"Teachings that are but rules taught by men"

[Heidi]

In Matthew 15:8-9-, Jesus says quotes Isaiah:

"These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught be men."

Following OT law is the same as a wife who shows love to her husband by consulting a rule book instead of following her heart. She will only give him 10% of the money she makes if the list tells her to instead of giving him all she makes out of love for him. She will only show him love once a week instead of shouting it from the rooftops when her heart leads her to.

The OT is simply a shawdow of what Jesus would write on our hearts. When we received the indwelling Holy Spirit, Jesus cleansed our hearts with his love so that we now respond from a clean heart instead of consulting a rule book. "For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks."

So it's foolish and meaningless to quibble about the law the bibleis not a rulebook. The OT law now exists only to show us what sin is. But our love for God comes from the Spirit, not from ourselves which is why they are called the "fruits of the Spirit" not the fruits of our labors.


So instead of quibbling about the rules that are taught by men, simply ask God to send you the Holy spirit to cleanse your hearts so you can honor him with your hearts and your lips. Once the law is written in our hearts, then we can respond from our hearts just like a wife whose love for her husband is written on her heart rather than in a rulebook. She is then no longer bound by rules, but by love.

 

[wavy]

Following OT law is the same as a wife who shows love to her husband by consulting a rule book instead of following her heart.

You equate the "precepts of men" with the Torah (which is not "OT law", a phrase not found in scripture).

And what you also fail to realize is that when the Master quoted this, he actually quoted from the Torah to prove how the Pharisees and Sadducees presently broke it (by mentioning their disobedience to Exodus 20:12).

As a matter of fact, in the very next chapter of Isaiah that Yahshua is quoting from, Isaiah 29:13, it says that the people had forsook the Torah of Yahweh (Isaiah 30:9).

And as far as the comment above, if the wife loves her husband, she will follow his rules with her whole heart in love, as the Torah itself says to do.

She will only give him 10% of the money she makes if the list tells her to instead of giving him all she makes out of love for him. She will only show him love once a week instead of shouting it from the rooftops when her heart leads her to.

This is nonsense. In the first statement you are obviously referring to tithes. Number one, tithes are not "money". Tithes were cattle etc. Never are tithes designated as money in the Torah. Not one instance. Secondly, that's what Yahweh required. It's all he needed for his Set-Apart Tabernacle. Nothing wrong with bringing more, but that's not what Yahweh said to bring.

With the second statement, you are obviously referring to the sabbath. This is also nonsense, sorry to say, because nowhere in the Torah does it say "love Yahweh once a week on the sabbath" or any other thing that can be compared with what you are trying to say.

These are concepts foreign to the scripture. These are the commandments and doctrines of men.

So it's foolish and meaningless to quibble about the law the bibleis not a rulebook.

The bible is to a rule book. It is all Torah instruction. Half of the stuff you are saying is (in some way, though in an improper, erroneous way) taken from the bible. Don't quote the bible. You don't need to. You have the Spirit, correct? Why consult the book that is telling you what you think you should say is the "truth"?

The OT law now exists only to show us what sin is.

That's what it always has done (properly Torah, not "OT law"). It's not just words that magically "show us" what sin is even though we do not have to follow it (which is what you are saying). If it's shows us what sin is (which is "rules and regulations", as I've heard you and countless others put it before) then we ought not to break it.

But our love for God comes from the Spirit, not from ourselves which is why they are called the "fruits of the Spirit" not the fruits of our labors.

Exactly, and love will cause one to desire to obey Yahweh's Torah (which is in his Word, which is all inspired - 2 Timothy 3:16) and "cleave unto him". This is done through the Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27) to any merit. The "word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it" (Deuteronomy 30:14). Paul quotes this very passage in Romans 10:8, revealing to us that the accomplishment to do Yahweh's will as found in his Torah is accomplished by the Word, which is the "word of faith which we preach", as Paul said. Torah pointing us to the Messiah in order to have our halacha (way/conduct/walk) in Yahweh's halacha of truth, Spirit and love (Torah).

So instead of quibbling about the rules that are taught by men

Again, you falsely, and I say this very vehemently and boldy, assert that Torah is "taught by men". Nothing is further from truth.

Once the law is written in our hearts, then we can respond from our hearts just like a wife whose love for her husband is written on her heart rather than in a rulebook. She is then no longer bound by rules, but by love.

Indeed. Rules are broken. Walking in love causes us not to break those rules.

 

[Soma-Sight]

Aye Carumba wavy....

You sure know your Bible!

The rules of the Torah in some circumstances are cultural....

IE - regulations in Lev about shaving your head a certain way or buying your wife for a certain amount of barter...

But the Ten Commandments that are continuosly attacked by the Evangelical community were written by God's own hand and apply eternally.

This thread is just another attempt to fill the gaping hole of illogical "Sunday as the Sabbath" propaganda.

 

[thessalonian]

In Matthew 15:8-9-, Jesus says quotes Isaiah:

"These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught be men."

The old testament is precepts of men?

This is no longer true?

Ps.1
[1] Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
[2] but his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.
[3] He is like a tree
planted by streams of water,
that yields its fruit in its season,
and its leaf does not wither.
In all that he does, he prospers.
[4] The wicked are not so,
but are like chaff which the wind drives away.
[5] Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;
[6] for the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked will perish.

Those very laws that are in the Old Testament are what are written on our hearts. Yes, we are to love Christ. He said "if you love me keep my commandments" so the commandments are still important.


John.14
[15] "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
[21] He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him."
John.15
[10] If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

 

[Georges]

In Matthew 15:8-9-, Jesus says quotes Isaiah:

"These people honor me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught be men."

The old testament is precepts of men?

This is no longer true?

Ps.1
[1] Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
[2] but his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.
[3] He is like a tree
planted by streams of water,
that yields its fruit in its season,
and its leaf does not wither.
In all that he does, he prospers.
[4] The wicked are not so,
but are like chaff which the wind drives away.
[5] Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;
[6] for the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked will perish.

Those very laws that are in the Old Testament are what are written on our hearts. Yes, we are to love Christ. He said "if you love me keep my commandments" so the commandments are still important.


John.14
[15] "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
[21] He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me; and he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him."
John.15
[10] If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

and.....

Psa 1:2 But his delight [is] in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Psa 40:8 I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law [is] within my heart.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Psa 119:70 Their heart is as fat as grease; [but] I delight in thy law.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Psa 119:77 Let thy tender mercies come unto me, that I may live: for thy law [is] my delight.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Psa 119:174 I have longed for thy salvation, O LORD; and thy law [is] my delight.


Psa 19:8 The statutes of the LORD [are] right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD [is] pure, enlightening the eyes. \

Psa 119:16 I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget thy word.

Psa 119:171 My lips shall utter praise, when thou hast taught me thy statutes.

Psa 112:1 Praise ye the LORD. Blessed [is] the man [that] feareth the LORD, [that] delighteth greatly in his commandments.

Psa 119:35 Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight.

Psa 119:47 And I will delight myself in thy commandments, which I have loved.

Psa 119:127 Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yea, above fine gold.

Psa 119:143 Trouble and anguish have taken hold on me: [yet] thy commandments [are] my delights.



Must have been a terrible burden for those ignorant people......Were they too dumb to realize that they were in Slavery to the Law......

 

[Heidi]

Following OT law is the same as a wife who shows love to her husband by consulting a rule book instead of following her heart.

You equate the "precepts of men" with the Torah (which is not "OT law", a phrase not found in scripture).

And what you also fail to realize is that when the Master quoted this, he actually quoted from the Torah to prove how the Pharisees and Sadducees presently broke it (by mentioning their disobedience to Exodus 20:12).

As a matter of fact, in the very next chapter of Isaiah that Yahshua is quoting from, Isaiah 29:13, it says that the people had forsook the Torah of Yahweh (Isaiah 30:9).

And as far as the comment above, if the wife loves her husband, she will follow his rules with her whole heart in love, as the Torah itself says to do.

She will only give him 10% of the money she makes if the list tells her to instead of giving him all she makes out of love for him. She will only show him love once a week instead of shouting it from the rooftops when her heart leads her to.

This is nonsense. In the first statement you are obviously referring to tithes. Number one, tithes are not "money". Tithes were cattle etc. Never are tithes designated as money in the Torah. Not one instance. Secondly, that's what Yahweh required. It's all he needed for his Set-Apart Tabernacle. Nothing wrong with bringing more, but that's not what Yahweh said to bring.

With the second statement, you are obviously referring to the sabbath. This is also nonsense, sorry to say, because nowhere in the Torah does it say "love Yahweh once a week on the sabbath" or any other thing that can be compared with what you are trying to say.

These are concepts foreign to the scripture. These are the commandments and doctrines of men.

[quote:c3a1d]So it's foolish and meaningless to quibble about the law the bibleis not a rulebook.

The bible is to a rule book. It is all Torah instruction. Half of the stuff you are saying is (in some way, though in an improper, erroneous way) taken from the bible. Don't quote the bible. You don't need to. You have the Spirit, correct? Why consult the book that is telling you what you think you should say is the "truth"?

The OT law now exists only to show us what sin is.

That's what it always has done (properly Torah, not "OT law"). It's not just words that magically "show us" what sin is even though we do not have to follow it (which is what you are saying). If it's shows us what sin is (which is "rules and regulations", as I've heard you and countless others put it before) then we ought not to break it.

But our love for God comes from the Spirit, not from ourselves which is why they are called the "fruits of the Spirit" not the fruits of our labors.

Exactly, and love will cause one to desire to obey Yahweh's Torah (which is in his Word, which is all inspired - 2 Timothy 3:16) and "cleave unto him". This is done through the Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27) to any merit. The "word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it" (Deuteronomy 30:14). Paul quotes this very passage in Romans 10:8, revealing to us that the accomplishment to do Yahweh's will as found in his Torah is accomplished by the Word, which is the "word of faith which we preach", as Paul said. Torah pointing us to the Messiah in order to have our halacha (way/conduct/walk) in Yahweh's halacha of truth, Spirit and love (Torah).

So instead of quibbling about the rules that are taught by men

Again, you falsely, and I say this very vehemently and boldy, assert that Torah is "taught by men". Nothing is further from truth.

Once the law is written in our hearts, then we can respond from our hearts just like a wife whose love for her husband is written on her heart rather than in a rulebook. She is then no longer bound by rules, but by love.

Indeed. Rules are broken. Walking in love causes us not to break those rules. [/quote:c3a1d]

So according to you then the Pharisees were loving God from the heart, is that correct? :o They sure thought they were!

What Jesus saw saying was that they had not cleaned their cups from the inside from the Holy Spirit, but were trying to clean if from the outside by following rigid dogma. One cannot clean the cup without their hearts being changed by the Holy Spirit first. That's what Jeus means by cleaning our cup from the inside, then the outside will become clean as well. Again, "For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks."

The bible is love. But if one's heart is not cleansed by the Holy Spirit first, then he will see the bible as merely a rule book.

Once our hearts are cleansed by the Holy Spirit, we then we will want to shower our Lord with adoration, love, worship, and praise. It will be a natural response from the heart, not simply following teachings that are rules taught by men. I'll tell you one thing; I wouldn't want my husband to have to consult a "how to" book before showing me love. I want it to come from his heart as a genuine expression, rather than pre-set circumscribed practices to which everyone else adheres, such as only giving me presents on my birthday or on Mother's day because that's what he's supposed to do. Once you understand the difference between the two will you know what Jesus means by; "teachings that are but rules taught by men."

 

[Heidi]

Does anyone here think the hearts of the Pharisees were close to God? :o Jesus sure didn't even though they followed the letter of the law exactly! So do you know what he was saying to them? :o

 

[Georges]

Does anyone here think the hearts of the Pharisees were close to God? :o Jesus sure didn't even though they followed the letter of the law exactly! So do you know what he was saying to them? :o

Heidi.....Jeus was/is a Pharisee....read any of Hyam Maccoby's (a renowned scholar in the field of ancient middle eastern religion, specializing in Judeo-Christian studies) books...he breaks it down in very minute detail the dealings between Jesus and the Pharisee's. He shows in detail the pharisaic argument between the two. Jesus' discussions with the Pharisee's are shown to be very similar to the discussions the Pharisee's had between themselves (that is the Hillel party and the Shammai party). Another item Heidi, where ever you see "priest" in the Gospels, it refers to the Sadducean party who were at odds with the Pharisee's. The Pharisee's liked Jesus, or at least respected him, the Sadducee's (the priestly body) did not.

Heidi, I've noticed a trend in your (and others of like mind) posts.....You have a little trouble distinguishing what is Law (Torah) and what is Custom (Man made Law surrounding the Torah). It is very important that you understand the difference between the two because this is the crux of the argument Jesus had in contention with the hard line Pharisees, but mainly Saduccees. Also, you gloss over and buy the Christian lie that the Law is a burden and weight upon the necks of the people. As proven in the Psalms and in other places, the Jews regarded the Law with Joy.


For the rest in Posterland, type a search on the book "Paul: the Mythmaker", it is very interesting to see how the gospels have been doctored to make all Jews (mainly the Pharisees) look like antagonists to Jesus, when in reality they espoused the same opinion.

Caveat!!!!....... it is an ey opening book that really dissects Paul and the development of his theology....makes you wonder about Paul.....it takes a look at all of the inconsistencies experienced in the Gospels and Letters.....and why they are there.

 

[Heidi]

Does anyone here think the hearts of the Pharisees were close to God? :o Jesus sure didn't even though they followed the letter of the law exactly! So do you know what he was saying to them? :o

Heidi.....Jeus was/is a Pharisee....read any of Hyam Maccoby's (a renowned scholar in the field of ancient middle eastern religion, specializing in Judeo-Christian studies) books...he breaks it down in very minute detail the dealings between Jesus and the Pharisee's. He shows in detail the pharisaic argument between the two. Jesus' discussions with the Pharisee's are shown to be very similar to the discussions the Pharisee's had between themselves (that is the Hillel party and the Shammai party). Another item Heidi, where ever you see "priest" in the Gospels, it refers to the Sadducean party who were at odds with the Pharisee's. The Pharisee's liked Jesus, or at least respected him, the Sadducee's (the priestly body) did not.

Heidi, I've noticed a trend in your (and others of like mind) posts.....You have a little trouble distinguishing what is Law (Torah) and what is Custom (Man made Law surrounding the Torah). It is very important that you understand the difference between the two because this is the crux of the argument Jesus had in contention with the hard line Pharisees, but mainly Saduccees. Also, you gloss over and buy the Christian lie that the Law is a burden and weight upon the necks of the people. As proven in the Psalms and in other places, the Jews regarded the Law with Joy.


For the rest in Posterland, type a search on the book "Paul: the Mythmaker", it is very interesting to see how the gospels have been doctored to make all Jews (mainly the Pharisees) look like antagonists to Jesus, when in reality they espoused the same opinion.

Caveat!!!!....... it is an ey opening book that really dissects Paul and the development of his theology....makes you wonder about Paul.....it takes a look at all of the inconsistencies experienced in the Gospels and Letters.....and why they are there.

You didn't answer my question: Do you think that the Pharisees honored God with their hearts or their lips even though they obeyed the Torah perfectly? What do you think Jesus thought they did and why? :o

 

[Heidi]

Also, there are no inconsistencies in the gospel. If you see some, then you are not interpretating them correctly. The 4 gospels are the same as 4 people witnessing an accident from the front, back, and each side. Does that make any of them untrue? :o Of course not. They are simply different persepctives.

Do you know what separates the Pharisees from true believers, Georges? if so, then please explain it.

 

[stovebolts]

Hello Heidi,

Do you think that one can obey God's written law and love - worship God with all of their heart?

Just a thought, but we are told to reach for Holyness. I believe the writer (?) Of Hebrews tells us how we are made complete in not only our suffering, but our obedience. Through perserverence (of obeying God's laws)we can obtain holiness. After all, shouldn't we reach for God's love continually as we strive for perfection?

Don't get me wrong, because I agree with much of what your saying,and I've but nicked the surface of this topic, but to be fair, not all of the pharasis where bad guys... And in the same manner, it's not the "law" that's "bad", but our perception of it... For it, among other things were shadows of Christ.

 

[stovebolts]

Hello Heidi,

Do you think that one can obey God's written law and love - worship God with all of their heart?

Just a thought, but we are told to reach for Holyness. I believe the writer (?) Of Hebrews tells us how we are made complete in not only our suffering, but our obedience. Through perserverence (of obeying God's laws)we can obtain holiness. After all, shouldn't we reach for God's love continually as we strive for perfection?

Don't get me wrong, because I agree with much of what your saying,and I've but nicked the surface of this topic, but to be fair, not all of the pharasis where bad guys... And in the same manner, it's not the "law" that's "bad", but our perception of it... For it, among other things were shadows of Christ.

 

[wavy]

So according to you then the Pharisees were loving God from the heart, is that correct? :o They sure thought they were!

No, they were not, and I believe they knew it. That is why Messiah reprimanded them so much.

What Jesus saw saying was that they had not cleaned their cups from the inside from the Holy Spirit, but were trying to clean if from the outside by following rigid dogma. One cannot clean the cup without their hearts being changed by the Holy Spirit first. That's what Jeus means by cleaning our cup from the inside, then the outside will become clean as well. Again, "For out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks."

I understand this. This is absolutely correct. I agree fully. But he never asserted to leave the outside dirty. Just to make sure you clean the inside too.

The bible is love. But if one's heart is not cleansed by the Holy Spirit first, then he will see the bible as merely a rule book.

I agree.

Once our hearts are cleansed by the Holy Spirit, we then we will want to shower our Lord with adoration, love, worship, and praise. It will be a natural response from the heart, not simply following teachings that are rules taught by men.

Agreed. Torah is not man's though. :-D

 

[Georges]

You didn't answer my question: Do you think that the Pharisees honored God with their hearts or their lips even though they obeyed the Torah perfectly? What do you think Jesus thought they did and why? :o

Of course the Pharisee's honored God with their hearts.....no man can keep the Torah completely, but you hornor God by trying to. Jesus' beef were the "man made" Laws...not the Torah....for the umpteenth time.

 

[Georges]

Also, there are no inconsistencies in the gospel. If you see some, then you are not interpretating them correctly. The 4 gospels are the same as 4 people witnessing an accident from the front, back, and each side. Does that make any of them untrue? :o Of course not. They are simply different persepctives.

Do you know what separates the Pharisees from true believers, Georges? if so, then please explain it.

At one time I thought there weren't, but you have to study Judaism (and at that what the Pharisse's believed and debated) to see how the arguements by the antagonists of Jesus were not form the Pharisee but rather from the Sadducees. The 4 gospels were written well after the fact....and Luke wasn't an eye witness. They have been fudged a little....the 3 best known additions are Mat 28:19, Mark 16:9-, 1 Jn 1:7-8. These were not in the earliest texts but were added in.....what else has been added?....HMMMM.

Nothing separates the Pharasee's from true believers....if they both believe and obey God. Flash....Got news for you.....the early Christian Church were Pharasic believers in Jesus......totally Jewish.

 

[Drew]

Greetings all:

I was going to post the following in another thread, but I believe that it is of some relevance here.

As I have stated in some other contexts, I think that the first half of Matt 12 reveals something very interesting about matters of "law".

As many of you know, in Matt 12, Jesus is accused of breaking the Sabbath law against work. He then proceeds to teach, and to me He teaches that sometimes "law" or "rules" (even God's laws or rules!!) can be broken without sin (this is not, repeat not, to say that his picking of grains was unlawful).

In the interests of clarity and precision, I will attempt to explain my position as carefully as possible.

1. In the OT, God (not man!!!) gives us the Sabbath law - no work on the Sabbath on pain of death. The reader of this post may well wonder: How would the people know what constitutes "work". Good question, hold that thought.
2. In Matt 12, Jesus says "it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath".

3. Even though it may not be exactly clear what constitutes "work", it seems painfully obvious to me that some members of the set of "activities that count as work" are also members of the category of activities that count as "doing good".

4. It seems to me that this places us in a difficult spot, if we try to argue that Jesus never advocated breaking the law (i.e. if special circumstances warrant). Consider an activity x that is both "work" and "doing good". An example might be building a fire to ensure family members do not freeze. In short, if Jesus is to be taken at his word, we are indeed able to do work on the Sabbath and not sin.

Many Christians try to escape this by effectively arguing that anything that is "doing good" does not count as being work. This seems to distort the meaning of the term "work" beyond reason. Lots of things that involve "doing good" are also "work" - performing emergency surgery as one example.

Another response is to claim that Jesus was talking about breaking man's law, not Gods. This seems obviously incorrect to me - the Sabbath law is clearly an edict ffrom God.

 

[wavy]

Does anyone here think the hearts of the Pharisees were close to God? :o Jesus sure didn't even though they followed the letter of the law exactly! So do you know what he was saying to them? :o

They did not follow the letter exactly. Outwardly in some cases, but outwardly you could tell they were hypocrites and bad trees (you can't be aware of bad trees if you can't see their fruit).

Example:

Luke 16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

"Thou shalt not covet" is broken here. They did not follow Torah perfectly.

The Master Yah also told us in Matthew 23:1-3 that they taught and didn't do as they teach. He even warns the people to not do after their works, which would mean you could outwardly see that they did not follow Torah. Clearly not following Torah perfectly, or to the letter as you say.

Also, it is also clear that they were lacking judgment, mercy, and faith (Matthew 23:23), all part of Torah.

And without a doubt it is clear they didn't follow Deuteronomy 6:5 or Leviticus 19:18. This is Torah. And even if they did everything else outwardly other than these two scriptures, they still have not done right because:

Deuteronomy 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this Torah to do them. And all the people shall say, Amein.

and...

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole Torah, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

So there. Your question has been answered.

 

[stovebolts]

Excuse the mess here as Blackberries don't do php very well.

George,
I think you took your last post just a bit too far... First, look at what paul had to say in Romans, chapter 1 and 2 and also 8 and 9, or maybee it's 9 and 10.. Can't remember exactly so just go ahead and read the whole letter ok?

Anyway, I get the sence that Paul was repremending the gentiles for dis respecting the Jews along with judeism... But then he goes to say something to the effect that we are not to cause somebody to stumble if they hold to a disputable belief... Such as holding one day more special than another day (perhaps the sabath??) Or what somebody eats.

I do not believe Paul was trying to convert the gentiles to judeism, but rather strike a balance between the two beliefs.

Heidi,

Forgive me if you take this the wrong way, for I honestly believe you are doing our Lords work, and that is to stir up the jews that they might be saved (as Paul states).

That being said, I think too many people search scripture to find what they are looking for, rather than what is fully there (I am guilty as charged). That being said, look how Paul shames the Romans for their disrespect of the jews and how he exerts their honor etc.. And then notice how he sums it all up to give the glory to God.

Now, of course I am speaking strictly on the entire letter that we call Romans here, written to the gentiles to both repremend them and the jews, as well as give them each the respect that God had given him the faith to make peace with everyone within his ability.

God bless

 

[stovebolts]

Excuse the mess here as Blackberries don't do php very well.

George,
I think you took your last post just a bit too far... First, look at what paul had to say in Romans, chapter 1 and 2 and also 8 and 9, or maybee it's 9 and 10.. Can't remember exactly so just go ahead and read the whole letter ok?

Anyway, I get the sence that Paul was repremending the gentiles for dis respecting the Jews along with judeism... But then he goes to say something to the effect that we are not to cause somebody to stumble if they hold to a disputable belief... Such as holding one day more special than another day (perhaps the sabath??) Or what somebody eats.

I do not believe Paul was trying to convert the gentiles to judeism, but rather strike a balance between the two beliefs.

Heidi,

Forgive me if you take this the wrong way, for I honestly believe you are doing our Lords work, and that is to stir up the jews that they might be saved (as Paul states).

That being said, I think too many people search scripture to find what they are looking for, rather than what is fully there (I am guilty as charged). That being said, look how Paul shames the Romans for their disrespect of the jews and how he exerts their honor etc.. And then notice how he sums it all up to give the glory to God.

Now, of course I am speaking strictly on the entire letter that we call Romans here, written to the gentiles to both repremend them and the jews, as well as give them each the respect that God had given him the faith to make peace with everyone within his ability.

God bless

 

[Heidi]

Does anyone here think the hearts of the Pharisees were close to God? :o Jesus sure didn't even though they followed the letter of the law exactly! So do you know what he was saying to them? :o

Heidi.....Jeus was/is a Pharisee....read any of Hyam Maccoby's (a renowned scholar in the field of ancient middle eastern religion, specializing in Judeo-Christian studies) books...he breaks it down in very minute detail the dealings between Jesus and the Pharisee's. He shows in detail the pharisaic argument between the two. Jesus' discussions with the Pharisee's are shown to be very similar to the discussions the Pharisee's had between themselves (that is the Hillel party and the Shammai party). Another item Heidi, where ever you see "priest" in the Gospels, it refers to the Sadducean party who were at odds with the Pharisee's. The Pharisee's liked Jesus, or at least respected him, the Sadducee's (the priestly body) did not.

Heidi, I've noticed a trend in your (and others of like mind) posts.....You have a little trouble distinguishing what is Law (Torah) and what is Custom (Man made Law surrounding the Torah). It is very important that you understand the difference between the two because this is the crux of the argument Jesus had in contention with the hard line Pharisees, but mainly Saduccees. Also, you gloss over and buy the Christian lie that the Law is a burden and weight upon the necks of the people. As proven in the Psalms and in other places, the Jews regarded the Law with Joy.


For the rest in Posterland, type a search on the book "Paul: the Mythmaker", it is very interesting to see how the gospels have been doctored to make all Jews (mainly the Pharisees) look like antagonists to Jesus, when in reality they espoused the same opinion.

Caveat!!!!....... it is an ey opening book that really dissects Paul and the development of his theology....makes you wonder about Paul.....it takes a look at all of the inconsistencies experienced in the Gospels and Letters.....and why they are there.

Sorry, Georges, but you have shown a complete lack of understanding of not only who Jesus was, but what the difference between true believers and the Pharisees is.

Jesus is not only the Son of God, but he is the Word which you can find in John 1:1-3. Also, by claiming that Jesus was a pharisee, then Jesus is casting out himself when he puts down the pharisees, which Jesus says is impossible. So before you make any more ludicrous claims like saying that Jesus was a pharisee, you need to first develop a personal relationship with your Lord so you know who he is. Then you need to scrutinize the gospel to see exactly what Jesus said to the pharisees. Then you need to believe every single word he said because he himself tells us the difference between true believers and the pharisees. Until you do all 3 things, you have nothing further to say about this subject that could possibly interest me.