have to hold us to on the day of judgment? Exactly.
Hello FOJ! The Law of God/Christ is how we will be judged. You should watch this video. I think you might find it interesting and maybe even helpful.
Blessings,
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots The law of Christ is the same 10 commandments he handed down at creation into the hearts of humanity which allowed them to know right from wrong, and then eventually engraved into stone. Christ taught the keeping of the commandments through a changed heart through faith in him.
The Commandments are a reflection of our lives to show us our sin so we go to Christ for cleansing. Christians always say we are not under the law anymore, however, we are not under the condemnation of the law.
It is the commandments that will stand as our condemnation or exoneration to the likeness of Christ.
I've also heard people say we can't keep the commandments as Christ kept them, however, if Satan is powerful enough to tempt us to sin ( break God's laws ) then Christ jas to be been more powerful to keep us from breaking them.
Any Christian who says we can't keep the commandments but claims the power of Christ over their life doesn't truly have faith that he can keep them from sin ( breaking God's Laws ). In doing this, they make their devil more powerful than their God.
My Jesus saves to the utter most, if Satan can tempt us to sin, then Christ can most assuredly keep us from sin. It is the commandments that will be the standard of which we are held accountable because the perfection of them in Christ was our example.
@@TheBiblicalRoots No true Christian on the face of the planet would say we shouldn't strive to be like Christ through sanctification. Those who say we should strive to be like Christ, but in the same breath say it's impossible don't have the form of faith they think they have.
Is perfection through Christ and the Holy Spirit possible? Yes. Will we obtain that perfection in our lifetime? That's an individual case because each person has their own relationship with Christ, and those who may reach that state will never know it because they will not be self-minded but only oriented to Christ. Because of this self has been removed from the equation, and Christ has taken its place in the heart bringing perfect obedience to him.
@@TheBiblicalRoots It's also the reason Jesus stated the greatest 2 commandments in Matthew 22:36-40 Love God and love others. On these two commands hang the whole law and the prophets. Both these commands embody the 10 as a whole, when we love God with all our heart, mind, strength, and life the first 4 are made perfect in us, and when we have obtained this kind of love for God love for our fellow humanity is perfected for them. This brings completion of the entire law into our lives fulfilling within us the likeness and character of Christ.
This is what most Christians don't understand due to religious leaders who teach through tradition instead of scripture.
@@TheFaithofJesus-bk4wl You wrote "The Law of Christ is the same 10 commandments he handed down at creation..". Can you support that with Scripture?
The Law of God is Holy, good and prrfect Romans 3:31
it certainly is. However Not the law of works - Romans 3:27 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.
Amen! (I think you meant to quote Romans 7:12).
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots they love quoting Roman's 3:31. This was the HRM first scripture they learned
@@TheBiblicalRoots Romans 7:12..the Law is HOLY, RIGHTEOUS, GOOD…
Christian…all good reasons not to be obedient..Got Torah Got Truth
Amen!! It has done what God designed it to do..
The curse of the law is death or condemnation, being under the curse is to be judicially condemned, to be under grace is to be judicially approved. Under the jurisdiction of the law is the requirement to keep his commandments, where being under the law is one who is condemned, so Paul can talk to those such as in Hebrews that have relied on sin and sacrifice for atonement.
Those truly lead by the Spirit cannot sin, thus complying with both the law of God and Christ.
Romans is written in the 3 laws, of God, of Moses and of Christ. Galatians is written in the 3 laws.
God's law from the beginning was the obedience of faith.
No longer under the law due to repentance, and atonement of past sins, therefore no longer in condemnation as they are in Christ.
"If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us" (1 John 1:10).
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Rob that is a general epistle, and the context to 1 John 1:10 is 1 John 1:6 & 8, those who walk in darkness, and say they have no sin. The who walk in darkness are sinning, but if they say they have no sin they lie, but if any man sin Jesus can forgive them to the forbearance of the Father.
"My little children, these I write that ye sin not", little children have had past sins forgiven in baptism, as 1 John 2:12.
That is why I have my Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity', because misreading of the NT ALWAYS allows sin.
hmm well.. The law of christ(prophesied in the 1st test. ISA 53 1:6) is to bear one another burdens(Gal 6:2)
as Paul stated he did... "to the weak I became weak" THATS THE LAW OF CHRIST.. it's not a specific list of laws lol.
Also under the law = not believing in Yah
so if you believe in Yah(which is a TORAH commands) and live like so, you're NOT under the law!
so Paul being around ppl under the law means UNBELIEVING PPL.
the 2 great commandments are from the TORAH the law of god/Moses
Deuteronomy 6:4-9
LEV 19:17-18
lastly in REV END TIMES! it says TWICE gods ppl will be the ones who have faith in Yah and KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS!
I'll stop there lol, so much more I can say but all love..
remember ppl, think like the FEW not like the MANY (Matt 7:13-14)
Have faith in God and follow the newest and greatest commandments to love God and others. Gods yoke is light. Simple. ❤
@@cheryliaquinta707 correct… Deut. 6:4-9 and Lev. 19:17-18 are the 2 great commandments stated in the O.T. They are not new though, you can’t add or take away from the law.
Regarding 40:51 “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak” according to the context is that to new Christians that were still immature he didn’t behave as a lot more knowledgeable and much more mature in Christ, pointing out each little thing they were doing wrong. But instead ignored certain things, prioritizing his battles in order that the more important things, they would listen to him and follow his leadership. He believed that going all in on them, would simply elicit a defensive response that would distance them and ultimately hurt their growth instead of feed it. So though he could feed them meat, he gave them milk and drank milk with them.
this sounds like All In - Galatians 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
No need to 'unpack' when Christianity predates and supersedes Israel and The Law. Christians aren't obligated to the Law because their promise came before the Law. (Gal. 3) The Law of Faith applies to the Christian as it did to the first Christian i.e., Abraham. (Jn. 8:56-58; Romans 3:27; 4; Gal. 5:6)
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
@andrewhodkinson1
7 hours ago
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
*Ah, the cure to the heart like an adamant stone from Zechariah 7. It would be nice if more Christians specialized in that propheticmatter-especially as it is extended in Ezekiel 18. Because if God were to walk into most Christian churches and teach the fullness of this doctrine, they would call him a blasphemer and attempt to crucify him for the clarification he gives in this passage from chapter 18 which demonstrates that man is actually required to turn from sin in order to create a new heart and spirit in himself, because our works really do matter to our salvation.
Eze 18:27
Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.
What a slap to the face of those who hate the law and say our works do not matter to our salvation. Did they ever pause to ask god if he agrees with their assessment though? Because the book god asks Isaiah to write in Isaiah 30 suggests that God is not fooled by the rebellion being taught by his people against his law, his prophets and which is ultimately an agenda seeking to cause the Most High to cease from before them.
Eze 18:28
Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Eze 18:29
Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal?
In otherwards, God’s people have been attacking him and fighting him on this the entire time. And this time he is putting his foot down and letting them know their reasoning was wrong as to how the plan of salvation actually works. Because their stony heart in Zechariah 7 was their refusal to hear his law and the words he sent by his Spirit through the prophets which teaches very differently what man should do than what modern Christians typically teach the plan of salvation to be with all their grace entitlement drunkenness.
Eze 18:30
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin.
How dare God expect that of them. Who does he think he is, the judge or something? Doesn’t he know Paul said they were saved by grace and not of works instead? You would think people would have realized something was wrong with Paul the moment he admits to having a “messenger of Satan” in 2Cor 12:7 just one chapter after telling us not to marvel because Satan’s ministers are transformed into ministers of righteousness. But, most Christians would rather follow a man with a messenger of Satan than God. Maybe that is why Christ warned us in Matthew 7 that broad is the way to destruction and few there be who actually find the gate to life.
Eze 18:31
Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
Oh, you don’t get a new heart or a new spirit until you cast away all your transgressions. So much for thinking grace entitlements are an adequate substitute for honestly working on our character and learning how to be righteous. It’s like when Christ told the Pharisees the importance of needing to also clean the inside of the cup, because they were like whited sepulchres full of dead men’s bones on the inside, rather than learning how to obey god from the heart.*
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.
Funny, it turns out that god actually takes notice of genuine obedience. If only more Christian pastors were honest enough to teach these things to their congregations, but maybe that is why God is getting rid of the pastors in Jeremiah 23 and replacing them with better shepherds at Christ’s coming.
Hi Rob ..the GOSPEL Is about a KINGDOM..the KINGDOM has a KING and a LAW..YHVH followed the TORAH when He used His fingers to write on the stone tablets as required by the KING of ISRAEL…when you state that God gave the Law to Moses …then it’s eternal because He is eternal..Got Torah Got Truth
Indeed! The Law of God/Christ reigns in the Kingdom.
RLS
#GotGospelGotTruth
@@TheBiblicalRoots Paul tells us that the SAME GOSPEL was preached to those in the wilderness…so if the Gospel you preach is different than the gospel Moses preached in the wilderness you are preaching a different gospel…the first-born were saved by the blood of the Lamb but it was disobedience ( not following Torah ) that kept them out of the kingdom…Got Torah Got Truth
Thank you.
You are thankful for deception? YOU ARE BEING DECEIVED WAKE UP, his words are all lies mixed with truth.
The law of God and the law of Moses are literally the same thing 💯❤️⚔️📖
Hi SGYT. I agree the Law of Moses is actually God's law. But in 1 Cor. 9:19-23, Paul refers to them as two different things. He says he is under one but not the other. That's what makes this passage so interesting!
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Shalom
It technically does not say that, no where in this passage does it even mention Moses. Paul like Messiah teaches against Judaism and the traditions of the elders, so I would submit to you that if there something he's not under it would be that, the oral laws and traditions while being under the law of God, which we both agree is the same thing as the law of Moses 💯❤️📖⚔️
@@TheBiblicalRoots Paul did no such thing. The message Paul is clearly conveying is that he was able to relate to ppl who rejected Gods' laws without rejecting Gods laws himself. The parenthetical statement "(without being without law toward God)" makes that very clear.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 Correct there are 3 different type of people in that scenario one that is under God's laws 1 that is under the law of Judaism and another 1 who rejects God's law 💯❤️📖⚔️
@@seekingGODs-YHWHsTruth144K That's what makes this passage so interesting! Paul says he three things all at the same time:
1. *Not* under the law of Moses
2. Under the law of God
3. Under the law of Christ
RLS
Hi Rob..1 Corinthians 9:20,21..the word Moses..you’ve added…not in scripture..the MESSIAH is GOD..
Paul is comparing the LAW of GOD and MESSIAH which is exactly the same and that he is under , to a law which he is not under…he is free from the law of the flesh …claiming freedom in the MESSIAH by rejecting His Law is what leads to slavery of the flesh…Sunday or Saturday or swine or Christmas or Easter…the MESSIAH never told anyone to celebrate His Birthday because He is eternal and biologically does not have an earthly father…Got Torah Got Truth
Hi Harry. you're right that Paul simply refers to it as the law (nomos) in this passage. And respectfully, this "law of the flesh" that you're trying to add to the text makes no sense. First of all, the phrase "law of the flesh" is not used anywhere in the Bible. And second, the context of Chapter 9 makes it glaringly obvious Paul is referring to the old covenant law. That's not even in question.
Shalom!
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Israel is no different than any other nation …the NT is full of examples where men ( flesh ) added their own laws …man made religion was the law Paul was free from…it was the perfect Law of freedom, the light that lights up the path we should go down ( the Mosaic Law came out of God’s mouth ) that Paul was preaching…a GOOD GOD can only give GOOD INSTRUCTIONS..why people would want to reject them and follow the teachings of men ( flesh ) is beyond my understanding ..
Got Torah Got Truth
Why does no one put new wine in old wineskins (Matthew 9:17)?
new wine into old wineskins
ANSWER
One day, the disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples fast like we do and the Pharisees do?” (Matthew 9:14, NLT). The Lord’s response included this parable: “No one puts new wine into old wineskins. For the old skins would burst from the pressure, spilling the wine and ruining the skins. New wine is stored in new wineskins so that both are preserved” (Matthew 9:17, NLT).
Jesus often taught with parables, using illustrations from everyday life to reveal spiritual truths. He did this so people could hear the truth without rejecting it, even if they couldn’t yet grasp the parables’ deeper meaning (see Mark 4:11-12; Luke 8:9-10). Before He introduced the concept of putting new wine in old wineskins, Jesus made a similar point using another familiar analogy: “Who would patch old clothing with new cloth? For the new patch would shrink and rip away from the old cloth, leaving an even bigger tear than before” (Matthew 9:16, NLT).
The problem with patching an old, pre-shrunk garment with a new, unshrunk cloth is something most of us can relate to even today. New fabrics that have never been washed or run through a dryer tend to shrink. Mending old clothing with an unshrunk piece of material would cause the new patch to pull away from the old in the wash, ruining the garment. The problem with putting new wine in old wineskins is similar.
As wine ages, it ferments, releasing gases that pressurize an airtight container. In Jesus’ day, wineskins were leather pouches used for storing and fermenting wine. A new wineskin’s fresh, supple leather could expand and stretch as the wine fermented. But old leather from a previously used wineskin would have already been stretched to its capacity. Putting new wine into old wineskins would cause the leather to crack, burst, and be ruined.
The parables reveal this truth: if we fail to understand that something new is needed, two valuable items-clothing and wineskins-risk ruin. But what does this have to do with the original question about fasting? What deeper message was Jesus conveying through these illustrations?
Through the parables, Jesus emphasized that He was doing something new-inaugurating a new covenant relationship between God and His people. John’s disciples were Jews. They were still following the rules of Judaism and living under the obligations of the Old Covenant, with its ceremonial rituals and religious regulations, including fasting on certain days (see Leviticus 16:29-31; 23:32; Luke 18:12).
Jesus asked John’s disciples, “Do wedding guests mourn while celebrating with the groom? Of course not. But someday the groom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast” (Matthew 9:15, NLT). Jesus had come to establish a new era. Now was a time for joy in the presence of the bridegroom. The disciples of Jesus would mourn and fast later. But while He was here among them, they would celebrate the forgiveness, fellowship, freedom, and new direction that His coming had ushered in. In other words, Jesus’ parables said, “Out with the old way of thinking and doing things, and in with the new.” If the Jews did not adjust their rigid religious mindset, they would experience a loss much like that of the ruined garments and wineskins.
The problem with putting new wine in old wineskins is that the old skins of the law cannot contain the new wine of the gospel. The Jewish followers of John would have to expand their view of God’s provision of mercy and grace to include Christ’s sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin, not just for Israel but for the whole world (Matthew 26:28; John 1:29; Hebrews 9:23-26; 10:14; 1 Corinthians 11:25). They would need to understand that salvation comes by grace through faith and not works (John 3:16-18; Ephesians 2:5, 8-9); that the need for temple sacrifices had ended (Hebrews 7:26-27; 10:1-18); and that, through the coming of the Holy Spirit, all believers of all races on earth are God’s temple (1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19) and His own beloved children (John 1:12; 1 John 3:1). This new reality was tough for the Jews to accept-including those who became Christians after the death and resurrection of Jesus (see Acts 10:1-11:18).
Though strict and inflexible as an old wineskin, the Old Covenant of the law was solid, familiar and comforting to the Jews who resisted embracing the New Covenant. But Jesus had no intention of putting a patch on the old garment of Judaism. By ushering in a totally new covenant, Jesus didn’t try to fix up or even throw out the law, but rather to fulfill all of it (Matthew 5:17-18). No mere human can keep the law perfectly as God requires (Matthew 5:20, 48; Exodus 32:33; James 2:10). Only Jesus Christ, the spotless Lamb of God could (and did) perfectly fulfill the law’s requirements (John 8:46; Hebrews 4:15; 10:12). So as comforting as having the law was for Jews, it was a heavy burden that no one could bear (Acts 15:10).
The gospel of Jesus-the good news-represents the New Covenant of salvation by grace through faith, not works, obtained for us by the blood of Christ (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 10:29). John’s disciples were fasting as an act of religious piety. Such actions may have been appropriate under a legalistic, works-based system, but they are no longer needed under the covenant of grace (Romans 3:20-24; 5:20; John 1:16-17; Galatians 2:16; 5:4).
Just as we can’t put new wine in old wineskins or patch up old garments with new, unshrunk cloth, we can’t mix the law with grace. The old, lifeless religious rituals are done, and we have a new life of freedom in Jesus. Our faith is ruined if it’s based on dead works instead of on the saving grace of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:11-28).
Taken from got questions.org
I'm surprised I haven't seen anyone say, "That's a misinterpretation - it doesn't say that in the KJV OR NKJV," because that's what my father said. (About being Paul being under the law @ 22:40)
BLAAAAAAAH
With all do respect, and since I do not know from what camp or platform you are speaking from…. I’m well aware of the differences in Priesthoods. What puzzles me is how you lump or insinuate being lawless. I spent over 10 years sitting under Brother Buie at the IOG Riverdale. I observe the Sabbath as often as my schedule allows it as I am a first responder in my industry. Feast day understood but not always observed. But I display daily the Fruits of the Spirit, I wholeheartedly display the Golden Rule of treating others as I would like them to treat me. Feeding those who might be hungry, providing to those who are needy, prison ministry, giving of my time in fellowship and council are a few way I display my love of God and people.
You truly don’t need to put Christ’s death into this conversation or lawlessness either. My guess is perhaps you assumed I lacked understanding which is furthest from the truth. With that being said I have come to a clearer view, understanding and awareness of scripture. I no longer fellowship with Israel weekly, no longer part of that camp. I appreciate your efforts in dialogue but your a bit off base in your tone and assumption my belief, understanding and practice in my faith walk. Be well and please refrain from continuing this dialogue unless it is edifying verses judging or assuming without knowing one’s position. Grace & Peace
The main purpose of Rob’s channel is to inform people that they can observe the laws given to Moses at Mt. Sinai if they wish, but are not required to, especially since Gentiles were never under these laws. Christians are NOT “lawless” as many Torah observant like to use to condemn them. The thrust of the issue is :circumcision, kosher eating, Saturday sabbath, and the Jewish feasts. No one is lawless for not observing these. Spirit filled Christians know what sin is. You sound like a very solid Christian man.
you don't have the Fruit of the Spirit and be under the law at the same time. You sound like you have been bending your elbow. Do worry about the Feasts you cant keep them as God Commanded anyway
I agree Torah Keepers are the True Lawless Ones. Shalom
"Under the Law of God? Or the Law of Moses?" - plot twists Moses law came from God himself
Every single one. Check out Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers , and Deuteronomy
I know I know ...but "Paul said..."
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the Covenants in the bible.
The Mosaic Covenant and the New covenant are completely different
The covenant is not the law, it's an agreement or contract that contains the law or instructions for keeping it, the new covenant has better promises but contains the same law that was called perfect - Psalms 19:7.
Thanks, Andre, but that's not much of a plot twist! I said that exact same thing in this video.
RLS
That distinction was literally discussed 🤦🏻♂️
@@Wisdoms_Inheritance New Covenant does contain the perfect law - the 10 Commandments
What do we do with 1 Cor. 5:8? Where it appears that Paul is instructing these Gentiles to get the leaven (sexual immorality) out of their camp (church) so that they can celebrate Passover without malice and wickedness.
Hi, Paul. Paul isn't preaching the observance of a literal Torah Pesach (Passover). He says "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed" (v. 7). He's drawing a parallel. The Jews in Egypt were delivered from death by the application of the blood of the lamb, after which they ate the Passover supper. And one of God's requirements for that feast was that no yeast (leaven) be found anywhere in their dwellings.
In 1 Cor. 5, Paul uses leaven as a picture of sin and says now that "Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed" (v. 7), the church must purge itself of “old leaven”-the things that belong to the “old life” before we trusted Christ, namely sin. He says we must also get rid of malice and wickedness (there was a lot of hard feelings between members of the Corinthian church) and replace them with sincerity and truth. As a "loaf of bread" (1 Cor. 10:17), the local church must be as pure as possible.
Blessings,
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots NASB “ Let us therefore celebrate the feast “ Paul leaves NO DOUBT by this statement that he is preaching a literal TORAH PESACH. Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 The theme of 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 [the ENTIRE chapter!] is sexual immortality within the Church at Corinth, from verse 1 (It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and sexual immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, namely, that someone has his father’s wife) all the way to the last verse 13 (But those who are outside, God judges. REMOVE THE EVIL PERSON FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.) It is not about a requirement to celebrate Pesach, nor any other feast, which aren't even mentioned. When Paul refers to Passover in verse 7, (Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been sacrificed), he is encouraging believers to be unleavened, i.e. without the sin of sexual immorality, the theme of the entire chapter. Or perhaps Paul has one theme for 12 of the 13 verses, but suddenly digresses in verse 8 (Therefore let’s celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth) to preach Passover observance. BTW, I do observe Passover, but not because of 1 Corinthians 5:8. Got context got truth.
Defenders of Saul, excuse me, Paul, exalt his teachings above those of Jesus, because they love darkness rather than light. Jesus came not to destroy the law and the prophets etc. Jesus says he kept his father's commandments which is the law. You keep the word of Paul, I rather, will keep the word of Jesus, who is the WORD
When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow." But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek."
It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too.
This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law.
Hi D4! Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him.
Shalom, RLS
Paul didn't disagree with Jesus on the premise that God's laws must be obeyed by the Christian. The problem is that this channel, like so many other "Christians", don't just preach another Jesus and another gospel. They go so far as to even preach another Paul, a lawless Paul that disagreed with the Messiah's doctrines.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779 trash talk from a Cultist. Torah Keepers are only Lawless, they Hate Jesus and His New Covenant Gospel.
You do realize Paul was speaking to Judaizers when he wrote - Galatians 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
How do Bible experts know? Paul brought the issue with him down to Jerusalem --
Acts 15:5 5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”
what was the PROBLEM? ***“It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses***
These same Judaizers persecuted Paul and the Church
Those in the 'Hebrew/Jewish Roots' kneel to Ba'al
David Wilber is that you?
I've often asked Torahists how could Paul say he was "NOT under law" (IC9.20) while at the same time saying "NOT WITHOUT the law" (1C9.21). I still haven't got an answer from any of them.
28:03 The "law of God" in the law of Christ is spoken of by Paul in R8.7.
R8.7 Because that the mindedness of the flesh (in the law of failance/Death vs. 2) is enmity toward God, for it (the mindedness) does not subordinate itself to THE LAW OF GOD (in Christ 1C9.21); for it (the mindedness) is not even able."
The truth is that a constant mindedness of the law of Moses, according to "the law of the FLESHY inner-aims, is a mindedness of the flesh.
@The Revelation Deception..1 Corinthians 9:20 “ NOT under law “ is NOT In ALL translations such as King James, Aramaic, Literal Standard Version, Webster’s , World English, Young’s…
1Corinthians 9:21..” NOT WITHOUT the Law “: it actually says “ to those who are without the law”…it’s referring to Gentiles who are without the Mosaic Law…that is why the word law here is strong’s 459 as in LAWLESS, WITHOUT LAW , WICKED..Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 Satan Loves you
@@TheRevelationDeception just sayin. You migjt be blasphem-ing thy Holy Spirit.
For This spirt is of Finding Torah. And applying to the fleshy Heart.
Ezekiel 11 19-20
And I will give them one HEART, and a "NEW SPIRIT" I will put within them. I will remove the HEART of stone from their flesh and give them a HEART of flesh, that they may walk in "my statutes" and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my "PEOPLES", and I will be their YAH/God.
Praise YAH!
@@harryabrahams2770 btw. If you 2 Peter Pauls writtings your are being decieved. Torahless aka lawlessness IS sin!
" now go and Sin no.more"
Got Torah, Got Truth!
Historically speaking ,hear in England UK, Christianity came to our shores in second century AD ,over 1800 years ago..But it took a while to get fully established.That came after Augustine visit to our country..
And when it did, the first thing they did was implement the ten commandments as Civil Law.One of the reasons for doing this was to stop the high amount of criminality ,drunkenness etc . Guess what ? It worked.. Praise GOD 🙏...
Not only that but we were taught by those early Christians to keep Sabbath Holy,and as a day of rest. Guess what? The result we/ England,UK prospered immensely..World leaders in inventions,a world empire , financially strong, prosperity in abundance. etc..
We weren't the only ones keeping ten commandments. The whole of Christianity did..We even brought Christianity and ten commandments to you a few hundred years ago in USA . You kept them too, incl Sabbath ..
Even though most of your Churches like ours keep Sabbath, there is a brand new teaching growing in USA with people like this group , that the Sabbath should not be kept by Christians, nor the Ten commandments per se..
You think keeping Sabbath and ten commandments are a heretical Hebrew roots/Torahism/SDA. issue only..But it's not .The whole of Christianity has kept Sabbath and ten commandments fr 2000 years.. as I said above .
You in USA are setting a dangerous precedent with this new age teaching of yours to get rid of Sabbath /10 commandments..GOD will not be happy with you USA if these teachings ,preaching continues,become affective, and a reality .....That's fr sure...😢...
By all means expose, reject HR, SDA, Torahism amongst/within Christianity ..But Sabbath ,ten commandments must remain Christian.. As they always have since Christ Jesus ..Praise GOD 🙏
I cant believe I agree with you - Rob teaches this heresy = "Even though most of your Churches like ours keep Sabbath, there is a brand new teaching growing in USA with people like this group , that the Sabbath should not be kept by Christians, nor the Ten commandments per se" The Lord's Day is the Christian Sabbath
@@salpezzino7803 Thank you Sir..GOD bless🙏.. I think our differences were over OSAS. However in the last few weeks I have come across some some Biblical scripture evidence that has changed my beliefs on this..As well as Scriptural evidence (84 verses,many from Jesus that I wrongly Interpreted)..
Also,it has come to my attention that the Ante Nicean Church fathers,incl many students of the apostles (pre 325AD) whose ten volume series I have studied fr many years now, shows they talked a lot about a salvific journey/perseverance/staying in the faith,danger of turning away from Christ, after being born again.
I found no direct evidence of OSAS amongst those letters at all. Which if it was true they most certainly would have been talking about.. Yet they mentioned the opposite..These are direct letters, from students of Paul,Peter etc..
More evidence,the video Mr Solberg did on OSAS.And I came across a book that shows the greek word for "faith" ; "Pistis", had different meanings in there culture than we do in our culture..Eg Allegiance, Loyalty, Obedience . Interesting but not read it all yet.. GOD BLESS🙏..
Thanks, Mikhael! (I assume you're referring to Augustine of Canterbury, not Augustine of Hippo!)
I've mentioned this many times and I want to repeat it again here because it's important: I do not believe that the Ten Commandments are irrelevant to Christians today. Not at all! Only that they are to be kept under the New Covenant, not the Old. (And honestly, the primary difference between the two is the nature of the Sabbath rest: the specific day and prohibited activities, and the punishment for not keeping it).
This is not a position I made up on my own. I arrived at it after a deep study of the commandments in the NT. I'm certainly not perfect and I don't know everything. But I do my best to teach what Scripture says and not what I wish it said. "Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ" (Col. 2:16-17)
Blessings,
Rob
Hi Sal. I know what you mean when you say "The Lord's Day is the Christian Sabbath." And for the record, I not only see no problem with Christians taking their day of rest on Sunday, that's the I day I take my own rest!
That said, I think it's important to note that what you said is not a biblical statement, but rather a statement of Church tradition. I say that because the Bible nowhere (a.) changes the Sabbath to Sunday, nor (b.) commands Christians to gather or rest on Sunday.
Blessings,
Rob
@@Mikhael1964 Amen
So, you claim Peter is saying the idea of circumcision is unbiblical because Peter felt it was a burden even the Israelites could not bear. And yet, in the very next chapter of Acts 16:1-3 we find Paul actively engaging in the now unbiblical act of circumcising Timothy? Should we also use Galatians 5 to argue that christ now profits Timothy nothing? What about Paul himself, seeing he was circumcised too???
Okay, I see where you're missing the mark, Corey. No one claimed that circumcision was "now unbiblical." It was never banned or prohibited. Rather, it ceased to be an _obligation._ For Christians, circumcision is permitted but not required. This is why Paul could circumcise Timothy for cultural reasons in Acts 16 so that they could preach the gospel in and among the Jews. However, even though circumcision was a requirement under the old covenant law, we know that Paul did not view circumcision as a _requirement_ for following Jesus because of what he wrote in Gal. 2 and 5, 1 Cor. 7, and because of the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.
Blessings,
RLS
@TheBiblicalRoots
8 hours ago
Okay, I see where you're missing the mark, Corey. No one claimed that circumcision was "now unbiblical."
*correct, circumcisionis quite Biblical.*
It was never banned or prohibited.
*correct as far as God is concerned, not necessarily so correct as far as man was concerned.*
Rather, it ceased to be an obligation
*You haven’t anywhere quoted god as claiming at any time that it ceased to be an obligation.*
For Christians, circumcision is permitted but not required.
*According to you and other men, but show us where God says that is actually the case. Because God says he will later get upset at his priests for not circumcising the strangers who come in among them in the Davidic kingdom of Ezekiel 44, suggesting God isn’t necessarily on board with this highly questionable position of the first church council. And did Paul really believe it was permitted if he is threatening people in Galatians 5 by arguing that if a man is circumcised, christ profits him nothing? Because paul’s comments about Moses and circumcision ended up becoming quite a problem in Acts 21.*
This is why Paul could circumcise Timothy for cultural reasons in Acts 16 so that they could preach the gospel in and among the Jews.
*The problem is that Paul argues in Galatians 5 that if a man is circumcised, Christ prophets him nothing. The man in this case is timothy. If Christ then profits Timothy something despite his being circumcised, then Paul is clearly fibbing in Galatians 5.*
However, even though circumcision was a requirement under the old covenant law, we know that Paul did not view circumcision as a requirement for following Jesus because of what he wrote in Gal. 2 and 5, 1 Cor. 7,
*But, where did Jesus say it wasn’t a requirement? I don’t see any statement from Jesus anywhere disputing either the Mosaic validity of circumcision, nor the much earlier Abrahamic validity of circumcision to support Paul’s view on the matter.*
and because of the decision of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15.
*Well, that decision potentially brings everyone who was involved in that under God’s warning in Isaiah 8:20, seeing how far they deviated from the law and the testimony there. And it is evident the decision reached there was not going to be permanent by any stretch of the imagination, because god is requiring the strangers/gentiles in Ezekiel 44 to be circumcised in heart and flesh before they will be allowed to enter the future temple of the Davidic kingdom. Plus, it is trivial to find God punishing people for failing to keep laws/requirements not mentioned in the four provisions concluded in Acts 15. Case in point, the punishment of the unprofitable servant and the punishment of the goats in Matthew 25. Those are just a couple of obvious examples. If you like, I could be far more exhaustive though.*
@@TheBiblicalRoots
Was circumcising one of the 10 commandments? No. However no one has kept all of the ten commandments, let alone all of the Mosaic Law and the Prophets except Jesus. When Jesus stated to the pharisees that they placed heavy burdens on the people that they couldn’t even keep, Jesus was referring to their fixation on the letter of the law while they completely were oblivious to or outright ignoring the heart of the law. The Mosaic Law and the Prophet was and is impossible to keep, reason why Jesus had to fulfill it for us and pay the consequences of our not being able to even keep God’s Eternal Law.
The Old Testament Law was used to show God’s holiness, to reveal to us our sinfulness and to point to Christ. But, after Christ, who went above and beyond, not just fulfilling all of the Mosaic law and the prophets, He is our new standard. We are under a New Covenant. In the Ten if you committed adultery you sinned, while in the New Covenant of Grace, Christ showed us that if you even look at someone with lust in your heart, you sinned of adultery. That the Ten said not to murder, but under the New Covenant anyone who is angry with a brother or sister is already guilty. That it’s not just by your actions that you sin, but by your very heart, intentions, desires. In OT law we were not to bear false witness of our neighbor and under the New Covenant we are to love our enemies.
The law shows us we can’t be justified by our own merits, that we fail miserably and depend wholeheartedly on Christ. Which under Christ’s law, it does so even more. Our righteousness comes from Christ. And under the New Covenant, God’s ordinances are written in our new heart, not in a stone or paper; and they are directed by the Holy Spirit.
Rom.3.20-31 For no one can ever be made right with God by doing what the law commands. The law simply shows us how sinful we are. 21But now God has shown us a way to be made right with him without keeping the requirements of the law, as was promised in the writings of Moses and the prophets long ago. 22We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are.
2Cor.3. He (God) has qualified us [making us sufficient] as ministers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not of the letter [of a written code] but of the Spirit; for the letter [of the Law] kills [by revealing sin and demanding obedience], but the Spirit gives life.
In fact, in the Ten Commandments they were to make rest in the Sabbath from works and make it Holy, yet in the New Covenant Jesus being Lord of the Sabbath is in who we rest in, instead of a day and it is He who is Holy and who the OT Sabbath forshadowed. The OT Sabbath forshadowed, pointed to, represented the rest that we have, under The New Covenant, everyday and eternally in Christ our Sabbath, who IS Holy and through Him we are made Holy everyday and eternally.
Jesus came and established a New Covenant in which ALL of the law is summed up in two commandments: love God above all things and love others as yourself; which we fail at also. Reason why we depend on Christ’s righteousness
In the Old Covenant, God dealt with the Israelites as a separate religious people to himself by the covenant of the Law of the Lord. But with His own from among the entire world, God deals with the world by the covenant of Grace.
In John 4, he opened to us a new form of worship that is beyond religious rites which is the worship of the Spirit and Truth. This is liberal worship in which we are not subject to the ordinance of religious law of old worship, but to grace and Spirit through faith to God, which is Christ the Lord of the Church.
It is man that keeps making law exceedingly above Grace, even in the grace dispensation. Many sadly see more of Moses in their brains and legalistic belief than of the Holy Spirit in our souls. And that's the reason so many are stuck with Law and far from the Grace in Christ, in their teaching and living of the gospel.
Paul also said, in Galatians, that the Law was a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. He also said in Colossians that Christ nailed the law that was against us to the cross....taking it away.
Romans 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another-to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God
Colossians 2:16 So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths
Romans 3:20-21, 28 "BUT NOW the righteousness of God WITHOUT THE LAW is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; ... Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. "
The law of liberty is the law of love.
James 2.12 Speak and act [consistently] as people who are going to be judged by the law of liberty. 13For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; but [to the one who has shown mercy] mercy triumphs [victoriously] over judgment.
2Cor.3. He (God) has qualified us [making us sufficient] as ministers of a new covenant [of salvation through Christ], not of the letter [of a written code] but of the Spirit; for the letter [of the Law] kills [by revealing sin and demanding obedience], but the Spirit gives life.
Gal.4.14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one saying, that is, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
Rom.9.-30-32 Even though the Gentiles were not trying to follow God’s standards, they were made right with God. And it was by faith that this took place. 31But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. 32Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path.
Hosea 2:11 “11 And I will put an end to all her mirth, her feasts, her new moons, her Sabbaths, and all her appointed feasts.”
Rom.10.3-4 For they (Israel) don’t understand God’s way of making people right with himself. Refusing to accept God’s way, they cling to their own way of getting right with God by trying to keep the law. 4FOR CHRIST HAS ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE LAW WAS GIVEN. As a result, ALL WHO BELIEVE IN HIM ARE MADE RIGHT WITH GOD.
Rom.13.9 The commandments, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet (have an evil desire), and any other commandment, are summed up in the single command, You shall love your neighbor as [you do] yourself.
10 Love does no wrong to one’s neighbor [it never hurts anybody]. Therefore love meets all the requirements and is the fulfilling of the Law.
her mirth to cease, Her feast days, Her New Moons, Her Sabbaths- All her appointed feasts.”
Romans 3:20-21, 28 "BUT NOW the righteousness of God WITHOUT THE LAW is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; ... Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."
Check out Galatians 3:15-39
The Purpose of the Law
15Brothers, let me put this in human terms. Even a human covenant, once it is ratified, cannot be canceled or amended. 16The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say, “and to seeds,” meaning many, but “and to your seed,” meaning One, who is Christ.
17What I mean is this: The law that came 430 years later does not revoke the covenant previously established by God, so as to nullify the promise. 18For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise; but God freely granted it to Abraham through a promise.
19Why then was the law given? It was added because of transgressions, until the arrival of the seed to whom the promise referred. It was administered through angels by a mediator. 20A mediator is unnecessary, however, for only one party; but God is one.
21Is the law, then, opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come from the law. 22But the Scripture pronounces all things confined by sin, so that by faith in Jesus Christ the promise might be given to those who believe.
23Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.
Sons through Faith in Christ
26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.
Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
"Permitted but not required" - alright, what is one to do with Roman's 2:26-28. Seems here, there is great emphasis on keeping God's Law. So much so that Gentiles who keep the Law will judge Jew''s that do not keep it.
Hi, Paul. These verses come from a larger passage (vv. 17-29) where Paul continues to show that Jews are not justified by having the law. He points out their hypocrisy as he describes them teaching others but not themselves and breaking the very law that they boast in (Rom 2:21-23). Using circumcision as an example, Paul argues that being Jewish is of value only if one keeps the law; obedience and action are more important than ethnicity (vv. 25-29).
RLS
it has nothing to do with it, neither does 1 Corinthians 9
@@TheBiblicalRoots Romans 2, Paul defines what a Jew truly is, You quoted the scripture and miss what Paul was saying - He redefined being a Jew.
Romans 2: 28 A man is not a Jew because he is one outwardly, nor is circumcision only outward and physical. 29No, a man is a Jew because he is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise does not come from men, but from God.
A true Jew, is heir of the promises made to the fathers. I am the True Israel, I am a Child of the Promise.
"Permitted but not required" is not in the Bible and flies in the face of - James 2:10 - Galatians 5:3 - Deuteronomy 27:26
When you say it is Permitted you are causing Believers to Sin and will be held accountable
Elijah can now make animal sacrifices, if he sees fit, "Permitted but not required"
@TheBiblicalRoots I can see that. I also could see - just having the Law/the written code , means nothing does nothing if you don't do it.
Just like a Gym membership. If you don't go to the gym and workout, you don't get stronger.
@salpezzino7803 Do you mean Romans? Which comes right before Corinthians.
Why does Paul say in 1Cor. 9:21b "But I do not ignore the Law of God;" NLT
Paul also uses the Law in 1 Cor. 9:7-10 to express how the Law of God/Moses says a minister who plants seed and works hard should also hope/expect to be fed or supported by those who benefit from his ministry. Thus the Law of Moses reference about nuzzling an Ox
How do you pick and chose what laws you keep unbelievable.you throw out Sabbath but keep tithe
I would like to know? By what standard. we know it isn't by God's standard. How do we decide which laws are permitted but not required?
@elijahirvin5911
8 hours ago
How do you pick and chose what laws you keep unbelievable.you throw out Sabbath but keep tithe
*Easy, if it benefits God, they toss it out. If it benefits their own pocket, they want to preserve it at all costs.
@@coreybray9834 Easy? So how do you know what benefits God? To you it had to do with material things?
Hello Elijah! I don't get to pick and choose. The Word of God is my authority. I do my best to understand what the Bible teaches. And for the record I have not "thrown out" the Sabbath (I keep my own day of rest) and I do not teach tithing, but rather the importance of giving generously from a cheerful heart. And I don't teach this because it's what I've "chosen," but because it's what I believe the NT teaches.
Blessings,
RLS
@@salpezzino7803
@salpezzino7803
5 hours ago
@coreybray9834 Easy? So how do you know what benefits God? To you it had to do with material things?
*If that is what god asks of us in certain instances is material things, then obviously he thinks it benefits him and his cause if we comply, right? Because there are many occasions where God has asked for material things from his people in the Scriptures. Or, do you believe it benefits god and his cause more when we refuse to comply and disobey him instead? Because Christ seems to think that man shall live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God in Matthew 4:4. Paul, however, seems to believe that we are no longer under the law in Romans 6:14. But, Paul conveniently fails to mention that the law contains many of God’s words that Christ formerly said man shall live by back in Matthew 4:4, for example, God is the one speaking the ten commandments according to Exodus 20:1. So, does it benefit god when christ says one thing and paul teaches Christ’s followers to head in a completely different direction than Christ who is actually the Good Shepherd of John 10 is trying to lead us? Because Christ was pretty explicitly certain in the gospels that a man cannot serve two masters like that which might help to explain why those who are actually sealed in Revelation 14 follow the lamb wheresoever he goes, not Paul or his messenger of Satan in 2Cor 12:7, not that too many Christians take the time to discern the difference. But, I would imagine that those who benefit God end up standing on the sea of glass in Revelation 15 singng the song of Moses and the Lamb, refusing to join Paul in his endless attacks on Moses and Christ’s doctrine, because they realize that Moses and Christ are the two prophets of the Messianic prophecy of Deuteronomy 18 and that the true gospel is not trying to get rid of Moses or the law God gave through him.
Hi Rob..” what were once legally commanded rituals “ legalism comes from the FLESH…the LAW comes from our CREATOR…Got Torah Got Truth
However, the context must surely include the interpretaion of Scripture within the overall context of the one true Church, the Church which is authorised to teach by our Lord Himself...?
A Quahal built apon a rock, a rock located in Thy Hebrew Lands!
Which is? Just say bluntly what ever it is you are attempting to state. Because you aren’t making sense.
You're using circular reasoning by having Paul answer his own viewpoint. Thus let a matter be established by two or three witness. But I will disregard.
1. The laws of God/Moses/Christ are the same. The covenant doesn't change the laws, it incorporates the law into the blessings and curses of the covenant. Thus in Jeremiah and Hebrews we see the Laws being in their Heart which is also said in Deuteronomy 10:16, This is why you see Noah knowing what animals are clean and unclean But if you take this approach then you also see that both covenants (Old and New) where for the House of Israel and House of Judah, but it is still based on what is written in the law of Moses Aka the written Law of God.
2. Even in verse 21 you see with the being like the gentiles he was no outside the law of God (implying being under the law of God). It would be like ministering to a drug dealer and relating to them while not taking drugs.
3. The law of Christ is summed up with love the lord God and your neighbor. But do you love God if you, for example eat something that he finds abominable/disgusting. Would you eat a roach in front of you're love one if they found it unbearable to watch? Again meaning the law is still in effect.
Peace and blessing to you my brother in Christ.
The law of Moses and the law of Christ are not the same. God tells us so - Paul brought an issue that was plaguing the Church to Jerusalem - Acts 15:5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.” ==== So No Your Cult is a Cult of Liars and Lawless False teachers. And you are no brother of mine, we have different fathers, your father is the Father of Lies - Peace
Even thy elect will be Decieved.
The Decievers Job "sin one of man" trlls(edit) tells us, is to get Man Not to follow Thy Fathers Instructions.
Wisdom is TORAH.
@6969smurfy
The Torah’s commandments do not apply to Christians.
Romans 2:14
Acts 15:5-20
Acts 21:25
Romans 14:20
Colossians 2:16-17-> Exodus 31:16-17
Paul’s instructions are what is binding on Christians.
Ephesians 3:1
Acts 22:20-21
1 Timothy 2:7
2 Timothy 4:17
Galatians 1:16-17
Romans 11:13
@johnmann8659 is all babble/baby speak John,
to a person that doesn't understand the Milk. (Infant Nourishment)
Simple Put ALL we need to do is
Berean test Everything, 119 test.
If you do not know the definition of Thy Words
in sert Word here-----
let's pick this One "Richous" it is Given DUET 6 25 how can you use it to make any TRUE revalation.
Remeber all the deciever does is make US question Father Instructions. Sin One Of Man!
All Praise to Thy Father!
Give thanks for the Messiah!
Halalu-YAH
The error of mainstream Christianity, God's laws don't apply but a mans does?
Romans 2:14-15 show the Gentiles by nature do that which is contained in the law, showing the law written on their hearts, but the law doesn't apply?
The things given in Acts 15 and 21 are taken straight from the law, but the law doesn't apply?
The misuse(as we see here) of Romans 14:20 and 1 Timothy 4:1-4(though not listed) can imply something not good.
Are Gentiles graffed in among the Jews? If so then the use of Exodus 31 and Colossians 2 don't apply here.
Though Paul was a teacher of the Gentiles, he never taught against God's law.
@@Wisdoms_Inheritance
Luke writes Paul is a chosen instrument to the gentiles (Acts 9:15-16).
Peter says Paul’s writings are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Why do you reject Luke and Peter also?
@@johnmann8659 I don't recall saying Paul's writings aren't good, he wrote according to the wisdom given to him, I did say he didn't teach against the law, there are contradictions in this video as it would be when trying to say the law came to an end when Christ said different.
The Old Covenant law given through Moses according to the order of Aaron in Judaism - Hebrews 7:11; Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 5:43; Matthew 22:39. #Good
The New Covenant law of Christ that came by Jesus according to the order of Melchizedek in Christianity - Hebrews 7:12; Matthew 5:44; John 13:34; John 15:12; Galatians 5:22; 1 Corinthians 13. #Better
Jeremiah 31:31-34; Luke 5:36-39.
The question is how do Christians introduce the New Covenant back at the cross, when the New Covenant explicitly teaches that under that covenant we won’t need to teach every man his neighbor to know the Lord, for we shall all know him. That doesn’t make sense to apply the New Covenant back then, because Christ was opposing that part of the New Covenant by sending his followers out to preach the gospel of God and his kingdom to all nations in Matthew 28 because very few people know who God was around the globe back then. Consequently, the New Covenant would seem to fit better at some point after the gospel commission reaches an ending point.
@@coreybray9834 Hebrews 9:16 For where there is a covenant, there must of necessity be the death of the one who made it. 17 For a covenant is valid only when people are dead, for it is never in force while the one who made it lives. (NASB)
@@coreybray9834 When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow." But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek."
It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too.
This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law.
@@kimartist
@kimartist
3 hours ago
@coreybray9834 When Christ died the Covenant/Testament ended because He was the Author & "Husband" (so to speak) of that Covenant, leaving Israel a bereft "widow.” But unlike a human husband, Jesus rose again & authored a New Covenant whereby Jesus could marry again - a "new man"/New Israel formed of "Jew & Greek."
*It sounds like an interesting story until you try to apply the New covenant at the same time as the gospel commission of Matthew 28. Jeremiah 31:31-34 would make the gospel commission completely a waste of time and irrelevant, because one of the stated provisions of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is that we will no longer need to teach others to know God, because we will all know him from the least unto the greatest. The implication being that the New Covenant comes much later at some point after the gospel of the kingdom is finished being taken to the world. In fact, some might argue that the old covenant is for the Old Earth and the New covenant is for the New Earth when god makes all things NEW in Revelation 21:1-5. So, what if the New Covenant is oriented more with respect to the death, resurrection and ascention of the two prophets of Revelation 11, rather than at the cross? Then the covenant Christ is authoring is actually the Old Covenant, and what the Jews did prior to Christ’s death were simply being taught how to reherse the matter through a system of types and figures until the Old covenant became instituted as a result of Christ’s death on Passover. Which is why God’s people entered into a covenant with him after the Passover and the Exodus in Egypt. In like manner, Isaiah speaks of the death of Christ in Isaiah 53, the initial rise of Christianity in Isaiah 54, the fulfillment of the other nation that would take the kingdom away from the Jews in Matthew 21 being called in by Isaiah 55 and the strangers/gentiles coming in receiving the Sabbath and covenant offer of God in Isaiah 56. Now, as for the New Covenant, I assure you, there will not be sinning like there is today under the New Covenant. If Christians were to sin under the New Covenant like they do today with the law of God written in their heart, their heart would be in perpetual condemnation of them. So, what if God waits to explain the problem of the heart like an adamant stone in Zechariah 7 as a future fulfillment, like unfolding such an insight closer to our day, and he starts preparing us by removing our stony heart in Ezekiel 11 and 36, by teaching us how to create in us a New Heart and New Spirit as god goes into detail about in Ezekiel 18, preparing us for a future time in the New Earth when he actually writes his law in our new heart in Jeremiah 31:31-34???*
It was also necessary for Jesus to die, because, according to law, the heirs cannot inherit unless the testator (author of a will/testament) dies. The inheritance is all the promises made to Abraham, because Jesus was also the Author of that Covenant too.
*Sure, this is why Isaac was taken up on the mount by Abraham to be sacrificed to serve as a type pointing forward to the death of Christ. It’s also why John is weeping in Revelation 5, because the scroll in the hands of the Father is a will with seven seals as testaments and wills were sealed in ancient times with seven witnesses. But, this was the unsealing of the Old Covenant going on which is not fulfilled in its completion until all seven seals are opened. But, in the future the time comes in Daniel 7 where christ receives his Father’s kingdom, but when does Christ’s Father die to comply with the law as you discuss above before the kingdom is passed to his heir, namely Christ his Son???*
This is the problem with putting yourself under a covenant that has ended. There is no longer any husband to protect you, provide for you, etc. It is a "dead letter" in terms of contract law.
*Not in this case, because Christ represents the Passover in Egypt, the people who came out of Egypt entered the Old Covenant after the fact. This is why christ preserves every jot and tittle of the Old Covenant’s law until heaven and earth passes away in Matthew 5:18 and Revelation 21:1.*
@@coreybray9834 Truly, the New Covenant began and became valid at the shed blood and one time death of the Lord Jesus Christ (Hebrews 9:16-17).
Luke 22:20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup, which is poured out for you, is the new covenant in My blood." (NASB)
1 Corinthians 11:25 In the same way He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” (NASB)
Hebrews 9:18 Therefore even the first covenant was not inaugurated without blood. 19 For when every commandment had been spoken by Moses to all the people according to the Law, he took the blood of the calves and the goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant which God commanded you [Exodus 24:8].” 21 And in the same way he sprinkled both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry with the blood. (NASB)
But many do not believe the truth (Hebrews 3).
Have a good one in Old Testament Judaism w/ the Law given through Moses and your Levitical priesthood according to the order of Aaron (Hebrews 7:11).
Hi Rod..are you aware of how often you add the word Moses after the word law to justify your theology when the word MOSES is not in the text…adding to scripture to mislead …not good..Got Torah Got Truth
Bravo! Caught that liar
Hi Harry. The context of Chapter 9 makes it glaringly obvious Paul is referring to the old covenant law, aka the Law of Moses. What other law could he be referring to? (FYI There is no "law of the flesh" mentioned in Scripture.)
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots not obvious at all…every civilization has laws that do not come from the creator..they come from man ( flesh ) ..Israel was no different…this is why Yehoshua said to the educated religious leaders of the day that the devil was their father…had they been teaching the Law of Moses which came from God as you stated He never would have made that statement…Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheBiblicalRoots what is obvious…1 Corinthians 20…every time the word Law is used
it is 3551..the Mosaic Law, Pentateuch…which all makes sense since Paul is talking about Jews…this is where it gets INTERESTING…the King James Version and others record Paul saying he is under that Law….other versions add that Paul saying he is not under that Law ( usually in brackets ) which makes me suspicious that this is added later… Got Torah Got Truth
@@TheBiblicalRoots in verse 20 Paul is talking about Jews… in verse 21 he is talking about gentiles since he uses the word law 459 …without law, lawless, wicked…so in this context it’s “ glaringly obvious “ that he is NOT talking about the Law of Moses ….verses 20 and 21 Paul is stating that in dealing with Jew or Gentile he uses a different approach…” though NOT being without the Law of God ( Mosaic Law )..Got Torah Got Truth
.
Torah means instruction.....whereas covenantal nomianism is actually what you are confronting.
What law would Jeremiah have understood as the law of God that will be written on our hearts? There was no problem with the law, God says he found fault with the people, not his law. But God found fault with the people and said: “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah, Hebrews 8:8. The promise of the new covenant is to have that law written on our hearts so that we cannot disobey it.
You have presented Hebrews 8:8, which quotes Jeremiah 31:31. The very next verse, Hebrews 8:9 (Jeremiah 31:32) says "not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord." Not like. Not like. What does 'not like' mean here?
@dancingzolins6782 What is the only thing different about the covenant mentioned? Not the law. It's the resurrection, the new heart with the law written on it. The inability to disobey God's law. God fixes the fault he found with them by fixing men, not his perfect law.
Hi, Cade. For Jeremiah, the "law" meant the the old covenant law, because he was under the old covenant. It was the only law he knew at that time.
RLS
I will NEVER understand why you promote lawlessness... You use cherry picked scriptures to try to prove your point that lawlessness is acceptable... Do you really believe that Mashiach died so you could be lawless? You're using Paul to contradict Mashiach Yahusha... He keep the law he kept the Shabbat he kept the feasts and expected his followers to do the same... He even clarified the law and made it more strict.. murder isn't the sin hate is the sin... Adultery isn't the sin.. Just thinking about lust is... He can't to show what the law was meant to do and your teaching the opposite and saying it's optional... Please read the Old covenant... The renewed covenant didn't negate the old it changed who or high priest is and welcomed the other nations..
@yahuahsmaidservant
Luke writes that Paul was a chosen instrument to the gentiles (Acts 9:15-16).
Peter writes that Paul’s writings are scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).
The Torah’s commandments are not required for Christians.
Acts 15:5-20
Acts 21:25
Romans 14:20
Colossians 2:16-17-> Exodus 31:16-17
Romans 2:14
@YahuahsMaidServant
3 hours ago
I will NEVER understand why you promote lawlessness...
*It’s rather easy why he does this! He does it because Isaiah 30, in that book god asks Isaiah to write, God clarifies that men like him want the Most High to cease from before them. Because in Zechariah 7 they have a heart like an adamant stone because they refuse to hear the law and the words God sent by his spirit through the prophets. And in Ezekiel 18, he doesn’t want to turn from this folly and create in himself a new heart and a new spirit like God teaches us to do, because in Ezekiel 11 and 36, he does not want to exchange his stony heart for a new heart. Instead, he wants to worship Paul, a man who admits openly to having a “messenger of Satan” in 2Cor 12:7 just one chapter after telling us not to marvel because Satan’s ministers are transformed into ministers of righteousness. Paul blurted out late in his career in Acts 23:6 that he was still a Pharisee, and Christ in Matthew 16 warned us to beware the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, because in Matthew 23:13 they didn’t want to enter the kingdom of God, but they instead in Matthew 23:15 seek to turn their procelites into twice the child of hell than themselves. So, when people do not take these warnings of Yeshua seriously, Pharisees like Paul really do turn them into twice the child of hell than themselves by turning them against Fathr Yah and his law. But, Father Yah said he would send in false prophets and suchin Deuteronomy 13 to test to see if we really love him, and Paul has been that test and source of most of the problems within Christianity today. Take away Paul, and 99% of the arguments against God and his law go away immediately. Take away Paul and more people would follow the Good Shepherd of John 10, and realizeYeshua was the other prophet like Moses in Deuteronomy 18, not another prophet diametrically opposed to Moses like so many try to turn things upside down to be. But, those who realize these two prophets are in agreement and that the law and gospel are a unified message: these will get the victory over the Beast, its image, its mark and the number of its name. And when they stand on the sea of glass in Revelation 15 they will sing the song of Moses and the lamb (the two prophets of Deuteronomy 18), not the song of Paul and his Messenger of Satan from 2Cor 12:7. Because from the moment Paul said we are no longer under the law, Paul brought himself under the judgment of God in Isaiah 8:20, proving there was no light in him for speaking against the law and testimony like that. Because God’s people are those God seeks to bind up the testimony and seal his law among his disciples in Isaiah 8:16. Because in Deuteronomy 6 that is what is bound to the right hand in forehead, where in Revelation 14 the mark of the beast is what ends up in the right hand and foreheads of those who come out from under the sealing protection of God’s law instead. And so guys like this that turn people away from the law and seal of god, they are the wolves in sheep’s clothing we were told would come and to watch out for.*
You use cherry picked scriptures to try to prove your point that lawlessness is acceptable... Do you really believe that Mashiach died so you could be lawless?
*Yes, guys like him basically do, because paul told them in romans 6:14 that they were no longer under the law, but under grace, and grace is a free gift according to Paul in romans 5, and that grace and works do not mix in Paul’s doctrine in Romans 11:6, because if you are circumcised and return to keeping the law to be justified in Galatians 5, Paul is sure you are fallen from grace, because his idea of justification in Romans 4:5 is one of faith without works intended to justify the UNGODLY which is really the same as the lawless if you think about it. However, James 2:14-19 argues that paul’s brand of faith without works is dead faith and a doctrine the devils practice-suggesting James likely was aware of Paul’s messenger of Satan in 2cor 12:7. So that is why Paul says you are saved by grace and not of works in Ephesians 2:8-9. But, Yeshua comes back in Revelation 2 to these same Ephesians and warns them to repent and DO THE FIRST WORKS, else he will remove their candlestick, the exact opposite of what Paul is teaching when he tells the Ephesians “not of works” from earlier. The church of ephesus basically rejected Paul, and Paul admits that all of Asia departed from him in his second letter to Timothy, meaning all 7 churches of the Roman province of Asia mentioned in Revelation 1-3 departed from Paul. But, the Savior praises the church of Ephesus in Revelation 2 for trying those who say they are apostles and are not, but are found to be liars. Yeshua never claimed Paul was an apostle, Paul called himself an apostle though, but his inability to get rid of his messenger of Satan in 2Cor 12:7-10 gives him away that he is not a true apostle, because in Luke 9:1, Yeshua gave all his true apostles power over all devils, not just a few, so Paul should have easily gotten rid of his messenger of Satan if he were a true apostle. But, he was more like one of those Pharisees Christ identified as being of their father the devil in John 8:44. It turns out Revelation 21 also exposes Paul is not a true apostle, because prophecy only recognizes twelve apostles of the Lamb whose names make it on the foundations of the New Jerusalem. And Peter in Acts 1 also tosses a stumblingblock in Paul’s way of being an apostle, because when they picked a replacement for Judas in Acts 1, it was only because there was a prophetic psalm allowing it, and an apostle had to be someone who had witnessed the entire ministry of Christ from the beginning, and Paul in 1Corrinthians 15 admits to being late to that particular party, being one born out of due season by his own admission. But, the real reason why there can only be twelve apostles is because christ said in Matthew 19 that there are only twelve thrones for his twelve apostles to sit on in the regeneration as these will judge the tribes of Israel. So, Paul gave rise to a lot of people claiming to be apostles like he was doing, but where he got the idea that there were more than twelve legitimate apostles after Acts 1 is anyone’s guess.*
You're using Paul to contradict Mashiach Yahusha... He keep the law he kept the Shabbat he kept the feasts and expected his followers to do the same...
*Yes, Paul is always used to contradict yeshua. That has always been by design. Unfortunately, Paul couldn’t keep his own conversion story straight. Luke writes down his conversion story, but Luke wasn’t actually there to confirm what happened. But, the most dubious detail of Paul’s conversion is his claim that Yeshua came back to convert him. If Yeshua came the second time, Revelation 1:7 declares that every eye would se him and that clearly did not happen. And Paul didn’t say he saw Yeshua, but a bright light. Again, Paul admits in 2Cor 11 that Satan comes as an angel of light and such. And in the accounts of his conversion in Acts 9 and 22 what the light tells him to do does not agree with what the light tells him to do when he completely changes his story in Acts 26. It suremakes one wonder why Paul has two very different conversion stories. It is as if he desperately rewrites the version in Acts 26 to avoid mentioning the role of Ananias. Was this because the Ananias of Daniel 9 and 22 wasn’t really a prophet at all, but was really the man who eventually became the High Priest named Ananias in Acts 23 who was not happy to see Paul just prior to Paul’s blurting out he was still a Pharisee, calling is conversion away from Phariseeism into serious question??? Was Paul worried that if he implicated the High Priest in his original murderous scandle that the king would be livid and get rid of both of them?*
He even clarified the law and made it more strict.. murder isn't the sin hate is the sin... Adultery isn't the sin.. Just thinking about lust is... He can't to show what the law was meant to do and your teaching the opposite and saying it's optional...
*Well, that’s because he thinks we are under the New Covenant. And gracers never actually read the New Covenant to learn God is writing is law in our heart, not tossing his law out. If god writes is law in our heart, then how could Paul possibly say we are no longer under the law in Romans 6:14? That would be pattently wrong. We would be under the law to such a tight and intimate degree that if we sinned under that covenant our own heart would condemn us. But, there is a serious problem of trying to introduce the New Covenant back at the cross as these guys do, because one of the provisions of the New covenant is we won’t be teaching others anymore to know God, because everyone will already know him. And that provision of the New covenant would directly conflict with the gospel commission of Matthew 28 where Yeshua sends us out to teach all nations about God and the gospel of his kingdom. So, the Old covenant was not ready to vanish away as the author of Hebrews 8:13 suggests, because the Angel of the Lord in Judges 2:1 promises he would never break his covenant.* The New Covenant doesn’t really come into play until after the gospel commission is over and we have passed into the New Earth. Otherwise, the fact that there is no son and moon in Revelation 21 would trigger a condition in Jeremiah 31 under the New covenant that would cause israel to cease as a nation before God. So, God has to wait until after the sun and moon are restored before he can introduce the New covenant of Jeremiah 31. This is why christ preserves every jot and tittle of the Old Covenant giving us the prophetic sign of heaven and earth passing away in Matthew 5:18, not the cross, and then comes back to John in Revelation 21:1 to show when heaven and earth actually passes away. So, anyone thinking we are not under the Old Covenant, but have passed under the New Covenant, is not paying attention to the prophetic signs.*
Please read the Old covenant... The renewed covenant didn't negate the old it changed who or high priest is and welcomed the other nations..
*Just wait until he learns that in Ezekiel 44 he is going to have to be circumcised in heart and flesh or God won’t allow him to enter the future sanctuary. Because he is sold on the idea that Act’s 15’s not requiring the circumcision of Gentiles is a done deal. And there again, notice that Peter doesn’t speak of grace as an alternative until after he meets and is involved in disputes with Paul and the other Pharisees playing both sides of the fence. If that wasn’t a plot to seriously damage the gospel message on the part of Paul and the other Pharisees, I don’t know what was. Yeshua never claims man is saved by grace like that at any time. Peter and james should have listened to Yeshua to beware the doctrine of the Pharisees in Matthew 16. Why were Pharisees even allowed to have a say in shaping church policy under the first church council when Yeshua never got along with the Pharisees or their doctrine???
Hello YMS! I very specifically spoke to that exact issue. So, respectfully, if you think I am promoting lawlessness, you either (a.) did not watch the entire video, or (b.) did not understand the teaching, (c.) are operating under a pre-determined agenda and willfully ignoring evidence to the contrary, or (d.) lying. I'm going to assume the answer is B and suggest you take another listen at how I explained that we are not under the old covenant law, but we are under the Law of God/Christ.
Shalom,
RLS
@@coreybray9834 I can't tell if you're agreeing? I didn't puff up Paul but I also don't deny his letters... I think the problem most people have is exactly what Peter says in his second epistle... That people who are either corrupt or lack understanding will try to use "beloved brother Saul" incorrectly as they have the prophets... Paul absolutely does not contradict any part of scripture... He uses the prophets to instruct and confirm the things he says... At no time does Paul claim we should abandon the law and the ways of Yahuah... On the contrary he's teaching to follow ALL that was before. He explains the new covenant difference of the priesthood we are under. Truthunedited.com explains it so much better than I ever could you should check it out anyone who believes that Paul/Saul promoted lawlessness should check it out
Law of God Or the Law of Moses--Mr.RL...this is more of a "Seventh day Adventist" view point that can easily be debunked. They are used they are the same thing Example... Jos 24:26,did Joshua add a command to the 10???Neh 8:1 -Neh 8:8,Neh 8:18
To me, Rob sounds like a SDA more often than not
Okay, I'll bite Estill. In 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, Paul says he is *not* under one law, but he *is* under another. How do you account for the distinction he makes?
RLS
9:42 it's weird that you read this and don't immediately recognize that he's admitting fraud🤦♂️😂
Religions are babble. Twists and turns, that's why the path is narrow.
Got Torah, Got Truth!
Got Messiah, it's the same Truth. They are Echad.
Elohiem! With HAYWAY sitting on Top! Most High!
Halalu-YAH!
@@6969smurfy who is Hayway?
If Jesus had never been resurrected, you would be correct.
R.
I suppose we got a good song out of it anyway..
Revved up like a deuce, another runner in the night
I noticed in the discussion with sean griffin u Had no interest, giving your opinion of acts 21. You mentioned that there should be a disconnect if somebody is doing animal sacrifices after the cross, yet when acts 21 was brought up, You Said yes, many of the Followers of Christ are partaking in this.
Yet you steered clear of way of even discussing, or giving your reason for this. Because it contradicts your understanding.
Did not Paul circumcise Timothy as an expediency, with no design of associating the ritual with salvation? Why not same in Acts 21? Paul would have no intent whatsoever of substituting an animal for the precious sacrifice of the Lamb of God.
So, 1 Corinthians 9 answers Sean the Satanic Cultist and Acts 21.
Side note, in Acts 21 James repeats the decision from God and the Apostles only requiring 4 restrictions for the Gentiles.
@@salpezzino7803 Paul. Circumcised. Timothy, because circumcision isn’t eternal command and Paul keeps the law.. that’s why he goes and does a vow To prove that, the accusations are not true, that he is teaching against the law and circumcision
@@salpezzino7803 Solberg was learning more in that discussion than he was teaching. There were many things he didn’t even know within his own Bible
@@indo3052 you are in error. Timothy was half Jew and was needed to give the Gospel in Jewish synagogues. Galatians 2:1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek
That scripture also shows your error, Paul didn't keep the Commanded Annual Pilgrimage Feasts
@@indo3052 I agree with that, However by reading your comments, you know even less than him
So you acknowledge that we were under the law of Moses before faith came (Gal 3:23) yet you claim gentiles have never had to follow the law of Moses. What a nice contradiction. How about instead of misinterpreting scripture, we just do what Jesus did. Be imitators of Paul and Christ (1 Cor 11:1)
Rob promotes another Father and son and /paul.
The bulk of Galatians 3 deals with the promises to Abraham and the role and relevance of the Law of Moses. Paul addressed his letter to the churches of Galatia (located in what is now Turkey). At the time, the province of Galatia was under Roman rule, and included the regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, and Pamphylia. All four are mentioned in the NT. Phrygia and Pamphylia are mentioned in Acts 2:10. It is reasonable to believe that among the 3000 saved in Acts 2 were some Jewish Phrygians and Pamphylians who returned to Galatia and were part of the early church. Other Jewish Galatians may have joined the church as a result of Paul's missionary work. Either way, "we were held captive under the law" does not imply nor prove that Gentiles ever had to follow the Law of Moses. Paul may have been simply referring to himself and his fellow Jews, and those Gentiles who CHOSE to follow the Law of Moses, ie proselytes to Judaism.
@@dancingzolins6782 Right, so you have to use eisegesis to narrow the scope of the epistle to the Galatians down to only Paul and a few jewish proselytizing. Not valid.
@cadewillcox1432 Perhaps eisegesis is what you are using to claim that Galatians 3:23 proves Gentiles were always obligated to follow the Law of Moses. "Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed." Can you provide additional verses that support Gentiles being obligated to follow the Law of Moses?
@dancingzolins6782 Why was Nineveh destroyed? Why were the Canaanites destroyed? Why were the gentiles given 4 commands out of the law of Moses in Acts 15? Why did Paul, who always led by example, observe the law of Moses in the book of Acts? (Feasts, sabbaths, sacrifices, vows, etc...) You have the position of trying to defend Why you should not act the same way Christ did. That's a position I would think it's unwise to take.
😅The laws of Moses is the law of God. What da heck?
When things are to obvious the flesh will choose the flesh over the Spiritual…Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 Harry - Satan Loves You
Paul disagrees with you....... Romans 3:31 ..We establish the Law.
Paul disagrees with you, Jeff. "You are not under the law, but under grace" (Rom. 6:14).
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots Paul disagrees with himself.
I think it's entirely possible that your idea of "sin" isn't reflected in Torah at all. You have a habit of referring to any action that doesn't align with commands from God as "sin". Torah doesn't do this. You impose things on the text that just aren't there
As an example.. Adam was given a command not to eat from a particular tree (incidentally eve was not told). The text NEVER says they sinned. Yet you and other followers of Paul seem to miss this entirely. In the very next chapter we are first introduced to the word "sin". However this is in regards to something that was never commanded
You should probably learn the word for "sin" and begin trying to actually read the tanakh in hebrew so you aren't just making things up that support your preconceptions
I hear you, T.! And I'm sure you would agree that a particular word doesn't need to be found in a passage for the concept to exist there. It's the old adage for writers: "show don't tell." For example, Genesis 3 describes blatant disobedience of God's command followed by punishment. We don't need to see the literal word חטא to know this was sin.
R.
@TheBiblicalRoots the Word Tells us, "sin is Transgressions of Torah" (babble translations of thy word Law)
@@TheBiblicalRoots your method of interpretation allows you to make things mean whatever you need them to mean
Try reading what the authors are saying on their own terms
When your Satanic Cult teaches that you must interpret the NT with the OT you see things as Satan wants you to-
Us Christians have the help of the Holy Spirit
This answers your question
Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-
@@tbishop4961 You're not kidding, T! Understanding what the original authors were trying to communicate is the struggle of every serious biblical scholar. And further, if we truly believe that Scripture is the Word of God (which I do), we're also faced with task of harmonizing the authors. Because even though, as created beings, we can never fully understand our uncreated, eternal God, He has revealed enough about Himself for us to know that He is not capricious or illogical and, therefore, would not contradict Himself.
Shalom,
RLS
If Moses was elected by The Father to present His law -- it is from The Father. If Moses was apostate he delivered his own law. Truth -- Moses was a messenger from God presenting God's law. If Paul deviated from Christ teaching he would be apostate -- he did not. Peter was also falsely represented in this video as denouncing "Hebrew roots" when in reality he warned that Paul's genius would be misunderstood by people who fail to understand the scriptures Paul read before his writings.
@@MrH4YAH Respectfully, please explain how Peter was misrepresented. Genuinely curious of your thoughts. Thank you.
Did you not listen to this video?
Paul did everything he could to deviate people from following the Torah presenting the crucifixion of Christ as being sufficient for being saved, and on top of it, he’s the only writer who speaks of his own authority that people take as the word of God, though he literally announces before the texts that he’s speaking in his own name.
Paul was a murderer and called himself a Jew, he never saw God face to face, and his message corrupts people from following the Law of Moses.
“Christians” eat pork, meat and cheese together and other animals though God warned against it which leads to health issues, they don’t respect the sabbath, they don’t observe the feasts, they don’t get circumcised and overall they simply act like hypocrites who shave the corners of their beard : they take whatever law they like and discard others like people who do whatever they want at the end of the day, regardless of the evil they cause to both themselves and others, and that’s why I do not include myself in any movement, I don’t call myself a Christian neither, nor a Protestant, nor a Catholic, nor any other thing, because we were not called to distinguish ourselves and have personal views about the word of God.
Jesus was obligated to follow the Law, that’s what proved that he was doing the devines work and gave him the powers he had, but he called everyone with intelligence to understand that the law of Moses was made as the design and rules of this world and life from the beginning to the end, and that not a single stroke of the pen from the law shall be erased, that includes everything written in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and the prophets.
When you read the New Testament from Paul’s writings it’s like you’re done away with everything written in what is called the Law and the prophets. The truth is that Paul wanted to make himself higher than everybody else with ego, that’s what the apostles were seeking, making a name for themselves, like Peter who asked Jesus to tell “who’s the greatest amongst them” egoistically and full of misunderstandings.
God doesn’t call nor speak to anyone for nothing, he does so to rectify things and if you’re taking heed to your Bible and that you truly have the fear of God in you it’s because you know you messed up, that things are not going right and good and your life, and that you’re trying to make things better - well, the law is what makes things better for the one who listens, the belief in Jesus alone cannot save you, at the end of times we were warned we will face judgment, that record will be opened, and that according to our works we will be judged. What works if not those regarding the Law ? Is God defined by any other thing but by the Law ? Isn’t the Law separating things inbetween what’s good and evil ? And isn’t the Law the ultimate expression of authority to debate a matter as to establish the truth ?
The Law is superior to theologies and beliefs, they prove God is true and that he’s not fooling around giving commands for nothing - it’s for peoples well being most and foremost, against the doing of evil second. People don’t get diseased out of nothing, people don’t die because the wind said so, it’s because not following the rules makes us stumble and for this reason we are to carefully study the Law and understand everything about it. Paul’s work is meaningless in not emphasising on the Law that’s why I’m completely split regarding his writing, and even suspect the Catholic Church to have invented things that they attributed to Paul for means of power in a lot of ways.
I consider some of his writing, but not everything, simply because he speaks of things he understands himself like philosophically at times instead of having a message from God like all the prophets or the apostles did by recounting the words and story of Jesus as was done in the style of Genesis.
We are called to have a discerning mind most and foremost, and to work towards bettering ourselves thanks to the Law.
@@fredlada1634 why don’t you convert to Judaism? It seems you have no need for a savior! What did Jesus do for you?
@@cheryliaquinta707
Go to 7:32 and he quotes Peter talking about HR--not true
In 1Cor 9 you claim Paul has made a strong case for his right to receive a paycheck, but Paul’s claiming he has such a right is not well developed in your presentation at all. And no serious Bible student would confuse Paul’s claim as being on the level of a commandment from God.
As for paul changing his hat depending on the audience he is approaching, you quoted him as doing that, but then you try to make excuses that he isn’t doing it. That’s just assert and deny logic at its finest.
Then you shamelessly try to portray Paul as some great man dedicated to the cause, but I thought paul didn’t believe our works amounted to a darn thing in romans 4:1-5, because we might have whereof to glory, but not before god????
And what if someone uses their freedom to indulge the flesh? If they can’t do that, then they aren’t as free as they are being mislead to believe, but then the fre gift of grace Paul posits in Romans 5 has all kinds of strings attached and isn’t nearly as free of a gift as he claimd it to be.
Then you speak about paul as a servant like Christ. Okay, but Christ in Matthew 5:17 came to fulfil the law as the basis for the servitude he was carrying out, so if Paul is trying to be a servant like christ out of love, then he is trying to fulfill the law like Christ came to do and is being roped back in by the law of Moses whether he realizes it or not. Everyone eventually runs into this problem when they get a whiff of love, because running away from the law of Moses is to run away from its love foundation contained in the two great love commandments. This is why people who initially join Paul in coming out from under the law might enjoy the taste of freedom and spiritual anarchy for a while, but the moment they start adopting the belief that love matters, there is no where to run but right back to the Mosaic law which contains the two great love commandments Christ quoted from the law in the gospels and based his gospel message around.Consequently, love is not going to lead to the kind of grace Paul is pitching. If you claim to love God and your fellow man, and you do no works to show it, you are nothing but a liar. And once you become aware of that, Christ is then going to introduce you to the impact of the last two parables of Matthew 25 where those who do no works end up screwed beyond belief. The unprofitable servant is cast into outer darkness, because he did no works like those who did the works of increasing their talents. The goats of matthew 25 did no works, and they were cast into the firey furnace prepared for Satan and his angels, sending the message that you better get off your but and do good works that benefit others, or you will not be saved. Because those last two parables of Christ are just the two great commandments from the Mosaic law in disguise. The parable of the talents is do you love your master (God) and if so why are you seeking to be a disobedient, unprofitable servant. And do you love your fellow man, then why are you like the goats not willing to lift a finger to help your neighbors in need? Once that cat is out of the bag, ideas like Paul was expressing in romans 4:1-5 and Ephesians 2:8-9 simply don’t work. Because justification and salvation without works, is a loveless justification and loveless salvation born of dead faith according to James 2:14-17 that is no different from what the devils believe in verse 19. Love will always compel you to get off your butt and do what is right as defined by the law and prophets. That is why the Savior says that if they will not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead. Christ’s message can’t reach those who are running from Moses and the Prophets, because Christ is the one who rose from the dead trying to persuade us. But, without a firm attachment to Moses and the Prophets, we simply won’t have ears to hear or eyes to see. And this is why Paul’s telling people they are no longer under the law is so dangerous in Romans 6:14, because god is sure there is no lightin him for speaking contrary to the law and testimony in Isaiah 8:20, because those who stray from the law are driven into darkness in verse 22, not to the light.
Thanks for that breakdown, Corey. Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him. So I would respectfully suggest you reconsider your view of Paul.
Also, I made a pretty strong case in this video that the Law of Moses is no longer in effect, and I stand by that as a biblically accurate. Jesus did not come to point us back to Moses. Moses pointed us to Jesus (Deut. 18:15). Jesus told the Pharisees "You search the [Jewish] Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40)
Shalom, RLS
But ,,,, But Moses didn’t give the Isreal Hebraic Nation ( Gods Sabbath ) …. Gods sabbath was from the beginning at creation. . The Sabbatarian is ( God ) … The sabbath has nothing to do with Moses creating it , because Moses didn’t create the sabbath rest . The sabbath is a chosen day from god the father , Jesus kept it , he did the works of the ( FATHER ) while in and during the sabbath . What kind of WORKs ? Did Jesus do while on the sabbath ? Works of The Faith , What are these permissions of works while on the sabbath ? .. Jesus said I kept my father’s commandments…. What are the Fathers commandments? ? The father’s commandments are the same that Jesus kept and taught . He taught that others should teach them , Do Them , Practice Them . . Now the sabbath is not binding to anyone,,,, However ( if ) you love Jesus , and claim to FOLLOW Jesus ? What day did Jesus keep ? ? Paul said follow me As I Follow Christ …. Now Paul followed Christ who is The Way ! The Truth ! And The LIFE ! ! What was and still is The Way ? ? I tell you that The WAY is Narrow … Following Jesus and the Apostles WAY and or Ways , they rested on The Sabbath , they preached on the sabbath, they healed on the sabbath , they did the works of the Faith while on , in and during the sabbath . . People have a problem with ( Gods Sabbath ) ….. you don’t have to keep it ( if ) you don’t love God and His Sabbath , then you don’t have to keep it for observance.
ANYTHING that detracts from Christ as the all sufficient source of our salvation or righteousness or holiness in God's eyes.... is anathema (is that the right word?)
at the very least its a hindrance
at the most it leads to apostacy
Detracts, hhmmm not following HIM and How he Lived is a big detractor, dont ya think?
I rely on nothing more than Christ and Christ crucified
His perfect sacrifice frees me
I live in freedom
His name "yeshua" literally means "YHVH saves"
I'm saved
saved from my sin, my weakness, my foolishness
God the Father sees yeshua instead of me
I am free to be me, uninhindered by my sin weakness and foolishness
led by the Spirit
which I pray for everyday
@@SDsc0rch beutiful words. But is the l Heart far from HIM?
, if and a repeat If you don't learn to walk and Talk as the New Rebirth claims. That is the Missing of the Mark!
Technically we are NOT saved until judgement Day. And the Heavens and earth has NOT.passed away. Because of this, we should know "what" we are to be judge on,
at Judgement Day.
Remember, alls it took to get us in our silly flesh, was a whispering in THY Ear, questioning YHVH s instructuins.
I pray you seek Fathers Light,
as Messiah has instructed US to do.
@@6969smurfy not saved until Judgement Day? Sean is that you? I was Saved the day I was Born Again. Those waiting until Judgement day will be surprised.... too late
@@SDsc0rchamen
Who is the greater authority? Paul or God ? Make your mind up.
The Law of Moses stands since the beginning of time until the last day, it is the ultimate expression of God and what proves whether something is good or evil.
Shave the corners of your beard if you like, take whatever law you think you like and sin endlessly on the other hand, but just remember the Law stands, and your own records will be put in front of the Law in the day of judgment.
For Paul to say he was righteous under the law should trigger you instantly, because he claimed to have been sinless though as a soldier he made people get killed.
This debate is proof you people worship Paul and see him as the authority though he’s clearly writing from his own hand and ego, something not seen ever before in all the OT and the prophets or the gospels.
Paul is the most dangerous of all the writers of the Bible. Jesus warned us against the “leaven” of the Pharisees for a reason, it’s because they twist things philosophically to fit their own agendas. In other terms, Paul justifies his every deed by claiming to have served others in teaching about Christ, but constantly talks about himself in his letters as to make him pious in the eyes of all.
There is no other writer in the entire Bible that gives me doubts other than Paul, he was all for the fame trying to wash away his murders by “serving” others, more like serving himself by making himself be some sort of priest and better authority than anyone else, as if he alone owned the gospels and the keys of the truth.
The Torah is greater than Paul’s writings who only seem to fit the hypocrites. The Law is not meant to be a burden, it is meant for our well being, there is nothing superstitious about eating clean animals and seeing others as impure who can infect you and make you diseased, or not sleeping with your own sister or family member, or washing yourself everyday, or not mixing meat and dairy together so has to have an inflamed belly and subsequent diseases etc
Remember what Jesus said about the Pharisees whom Paul says he is/was, especially coming from a “Hebrew of Hebrews” as if it gave him better authority or status or justification of righteousness. A benjamite, like king Saul, like pretty much every son of Jacob : treacherous.
One might as well read Micah the prophet to hear what God said about Jacob and how he’s not unseeing the evil that he carried in his heart, nor what his descendants do, and if Micah chapter 2 & 3 are not talking about current day Israel I don’t know what else will give you eyes to see and ears to hear.
Hi Paul! Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). No one is "worshipping" Paul. But to reject him is to reject Jesus who sent him.
Shalom, RLS
1. How can the Law of Moses, in your words, "stand since the beginning of time"? Did Moses and the Israelites already have the Law of Moses before Moses went up the mountain to receive it?
2. Where does it say, in your words, "not mixing meat and dairy together so as to have an inflamed belly and subsequent diseases"? Where does it even say "not mixing meat and dairy"?
Law of Moses is the law of god
Hi Elijah. I agree the Law of Moses is actually God's law. But in 1 Cor. 9:19-23, Paul refers to them as two different things: he is under one but not the other. That's what makes this passage so interesting!
RLS
@@TheBiblicalRoots see he is back, nothing you said before sunk in. I destroyed his and his false teachers lie about Acts 15:21 on this thread somewhere.
Jesus would have added to your comment "You Fool"
lets see if he comes back and falsely teaches that Gentiles need to go to a Jewish synagogue to learn the law or Moses. Or what other vomit Satan taught him.
A little leaven leavens the whole lump --------------- the Leaven are Judaizers, 1st century and Today's
Only a strait up deceiver teaches Gods law and Moses law are different. Your bible college ripped you off.
Rubbish Rubbish Rubbish.
I agree Paul counted be a Jew, a Hebrew of Hebrews as Rubbish Rubbish Rubbish
Act 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
Joh 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. Joh 5:47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments. Mal 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD: Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.