Daniel 9

[Mitspa]

Mornin' sis, I have a little time before work and I would like to expand a little more about this cloud thing.

And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. Act 1:9-11

We see it was the disciples that saw Him ascend and they are a type of the Church in this prophecy, notice it says they, that is the Church, will see Him return, it was His disciples that saw Him ascend, not the world, and so it will be with the Rapture, we will see Him come for us, the world will be thrown into turmoil, we know that because of the commentary in Hebrews about Enoch (a type of the Rapture of the Church before the Judgement of God fell on the earth in the Old Testament),

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Heb 11:5

We see the looked for him, but couldn't find him, that means they didn't see him go, otherwise they would of know where he had gone, ...makes sense, no?

And so it will be with the Rapture of the Church, just imagine, millions and millions of people disappear in the twinkle of an eye, in today's vernacular that is a nano second, and I believe, and this is my personal view, because of the character of my Father and the reason He spared Nineveh Jonah 4:11, ...babies and young children that have not reach the age of responsibility/accountability will be taken too, not just believers children, but non believers children too, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, New Agers, Atheists, Agnostics, all children in this category will be taken and I believe that will be the reason (the hint given to us in Hebrews) the world will come looking for us and their children.

We read during the Tribulation that so many people will be saved they can't be counted Rev 7:9, 14, who are these people, first we need to look at who they are not, Paul tells us they are not the people that have already heard the Gospel, the tares in the Kingdom Parable, pew warmers,

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 2Th 2:10

what happens to them, all that have faith in the wrong Gospel, all that have accepted the social Gospel of today, the abundant life, prosperity gospel of John 10:10?

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2Th 2:11, 12

Tuff stuff to believe, but there it is written in the Word.

...lets go back to the subject of who will be saved during the Tribulation, many from the cults, false religions, New Agers, Atheists, Agnostics, probably many of those who have lost their children in the Rapture and those that knew someone that had lost children that will hear the true Gospel of 1 Cor 15:1-4 and believe in Jesus and receive a saving faith.

I know I would do anything to protect my children, it's basic human nature and I believe Father will use this love, this instinct in the non-believing world to save multitudes, I believe it will be the driving force in them to resist the A-C and ultimately die for their faith in Jesus.

So we can also see from what Paul taught that during the Trib there won't/can't be any believers on the earth, just non-believers.

Time for work, later sis,

May the Lord richly bless you today,

Gene

You know Mr Gene, I wont call you brother for Im not sure I have the same gospel as you or at least its seems? You make a good report and I want to believe that you mean no harm, but over and over you disappoint me with some of your ignorance.
It is the goodness of God that leads to repentance and the gospel is the good news.. not the bad news or the religious news. What part of John 10:10 is it that you reject? Or is it that you want abundant life and free grace but cannot stand that God would give this same life in abundance to the non-religious? Please don't run away this time and give an answer and defense for this religious statement :
"what happens to them, all that have faith in the wrong Gospel, all that have accepted the social Gospel of today, the abundant life, prosperity gospel of John 10:10?"

No my friend it is those who know and believe in Gods goodness and abundance that will be with Him and it will be the religious and those who reject His goodness that will be left to endure the trails to come.

Re 3:7 ¶ "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write, 'These things says He who is holy, He who is true, "He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens":
8 "I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name.
9 "Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie--indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you.
10 "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

 

[JustPassingThru]

Why is it mitspa when you read something you don't understand or the Lord hasn't revealed it to you yet, you resort to name calling, or are you saying you know everything? From the words that proceed out of your mouth you affirm you are a child in the faith, can a good spring bring forth bad water and can a dirty spring bring forth good water?

Please answer these questions.

You like to talk about context, what is the context of John 10:10, who is it the verse is talking about?

It is a comparison, can you see that?

So what is the false social gospel of today?

Here you go, a quote from Rick Warren, one of the gurus of the social gospel, in his book A Purpose Driven Life,

Wherever you are reading this, I invite you to bow your head and quietly whisper the prayer that will
change your eternity: ‘Jesus I believe in you and I receive you.’ Go ahead. If you
sincerely meant that prayer congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!

Whoa, no mention of a need of repentance, no mention of why we need salvation, no mention of the finished work of the Cross, no mention of without the shedding of blood there is no remission........, but rather, ...I believe in you Jesus, ......James tells us the demons believe in Jesus, ...and tremble!

Now compare that with the True Gospel,

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 1 Cor 15:1-4

Now, do you have the audacity to try and tell me the social gospel of today is the same as the true Gospel as Paul has recorded for us?

On top of that Paul tells us the Gospel has power to save souls Rom 1:16, where is there any promise of power in John 10:10, there isn't and when it doesn't work for people they are told they don't have enough faith, inferring that the people have their own faith to believe the social gospel, ...but we are told we are given the faith by God to believe the Gospel Eph 2:8

Man, you don't know these things?

So, how does John 10:10 reveal the social gospel, ...satan is a counterfeiter, he can't create, so he is restricted to using the words of God, he simply took the promise of Jesus to give to His children an abundant life and twisted it, weaved it into the social gospel,

...receive Jesus (see the prayer of the social gospel above) and your life will be filled with joy and happiness (if you don't believe this is part of it then read the book before responding), then weave some more into that, didn't Jesus say whatever you ask in my name you will have it, so I want a Ferrari, a mansion on the beach at Maui, a couple of mill in offshore banks, nay make that ten.....

If you can't see the difference...

Why do you think the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write?

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 1 Cor 15:2

Those that are being deceived by the social gospel are the ones Paul is talking about that have believed in vain!

Here's some more light for ya, if you can receive it,

Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. Rev 3:9


The the synagogue of Satan is the apostate church that Paul is explaining to the Thessalonian believers (and us),

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 2 Th 2:10-12

What is a lie,... the social gospel, what is the appeal of the social gospel, the lie, ...you will become like God.

It's the Laodicean church with it's damning social gospel present on the planet today.

Now go plug all that back into my post and maybe you can understand.



Oh, and I don't run away, ...I just get tired of dealing with petulant children.

In His Love brother,

Gene

 

[Mitspa]

Well not sure where to start with your rant... so I will start with John 10:10 which is very much the core of the gospel.
What part of it do you reject? Which was your ignorant statement " the abundant life gospel of John 10:10" Here is the gospel:

Eph 2:1 ¶ And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,
2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
4 ¶ But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Sounds like John 10:10 to me?

 

[Mitspa]

Joh 10:9 "I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
10 "The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
11 "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.
12 "But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.
13 "The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep

 

[JustPassingThru]

Somehow I knew you wouldn't receive it, to bad you can't see the true Gospel,

These are the Holy Spirit inspired words of Paul,

And, brothers, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received, and in which you stand; by which you also are being kept safe, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures;

And just in case you doubt it was given to him by God,

And, brothers, I make known to you the gospel which was preached by me, that it is not according to man. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it except by a revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal 1:11, 12

I don't know what else I can show you, you are not open to receive the Word of God, so following the command of Paul,

But the servant of the Lord must not strive, but to be gentle to all, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those who oppose, if perhaps God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, 2Ti 2:24, 25

Adieu,

Gene

 

[Mitspa]

Somehow I knew you wouldn't receive it, to bad you can't see the true Gospel,

These are the Holy Spirit inspired words of Paul,

And, brothers, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received, and in which you stand; by which you also are being kept safe, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures;

And just in case you doubt it was given to him by God,

And, brothers, I make known to you the gospel which was preached by me, that it is not according to man. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it except by a revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal 1:11, 12

I don't know what else I can show you, you are not open to receive the Word of God, so following the command of Paul,

But the servant of the Lord must not strive, but to be gentle to all, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those who oppose, if perhaps God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, 2Ti 2:24, 25

Adieu,

Gene

So what you think only those scriptures with the word "gospel" in it is the gospel? That's just silly.
What about John 1o:10 that you claimed was not the gospel in some way? Answer for your sin!

 

[Mitspa]

Here is one with the word in it...maybe then you will understand why me and you will never agree about the true gospel?

Ga 1:6 ¶ I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,
7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.

Ga 2:21 "I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain."

Ga 3:2 This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3 Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?

 

[Brother Paul]

Can we do a study in Daniel 9? I'm curious why the Jewish people cannot see it is obvious that Jesus is described on this chapter. Does anyone know what they say about this prophecy specifically? I'm always wondering about how Jews reconcile these prophecies in their minds and reject Jesus messiah---

Or is it better not to concern myself? I feel like if I know why, then I can defend the faith if I ever get into a conversation with a Jewish person.

In the Talmud, Megillah fol.3a the writer tells us that Rabbi Jonathan, “…sought to make a Targum of the Hagiographa; but a Voice from Heaven came forth and said, ‘ENOUGH!’ The bewildered Rabbi Jonathan then asks the Voice “And why might I not execute a Targum of the Hagiographa?” Then the Voice from Heaven answered and said, “Because the end, about the Advent of the Messiah is revealed in it".

Much later in History Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi speaking in agreement tells us, “I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures, and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah, clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the Prophet Daniel, which are written in the ninth chapter of the prophecy of Daniel“

Not that there is not much more about Him, all throughout the Scriptures, but here…only here…is the timing of His arrival so clearly revealed. They believe this "anointed one" has already come but they do not believe Jesus was this messiah...they also believe this messiah (who they call Moshiach ben-Yosef in the Talmud) and the one who comes in the clouds (the scion of David) are not the same person...

Hoped this helped a bit, Allie

 

[AllieWi]

In the Talmud, Megillah fol.3a the writer tells us that Rabbi Jonathan, “…sought to make a Targum of the Hagiographa; but a Voice from Heaven came forth and said, ‘ENOUGH!’ The bewildered Rabbi Jonathan then asks the Voice “And why might I not execute a Targum of the Hagiographa?” Then the Voice from Heaven answered and said, “Because the end, about the Advent of the Messiah is revealed in it".

Much later in History Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi speaking in agreement tells us, “I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures, and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah, clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the Prophet Daniel, which are written in the ninth chapter of the prophecy of Daniel“

Not that there is not much more about Him, all throughout the Scriptures, but here…only here…is the timing of His arrival so clearly revealed. They believe this "anointed one" has already come but they do not believe Jesus was this messiah...they also believe this messiah (who they call Moshiach ben-Yosef in the Talmud) and the one who comes in the clouds (the scion of David) are not the same person...

Hoped this helped a bit, Allie

Yes it did. So they believe one will come in the clouds? Where in the bible is the scion of David mentioned? This is fascinating.

 

[Mitspa]

Oh, and I don't run away, ...I just get tired of dealing with petulant children.

In His Love brother,

Gene

But the servant of the Lord must not strive, but to be gentle to all, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those who oppose, if perhaps God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, 2Ti 2:24, 25

Adieu,

Gene


Pr 28:1 ¶ The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion.

 

[Brother Paul]

Yes it did. So they believe one will come in the clouds? Where in the bible is the scion of David mentioned? This is fascinating.

Scion of David is a phrase I myself coined. Scion is an old term used for a member of a most notable family. It also refers to a young plant (offshoot) or something chosen to graft (or root) and He is the root and the offshoot of Jesse. I was referring to "the son of David", Moschiach ben Dav-ed, the end time Messiah. (For us He is the same one who comes twice, for them two who come at different times)...

The OT does not really use the phrase "in the clouds" (which means from heaven) but Micah 5:2,3 (where He actually has been coming forth since eternity) along with Daniel 7 (where He is sent from the Ancient of Days) and Zechariah 12:10 (when they look upon Me who they have pierced and mourn for him...for NT see also Matt. 24:30, and Rev 1:7) all are passages they use to say Messiah, son of David comes at the end time and is sent from God (He is the one they are waiting for)...some thought as a human political warrior (like Hyracannus) other Rabbis as a god-like being...

What I found fascinating is the different Rabbinical views of their first Messiah...for example

Very early on (1st century), Rabbi Jonathan ben-Uzziel interprets, ‘ Behold the man Messiah’ (of Zechariah 6:12) and so it is said ‘ A man of pains and known to sickness (Isaiah 53).” He ties the two passages together as referring to the same messiah.

While at the beginning of the 2nd century, diaspora Rabbi Jose the Galilean, speaking of Messiah (called ben-Yosef), declared that “the Lord has made the iniquity of us all to meet on him“!

In the Talmud Sanhedrin 98b it is asked of “messiah,“…what is his shem? (name) The section goes on to say, that the Rabbis called him “the leperous one”. Some used the term “Cholaya”, because “Surely he has borne our sickness“! Note how this is a direct quotation from Isaiah 53? Please also note he is referring to an even earlier tradition. Rabbi Simeon speaking of Isaiah 53 took it even a step further when he said, “…whoever will not admit that Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must suffer them for himself…”. Yet after Rabbi Schlomo Yitzchaki (Raschi) came (11th century) all Rabbinical Jews say these things refer to the nation of Israel itself.

The ancient Jews always had three or four schools of thought going on, regarding what all these things mean (like the Schools of Shamai and Hiillel, the Saduccees, the Zadokites, etc.), who would debate the scriptures (much like Christians today) ... this "pilpul" (arguing or debate)...forms the basis of much of the Talmud.

brother Paul

 

[Mitspa]

Scion of David is a phrase I myself coined. Scion is an old term used for a member of a most notable family. It also refers to a young plant (offshoot) or something chosen to graft (or root) and He is the root and the offshoot of Jesse. I was referring to "the son of David", Moschiach ben Dav-ed, the end time Messiah. (For us He is the same one who comes twice, for them two who come at different times)...

The OT does not really use the phrase "in the clouds" (which means from heaven) but Micah 5:2,3 (where He actually has been coming forth since eternity) along with Daniel 7 (where He is sent from the Ancient of Days) and Zechariah 12:10 (when they look upon Me who they have pierced and mourn for him...for NT see also Matt. 24:30, and Rev 1:7) all are passages they use to say Messiah, son of David comes at the end time and is sent from God (He is the one they are waiting for)...some thought as a human political warrior (like Hyracannus) other Rabbis as a god-like being...

What I found fascinating is the different Rabbinical views of their first Messiah...for example

Very early on (1st century), Rabbi Jonathan ben-Uzziel interprets, ‘ Behold the man Messiah’ (of Zechariah 6:12) and so it is said ‘ A man of pains and known to sickness (Isaiah 53).” He ties the two passages together as referring to the same messiah.

While at the beginning of the 2nd century, diaspora Rabbi Jose the Galilean, speaking of Messiah (called ben-Yosef), declared that “the Lord has made the iniquity of us all to meet on him“!

In the Talmud Sanhedrin 98b it is asked of “messiah,“…what is his shem? (name) The section goes on to say, that the Rabbis called him “the leperous one”. Some used the term “Cholaya”, because “Surely he has borne our sickness“! Note how this is a direct quotation from Isaiah 53? Please also note he is referring to an even earlier tradition. Rabbi Simeon speaking of Isaiah 53 took it even a step further when he said, “…whoever will not admit that Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must suffer them for himself…”. Yet after Rabbi Schlomo Yitzchaki (Raschi) came (11th century) all Rabbinical Jews say these things refer to the nation of Israel itself.

The ancient Jews always had three or four schools of thought going on, regarding what all these things mean (like the Schools of Shamai and Hiillel, the Saduccees, the Zadokites, etc.), who would debate the scriptures (much like Christians today) ... this "pilpul" (arguing or debate)...forms the basis of much of the Talmud.

brother Paul

Brother Paul, I hope you would be careful to explain to our dear little sister in the Lord... that these men have no access to the truth and the Talmud itself is a abomination and a rejection of all that God has ordained as acceptable. I don't think others who are as educated as you, understand how to separate the glimmers of truth that one might find in "some" jewish tradition, and the overall rejection of the gospel that these writings represent. I believe you can look into these things and find certain truths that relate to what you know as the true gospel, but these things could work to confuse others who are not as grounded in the truths of the New Testament. I hope you will consider my attempt to remind you to be cautious with the great knowledge that you have and I hope you continue to edify those who lack some of your understanding?

 

[Brother Paul]

Yes! Assumed she knew this Mitzpa, good point...

Allie, the Jewish Rabbis lack much and the Talmud is NOT the word of God or any substitute for it...the info was shared for your edification and grew from and was regarding your OP...

Mitzpa, my formal education however is in Liberal Arts and Science not theology (I never went to Bible school or Seminary)...After I realized the errors I had been discipled into (my Pastor and first teachers were strict Calvinists) God gave me much and directed me to study Christ and the earliest doctrines of the Christian faith as they can be understood and proved from the OT alone (this really changed my mind - metaneo), and as these doctrines were seen within the ancient traditions and understandings of the Hebrew mindset as opposed to the later development of understanding and interpretation from among the Greek and Latin based thinkers (the basis of the errors I had been brought into).

The way I see it, when the Apostles taught and preached, there was no New Testament (they were writing it at that time) so all they taught and believed must be found and provable from the OT (salvation by grace through faith, the Christ who would suffer, the virgin birth, the purpose of His coming, baptism, the resurrection from the dead, etc.)

 

[Mitspa]

Yes! Assumed she knew this Mitzpa, good point...

Allie, the Jewish Rabbis lack much and the Talmud is NOT the word of God or any substitute for it...the info was shared for your edification and grew from and was regarding your OP...

Mitzpa, my formal education however is in Liberal Arts and Science not theology (I never went to Bible school or Seminary)...After I realized the errors I had been discipled into (my Pastor and first teachers were strict Calvinists) God gave me much and directed me to study Christ and the earliest doctrines of the Christian faith as they can be understood and proved from the OT alone (this really changed my mind - metaneo), and as these doctrines were seen within the ancient traditions and understandings of the Hebrew mindset as opposed to the later development of understanding and interpretation from among the Greek and Latin based thinkers (the basis of the errors I had been brought into).

The way I see it, when the Apostles taught and preached, there was no New Testament (they were writing it at that time) so all they taught and believed must be found and provable from the OT (salvation by grace through faith, the Christ who would suffer, the virgin birth, the purpose of His coming, baptism, the resurrection from the dead, etc.)

Thank you Bro Paul... for explaining the Tulmud and the Rabbis you quoted

As far as Apostles having New Testament epistles to teach from (especially the Gospels and Pauls epistles) I believe there is evident truth, in the scriptures themselves, that they did have these and use them in an increasing manner. But of course they very much depended upon the Old Testament and all they spoke and taught was to prove the truth of the Old as being fulfilled in the New... I guess we can discuss that on another thread at another time? But again thank you

 

[Brother Paul]

Thank you Bro Paul... for explaining the Tulmud and the Rabbis you quoted

As far as Apostles having New Testament epistles to teach from (especially the Gospels and Pauls epistles) I believe there is evident truth, in the scriptures themselves, that they did have these and use them in an increasing manner. But of course they very much depended upon the Old Testament and all they spoke and taught was to prove the truth of the Old as being fulfilled in the New... I guess we can discuss that on another thread at another time? But again thank you

Well when Matthew was taking his notes during the ministry of Jesus there was not yet a gospel of Matthew and Paul wrote 1 Cor around 54 A.D. so I suppose when "the Apostles" first went out teaching (immediately after Pentecost) there were no New Covenant writings...believe me I date Matthew as first and very early (JMO), Mark wrote Peter's memiors while Peter and Paul were in Rome (60s), and we hear in Church history that when Thomas left Parthia and went to India (between 52 and 75 A.D.) he had with him a gospel of Matthew written in his native tongue (Hebrew Aramaic)...secondly, the Jews (who they usually went to first in every community) didn't care about nor would they have believed (or even listened to) the Apostle's "writings"...when Jesus prays "Sanctify them by the truth, your word is truth" He is speaking of the OT not the NT...

Do you think you can teach Jesus and Him crucified and resurrected and salvation by grace through faith from the OT alone (thanks be to God we no longer need to)? Most modern Christians cannot. This is where the Spirit led me....clearly the NT enlightens us to the deeper more true meaning of the OT but it is a compelling study...imagine speaking to an orthodox Jew and trying to prove Christ, could you do it (not an insult just a query)? I have tried many times and only succeeded twice....but it is a good study, it helped me see the scriptures through fresh eyes and was very educational. This is why I read the Targums and the Talmuds because they are very Rabbinical and place their rabbinical commentaries as Oral Torah (not that they are but they believe it).

In His love

brother Paul

 

[Mitspa]

Well when Matthew was taking his notes during the ministry of Jesus there was not yet a gospel of Matthew and Paul wrote 1 Cor around 54 A.D. so I suppose when "the Apostles" first went out teaching (immediately after Pentecost) there were no New Covenant writings...believe me I date Matthew as first and very early (JMO) and we hear in Church history that when Thomas left Parthia and went to India (between 52 and 75 A.D.) he had with him a gospel of Matthew written in his native tongue (Hebrew Aramaic)...secondly, the Jews (who they usually went to first in every community) didn't care about nor would they have believed the Apostle's "writings"...when Jesus prays "Sanctify them by the truth, your word is truth" He is speaking of the OT not the NT...

Well that is a limited view of the record we have.. At what point the epistles of Paul and the records of the gospels became widespread through the forming churches is not exactly clear, but we can see from the beginning that the practice of letter writing was very much apart of the New Testament record. Even in Acts we see the use of letters (epistles) from those in Jerusalem to the other churches. When Paul comes onto the scene we see a New Revelation of that which was understood and his epistles being the foundation of all sound doctrine.

By the way Jesus Himself is the "word" and He was speaking the words that was Spirit and life. The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. When Peter said Lord "you have the words of life" he was not speaking about the law but the Person of Christ Jesus.

 

[Brother Paul]

Well that is a limited view of the record we have.. At what point the epistles of Paul and the records of the gospels became widespread through the forming churches is not exactly clear, but we can see from the beginning that the practice of letter writing was very much apart of the New Testament record. Even in Acts we see the use of letters (epistles) from those in Jerusalem to the other churches. When Paul comes onto the scene we see a New Revelation of that which was understood and his epistles being the foundation of all sound doctrine.

By the way Jesus Himself is the "word" and He was speaking the words that was Spirit and life. The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. When Peter said Lord "you have the words of life" he was not speaking about the law but the Person on Christ Jesus.

I agree...though that has nothing to do with, nor the truth value of my reply, to Allie's OP...she wondered how did or do the Jews see this...

 

[Mitspa]

I agree...though that has nothing to do with, nor the truth value of my reply, to Allie's OP...she wondered how did or do the Jews see this...

I think I mention this was another topic for another day? But you seemed to want to continue on the issue?

 

[Brother Paul]

I think I mention this was another topic for another day? But you seemed to want to continue on the issue?

No I was just giving her information...and then it started a spiral off the OP...and yes this would be an interesting topic but we probably would agree much more than we differ...though we both hold scripture as the truth and the final authority in all matter of faith and doctrine, we might have some differences because I sense as a witness you would trust the opinions (by consensus) of the modernist Critical School, where I would trust as a witness the history passed down and found recorded in the earliest church writings (regarding the history of events that is).

 

[Major]

Yes! Assumed she knew this Mitzpa, good point...

Allie, the Jewish Rabbis lack much and the Talmud is NOT the word of God or any substitute for it...the info was shared for your edification and grew from and was regarding your OP...

Mitzpa, my formal education however is in Liberal Arts and Science not theology (I never went to Bible school or Seminary)...After I realized the errors I had been discipled into (my Pastor and first teachers were strict Calvinists) God gave me much and directed me to study Christ and the earliest doctrines of the Christian faith as they can be understood and proved from the OT alone (this really changed my mind - metaneo), and as these doctrines were seen within the ancient traditions and understandings of the Hebrew mindset as opposed to the later development of understanding and interpretation from among the Greek and Latin based thinkers (the basis of the errors I had been brought into).

The way I see it, when the Apostles taught and preached, there was no New Testament (they were writing it at that time) so all they taught and believed must be found and provable from the OT (salvation by grace through faith, the Christ who would suffer, the virgin birth, the purpose of His coming, baptism, the resurrection from the dead, etc.)

Thank you Paul.....that was going to be my point to you as well as my friend Mitspa.